Wednesday, September 5, 2012

Gun bans, global government, NWO ... coming in November! Romney or Obama, does it really matter who wins?


I think it is imporat for all Americans to realize what is REALLY at stake here.  This is not just about an election; this post speaks to much broader issues. As I see it, we are damned if we do and damned if we don't, so election day 2012 is THE catalyst for something really big. Will America be ready?

According Merriam-Webster, the definition of fiat is:

fi·at noun \ˈfē-ət, -ˌat, -ˌät; ˈfī-ət, -ˌat\Definition of FIAT

1 : a command or act of will that creates something without or as if without further effort
2 : an authoritative determination : dictate fiat of conscience
3 : an authoritative or arbitrary order : decree fiat gt;
 My argument is simple.  I think that should bozo lose, he will sign away, give up everything, and bow "as a good faith gesture" in the two months of his lame duck sessioh before he leaves office as a final blow to the detriment of the US and will most likely proclaim a US a particpant (not leader) in the new world order in order to ensure the "anti-colonial" dream of his father comes to fruition. We will see things passed and signed for that will literally take an act of congress to undo, but only if congress and the American people have the will and the stamina to do it. It will take years to undo the damage it takes but a pen stroke to accomplish.  Is it Constitutional?  OF COURSE NOT, BUT THAT HASN'T STOPPED HIM YET!  Nor have the voices of our Congress, the Supreme Court of the United States, or the citizens been loud or forceful enough.  If not now, when?

On the other hand, if boz wins, over the next four years, he signs away everything, gives up everything to everyone, and bows as a "good faith gesture" to dictators, foreign leaders as his way out o to reach out the fig leaf in order to see the "anti-colonial" dream of his father comes to fruition.   He will rule by fiat, and November will be a huge date by which we, as Americans, must be prepared. It will be the defining moment for America, not in the winner/loser in the election sense, but who America is, what she stands for, what her citizens are made of, whether or not she will continue to be a beacon to the world, and most importantly, whether or not Americans become the labor force in a communist, socialist, facist, marxist, liberal, progressive commune or live in a free country.

I would like to remind each of you of the following:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” – Excerpt from the American Declaration of Independence, which was ratified on July 4, 1776.

And as for our Pledge of Allegiance and its history:

The Pledge of Allegiance was written in August 1892 by the socialist minister Francis Bellamy (1855-1931). It was originally published in The Youth's Companion on September 8, 1892. Bellamy had hoped that the pledge would be used by citizens in any country.

In its original form it read:
"I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
In 1923, the words, "the Flag of the United States of America" were added. At this time it read:
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
In 1954, in response to the Communist threat of the times, President Eisenhower encouraged Congress to add the words "under God," creating the 31-word pledge we say today. Bellamy's daughter objected to this alteration. Today it reads:

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
Source: http://www.ushistory.org/documents/pledge.htm

Today, we have a president and a seditious faction in our country; COMMUNISTS once again challenging President Eisenhower's response.  We must respond "to the Communist threat of the times" lest we lose America forever.

Friday, August 10, 2012

Romney's strategy (if he has one, I don't see it) is NOT WORKING. Can someone close to him clue him in PLEASE! And then, there's the Elizabeth Warren SCANDAL!!

I wrote this long before Laura Ingraham said anything on O'Reilly.
 
This is looking alot like the mealy-mouthed McCain strategy. I can't hear Romney! His voice and message are being silenced by the botox-face, prince of darkness, axlerod, greasy-haired wasserman, and by bozo himself screaming his 2012 campaign message.
 
Are Andrea Saul and the other inept campaign staff gone yet from Romney's campaign?  Why isn't someone out there explaining what "she meant to say," or what "she really meant?"  Bozo has so many people covering for him.  Romney needs some on his campaign staff who aren't afraid to get a little dirty and who have a little more savvy and much more common sense. He needs better spokespeople out in front talking about his issues, his solutions, his successes, and to do his dirty work if he won't do it himself. Hell, hire Ann Coulter for heaven's sake.

Romney s getting down to the wire. Once independents make up their minds, these independents will shut down and tune out. They are already deciding and it's not for Romney. Where is the indignance? Where are the Romney attacks? If you can't stand the heat, get out of the freaking kitchen. This not a Harvard gentlemen's club. We don't need another mealy-mouthed candidate in a debate. Call bozo what he is. Call him a liar. Call him a socialist. Stop dancing around; stop being PC. Romney is confirming my initial thoughts about him. He just doesn't have that "it" factor, and I don't care who his running mate is. Romney himself must do more!!! The simple answer is that he has lost control; control of his message, control of his campaign reps, control of his "brand," and basically, control of this election process. He becomes smaller by the day.
 
I don't care if he can't spend money. He has himself.  If he calls out bozo, he will get the media attention.  And that television face time is free, silly!

****
The line from Romney headquarters last month was “every day we’re not talking about the economy is a day we lose.” This line, which came from the highest reaches of the campaign, was proffered to explain the unwillingness to provide substantive details on a host of policies besides the economy. Well, Romney HQ isn’t talking about the economy these days. It’s talking about the ad that all but accused Romney of murdering a woman with cancer. It’s talking about its vice-presidential pick. It’s talking about whether its ad accusing the president of gutting welfare-to-work laws is accurate. Guess what? It turns out you can’t just talk about the economy when people—and the media—want to talk about something else.

The polls suggesting he’s seven or nine points behind are surely wrong, but given that there is only one national poll that shows him ahead, we have to presume Romney is behind. He should presume he’s behind. And given that there’s no good reason whatever for Obama to be leading, one can only presume that Romney’s strategy in July and now in August is not working.

