Category: Congress


… need a good horsewhipping.

Free Republic


Were you aware of this law?

DICK ACT of 1902 – CAN’T BE REPEALED (GUN CONTROL FORBIDDEN) – Protection Against Tyrannical Government

It would appear that the administration is counting on the fact that the American Citizens don’t know this, their rights and the constitution. Don’t prove them right.

The Dick Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws.

It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities.


The three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia, the unorganized militia and the regular army.

The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy.

The Dick Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The President of the United States has zero authority without violating the Constitution to call the National Guard to serve outside of their State borders.

The National Guard Militia can only be required by the National Government for limited purposes specified in the Constitution (to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress insurrection and repel invasion). These are the only purposes for which the General Government can call upon the National Guard.


Had to post this; it’s linked to in the post on Katrina Pierson, the type of conservative we need more of. “X”


How The GOP Plans To Crush The Tea Party Revolt


AP Photo / J. Scott Applewhite

Daniel Strauss – February 11, 2014,  2:30 PM EST | 25821

After House Republicans conceded on Tuesday that they would bring a debt ceiling bill to the floor for a vote without attaching policy concessions, the tea party seemed in open revolt, calling for the replacement of Speaker John Boehner (R-OH). Meanwhile, incumbent Republican senators have quietly been working behind the scenes to cut off their funding sources.

“I’ve been told by a number of donors to our ‘super PAC’ that they’ve received calls from senior Republican senators,” FreedomWorks President and CEO Matt Kibbe told The New York Times. Those donors would then say to FreedomWorks, per Kibbe, that “‘I can’t give to you because I’ve been told I won’t have access to Republican leadership.'”

It was a sentiment echoed by The Madison Project’s policy director Daniel Horowitz to TPM on Tuesday: “It’s almost as if McConnell and his allies are acting like the IRS with intimidation.”

When asked if they’d experienced a similar phenomenon to FredomWorks, Horowitz replied, “I’m sure they tried. Our model never relied upon big donors who are well connected to the D.C. political establishment.”

Conservative groups have thrown a lot at the establishment in return. On Tuesday, after every single attempt to exact policy concessions from Democrats over the debt ceiling, conservative groups Club For Growth and the Senate Conservatives Fund immediately rallied their supporters.

“These leaders have telegraphed weakness to the Democrats and sabotaged conservative efforts so many times that Republicans now have no leverage. There’s only one solution,” SCF Executive Director Matt Hoskins wrote in an email to supporters. “John Boehner must be replaced as Speaker of the House.”

Club For Growth also blasted out, “Something is very wrong with House leadership, or with the Republican Party. This is not a bill that advocates of limited government should schedule or support.”

Outside conservative groups have proven an increasingly painful thorn in the paws of establishment congressional leadership and incumbent GOP lawmakers in the 2014 election cycle. These groups have boosted tea party challengers who otherwise would have been nearly impossible campaigns against incumbents and pressured lawmakers on the Hill to vote more in line with the tea party on essentially every piece of legislation.

The GOP’s response has been multifaceted. Republican opponents of the conservative organizations have:

Castigated GOP candidates for working with outside conservative groups. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) notably sat down with Nebraska Senate candidate Ben Sasse, who is increasingly looking like the frontrunner in the GOP primary, and scolded him for associating with the Senate Conservatives Fund.

Tried to suffocate an outside Republican consulting vendor that often works with the outside groups. Two committees, the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the National Republican Campaign Committee, both cut ties with Jamestown Associates, a Republican vendor that has worked with tea party groups before. In a rare move the NRSC and NRCC publicized its decision to sever its ties, a clear warning to other consulting vendors that worked with outside tea party organizations against Republicans. To show its defiance, the conservative Club for Growth also announced recently that it had hired the firm.

Fired tea party allies on Capitol Hill. GOP operative Paul Teller was forced out as the head of the Republican Study Committee, a group that serves as the in-house think tank for conservative Republicans in the House of Representatives, in response to his regular close interaction with conservative organizations. But conservative organizations seemed to have gotten the last laugh as Teller is now deputy chief of staff for tea party darling Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and his portfolio includes working liaising with outside organizations and tea partiers.