Which is why the “we only talk about the economy” line, while superficially clever, was and is so foolish—stupid, even. Of course Romney wants to focus on that one issue. It’s the one that hurts Obama the most, and the one on which he seems to score the best. He and his team have an idea about the campaign. They need to win independents to win. Independents are less ideological. So don’t press the ideological buttons. Keep it simple. Keep it plain. Obama has hurt you. I’ll help you. Fine.

But that’s not the only reason they’re doing it this way.

Romney and his people prefer this strategy because it’s what is most comfortable to them. He is not, at root, an ideological person. Neither, at root, are they. And the data suggest this is not a time for a sharply ideological campaign. The data suggest Romney needs to run as Mr. Fix-It. That is how Romney prefers to view himself. So the two match perfectly.
Alas for him, that’s not how it works. If conservative ideology is a problem with some independents, it also has the virtue of providing those who use it to discuss the nation’s problems with a pulse. Romney has just learned over the past few weeks that he cannot limit the discussion to the topics he wishes to talk about, especially when his rival is spending $100 million trying to destroy him in the swing states and when the media are largely serving his purposes by acting as though an increase in the unemployment rate and utterly unimpressive jobs-creation numbers are somehow good news.

So here’s why he should be talking about other things, releasing plans, giving speeches on big topics—because it’s the only way he can control the discussion. If he says the same thing about the economy every single day, he bores. He provides nothing new for anyone to fix on. He has to feed the beast. And it can’t just be that he puts his toe gingerly in the welfare-reform pool one day and then defend himself for three days after. It all has to keep moving.

In any case, if he doesn’t start putting things down on paper and develop the themes in speeches and get specific so that there is some meat on the bones of his policies, what on earth is he going to talk about for the next 88 days? Whether or not he killed a woman? This is a race he should be able to win, so if he loses, it won’t be because Obama won it. It will be because he lost it—and we’re seeing exactly how that might happen right now.
Source: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/20...-isnt-working/
 
And why is Elizabeth Warren's daughter repsonsible for sending out the voter registration to names on the welfare rolls with taxpayer money ESPECIALLY when the MA registration is already higher than the national average!! 72.6% to 71% nationwide, acording to Mark Trumbull http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Deco...en-Senate-race

And also, 6 senate seats to support ... Sorry, but I don't agree with Orin Hatch, nor do I agree with Romney's endorsement of him. Has Romney done anything right? Pun totally intended!!!!
1. Forget Hatch, don't like him, don't trust him ... nuf said.
2. Murdock in Indiana (formerly Lugar's seat, yeah!)
3. RINO Scott Brown (but he's our RINO!) is way better than Elizabeth Warren, and I will support him, again
4. Ted Cruz in TEXAS
5. Deb Fisher in Nebraska
6. And finally, Todd Aiken ... anyone but McCaskill (remember her HELLCARE vote ... didn't make her too popular with the voters in her state who are 72% against HELLCARE) in Missouri
Source (with added comments by me): http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politic...ent-entrenched
 
Please take a look at and support:  http://specialoperationsspeaks.com/
 
 

Saturday, August 4, 2012

Okay, so how do you want to play this? "Obama's Second Term Transformation Plan" Please, just read it.

I admit, I have been a little absent … focusing more on actions, doing rather than writing. I always felt as if I may have been the only person reading my posts, that I was “chicken little” and the sky wouldn’t fall, and that maybe I was reading too much into “events” as they happened. I questioned my ability to put the events into perspective and certainly questioned my ability to persuade. I rarely and warily watch the news anymore as it relates to the presidential election on November 6.

I did the whole "support Chick fil A day" and Ted Cruz won, so I was feeling pretty good. And then, I received this email. WTF? Hit me over the head with a sledgehammer. HELLOOOOO AMERICA! Isn’t this what I have been screaming from the top of my lungs. With a vote today, INCLUDING HOUSE REPUBLICANS, I MIGHT ADD, to eliminate Senate confirmation for 169 presidential appointments.”  WHAT?! WHAT?! WHAT???!!! We are at the crossroads.

Mark Levin was livid when he read, on air, that House Republicans had voted to eliminate the Senate confirmation process for the reported number of 169 presidential appointments. And the explanation he got from a couple of sources was that Romney had told Republicans to vote for it, so they did. Levin wonders if we are already going back to the days of George W. Bush when House and Senate members voted a certain way to support the president instead of the Constitution.

First, here’s the background:

WASHINGTON POST– The House Tuesday evening passed a measure to improve the clogged presidential appointee confirmation process by eliminating 169 jobs from requiring Senate approval.
The positions in that category, such as assistant secretaries for public affairs or for administration or management, are ones that rarely spark partisan Senate battles.

The Senate has already changed its rules to place another 270 or so nominees in a “streamlined”category where, if no senator objects, the nominee would bypass laborious committee hearings and go directly to the Senate floor for a vote.

That second category includes jobs such as chief financial officers or assistant secretaries for legislative affairs at various agencies.

All told, those actions, which also affect some 3,000 members of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Public Health Services Corps, would streamline or reduce confirmation requirements for about 30 percent of the positions now needing committee hearings and Senate floor votes.

“The legislation is going to benefit whoever is our next president,” said Max Stier, president and CEO of the nonpartisan Partnership for Public Service, which led the effort to reform the broken confirmation process.
Source: http://www.therightscoop.com/mark-levin-slams-house-republicans-for...

And do you really think Cass Sunstein will really go silently into the night or will he be like Van Jones and move to a high-paying job in the Soros network?  Ditto for his wife, Samantha Waters … remember her “The Responsibility to Protect” adopted by the UN, for some countries, but not for others? http://yourdaddy.net/2011/04/03/george-soros-the-responsibiltiy-to-...