Forming super PACs and organizations to counter tea party organizations. On the campaign trail, supporters of incumbent Republican lawmakers facing primary challenges have formed their own super PACs to counter attacks by tea partiers and insurgent challengers. The latest example is the super PAC supporters of Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS) formed to help him stave off a strong challenge from state Sen. Chris McDaniel (R-MS). The Chamber of Commerce also pledged a hefty $50 million to fight those outside groups.

So far these efforts haven’t silenced the tea party’s attacks on Republicans, but they have shown that Republicans aren’t likely to take the attacks lying down. Still, groups like The Madison Project and the Senate Conservatives Fund seem unlikely to back down, and they may just prove that Republican leadership still has to fight its own party on some fronts.

“We’re not getting hurt by this because our donors are primarily ordinary conservatives across the country who are not intimidated by or even connected to people in the political class,” Horowitz said.


From PAN National Director Darla Dawald –

Katrina Pierson and her story are what the Republican Party desperately needs….

  • Posted by Darla Dawald, National Director on February 18, 2014 at 7:31pm in Patriot Action Alerts

Katrina is taking on Pete Sessions (another RINO and career politician).

By Amy Kremer


Have you heard of Katrina Pierson? Probably not.

We hear a lot about the problems the Republican Party has attracting voters outside its traditional base, perceived as overwhelmingly male, older, married and white.

GOP-affiliated talking heads lament the fact that women, young people, singles and minorities won’t give the Republican Party a second look. Party operatives spend millions on post-mortems and autopsies analyzing the intractable puzzle of the GOP’s lack of acceptance within these circles.

We are told that Republicans might never win national elections again because they alienate minorities and don’t know how to reach or effectively communicate their message to a diverse set of voters.

The establishment thinks watering down conservatives’ message and becoming more moderate will grow the party. Party elites discourage or condemn the type of dynamic candidates most conservatives are looking for.

But the “experienced” consultant’s model of a viable candidate hasn’t been updated in 20 years.

Romney McCain

When the establishment-preferred model fails, GOP elites always blame the base for the loss, when realistically, it is that their milquetoast candidates and campaigns that lack the kind of broad appeal and the substantive ideas needed to win in today’s political environment.

The establishment honestly believes, that if they could only take down … the GOP would prosper and win.

But conservatives have endured their blueprint time and again. What GOP elites excel at most is losing elections and refusing to learn from past mistakes.

There are candidates right now under the Republican establishment’s nose that would attract the very voters even the experts agree the GOP desperately needs. You would think Republicans and the broader conservative movement would be eager to spotlight examples of young people, singles, women and minorities who are running as Republicans. You would think right-leaning journalists would be falling all over themselves to cover a conservative candidate who has been fearlessly taking on the GOP establishment and challenging a 17-year incumbent and staunch ally of House Speaker John Boehner.

You would think that a young, conservative, black single mother who made a name for herself by fighting to elect Ted Cruz to the U.S. Senate would be a cause celeb for conservatives.

You would think that the conservative media would want to profile her or give her some kind of coverage, just as BET (Black Entertainment Television) has.

You’d think, but you’d be wrong.


Katrina Pierson is challenging incumbent Representative Pete Sessions in the Republican primary for Texas 32nd Congressional District, though few outside of Dallas have heard about her race. Rep. Sessions has voted for TARP, against reining in the NSA, to raise the debt ceili…

Continue the story and more about Katrina click here

I have personally endorsed Katrina Pierson. She is another Tea Party leader that has stepped up and is heeding the call. We need to support all of the real true conservatives that are stepping up to oust these RINOs.

The Foreign Student – In the Whitehouse

Congress is as complicit as Obama in their blatant refusal to ignore his -ahem- parentage, and allow him to run for the Presidency.  Also their failure to bring him up on Treason charges.  This sad bit of info, sent by (I suppose) a supporter via e-mail to Russell Best <> was then sent by him to 35 people including me.  This is just a small sample of the fraud he is, his illegitimate residency at the Whitehouse, and why I categorized this post under Congress. From Facebook; click on photo for enlarged view.

securedownload Obama Foreign studant

Posted on December 16, 2013 by Gary DeMar

The Reason GOP is Not Going after the IRS for Harassing Tea Party Groups

December 16, 2013

Two seemingly unrelated articles caught my attention. Here’s the first one: “Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberly Strassel noted on Friday [Dec. 13] that Barack Obama and the IRS have a new plan to target Tea Party groups in advance of the 2014 elections. During Thanksgiving week, the Treasury Department announced a proposal to limit the political activity of 501(c)(4) groups.”

One would think that Republicans in Congress would be outraged. The silence is deafening.

We know that the IRS was going after conservative groups, many of which were associated with the newly formed Tea Party movement. It was a big story for a time, and then it seemed to die.

Why haven’t Republicans made an issue of this unconstitutional and possibly criminal scandal? Stories have come out showing that officials in the IRS had gotten instructions from the top to slow down the approval process of Tea Party groups.

Now we know why the GOP has let the IRS off the hook. Establishment Republicans and their lobbyists hate the Tea Party, but for different reasons.

Republicans like pork as much as the Democrats do, and their lobbyists will do anything to stop anybody who gets in their way to bring home the fattened political bacon. Tony Lee at Breitbart reports on the second one:

“Lobbyists are reportedly ‘pumping their fists’ over House Speaker John Boehner’s declaration of war against the Tea Party last week.

“According to The Hill, lobbyists were ‘pleasantly surprised by’ Boehner’s ‘strident remarks’ last week in which he said Tea Party groups have lost ‘all credibility’ after they opposed the budget compromise that increased taxes. Tea Party Patriots co-founder Jenny Beth Martin said Boehner’s words were a declaration of war on grassroots conservatives.”

When American bank robber Willie Sutton was asked why he robbed banks, his answer was simple: “That’s where the money is.” Lobbyists know if you want tens of millions of dollars, you go to Washington,

The GOP may be against individual welfare, but they are whole hog for corporate welfare. Lobbyists are permanent fixtures in Washington hoping to get their slice of the tax-payer income-tax pie. It’s no wonder that the area around DC area is ground zero for our nation’s Super Zips.“A Washington Post analysis of the latest census data shows that more than a third of Zip codes in the D.C. metro area rank in the top 5 percent nationally for income and education.”

So it’s no wonder that Boehner and other Establishment Republicans are attacking the Tea Party and not stopping the IRS from bullying conservative groups.

Republicans like Boehner and Ryan know were the money is. While it’s politically conservatively correct to attack liberal pork, it’s a whole other thing to attack GOP pork. Now you’re meddling.



How the Federal Government will Respond to the Liberty Amendments

Posted on December 16, 2013 by Common Constitutionalist

I know I’m not supposed to think this, and revenge is neither sweet nor charitable, but would it not be a wonderful spectacle to witness and be part of a movement that helps restore America and watch as all branches of the federal government sit helplessly as their power erodes with the passage of the liberty amendments?

Recently, thanks in no small part to Mark Levin’s latest bestseller, The Liberty Amendments, there has been a resurgence of interest in the Constitution and states’ rights.

Some states have begun to assert themselves along constitutional lines. It’s as if we all forgot that the Constitution was written by and for the states and to protect the citizens from the very thing that afflicts us, and oppressive centralized authority.

I’ve written many times about how the founders of this country were truly a gift from God, Their wisdom and prescience have not been repeated since.

Who else could have predicted the mess we currently find ourselves in?

Yet they foretold it. Why else would they have inserted Article V into the Constitution?

“The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress.”

Levin’s book was released in August and months later 100 representatives from 32 states assembled at George Washington’s home in Mt. Vernon to discuss the implementation of Article V.

Now you tell me; is that not a Christmas miracle?

States like South Carolina and Virginia have already begun to assert authority over the feds. It really is wonderful to see. And there’s really nothing the federal government can do about. Or is there?

We all know, and it is well documented, just how low down and dirty the current administration is. Heck, not just them, the entire government, including both Houses and Parties.

But as bad as we think they are now, we ain’t seen nothin’ if states begin successfully to curb and reverse federal authority.

We’ve seen what the NSA, EPA, and IRS are capable of, and they’ve only just begun.

Look at how the Republican leadership reacts whenever their ironfisted authority is challenged, although their vitriol is reserved only for conservatives and constitutionalists.