And then the threat of bozo actually giving amnesty to the illegal aliens just before the election (probably in time to register!), but that would probably be over-kill. Deferred action, amnesty … they are just words, and quite frankly, I don’t think it matters anymore.

I left Restoring Love with a goal and a commitment to make a difference. I feel as if I were sucker-punched. Why? Because the following memo is true … every single last word. So what are we to do? What are you going to do?\

I feel as if I were cold-cocked, water-boarded just before they pulled out my fingernails and I am p*ssed off as the line in the sand moves ever-backward.

"From: John Porter
To: Americans everywhere

I was sitting at my keyboard halfway through my writing a letter to you about how Barack Obama was fulfilling his pledge to "Transform America" by "Changing the fundamentals of America", so that our government would become the plantation, he the owner, and we the slaves, when this article by Steve McCann appeared in my in box. After checking it for accuracy, and finding it so, I put my writing on hold and here present it to you, for I could not say it better … Is it already too late?

*Obama's Second Term Transformation Plans*

The 2012 election has often been described as the most pivotal since 1860. This statement is not hyperbole. If Barack Obama is re-elected the United States will never be the same, nor will it be able to re-capture its once lofty status as the most dominant nation in the history of mankind.

The overwhelming majority of Americans do not understand that Obama's first term was *dedicated to putting in place executive power* to enable him and the administration to fulfill the campaign promise of "transforming America " in his second term regardless of which political party controls Congress. That is why his re-election team is virtually ignoring the plight of incumbent or prospective Democratic Party office holders.

The most significant accomplishment of Obama's first term is to make Congress irrelevant. Under the myopic and blindly loyal leadership of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, the Democrats have succeeded in creating an imperial and, in a second term, a potential dictatorial presidency. During the first two years of the Obama administration when the Democrats overwhelming controlled both Houses of Congress and the media was in an Obama worshipping stupor, a *myriad of laws were passed and actions taken which transferred* virtually unlimited power to the executive branch.

*The birth of multi-thousand page laws was not an aberration.*

This tactic was adopted so the bureaucracy controlled by Obama appointees would have sole discretion in interpreting vaguely written laws and enforcing thousands of pages of regulations they and not Congress would subsequently write. For example, in the 2,700 pages of ObamaCare there are more than 2,500 references to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. There are more than 700 instances when he or she is instructed that they "shall" do something and more than 200 times when they "may" take at their sole discretion some form of regulatory action. On 139 occasions, the law mentions that the "Secretary determines." In essence one person, appointed by and reporting to the president, will be in charge of the health care of 310 million Americans once ObamaCare is fully operational in 2014.

The same is true in the 2,319 pages of the Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act which confers nearly unlimited power on various agencies to control by fiat the nation's financial, banking and investment sectors. The bill also creates new agencies, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, not subject to any oversight by Congress. This overall process was repeated numerous times with other legislation all with the intent of granting unfettered power to the executive branch controlled Barack obama and his radical associates.

Additionally, the Obama administration has, through its unilaterally determined rule making and regulatory powers, created laws out of whole cloth. The Environmental Protection Agency on a near daily basis issues new regulations clearly out of their purview in order to modify and change environmental laws previously passed and to impose a radical green agenda never approved by Congress.

The same is true of the Energy and Interior Departments among many others. None of these extra-constitutional actions have been challenged by Congress. *The left in America knows this usurpation of power is nearly impossible to reverse* unless stopped in its early stages.

It is clearly the mindset of this administration and its appointees that Congress is merely a nuisance and can be ignored after they were able to take full advantage of the useful idiots in the Democrat controlled House and Senate in 2009-2010 and the Democrat Senate in the current Congress.
Additionally, Barack Obama knows after his re-election a Republican controlled House and Senate will not be able to enact any legislation to roll back the power previously granted to the Executive Branch or usurped by them. His veto will not be overridden as there will always be at least 145 Democratic members of the House or 34 in the Senate in agreement with or intimidated by an administration more than willing to use Chicago-style political tactics.

The stalemate between the Executive and Legislative Branches will inure to the benefit of Barack obama and his fellow leftists.

The most significant power Congress has is the control of the purse-strings as all spending must be approved by them. However, once re-elected, Barack Obama, as confirmed by his willingness to do or say anything and his unscrupulous re-election tactics, would not only threaten *government shutdowns* but would deliberately withhold payments to those dependent on government support as a means of intimidating and forcing a Republican controlled Congress to surrender to his demands, thus neutering their ability to control the administration through spending constraints.

Further, this administration has shown contempt for the courts by ignoring various court orders, e.g. the Gulf of Mexico oil drilling moratorium, as well as stonewalling subpoenas and requests issued by Congress. The Eric Holder Justice Department has become the epitome of corruption as part of the most dishonest and deceitful administration in American history. In a second term the arrogance of Barack Obama and his minions will become more blatant as he will not have to be concerned with re-election.

Who will be there to enforce the rule of law, a Supreme Court ruling or the Constitution? No one. Barack Obama and his fellow-travelers will be unchallenged as they run roughshod over the American people.

Many Republicans and conservatives dissatisfied with the prospect of Mitt Romney as the nominee for president are instead focused on re-taking the House and Senate. *That goal, while worthy and necessary, is meaningless unless Barack Obama is defeated.. The nation is not dealing with a person of character and integrity but someone of single-minded purpose and overwhelming narcissism. Judging by his actions, words and deeds during his first term, he does not intend to work with Congress either Republican or Democrat in his second term but rather to force his radical agenda on the American people through the power he has usurped or been granted.