Do we really think politicians and power-mad authoritarians will go quietly into the night? Think again.

So what might happen to these states that don’t know their place and decide to get all uppity?

First, we’ll see all the Soros-funded groups like Center for American Progress and MoveOn join with the ACLU (as if they’re not already joined) and file a gazillion lawsuits in federal courts, that, thanks to Harry Reid, are currently being packed by judges who are part of the federal government and won’t want to see their privileges and pensions tampered with, claiming this or that is unconstitutional.

Then the Jackboots will swing into action. “Gee, pick your state; you’re getting a bit uppity and we’re afraid if you keep this up, maybe we will have to pull your educational funding. Remember those federal highway funds you needed? We may have to divert them to a friendlier state.”

Don’t think this can and will happen? Think it’s illegal for the feds to withhold those funds, you say? Hah!

Just look at the record of the low down nefarious thugocracy that currently resides in the White House. Do we really think they care that legality may get in the way of their agenda?

Let’s not be naïve.



Oil and water – or liberalism and cold reality.  Some things just don’t mix.

On July 18, 2013 Detroit, Michigan became the largest city in American history to declare bankruptcy after a decades-long love affair with Big Government policies.

Some are now calling for a federal bailout, forcing American taxpayers to pony up to pay for Detroit’s massive debt.

As I said when asked about this possibility recently, “Over my dead body.”

If you agree, it’s absolutely vital you sign your “NO BAILOUT!” petition IMMEDIATELY.

Without the action of good folks like you, I truly fear what you and I see happening to Detroit could very well be the future of our country.

Once a shining, vibrant city, the statistics now coming out of Detroit are alarming:

>>>    Detroit was America’s fourth largest city in the 1960s with a population of 1.8 million.  Today, the city’s population has decreased to just over 700,000;

>>>    Average police response time in Detroit is nearly one hour, and just 8.7% of crimes are solved;

>>>    Detroit’s municipal debt stands at more than $18 BILLION – or over $25,000 per man, woman, and child.  In fact, in just four years, $0.65 of every dollar taken in taxes would go to pay off debt.

Now, American taxpayers – already being bilked by big spending politicians in BOTH parties – are being asked to cover the tab.

With nearly $17 TRILLION in national debt, can we even afford it?

You and I both know the answer is “NO!”

Not only that, but whether it’s bailouts of private companies, banks, or local governments, all bailouts ever end up doing is encouraging irresponsibility and mismanagement.

And hardworking families and small businesses – often those struggling to make ends meet – pay the price.

Yet too often our politicians in Washington, D.C. just don’t listen.

Taxpayers are viewed as nothing more than ATM machines politicians use to pay for whatever outrage they come up with next.

My question is, who’s going to bail out Washington, D.C.?

Unless you and I start fighting back, the answer to that question is you and me.

The good news is, the last round of automotive and bank bailouts under TARP launched the Tea Party.

More members of Congress than ever in recent memory are joining me in saying “not so fast” when it comes to handing out even more of our tax dollars.

But more must be done.

So won’t you please sign your “NO BAILOUT!” petition IMMEDIATELY?
And, if you can, please agree to a generous contribution today.
Click to sign

With Congress set to go on its August recess, there’s never been a better time for my colleagues to start hearing from the folks back home.

You and I need to send a loud-and-clear message that not only must the bailouts stop right here and now, but Washington, D.C. needs to get serious about cutting spending.


February 27, 2013  by

The Internal Revenue Service has strict codes regulating the lawful operations of 501(c) (4) charities like “Organizing for Action (OFA)” the new Obama social welfare advocacy group that succeeded “Obama for America” the Presidents official 2012 re-election campaign. After a little tax code research, I have, come to the conclusion, that OFA and President Obama bear investigation by the U.S. House of Representatives for not only potential ethics transgressions but for alleged U.S. tax law violations.

IRS regulations state: 501(c)(4) non-for profit organizations (i.e. Organizing for Action) must be operated “exclusively for the promotion of social welfare.” 501 (c)(4) groups are not prohibited from participating in campaigns or elections as long as they serve the goal of “social welfare.”