The governmental structure of the United States was set up by the founders in the hope that over the years only those people of high moral character and integrity would assume the reins of power. However, knowing that was not always possible, they dispersed power over three distinct and independent branches as a check on each other.
What they could not imagine is the surrender and abdication of its constitutional duty by the preeminent governmental branch, the Congress, to a chief executive devoid of any character or integrity coupled with a judiciary essentially powerless to enforce the law when the chief executive ignores them.
Conservatives, Libertarians, the Republican Party and Mitt Romney must come to grips with this moment in time and their historical role in denying Barack Obama and his minions their ultimate goal. All resources must be directed at that end-game and not merely controlling Congress and the various committee chairmanships.

Steve McCann
May 12, 2011

I would add but 6 words to those above mentioned, Conservatives, Libertarians, the Republican Party and Mitt Romney, to say "and we the American people also," must come to grips with this moment in time and our role in denying Barack Obama his lifelong goal of "transforming" us into his slaves working on his government plantation.

Please forward this to all you can, maybe together we can save America for ourselves and those who will follow after us.

May God bless America."

Saturday, June 30, 2012

Welcome to La La Land .. Is this a true Republic or is it merely an illusion?

“But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.”
                                                                        John Adams[1]

I’m not talking about the terrorist attacks. Those are simply part of the final phase. The overthrow of America has been going on for decades. If someone tried to collapse the United States overnight, of course the American people would revolt. That’s why it had to be done slowly, quietly. It has been aided from both the outside and the inside. All the massive problems besetting your nation, all of the economic, political and social turmoil, hasn’t suddenly picked up speed by accident. It is all by design and it all has a singular, overriding purpose.[2]
… You don’t have to look for anything … [i]t’s already here. It’s all around you. You’ve been looking right at it for years without knowing. You still have your name. You still have your flag. You still believe you have your freedoms, though in reality they have been slowly siphoned away. You still believe you have a Republic when, day-by-day, what you are being left with is merely the illusion of a Republic. Your entire house, as it were, has been rebuilt one brick at a time and no one has even noticed. No one has done a single thing about it.[3]
When does fiction mimic reality? Or when does fiction speak the truth?  I finished reading this “travel” book the night before SCOTUS rendered its decision, and I had an epiphany.  HELLCARE WOULD BE UPHELD. When I heard the actual news alert the next day, that knot in my stomach that started the night before, got bigger.
59 of 92 laws in hellcare have already been enacted. And even if the newly elected representatives have the balls to repeal this heinous law, will they repeal the insidious taxes contained therein and the laws that impact taxpaying citizens right now and then in the future? Again, methinks not.  This is a parasitic relationship, and we the people are the host. Parasitism is defined by:
A ... relationship ... in which one organism, the parasite, lives off of another organism, the host, harming it and possibly causing death. The parasite lives on or in the body of the host.
 ... Usually, although parasites harm their hosts, it is in the parasite's best interest not to kill the host, because it relies on the host's body and body functions, such as digestion or blood circulation, to live.[4]
This government will bleed us dry and watch as we crawl and then wither.  For what?  For its survival and for CONTROL AND POWER.

I am here watching a socialist medical program up close and personal.  A doctor refused to diagnose a child with a highly contagious disease. Why? Because of the paperwork associated with the correct diagnosis. “Come back in 5 days if the child is not better!”  Of course they will be better in 5 days; that or he will be dead!

So quietly we continue to work within the system. Realistically, can we succeed? Is our Republic real? Or is it simply and illusion of a Republic we once knew? GOD BLESS MY BELOVED REPUBLIC.

[1] http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/John_Adams/
[2] Brad Thor, Full Black (Atria Books, a division of Simon & Schuster, July 2011), 362

[3]Id.

Friday, October 21, 2011

Is this a devolution? And are we, as Americans, devolving?

Is this a devolution?  And are we, as Americans, devolving?  Why have we allowed terrorists to change us, our moral fiber, and who we are? 

According to Merriam-Webster:

de·vo·lu·tion  noun \ˌde-və-ˈlü-shən also ˌdē-və-\
Definition of DEVOLUTION
1.    : transference (as of rights, powers, property, or responsibility) to another; especially: the surrender of powers to local authorities by a central government

2.    : retrograde evolution : degeneration
I am not concerned with the first definition, but rather the second; retrograde evolution : degeneration.

We have always hailed ourselves as being just, good, and honest people.  Why have we allowed terrorism to affect us?  To change us?  This is the slow march, the dance if you will, done by Hitler and the Nazis before they devolved into the vilest of animals during WWII.  Is it the absence of God, the void of faith, or the sheer hatred that blinds us?  Isn't hatred an exact definition of terrorist.  Passion without reason? 
In my previous rant, “Has Obarfo done the right thing?”  http://apatriotrant.blogspot.com/2011/05/has-obarfo-done-right-thing.html?showComment=1304428611993#c9171716334088028176 I question the motives for his, "I did this" and "I did that."  I went on to say:
Americans will never lose any sleep over UBL's death; however, as they have time to consider the consequences of the actions of this big-mouthed, self-possessed, manical, narcissist, egocentric person in the WH, I think all Americans might wish it had not been dealt with like a trophy, but more discreetly as "house cleaning" and taken out with the trash. And why in the world talk about the burial and how his body was handled in the muslim tradition. No head turned toward Mecca, or perhaps they turned the ship around, to honor him.  I hope someone ate bacon and had it on their hands before they handled him.  UBL is no longer the only problem. The jihadists are emboldened and, and if you think Gitmo was a catalyst for recruitment, just what in the hell do you think this grandstanding by BO is going to cause?
And then, we had the assassination of Anwar Al-Awlaki, an American citizen.  We didn’t cut off the head of the snake… It will grow another one.  As bad as he was, he should have been brought to justice and executed as a traitor, a murderer, or something.  It was another grand-standing attempt by obozo in an effort to resurrect his sinking poll numbers.
This brings me to the barbaric and brutal manner in which Gadaffi was executed, but only after he was kicked and beaten, and quite frankly, if we follow obozo’s example and applaud this kind of behavior, I don’t see much difference between them and us.  We are slowly becoming they, and they are becoming we just like in the story of The Sneetches by Dr. Seuss.  This story of the “haves” and the “have nots,” but the “have nots” began mimicking the “haves” until one day, they were the same; one couldn’t tell the difference between the groups. 