I would think that President Obama, educated man that he is, understands the concept of “social welfare,” but maybe not, given social welfare requires knowledge of social welfare’s economic origins. After all, economics is a subject that Obama has had little regard for unless it requires blindly signing legislation that redistributes Americans income to his constituency.

Even if we allow for Liberal Democrat’s idealistic fantasies touting future economic benefits from legally owned gun regulation—or what liberals may try to characterize as “social welfare” i.e. decreased gun violence in America—both reality and government crime statistics prove the Obama team wrong every day. U.S. Department of Justice statistics prove that violent crime, specifically gun related violent crime is decreasing, not increasing in America. Taking away guns or ammunition will have an adverse effect on social welfare and have a negative economic benefit.

Examples of this fact are found in major cities like Chicago—a city run by Democrat idealists for close to a century—a city buried in real “social welfare” problems like debt, unemployment, government dependency, failing schools, poverty, illiteracy, corruption, and gang violence. However, where are the economic benefits for the windy cities residents from Chicago’s strict gun laws?

Obama’s Organizing for Action may claim that gun and ammunition regulation—an infringement of 2nd amendment freedoms and an ethical violation of Obama’s oath of office amounts to social welfare, but I would challenge the President to provide the data to back up his liberal assertions. They are lies propagated by a President who at best is stretching the truth and in reality is redefining U.S. tax law to service his political agenda, nothing more. No economic or “social welfare” benefit will be gained by eliminating or regulating legal gun ownership in U.S. communities. To the contrary, gun regulation will foster crime, and with it economic decline in American communities. Chicago’s rising crime and DOJ statistics prove this point, Obama’s Organizing for Action is violating IRS code with its anti-second amendment advocacy framed as social welfare, and it warrants investigation by Congress and the Internal Revenue Service.

It also warrants mentioning that federal and state anti-second amendment regulations cause job losses. Obama’s and liberal states Governors proposed gun control policies have many established gun and ammunition manufacturers actively considering relocating and/or downsizing. I suppose some liberals may consider this a form of “social welfare,” but I am almost positive soon-to-be unemployed workers at certain gun manufacturers would disagree.

Back in the 90s during the Clinton years, Congress charged Newt Gingrich, who was also harangued and vilified for his political activities involving a 501(c) (3) charity—accused of promoting political causes and candidates—with 84 separate ethics violations. Yet Newt Gingrich did not violate his oath of office to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution or commit a single crime. Eventually, reprimanded by Congress and viewed by his party as a political liability Gingrich succumbed to political pressures and resigned.

Today Organizing for Action is raising funds—from donors that do not require identification—to push President Obama’s second term agenda. Two days ago, it was publicly revealed that President Obama is granting White House meetings to donors and fundraisers that contribute 500 thousand dollars to his “Organizing for America” the Obama social welfare machine. In addition, it is been suggested that MSNBC is a major benefactor of OFA. Sounds like pay to play to me. Moreover, many view this as ethical government.

It may come as a surprise to some of you, but I have been a subscriber to President Obama’s campaign website, which is now the Organizing for Actions website, since Obama’s campaign began. Suffice it to say, I believe in keeping my enemies close. Every day I receive e-mails from OFA asking for volunteer assistance as well as financial support. These emails reference the importance of passing the Obama second term agenda in every communication. Specifically the agenda President Obama lies out in his 2013 State of the Union address.

Can someone, even a liberal explain the “social welfare” or economic benefit for America, if Gays are given Constitutional protections like same sex marriage? Will America experience an economic boom and historic job growth attributable to LGBT matrimonial bliss? Better yet, can someone explain the social welfare or economic benefit of abortion or reproductive rights that deny fathers the equal right to raise a child doomed to whimsical termination? No Obama second term agenda items provide a “social welfare” or economic benefit for Americans, only Obama’s Americans or Democrat voters, yet Obama’s OFA is busy raising anonymous contributions to promote Democrat candidate ideologies over Republican candidate positions.

Is this not, the same violation of ethics that took Newt Gingrich down?

For all of its obvious and documented ethics violations and potential IRS code abuses, President Obama’s self-serving Democrat loyal “Organizing for America” requires investigation. Get on the horn America; I think these allegations may have some teeth.