I'm sorry.  Even the children "get it!" If one group changes, one cannot tell the groups apart.  Can you still tell the difference?

We must not allow the liberal progressive idiots dictate how we as Americans react.  We must check our emotions at the door and continue to do what is right.  After the word “devolution” came to mind, and I began this blog, I received this blog in an email.  This blog by Ken Marrero mirrors my sentiments almost exactly:

Am I the Only One Disgusted with Post Gadhafi Libya? 10/20/2011 By Blue Collar Muse

Mitt Romney said, “It’s about time … Moammar Gadhafi was a tyrant who terrorized the Libyan people and shed American blood, and the world is a better place without him.” Marco Rubio weighed in with, “… justice has been done today.” Meanwhile, the reports of exactly how Gadhafi died are, in the words of one network, “conflicting.”
The one constant in the accounts I have read is that when he was captured he was alive. A few minutes later, he was not. Therein lies my problem.
I will not defend or condone Gadhafi’s life or actions. They are indefensible. He was a murderer and a tyrant. None of that is in question. What is in question seems to be the issue of what we do with captured tyrants.
If Gadhafi were killed in a shootout like Saddam Hussein’s sons, I would have no problem. If we locate him in a training camp and obliterate it with a missile, I would have no problem either. Those are legitimate actions in a war zone and are morally and intellectually defensible.
However, when we found Saddam Hussein, a man just as evil as his sons or Gadhafi, hiding in a hole in Tikrit we did things a little differently. Because regardless of the lawless scum we were hunting, it was Americans doing the hunting.
The scenarios are eerily similar. Both men were found in makeshift hidey-holes. Both had members of an entourage or security detail with them. Both were discovered by a group of hundreds of their enemies, all armed to the teeth. Both were found shaken or disoriented. Both were taken alive.
The difference? Hussein was captured by American soldiers. Gadhafi was captured by Muslim insurgents. Hussein got three hots and a cot for a few months, was tried, convicted and executed. Gadhafi was promptly murdered by his captors. This act is now celebrated by GOP politicians as justice and overdue justice, at that.
When did I wake up in Bizarro World? I thought I lived in America. I thought we believed all men are created equal and none may be deprived of life without due process. As frustrating as it is, I thought mine was the nation ridiculed for wounding a criminal in a police chase, spending thousands of tax dollars to heal him, jail him and try him and execute him if he is found guilty. Because taking a man’s life – any man’s life – is the ultimate in serious.

Last month we had yet another national discussion on Capitol Punishment around the execution of Troy Davis. Several witnesses recanted their testimony and we again agonized over the ultimate punishment. Because we are Americans.

So I am disturbed when a man surrenders or is captured and it appears probable he was murdered by those who held him. That is not how we do things in America.

In the end, however, it is more disturbing that two of the most powerful and respected men in American government – Marco Rubio and Mitt Romney – find nothing wrong with the events as they transpired. Or, if you will, are unable to refrain from offering their approval of events the nature of which they do not fully know.

Perhaps such behavior is good politics. But if I have learned anything as an activist, it is that good politics breed bad realities!

The men who murdered Gadhafi do not share our values, our principles or our view of Life and the worth of every man. We may have stood alongside them as they fought a vicious strongman. But we ought to distance ourselves from them. We ought to roundly condemn them. They are as much animals as the man they murdered and by murdering him have earned our contempt and disgust.

The first act of the post-Gadhafi Libya was not to show a watching world they were ready to join it as civilized men. It was not to demonstrate that the freedom from tyranny they have publicly cried out for truly burned in their hearts. It was not to side with an American President who sent aid because their oppressor cruelly treated them in their helplessness.

They showed they were replacing Gadhafi’s tyranny with their own. They showed they pursued mere liberation instead of yearning for true Liberty.

And there are Americans who celebrate this? Words fail …

Let us not lose the boundaries that separate us from chaos and Anarchy.  I am constantly reminded by the images of the Nazis ascent to power in Germany:


Let’s take a look at how Hitler got into power.

Features of Fascism

1. One leader – a dictator

Leader     Name      Party     Country
Il Duce    Mussolini  Fascisti  Italy
Führer     Hitler N    Nazi      Germany
Caudillo   Franco     Falange  Spain

2. A fascist state is TOTALITARIAN (one party state), so there would be no choice between parties in an election.

3. A dictator maintained his power by violence and fear.  Private armies were used (e.g. Mussolini’s Blackshirts, Hitler’s Brownshirts = Sturmabteilung or Stormtroopers) to protect the leader and attack enemies (e.g. Communists)

4. A dictator maintained his power by strict control of the media. CENSORSHIP denied people information, and PROPAGANDA forced fascist ideas onto people.

5. Nationalism was encouraged with the use of symbols, e.g. Italy with the clenched fist and the sheath of corn, and Germany with the swastika, goosestep and straight-armed salute.