 I found this in another of their links about Al Sharpton. (I can barely stomach to name him, let alone do a blog on this tare)

Apparently this bill was stillborn.  How many times have I blogged about enough evidence to have “O” brought up on TREASON charges?  The bunch of steers in Congress, (2010 freshmen excluded from the analogy) may need to be recycled next election.   Plus the nerve of seeking U.N. “approval” when Congress is to be consulted… TO H with the U.N.

 Declares president’s use of military without approval ‘high crime, misdemeanor’

author-imagebyDrew Zahn

Drew Zahn is a former pastor who cut his editing teeth as a member of the award-winning staff of Leadership, Christianity Today’s professional journal for church leaders.

Let the president be duly warned.

Rep. Walter B. Jones Jr., R-N.C., has introduced a resolution declaring that should the president use offensive military force without authorization of an act of Congress, “it is the sense of Congress” that such an act would be “an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor.”

Specifically, Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution reserves for Congress alone the power to declare war, a restriction that has been sorely tested in recent years, including Obama’s authorization of military force in Libya.

In an exclusive WND column, former U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo claims that Jones introduced his House Concurrent Resolution 107 in response to startling recent comments from Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta.

“This week it was Secretary of Defense Panetta’s declaration before the Senate Armed Services Committee that he and President Obama look not to the Congress for authorization to bomb Syria but to NATO and the United Nations,” Tancredo writes. “This led to Rep. Walter Jones, R-N.C., introducing an official resolution calling for impeachment should Obama take offensive action based on Panetta’s policy statement, because it would violate the Constitution.”

Read “The Case for Impeachment” and know why Obama has got to go before America is done for …

Get the bumper sticker that tells everyone to Impeach Obama!

In response to questions from Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., over who determines the proper and legal use of the U.S. military, Panetta said, “Our goal would be to seek international permission and we would … come to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this, whether or not we would want to get permission from the Congress – I think those are issues we would have to discuss as we decide what to do here.”

“Well, I’m almost breathless about that,” Sessions responded, “because what I heard you say is, ‘We’re going to seek international approval, and then we’ll come and tell the Congress what we might do, and we might seek congressional approval.’ And I just want to say to you that’s a big [deal].”

Asked again what was the legal basis for U.S. military force, Panetta suggested a NATO coalition or U.N. resolution.

Sessions was dumbfounded by the answer.

“Well, I’m all for having international support, but I’m really baffled by the idea that somehow an international assembly provides a legal basis for the United States military to be deployed in combat,” Sessions said. “They can provide no legal authority. The only legal authority that’s required to deploy the United States military is of the Congress and the president and the law and the Constitution.”

The exchange itself can be seen below:

The full wording of H. Con. Res. 107, which is currently referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary, is as follows:

Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a president without prior and clear authorization of an act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution.

Whereas the cornerstone of the Republic is honoring Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that, except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of offensive military force by a president without prior and clear authorization of an act of Congress violates Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under Article I, Section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution and therefore constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution.

If you’d like to sound off on this issue, please take part in the WND Daily Poll.

So happens there are conservative Americans of hispanic descent who F’n would vote for a Candidate that proved he  “had a pair”  “X”


Savage to GOP candidates: Say this and you’ll win

“This is a primary issue … and none of them will talk about it”

Pointing to the Obama administration’s announcement yesterday of a de facto amnesty for hundreds of thousands of El Salvador nationals living illegally in the U.S., talk-radio host Michael Savage wondered aloud why the candidates for the Republican presidential nomination and the moderators of more than a dozen debates have virtually ignored the issue of illegal immigration.

“This is a primary issue in the United States of America, and none of them will talk about it,” Savage told his “Savage Nation” listeners last night.

“How can I get excited about an election … when there are certain topics of immense importance to the American people that are verboten?” he asked.

You’ve always known that “Liberalism is a Mental Disorder”: Get Savage Solutions

The Department of Homeland Security announced yesterday that it will not force 215,000 El Salvadorans living in the U.S. illegally to return home because of a series of earthquakes in 2001. The agency said El Salvador “remains unable, temporarily, to handle adequately the return of its nationals.”

“He is going out full bore for the illegal alien vote,” Savage said.

Savage said that even if debate moderators such as left-leaning Diane Sawyer and George Stephanopolous of ABC News won’t raise the issue, the Republican candidates “have every opportunity to raise these questions whenever a camera is put near their face.”

“They could simply say, ‘You know, I’m outraged this morning the president granted de facto amnesty to 215,000 people from El Salvador. That’s a foul ball. He has to come to Congress for this. He is not a dictator.’

“That would win the election” for any candidate who would say that, Savage said.

But it’s clear, Savage said, that the candidates are afraid of the “Hispanic lobby.”

“Politicians are catering to them,” he said. “They would rather cater to an imagined illegal demographic than to a rock-ribbed conservative demographic.”

Savage recalled a dinner he had in December 2010 with former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who won the New Hampshire primary last night after a narrow victory in Iowa.

Savage asked Romney why he didn’t strongly address the illegal alien problem. Romney acknowledged the problem but essentially said that no matter how you approach it, you’ll be labeled a racist.

Obama, meanwhile, according to Savage, “wants to make certain as many illegal aliens vote for [him] as possible, since most Americans have detached from the Good Train Obama.”

“They will not vote for this man again,” he said of American citizens. “They understand they’ve been lied to, that he’s in it for his own self and his party.”

“The Savage Nation” airs live Monday through Friday from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. Eastern. It can be heard online through stations such as KSTE in Sacramento.

Long ago I upset people by being so appalled at similar behavior, that I commented “435 reasons for a sniper rifle”.    I know I can’t take the law in my own hands;  however, treason is treason.  In time of war, being convicted of treason calls for a firing squad.  “X’

Posted on December 20, 2011 by qathy             [PAN member]

Today I went searching for a specific piece of legislation. It is a bill currently in committee in the House of Representatives. Imagine my dismay when I discovered that it includes a clause which says that the 11th amendment does not apply to any lawsuits initiated by people complaining of infractions of the legislation.

Forgive me for my apparent stupidity, but how can Congress enact such legislation? If such a clause is included in this bill, how many others have the same clause? Why are we not aware that Congress is so blatantly pushing the Constitution aside?

For a long time I have known that Congress avoids the Constitution when it feels the need. Every entitlement program in existence would disappear in a flash if the Constitution prevailed. But I was not aware that any of the bills that created these programs included a clause which said, in essence, the Constitution is suspended with regard to this bill. I always thought they were simply finessing the programs and that they succeeded simply because nobody has yet mounted a successful attack on their Constitutionality.

This, situation, however, is different. This bill states in plain language that even a legislative dummy like me can understand. This bill says that 11th amendment may not be used as a defense in lawsuits subsequent to this legislation.

In case you don’t have the amendments memorized, the 11th amendment is about states’ rights. It enshrines the sovereignty of states with regard to the powers not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution. The 11th amendment says:

“The judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by citizens of another state, or by citizens or subjects of any foreign state.”

By inserting a clause that says this amendment does not apply, the Congress says that the citizen from state A who objects to action in state B and sues on the basis of this law may sue state B without regard to the fact that the Constitution disallows such suits. Nothing in the Constitution forbids a citizen in state A from suing his own state for some infraction, but it does not permit him to cross state lines to lodge such a suit. Congress appears to have appropriated to itself some power we did not grant it in the Constitution, because it appears to believe that it can deny Constitutional rights to a state.

Notice that I have not commented on the central subject of the legislation. That is not the issue I am concerned about in this post. I am concerned about anything that dilutes the power of the Constitution to shape our government. We have a Constitution precisely because the federal government needs boundaries. Without limits applied to it, the federal government will overrun the states and reduce them to mere administrative units for federal power. It is appalling to see that this statement has been boldly inserted into a piece of legislation and nobody is worrying about it.

I am not sure how I find out if this clause is in any other bills or in existing laws. If it is, then I am really worried.

When our president stated recently that this form of government does not work and never has worked, I was appalled. I knew he believed it, but I thought he was still trying to fool us into believing something better of him. In the legislative clause which asserts that Congress can disallow a right which the Constitution grants to states, I see that our president is not alone in his belief that the Constitution is not a good thing, because it interferes with federal power. This is scary.