6. Hitler united the majority of Germans by attacking minority groups. He said ARYAN people (Teutonic, blue eyed, blond haired) were a HERRENVOLK or master race. He said inferior races (Jews, Slavs, Gypsies, Yellow/Black skinned people) should be exterminated. Uneconomic peoples (e.g. the aged or the disabled) or non-conforming Aryans (homosexuals, socialists, Jehovah’s witnesses etc.) were to be exterminated.[1]

And then the use of propaganda:

Mein Kampf contains the blueprint of later Nazi propaganda efforts. Assessing his audience, Hitler writes in chapter VI:

"Propaganda must always address itself to the broad masses of the people. (...) All propaganda must be presented in a popular form and must fix its intellectual level so as not to be above the heads of the least intellectual of those to whom it is directed. (...) The art of propaganda consists precisely in being able to awaken the imagination of the public through an appeal to their feelings, in finding the appropriate psychological form that will arrest the attention and appeal to the hearts of the national masses. The broad masses of the people are not made up of diplomats or professors of public jurisprudence nor simply of persons who are able to form reasoned judgment in given cases, but a vacillating crowd of human children who are constantly wavering between one idea and another. (...) The great majority of a nation is so feminine in its character and outlook that its thought and conduct are ruled by sentiment rather than by sober reasoning. This sentiment, however, is not complex, but simple and consistent. It is not highly differentiated, but has only the negative and positive notions of love and hatred, right and wrong, truth and falsehood."[2]

When he started his political career, he certainly did not want people to know that he was lazy and a poor achiever at school. He fell out with one of his earliest supporters - Eduard Humer - in 1923 over the fact that Humer told people what Hitler had been like at school.

Hitler was certainly gifted in some subjects, but he lacked self-control. He was argumentative and bad-tempered, and unable to submit to school discipline....moreover, he was lazy. He reacted with hostility to advice or criticism. (Humer)


Humer had been Hitler’s French teacher and was in an excellent position to "spill the beans" - but this met with Hitler’s stern disapproval. Such behaviour would have been seriously punished after 1933 - the year when Hitler came to power. After 1933, those who had known Hitler in his early years either kept quiet about what they knew or told those who chose to listen that he was an ideal student etc.[3]
In a 1920 leaflet, the NSDAP blamed 300 bankers and financiers throughout the world for dictating policy to the world and holding it to ransom.

"Shake off your Jewish leaders............Don't expect anything from the Bolsheviks (the Russian Communists)............(The Russian government) is nine-tenths Jewish. Bolshevism is a Jewish swindle."[4]

Hitler kept to his promise of working within the law. If he did not, it would have looked like an act of political desperation. However, as with any small party, the Nazi party's funds were limited. Political obscurity beckoned for the Nazis.

They were saved by an event out of their hands - Wall Street Crash of October 1929. This event was crucial to the Nazis. The Americans called back the money they had loaded Germany in 1924 and 1929 (the Young Plan). Germany had no money to invest in her economy. The growth from 1924 to 1929 had been somewhat of an illusion as a great deal of the money invested had been from overseas loans - primarily America. Money borrowed had to be paid back. In October 1929, Germany was left effectively bankrupt - again.

The impact of the Wall Street Crash took time to impact Germany. Unemployment was not a major issue for 1929. But by September 1930 it was.
September 1928  650,000 unemployed
September 1929  1,320,000 unemployed
September 1930  3,000,000 unemployed
September 1931  4,350,000 unemployed
September 1932  5,102,000 unemployed
January 1933       6,100,000 unemployed[5]
 

And as I wrote during my trip to Israel:

"... we set out for the Holocaust Museum in Jerusalem, the Yad Vashem. Dachau, Auschwitz, and the Holocaust Museum in Berlin did affected me quite as deeply, nor touched every nerve I have as a visit here did.

The chronology of events in 1940 Germany is alarming and seeming all too familiar when compared with what is happening in the United States. I was a tourist, and on this visit on this day sent warning sirens blaring in my head when I heard the narrator on the audiotape say, “ Hitler and the Nazis …‘reshaped the family, … replaced or removed religion, the government took over the education, … control of the banks, the financial system, healthcare, the auto industry… assumed control of the children, and … ran the youth camps.’ Two old radios were in this exhibit, and the narrator continued, “Radios were distributed by the government to the people in order to disseminate information [propaganda] effectively and efficiently to everyone in order to “control the masses.” [Could this be a little like ensuring everyone has broadband, or cell phones, etc.? Added by TG] It started with a fire intentionally set in a government building in Berlin to instill fear. They were successful in instilling fear. Then, the Nazis promoted the “terror threat.” It was all they needed to “gain a foothold” when the government came in “to protect the people.” And the people willingly let the fox into the henhouse."

Are we there yet?  I think we are knock, knock, knocking on the gates!



[1] http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/adolf_hitler.htm
[2] Mein Kampf citations are from the Project Gutenberg-hosted 1939 English translation by James Murphy.
[3] http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/adolf_hitler.htm
[4] Id.
[5] Id.

Tuesday, September 6, 2011

Illegal Aliens Receive $4.2 BILLION in Addidtional Child Tax Credits. So where is the "shared sacrifice?!!!"

Remember my blogs about "anchor babies" and "illegal immigration?" Well, now we find that they cost taxpayers about $4.2 billion, and this idiotic government cannot figure out how to cut the budget. Are they kidding?  How stupid are they?

For those who follow me, this information is subsequent to my blog: "May I see your papers please?"
http://apatriotrant.blogspot.com/2010/05/may-i-see-your-papers-please.html

Amnesty Costs 70 Times More Than Enforcement!
So why is it even on the table?  The cost of amnesty: $999 billion.
The cost of attrition by enforcement: as little as $14 billion.
Amnesty would cost up to 70 times as much as enforcing existing law.

Illegal Aliens Receive $4.2 Billion in Additional Child Tax Credits
Posted by Daniel Horowitz
Friday, September 2nd at 1:49PM EDT


Throughout the entire debt ceiling imbroglio, Democrats incessantly regurgitated the talking point about the need for “a balanced approach.” They were so uniform and synchronized that they sounded like the sheep in Animal Farm. Ironically, their idea of a balanced approach was singularly focused upon Oil Company and corporate tax deductions, which are negligible compared to the crushing debt. The targeted oil tax deductions would have brought in $2 billion in annual revenue, while the cancellation of the corporate jet depreciation deduction would have saved only $3 billion over 10 years!
Well, it turns out that illegal aliens, most of which pay zero in net taxes, enjoyed $4.2 billion from the Additional Child Tax Credit (ACTC) last year. That’s more than the annual revenue from the selected oil tax deductions and corporate jet deductions combined!

Yesterday, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Collection released a shocking report detailing how illegal aliens are able to utilize a filing loophole to obtain billions in ACTC funds. The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and ACTC (unlike the base child tax credit) are totally refundable and can award the recipient with a negative tax balance. Appropriations for the EITC in FY 2010 were $54.7 billion and $28.3 billion for the ACTC. While EITC appropriations are protected from illegals (those who don’t engage in identity theft) because they are only awarded to those who provide a valid Social Security number, the same cannot be said for the ACTC.

Here is the punchline of the Inspector’s report:

"Many individuals who are not authorized to work in the United States, and thus not eligible to obtain a Social Security Number (SSN) for employment, earn income in the United States. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) provides such individuals with an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN) to facilitate their filing of tax returns. Although the law prohibits aliens residing without authorization in the United States from receiving most Federal public benefits, an increasing number of these individuals are filing tax returns claiming the Additional Child Tax Credit (ACTC), a refundable tax credit intended for working families. The payment of Federal funds through this tax benefit appears to provide an additional incentive for aliens to enter, reside, and work in the United States without authorization, which contradicts Federal law and policy to remove such incentives. […]"

Because concerns were raised by Congress, the Government Accountability Office, and the IRS regarding noncompliance with EITC requirements, a law was passed in Calendar Year 1996 to deny the EITC to individuals who file a tax return without an SSN that is valid for employment. As such, filers using an ITIN are not eligible for the EITC. The change in the law was made prior to the establishment of the ACTC. However, the same law prohibits aliens residing without authorization in the United States from receiving most Federal public benefits, with the exception of certain emergency services and programs.

Nonetheless, IRS management’s view is that the law does not provide sufficient legal authority for the IRS to disallow the ACTC to ITIN filers. In addition, the Internal Revenue Code does not require an SSN to claim the ACTC and does not provide the IRS math error authority to deny the credit without an examination. As such, the IRS continues to pay the ACTC to ITIN filers.

According to the latest employment data, we’ve lost 2.57 million jobs since Obama took office, even though there are 5.1 million additional people of working age in the country. Illegals are not only competing for scarce jobs; they are enjoying billions in handouts ensconced in the tax system, due to willful negligence on the part of the IRS. For most Americans, they are the most belligerent agency in the government, yet they are suddenly indolent in going after illegals. Obama wants them to clamp down on tax deductions for corporations that pay billions in taxes, while blithely allowing them to ignore billions in refundable handouts to those who shouldn’t be here in the first place.

Talk about a balanced approach.
Source: http://www.redstate.com/dhorowitz3/2011/09/02/illegal-aliens-receive-4-2-billion-in-additional-child-tax-credits/


My other blogs on the subject: http://apatriotrant.blogspot.com/2010/09/birthright-citizenship-in-united-states.html and
http://apatriotrant.blogspot.com/2010/06/anchor-baby-packages-open-gates-for.html
And now you ask, "Why do we have a problem?"

Thursday, August 11, 2011

Bye, Bye Miss American Pie! Another stop-gap measure put in place by our Founding Fathers is being surreptitiously stripped!


sur•rep•ti•tious [sur-uh p-tish-uh s] adjective1. obtained, done, made, etc., by stealth; secret or unauthorized; clandestine: a surreptitious glance.
2. acting in a stealthy way.
3. obtained by subreption; subreptitious

Can we survive if we continue to do nothing?

So this is how they are going to do it. The Electoral College (“College”), the last great protection given to us by our wise and thoughtful Founding Fathers is under attack and is being stripped away under the cover of darkness. What’s worse, no one seems to be aware that it is happening or what the consequences for this action might be. What are the ramifications if this College is allowed to be eliminated? The small, rural, less-populated states basically lose their voice in a presidential election.

According to “[t]he Electoral College, administered by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), is not a place. It is a process that began as part of the original design of the U.S. Constitution. The Electoral College was established by the founding fathers as a compromise between election of the president by Congress and election by popular vote. The people of the United States vote for the electors who then vote for the President.”[1]

“The electors are a popularly elected body chosen by the States and the District of Columbia on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November (November 4, 2008). The Electoral College consists of 538 electors (one for each of 435 members of the House of Representatives and 100 Senators; and 3 for the District of Columbia by virtue of the 23rd Amendment). Each State's allotment of electors is equal to the number of House members to which it is entitled plus two Senators. The decennial census is used to reapportion the number of electors allocated among the States.

… If no presidential candidate wins a majority of electoral votes, the 12th Amendment to the Constitution provides for the presidential election to be decided by the House of Representatives. The House would select the President by majority vote, choosing from the three candidates who received the greatest number of electoral votes. The vote would be taken by State, with each State delegation having one vote. If no Vice Presidential candidate wins a majority of electoral votes, the Senate would select the Vice President by majority vote, with each Senator choosing from the two candidates who received the greatest number of electoral votes.”[2]

“... Sometimes countries change their rulers by a military coup against whomever is in power.

The United States has had a stable government for two centuries, and every change from one governing gang to another has been peaceful and accepted by the American people. The Founding Fathers created a unique system in the U.S. Constitution called the Electoral College. It is the mirror image of the great compromise that created Congress, recognizing both big population states and small states. The Electoral College respects the fact that we are both a nation of "We the people" and also a nation of individual states.

All of a sudden, a new movement has emerged called National Popular Vote that is trying to change our method of electing a President. They are not doing it in the proper way by proposing a constitutional amendment; they are trying to abolish the Electoral College by stealth. They go around the country to get state legislatures to pass a law that would order their state's presidential Electors to ignore how the people of their state voted and instead cast their Electoral College ballots for whoever they think won the most votes nationwide. This is offensive on many levels: first, because it is vote stealing on a massive scale, and second because it dishonestly makes people believe that they are voting for the candidate who got a majority of the popular vote, whereas there is no requirement that the candidate have a majority; he most usually will have only a plurality. Tell you state legislators to vote No on National Popular Vote. We like the U.S. Constitution the way it was written. It has served us well.”[3]

There have been enactment by 9 States for 132 electoral votes; or 29% of the 270 electoral votes needed to activate the legislation.

• Maryland - 10 votes
• Massachusetts - 11
• Washington - 12 votes
• Vermont - 3 votes
• DC - 3 votes
• Hawaii - 4 votes
• New Jersey - 14 votes
• Illinois - 20 votes
• California - 55 votes

Who is in favor of the change?  Primarily, densely-populated, heavily Democrat or very liberal states, all in a heap of financial trouble and all strongly in support of obozo. Even the unlikely Fred Thompson has stamped his approval on the movement. See more at: http://eon.businesswire.com/news/eon/20110512006534/en

According to the Nevada News & Views says, “National Popular Vote: Dangerous Scheme to Steal Presidential Elections”

"(Janine Hansen) – In 2008 Nevada was favored by great attention from Presidential candidates. Candidates Barack Obama, Sarah Palin, and Ron Paul even graced rural Elko. We might ask the question, why was Nevada, with only 5 Electoral College Votes, important enough for such lavish attention?

In the “Great Compromise” of 1787 which brought small and large states together to form our Constitution and Union, small states received equal representation in the Senate—2 Senators each. While, large states received, proportional representation based on population in the U.S. House of Representatives. The genius of this Great Compromise, which brought large and small states together and made us a nation, was extended to the process for electing our president known as the Electoral College, where the electors from states small and large cast votes for president based on this Great Compromise formula.

In the Electoral College all states and all regions of the country are important because the final tally for presidential votes is based on the Electoral College. No president can win by only receiving the popular vote in the large population states. All the people in every state small and large are important participants in presidential politics and the presidential election.

Now there is a scheme to strip the genius of our Electoral College out of our U.S. Constitution, not by the time honored process of amending the Constitution, but by circumventing the Constitution through an agreement between the states called “National Popular Vote.” The Constitution requires that three-fourths of the states, that’s 38 states, agree to amend the Constitution. National Popular Vote would change that by allowing as few as 18 to 21 states to make an agreement, thereby skirting around the Constitution and implementing this NPV agreement.

National Popular Vote would require that all states who sign on to their NPV agreement must forfeit their states electoral college votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes. However, there is no lower threshold that a presidential candidate must achieve. No president has been elected in recent years with over 50% of the popular vote, because of third party candidates. Every president is elected by a ”plurality” not a majority.

Under the NPV scheme, a president could win with as little as 30 percent or even 15 percent of the popular vote, depending upon how many candidates were running. When a presidential candidate is “declared” to be the National Popular Vote winner, all states that have signed onto the NPV agreement must forfeit their electoral votes to the “designated” winner. In other words, if Nevadans voted for candidate A and candidate B was designated as the NPV winner, Nevada’s votes would go to candidate B regardless of how Nevadans voted!

This is a grand vote stealing scheme to amass power in the hands of the big population states like New York, California, Florida, Texas, and Illinois, while abandoning the protections for small states secured by our Founding Fathers in the Constitution through the Electoral College.

The Nevada State Senate Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections will be considering SB344 “National Popular Vote” on Thursday April 7th. If the Nevada Legislature votes for SB344 National Popular Vote, it would be like Esau the son of Abraham selling his birthright to Jacob his brother for a mess of pottage.

This may be the most important and potentially dangerous vote our Legislature casts this session. The future of the nation and our Constitution is at stake."[4]

It will end elections as we know them, and perhaps, it is necessary to pass if the Democrats want to retain the White House. I know of no better way to cancel out Mom and Pop middle America and impose liberal, radical, progressive, socialist, tree-hugging, environmentally radical ideas on everyone? I don't believe there is one. Please share, stand, and oppose the elimination of the Electoral College.
______________________________
[1] http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/about.html
[2] http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/procedural_guide.html
[3] http://blog.eagleforum.org/2010/04/whats-wrong-with-popular-vote-movement.html 
[4] http://nevadanewsandviews.com/2011/04/05/national-popular-vote-dangerous-scheme-to-steal-presidential-elections/