Just yesterday I listened to an interview with Stuart Varney. He said something very important. He said that when he came to the USA forty years ago, he was fleeing socialism. He is very disturbed to see that it is now arising in the US, the place he thought would be a haven from its onslaught. I feel the same way. I grew up knowing that we needed to defend ourselves from the USSR because we did not want to be engulfed by socialism. Now I feel that it is engulfing me, anyway.

What can a single outraged citizen do about this problem?

Courtesy of Citizen Tom

 Posted on December 22, 2011by

Following in the footsteps of a tradition as favored as a certain popular poem, Delegate Scott Lingamfelter reminds us once again of the consequences of failing to elect the best people we can.

T’was the Night of Our Gridlock

T’was the night before Christmas and all through DC;
The President and Congress just couldn’t agree;
Once again they are arguing about how to spend bucks;
Leaving no doubt among us that they’re all just nuts

“Extend unemployment!”, Obama demands;
“Pay for it first” is the House’s firm stand;
“More debt’s the way” says Reid in a fit;
“And a two month extension is all that you get”

“But the President wants a full year” says the House
“We all agree so let’s vote this bill out”;
“Well on second thought” Mr. Reid said with glee
“A two month deal is best politically?”

“If we go with a year, we’d end this big mess;
No more to argue, is that really best?
Then how can Obama beat up on your guys;
At the State of the Union when that time arrives?”

Says ol Dirty Harry, “It’s all about power;
If we lose the Senate, the libs will be sour”
Says the House with disgust, “make it a year!”
Give all the people a reason to cheer!”

“Prove to them now that you’re not a big jerk
Delay your vacation, let’s get down to work!”
“Delay our vacation?”, Reid says with surprise
“We’d rather the House be blamed and despised”

“Sure, a year would be best for all in the land;
But not for Obama, with whom we all stand”;
“If we yield to you”, say Reid with a sneer;
Barack’s State of the Union will fall on deaf ears”

“That just will not do with Elections at stake;
To heck with the people, two months you will take!”
So that’s where we stand, in good ol’ DC;
Watching our leaders be all they can be”

Which leaves me to wonder as I look to the sky;
“Hasten November” when I say good-bye
To Obama and Reid, who lead from behind;
While hard working families are left in a bind

Elections do matter, of that I am sure;
And if Obama returns, even more will be poor;
It’s time for real change, and don’t be in doubt;
That change will arrive when we vote this guy out!”

L. Scott Lingamfelter, December 2011

The Ripening Wanderer

The Clockwork Conservative

All wound up about politics, history, culture... lots of stuff.


at the Re-Birth of America!

ON MY WATCH - the writings of SamHenry

A Writer's Take on Global and National Issues with Background Information and Humor As Needed

Once Written

A Political Blog

Welcome to the Right Central

Under Construction.

purveyor of space kablooie stories.

Truth in Palmyra

By Wally Fry

Truth and Shadows

Following the white rabbit

Pacific Paratrooper

This site is Pacific War era information


The best in WWII aviation history

BUNKERVILLE | God, Guns and Guts Comrades!

God, Guns and Guts Comrades!

Aces Flying High

An Aussie's travels to air shows, aviation museums and related events around the world, with a bit of aerospace history along the way!

Eyes on Europe & Middle East

Des regards croisés sur l'Europe et le Moyen Orient

Doc Baize

Give me liberty or give me death!



Chastisement 2014

He is ready to separate the chaff from the wheat with his winnowing fork


The Take Down Of America

The Dangers of Allah

Confused about Islam, Muslims, Taqiyya, Kitman, The Islamic State, and Sharia? I've spent 14 years studying these confused beings.  They are not at all what they want us to believe, especially those who are ruled by al Qaeda , ISIS and the Muslim Brotherhood as well as those who commit overt and covert Jihad while practicing Sharia tortures upon women

Treason Among Us

A blog by Guido Volante Author of "Treason Among Us; Secrets of the S.E.C."

The Counter Jihad Report

News ~ Resources ~ Activism

Documenting the Islamization of America

Digestible Politics

Politics Made Easy!

A Conservative Christian Man

Stand for Your Belief or it is Not a Belief but an Excuse

sharia unveiled

illuminating minds

We Moved > Go To:


%d bloggers like this: