- “If I wanted America to fail”
- All 50 State Constitutions Mention…
- Best of CPAC
- Documentaries & Media
- George Soros
- How Do You Kill 11 Million People?
- It’s mental health that is the problem, not guns
- Lara Logan’s Warning to America
- Make Mine Freedom
- Obama Admin Caught Sending Guns to Drug Cartels
- Restoring America’s Promise
- Rules for Radicals
- SCOTUS: Government Can Force You to Buy Anything
- The Iron Lady
- The Signing
- What is a Constitutional Moderate?
- Why Republicans Lost
- 2012 Primary
- Academic Misconduct
- Amity Shlaes
- Ayaan Hirsi Ali
- Ben Carson
- Bill Whittle
- Bobby Jindal
- Breitbart is Here
- Chris Christie
- Colion Noir
- Communications Theory
- Culture War
- Dan Perino
- Dick Morris
- Dirty Tricks
- Elections have Consequences
- Elite Media
- Energy Policy
- Foreign Policy
- Gangsta Govt
- Global Security
- Health Law
- Herman Cain
- John Wayne
- Kirsten Powers
- Lee Doren
- Michelle Rhee
- Milton Friedman
- Mitt Romney
- Mortgage Crisis
- Mount Vernon
- National Security
- Niall Ferguson
- Nikki Haley
- Paul Ryan
- Pay to Play
- Prager University
- Rick Perry
- Robert Spencer
- School Indoctrination
- Social Security
- Stuck on Stupid
- Tammy Bruce
- Thomas Sowell
- True Talking Points
- Vote Fraud
- Walter Williams
October 2014 M T W T F S S « Sep 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
This ad is a great example of how far politicians will lie to get elected.
One would think by this commercial that Alison Grimes is a conservative Democrat. She isn’t. This commercial is clearly designed to paint her as a conservative Democrat, much like the the “Sportsman for Obama” pro-gun television ad from 2008.
Alison Grimes’ earlier speeches and debates clearly demonstrate that she is a proud card carrying leftist. her rhetoric is similar to what one finds from DNC Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schulz (1, 2, 3, 4), and like Schultz, is in solid standing with the Nancy Pelosi/Harry Reid wing of the Democratic Party.
Grimes would vote to place the same gun banning, eco-extremist, anti-affordable energy leaders in charge of the Senate, committees, and confirm into the executive branch as it has now, which is why anti-gun groups and most every other far left interest donate to her campaign.
The 2008 Obama “pro-gun” television ad has been pulled down from his YouTube channel which is a shame because we would like to show it to you for comparison, but remember this:
[Editor's Note: Interestingly enough, back in 2008 during my college days, I wrote a post calling out Obama's pro-gun ads as a fraud when compared with his record. Even MSNBC called him out on the deception. You can read the post HERE.]
Today’s political communications are designed to target specific groups of voters with messages and images designed for “attitude implantation”. A pro-gun coal miner might look at the Grimes ad and think he has a champion in her, but the truth is she would vote for the same leaders and appointees sent by the party leadership.
Emails and home mailings are targeted to the each type of voter specifically. If enough data can be gleaned from your internet activity, political donations, and Facebook group memberships you will get political communications in your inbox telling you exactly what you want to hear. For example, this very writer donated to Rand Paul’s lawsuit against illegal NSA domestic spying. Afterwards I received “please donate” emails from the RNC, as well as the House and Senate Leadership PAC’s sounding as if the GOP establishment is the heartbeat of the TEA Party movement and in the corner of Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, and Rand Paul when reality is in fact very much the opposite.
The technology exists today to find out exactly what the hot button issues for most voters are and to tell them exactly what they want to hear in order to solicit votes and donations with no regard for intellectual honesty.
[Editor's Note: Wow did we nail it: NYT: Democrats Using Ferguson Shooting To Mobilize Voters For 2014]
The horses were led to water and everyone drank….
Before we dig into what may be the most important story about the riots, looting and protests in Ferguson Missouri we want to make one thing very clear. We are not taking a position on whether or not the Micheal Brown shooting was totally justified.
The facts are that there are multiple conflicting witnesses on both sides, people are rushing to judgment and there has been disinformation coming from both sides. For Example: some reports said that Brown was shot in the back and the autopsy proved that was not the case. Other reports said that Officer Wilson suffered an eye socket fracture and now that has been refuted. It is going to be some time before we have a more complete picture of what happened on that day, if ever.
What we are certain of however is that fear, mistrust and agitation have been fueled by both “sides”. While some have acted responsibly, powerful Democrats and activists with deep roots into the current Democratic Party leadership are the ones burning this candle at both ends.
“If you’re not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.” – Malcolm X
It has been the playbook of the left to destroy the American melting-pot (E pluribus Unum), by agitating any differences among Americans. Rich vs poor, black vs white, lack vs Latino, management vs labor; all are used to divide and conquer. Democrats are empowered by promising justice to both sides. This playbook has been spelled out in detail by in countless books and publications by the left from the Communist Manifesto, to the works of Vladimir Lenin, the scholarly research of Cultural Marxism by the Frankfurt School (which invented multiculturalism and political correctness), to the current Democratic Party campaign playbook, Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky.
Instead of dealing with the low hanging fruit first such as the agitation of Al Sharpton lets look at those who runs state and local politics in Missouri. How has local law enforcement been politicized in recent years?
Missouri Governor Jay Nixon put out his infamous MIAC Report with the Missouri Highway Patrol which lumped people who are pro-life, oppose illegal immigration, TEA Party activists and veterans as terrorists along with skinheads and anti-semites.
Remember this from the 2008 election? St. Louis County prosecutors and sheriffs formed the “Obama Truth Squad.”
Prosecutors and sheriffs from across Missouri are joining something called the “Barack Obama Truth Squad.” Two high-profile prosecutors are part of the team. We met them this afternoon in the Central West this afternoon. They are Jennifer Joyce of the city (and) Bob McCulloch, the St. Louis County prosecuting attorney. They will be reminding voters that Barack Obama is a Christian, who wants to cut taxes for anyone making less than $250,000 a year. They also say they plan to respond immediately to any ads and statements that might violate Missouri ethics laws.
The threat here is not veiled at all. Work against the election of Barack Obama and you will gain the undivided attention of police and prosecutors.
This is also where Kenneth Gladney, a 38 year old black men who was selling political buttons and shirts to make a living at political events, was beaten on video by SEIU thugs working in league with the Democratic Party. St Louis law enforcement and prosecutors were not interested in filing charges until public pressure grew and then the prosecution was so unaggressive that in spite of having the video which shows what happened, the SEIU thugs were acquitted.
Governor Nixon at first was critical of St Louis authorities, all Democrats mind you, saying that police, by selectively releasing bits of information were trying to besmirch Micheal Brown, then Gov. Nixon said that he wanted a vigorous prosecution of the officer involved, even going so far as to say that there “needs to be justice for the family of Micheal Brown”. Now Gov. Nixon says that the officer might not face any kind of trial at all.
It get’s better. The prosecutor and chief investigator Bob – Obama Truth Squad – McCulloch’s “father, mother, brother, uncle and cousin all worked for the St. Louis Police Department, and his father was killed while responding to a call involving a black suspect”. Local community leaders have asked McCulloch to recuse himself because of the apparent conflict of interests. McCulloch has refused to recuse himself and Governor Nixon, who promised that justice, is standing by McCulloch.
Who needs agitators like Al Sharpton when you have a crew like this undermining all confidence in the process?
Confidence in the process needs to be restored if there is going to be any healing in Ferguson. Fox News’ Steve Harrigan asked one of the protestors if he believed in innocent until proven guilty:
(Paraphrasing) Sure I do, there should be a trial, but there is a double standard. If someone from my community shoots an unarmed man he will get locked up and then there will be a trial to give him a chance to be prove himself innocent. When they kill us they don’t get locked up, most of the time there is no trial, nothing.
Agree with the protestor’s interpretation of the system or not, to the average man on the street the protestor makes a good point. There appears to be two justice systems, one for those in power and another for his community. Reason Magazine reports that 50% of Americans believe that police are not held accountable for their misconduct. That number rises to 64 percent for Hispanics and 66 percent for African Americans.
Local police, who’s training and actions are under the jurisdiction of the very well connected Democrats mentioned above, have not inspired confidence and instead have accomplished rather the opposite. To be clear we are not anti-police by any means but facts are facts and the behavior of local police controlled by Democrats for decades speaks to the problems in St Louis County.
While the militarization of police is another article and another subject, there are clear training issues shown in these photos. Christopher Holton, Vice President of the Center for Security Policy, stated on his Facebook page that putting a sniper in plain view with his rifle pointed at protestors is foolish and clearly provocative. Police going about with rifles raised is more of the same. Anyone with firearms training knows that one do not raise a weapon at someone unless there is an intent to shoot as someone should have told the officer in the video below while he was threatening to “expletive kill protestors” (warning NSFW):
Further undermining public confidence, as thugs looted police were ordered to stand down leaving store owners on their own. Police also targeted journalists which has resulted in multiple lawsuits under Missouri’s Sunshine Law. At least one of the attacks on a news crew was caught on video.
The raw statistics of Ferguson Police under the control of our inclusive and tolerant Democratic Party friends also do not inspire confidence. While over 67% of Ferguson’s population is black only three of its 53 police officers are. Traffic stop statistics show that 86% of traffic stops are black drivers. One member of the Ferguson City Council is black and zero members of its school board are. Here is a statistic that anyone would find maddening, 19% of Ferguson’s general budget comes from traffic fines and court fees. For profit policing has always disproportionately affected the poor and in a community like Ferguson it means blacks. It will be interesting to see how Democrats attempt to find a way to blame non-existent Republicans in Ferguson or St Louis for this.
All of this and more has prompted Attorney General Eric Holder to launch a full DoJ investigation of his own. We wish this development would inspire confidence. Remember that Holder is responsible for sending guns to Mexican drug cartels in an effort to blame American gun owners for the violence that ensued. Holder Has politicized the voting rights division and protected the Black Panthers as they showed up armed to the polls to help insure that only Obama supporters voted. Eric Holder launched a non-existent investigation into illegal IRS targeting of grass roots political groups and 47 government Inspector Generals have sent a letter of protest to Congress stating that the Obama Administration is getting in the way of justice. Eric Holder’s Justice Department is also responsible for the intimidation and illegal spying on journalists. Some are already openly asking if Eric Holder intends to railroad the police officer involved in the shooting for political reasons.
Government officials and those in their employ are not the only ones agitating. Several elite media networks have been shameful in their provocative and over the top coverage of Ferguson in an attempt to generate conflict and thus ratings.
Former CNN anchor and Fox News Channel’s “MediaBuzz” host Howard Kurtz blasted the irresponsible coverage:
“Some liberal outlets [are] creating almost a lynch mob mentality around this, the Huffington Post today, screaming banner headline ‘Arrest Him.’ Now, the Huffington Post, nor you or I, knows exactly what happened” he said. And “when you cross that line into becoming an advocate and to demanding that somebody be prosecuted before the facts are in, while the investigation is going on, you’re grandstanding, you’re trying to keep the story alive and I really think it’s troubling.”
Kurtz also criticized CNN for showing the house of accused officer Darren Wilson, stating, “It defies my understanding how you could put his life or the life of his family in danger by even briefly showing the house or naming the street.”
[Note: CNN was not alone. Yahoo News, USA Today and the Washington Post also reported the location of Officer Wilson's home.]
The coverage drove CNN to number one in “the demo” and second in overall ratings. Howard Kurz, a liberal who at times acts as an apologist for political media bias, wasn’t alone in his candid critique. Breitbart News’ John Nolte:
Which now brings us to Al Sharpton. Politico reports that Al Sharpton is the White House’s man on the ground in Ferguson. Aside from Al Sharpton’s long history of bogus racial incitement and hoaxes, what does NBC think it is accomplishing with allowing Sharpton to be a player at creating news events in Ferguson while covering those same events on his nightly MSNBC program? All pretense of fairness, accuracy and objectivity is out the window.
Alveda King, niece of slain civil rights icon Dr. Martin Luther King, said that where Al Sharpton goes unrest escalates.
Speaking of unrest, agitators from Chicago were spotted in Ferguson inciting violence including Black Panthers and members of the Chicago Revolutionary Communist Party all of which have close ties with the Saul Alinsky inspired “community organizers” of the Chicago political machine which President Obama had worked with for years. Other self admitted revolutionary communists with relationships with the White House include Bill Ayers, Van Jones, Frank Marshall Davis(2), and Reverend Jeremiah Wright (2).
On Monday at Micheal Brown’s funeral the agitation continued with repeated comparisons of Brown to Jesus Christ, and the end goal – a statement from Al Sharpton calling for political action to follow him and of course to vote Democrat:
Sharpton called for Brown’s death to become a springboard for political action. “We can’t have a fit, we’ve got to have a movement,” Sharpton said. “A fit you get mad and run out for a couple of nights, a movement means we’ve got to be here for the long haul, and turn our chance into change,” he said, “our demonstration into legislation.”
It is always the goal of those who seek power to control both the establishment and the opposition. Those in the leadership of “all/both sides”, in apparent opposition to each other, all have a long chummy relationship with a segment of the leadership of the Democratic Party.
In the mean time black unemployment and labor participation are hovering at record lows, our inner cities are disaster in spite of trillions in new spending that promised to fix it, inner city schools are the quintessential example of failure. The Conference of Mayors reports that American jobs pay 23% less than they did before 2008 totaling $93 billion in lost wages.
Every graphic below creates a false narrative and is yet believed by many people.
In 1890 the US Government did kill 290 civilians including women and children who were asked to surrender their arms and did so, when they were slaughtered.
What does the graphic omit? It was called the “Battle of Wounded Knee” in some older history books. Of course, since the winner usually writes the history, that explains why this event was called a “Battle” and not a “slaughter” which is much closer to the truth.
What is the lie? This event did not happen at a school.
Below is yet another example of out of context selective editing:
Actual quote from “The Audacity of Hope” [pg. 261]:
Of course, not all my conversations in immigrant communities follow this easy pattern. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific assurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.
In today’s examples we see propaganda that is designed to target the sensibilities of traditionalists and conservatives. Propaganda from “the right” is usually far less sophisticated and of lower production value than examples from the progressive left. There are several reasons for this.
The “right” just aren’t very good liars. To most traditionalists, Christians, Conservatives and Libertarians lying is held in disdain. Conversely, when one reads most any major leftist/progressive thinker be it Hegel, Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Weber, Gramsci, Alinsky, Lippmann, etc they all endorse deception as a legitimate political tactic going so far to say that “rationality must be imposed from above”, “the ends justifies the means”, “the truth is anything that advances class struggle”, “all morality is secondary to the class struggle polemic”, “those who oppose the advance toward a leviathan state should be painted as rubes”, etc.
A great deal of this propaganda comes from outlandish conspiracy sites and/or from small bloggers who are trying to drive up traffic by coming up with something to grab attention.
Some of this type of misinformation is created by leftist sites and pressure groups so they can out “conservative lies” and thus bring attention to themselves. Creating controversy for the purpose of playing the hero is hardly a new tactic in political activism.
Political candidates from both parties have been known to put up fake “patriot” web sites that propagate disinformation and smears on rival candidates designed to target the sensitivities of conservatives. Social Media often picks up this misinformation and runs with it. The elite media often refers to such tactics as “campaign dirty tricks“. Mitt Romney employed this tactic against Fred Thompson and got caught. Ron Paul supporters have been caught doing this as well.
As a part of our attitude change propaganda series today we are looking at Alex Jones.
Alex Jones uses several tricks to make his site look like a real information source. Aside from slick graphics that make parts of his site look like other legitimate news sites, he takes work from credible publications such as Human Events, recycles them with his hype and conspiracy theories added, and then tells people that the ONLY source of this information is him and that everyone else conspires to keep this from them (OK that one is partially true). Like all conspiracy theorists such as “9/11 truthers” those who effectively disagree with Jones automatically become a part of “the conspiracy”.
Jones uses a regular formula for what he puts out to keep his readers and listeners hooked. Jones mixes 1/3 to 2/3 of real facts with over-hype and his cult of personality conspiracy language. He will show you A + B & then how A + B = C, and then say this is why his X Y Z narrative is completely true. Jones does not explain or demonstrate how he makes the leap from ABC to XYZ in his narrative. Conveniently, when you argue with Jones he throws what is true about the A B C part of his narrative in your face and accuses you of lying or being against “the facts”.
Jones does same thing that Donald Trump did in his demonization of China in his “almost” presidential campaign – ‘IT’S THEM! THEY CHEATED! THEY did this to YOU!’ Now granted China does not play fair, but the truth is that China uses our leaders’ own stupidity against us. While China most certainly intends to damage us to a degree, it is no where near the damage caused by our own deeply flawed leaders. The victim card is mighty seductive to those who have not steeled themselves against it.
Those who are new to politics risk getting caught up with Jones pretty easily. Few will deny that Jones is entertaining. He is a cult of personality propagandist who leverages the appeal of a cloak and dagger soap opera. People who believe Jones over time become emotionally attached, they “believe in Alex” and it becomes less and less about facts or policy. Being a “Joneser” effectively renders someone politically powerless. Jonser’s mostly talk amongst themselves but never gain any political power as those with political experience ignore them. Jonser’s, like most people caught in a cult of personality, are virtually immune to any evidence that indicates that Jones is flawed.
45 Failed Alex Jones Predictions
To those who follow such things, you might say, “so what else is new”. Even so, it is worth reporting because it is an excellent example of attitude change propaganda mass media theory and it demonstrates how far some people will go to propagate a lie.
The video below from Right Wing Watch shows Glenn Beck talking about two different subjects and then splices them together to create the false narrative/claim against Beck, namely that he is warning that Obama is going to round up conservatives and put them into camps. The splice happens at 1:07 into the video.
At the beginning of the video Beck accurately explains historical examples of when those in power demonize people so as to make them two dimensional and easier to persecute. At the 1:07 mark the video cuts to Beck speculating on how he thinks Obama might react to mass critique if the elite media turned on him. By linking these two clips together using careful editing they have gullible people believing something that Beck simply did not say or intend to say.
The ruse by Right Wing Watch is further given away in the clip they used as Beck can be seen clearly stating that both sides in a conflict often use such demonization techniques.
This is the kind of dishonest shenanigan that “People for the American Way” and “Media Matters” have been caught doing from time to time. Alec Baldwin sits on the board for the group if that is an indication oh how off the rails they can get.
Here is an example where Media Matters was caught red handed doing the same – LINK.
Glenn Beck does three hours of broadcasting a day, so if someone disagrees with him there is room to do it legitimately without resorting to dishonest editing tricks.
Glenn Beck posts the entire audio of his show on his web site and on SoundCloud every day. Anyone can download the entire show and listen for themselves as there is no sign up or membership fee.
The entire post from Right Wing Watch is below:
Glenn Beck Warns Obama Is About To Snap, Will Start Putting Conservatives Into Internment Camps
On his radio broadcast today, Glenn Beck warned that too many crises are piling up all at the same time which will cause the press to finally turn on President Obama. That, in turn, will cause Obama to finally snap and start rounding up conservatives and putting them into camps.
Just as German society demonized Jews for years before the Nazis took power, Beck warned that this nation “has been watering some seeds” for nearly ten years to condition Americans to accept that “there are those enemies of the president that need to be punished.”
Once the press turns on Obama, Beck warned, he “is not going to react well” because he has been coddled his entire life and was always treated like a god who was never to be criticized or questioned.
Saying that Obama is like a spoiled child who is about to be told that he doesn’t get a trophy just for participating, Beck predicted that Obama would respond by lashing out furiously at conservatives and putting them into internment camps.
By Chuck Norton, Editor
[Note: This article was quoted by Eric Bolling on The Five - fxn.ws/1kRPBlz ]
Continuing on with our attitude change propaganda series, put this one in the “how far will they go to lie to you” folder.
If one were to believe the graphic below put out by “Mom’s Demand Action” you would think that the United States is the most violent country in the world…
However, the hoops one must jump through to get to the 20x number is staggering. If one were to add Americans shot by police, drug gang vs drug gang violence, border violence from Mexico, and Americans killed in war we still could not get near the 20x number claimed.
Tricks such as counting the deaths of Americans by police, during war, or even on D-Day as “gun violence” (after all the Germans used 14 MG42 machine guns to defend Omaha Beach at Normandy) are commonplace when one examines the statistics put out by academics and pressure groups who are given grants to come up with such scarey numbers.
The rather long list at the bottom of this page is the number of intentional homicides per 100,000 as ranked by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. As you can see, the United States is far from the most dangerous country in the world. The United States is average when it comes to numbers that count, in this case intentional homicides. There are 104 countries that rank worse than the United States and 102 countries that rank better. It is important to point out that most of the safest countries are smaller and have a unified culture as opposed to the United States which is huge and is a “melting pot” culturally.
Tiny little Belgium has an intentional homicide rate of 1.7 per 100,000. If we were to take that number and multiply it 20x the United States allegedly should have an intentional homicide rate of 34.0 per 100,000 rather than the 4.9 we have now.
But the story doesn’t end there. The gun violence in the United States has dropped over 49 percent since 1993 (http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/files/2013/05/firearms_final_05-2013.pdf]. Assaults, robberies, and sex crimes are also down 75 percent. While at the same time gun sales have risen exponentially.
According to a recent investigation by The Washington Times:
“More than 21 million applications were run through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System last year, marking nearly an 8 percent increase and the 11th straight year that the number has risen.”
Let’s put that 21 million number in context. Each time a firearm is purchased, unless the buyer is exempt, the buyer’s name is put through the FBI National Instant Check Service (NICS) database to perform a back ground check. There is one NICS check even if the sale is for multiple guns. Also, in states such as Indiana, buyers who have a permit to carry a concealed weapon are exempt from the check. While no one knows the exact number of guns sold to civilians last year, that number may well be over 30 million in a single year.
What does all this mean? It means that while violent crime and firearm related homicide has dropped dramatically, literally hundreds of millions of guns have been bought by American civilians during the same time period. It means that any claims that civilian gun ownership is the cause of “escalating violent crime” is not supportable by any genuine examination of available data. So much so that recent data tends to suggest the opposite.
Who Is Shannon Watts?
This writer, as a student of mass media theory, is impressed by the production value, top of the line graphics and slick emotional marketing appeals generated regularly by Mom’s Demand Action. The work is impressive even by standards of a billion dollar presidential campaign, but when one looks at Mom’s Demand Action’s FaceBook they tell you that it was started by a concerned home maker from Indiana named Shannon Watts and its leaders are just a few concerned mothers. Oh really?
So who is Shannon Watts and where is she getting funds for top of the line campaign materials as well as the public relations talent to produce it?
Upon doing some digging we learned that Shannon Watt’s real name is Shannon Troughton. Her LinkedIn page shows her long career as a high dollar East Coast corporate and government public relations executive including:
Director, Global Public and Corporate Affairs at Monsanto
Freelance Senior Consultant/Counselor at Fleishman-Hillard
Founder and President at VoxPop Public Relations
Vice President, Corporate Communications at WellPoint
Director, Global Communications at GE Healthcare
Vice President, Corporate and Public Affairs at Fleishman-Hillard
Public Affairs Officer at Missouri State Government
Monsanto stands out as it has been named on multiple occasions as the company with the worst ethics record in the world. Vanity Fair even did a large investigative piece on Monsanto called “Harvest of Fear” and our sweet little home maker Shannon “Watts” Troughton was their chief spin-doctor.
[Editor's Note: We do not have the space to outline the ethical lapses of Monsanto and quite candidly, explain just how low Monsanto will go and the lengths they will go to destroy little people just because they can. Books, and lots of them, have been written about this. Being the most unethical is not just something that happens, it is a choice and being the worst offender of all takes effort.]
At Fleishman-Hillard she directed a crisis communications team who represented Monsanto, BP Amoco, Bayer Corporation, Firestone, McDonald’s, Applebee’s, Purdue Pharma, Osco, BASF, and Hallmark. She even has a listing in PR Newswire.
In short, Shannon “Watts” Troughton is a ruthless high dollar public relations hired gun.
One does not have to look far to find people Shannon “Mom’s Demand Action” Troughton has smeared. Television and radio star Dana Loesch has been a frequent target of Troughton’s. Among other things, Troughton has falsely accused Loesch of being on the payroll of the NRA and of a gun company called Magpul simply because Loesch has stated that women should be allowed to choose to use a firearm for self defense.
Follow The Money
The New York Times, Buzzfeed and others have reported that “Mom’s Demand Action” is a front group for former New York Mayor Micheal Bloomberg’s “Mayors Against Illegal Guns”. Bloomberg has vowed to spend $50 million of his own money to battle the National Rifle Association. NRA certified instructors train both civilians and law enforcement, as well as teach hunter’s safety courses. The NRA also advocates for civilians who choose to use a firearm for self defense.
Mayors Against Illegal Guns’ efforts have been hamstrung thus far as high profile members have left the organization saying about Bloomberg’s group, “They’re not just against illegal guns, they’re against all guns.”
Dana Loesch attempted to interview Shannon “Watts” Troughton at the NRA Convention to see if she would be willing to correct the record or clarify her previous false statements. Armed guards working for Watts intervened and tried to push Loesch out of the way as Watts made her way to an up-armored SUV with a New York license plate. Erica Soto Lamb, a spokesman for Mom’s Demand Action, confirmed that they use armed guards at public events.
Erica Soto Lamb, a spokesman for Mom’s Demand Action, confirmed that they use armed guards at public events.
[Editor's Note: Yours truly was banned from Shannon "Watts" Troughton's Mom's Demand Action FaceBook page within minutes of posting something challenging on of their claims. Like most hard propaganda outfits, they are not interested in any serious dialogue. Big money interests often create pressure groups designed to give the appearance of being grass roots organizations, but the decisions are always made where the money is, at the top. The creation of fake grass roots groups is often called "astroturfing". ]
Just yesterday Shannon “Watts” Troughton told CNN Host Victor Blackwell that “a good guy with a gun has never stopped a bad guy with a gun”. Of course that statement doesn’t pass the snicker test, but it does cause one to ask why she needs armed guards if she believes her own talking points, of course the obvious answer is that she doesn’t, but Bloomberg money spends as well as any other.
UPDATE – Shannon “Watts” Troughton’s list of school shootings includes incidents that were not school shootings (she lied) – LINK.
El Salvador 69.2
Ivory Coast 56.9
US Virgin Isl 39.2
St. Kitts& Nevis 38.2
South Africa 31.8
Trinidad & Tobago 31.3
Central African Republic 29.3
Puerto Rico 26.2
Saint Lucia 25.2
Dom Republic 25.0
St Vincent & Grenadines 22.9
Equatorial Guinea 20.7
Burkina Faso 18.0
Sierra Leone 14.9
French Guiana 13.3
Papua New Guinea 13.0
Cape Verde 11.6
Turks 7 Caicos Islands 8.7
Brit Virgin Isl 8.6
Costa Rica 8.5
Cayman Islands 8.4
Antigua & Barbuda 6.8
North Korea 5.2
This is a great example of why so many universities do not teach American History well, virtually ignore American Studies and why Common Core dedicates all of a few lines of text to George Washington, James Madison and Thomas Jefferson.
What we see below is a textbook example of attitude change propaganda in action. It cherry picks certain facts and partial facts way out of context and strings them together with an attitude to create a narrative and an attitude that is entirely false. This kind of lying is no accident. It takes a very deliberate mind to come up with propaganda this sophisticated.
If students were well educated in civics as well as the history of Western Civilization they would not fall for nonsense like this from the FaceBook page of “Being Liberal” which I saw cross posted on the timeline of a recent high school graduate:
Forcing a whole country to abide by the laws of one religion leads to persecution and oppression. We see this not only in the U.S. but other countries. Keep religion out of the Constitution – let everyone choose their own belief system..coexist. – Kelsie Ferguson
It’s important to remember history accurately.
Since we are remembering history accurately today….
The Constitution was meant to be a short and simple framework for government, it was never intended to be the guidebook for governance. This is why honest judges look at the Declaration of Independence (which says that our rights come from you know who), the Federalist Papers, letters and notes from the Founders, early docs that influenced the Constitution like the Virginia Declaration of Rights etc.
It might be important to point out that all 50 state constitutions mentioned God – http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/g/god-constitutions.htm
Also, one does not need to have God to have persecution or oppression. Shall we tally up the number of the dead by regimes hostile to the notion that human rights are God given?
People’s Republic of China 1949-present
Body Count: 73,237,000
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
Body Count: 58,627,000
1922-1991 (69 years)
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
Body Count: 3,163,000
Cambodia under Pol Pot
Body Count: 2,627,000
Vietnam (Note: this number excludes the 1,062,000 from the Vietnam War)
Body Count: 1,670,000
People’s Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
Body Count: 1,343,610
Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
Body Count: 1,072,000
People’s Republic of Mozambique
Body Count: 700,000
Socialist Republic of Romania
Body Count: 435,000
This list continues for a long way. It is also important to note that Islamic regimes do not recognize God given human and political rights as we know them.
I see the mention of James Madison. GREAT! The Founders were virtually unanimous in their belief that the state should not create a state church as most every European power had done. In each case a European power cherry picked one denomination of Christianity over the others. The Founders were virtually unanimous in their opposition to that behavior.
That being said most of the Founders, James Madison especially… well take a read:
First, Madison was publicly outspoken about his personal Christian beliefs and convictions. For example, he encouraged his friend, William Bradford (who served as Attorney General under President Washington), to make sure of his own spiritual salvation:
[A] watchful eye must be kept on ourselves lest, while we are building ideal monuments of renown and bliss here, we neglect to have our names enrolled in the Annals of Heaven.
Madison even desired that all public officials – including Bradford – would declare openly and publicly their Christian beliefs and testimony:
I have sometimes thought there could not be a stronger testimony in favor of religion or against temporal enjoyments, even the most rational and manly, than for men who occupy the most honorable and gainful departments and [who] are rising in reputation and wealth, publicly to declare their unsatisfactoriness by becoming fervent advocates in the cause of Christ; and I wish you may give in your evidence in this way. 
Second, Madison was a member of the committee that authored the 1776 Virginia Bill of Rights and approved of its clause declaring that:
It is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity toward each other. 
Third, Madison’s proposed wording for the First Amendment demonstrates that he opposed only the establishment of a federal denomination, not public religious activities. His proposal declared:
The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established. 
(Madison reemphasized that position throughout the debates. )
Fourth, in 1789, Madison served on the Congressional committee which authorized, approved, and selected paid Congressional chaplains. 
Fifth, in 1812, President Madison signed a federal bill which economically aided a Bible Society in its goal of the mass distribution of the Bible. 
Sixth, throughout his Presidency (1809-1816), Madison endorsed public and official religious expressions by issuing several proclamations for national days of prayer, fasting, and thanksgiving. 
 Letter of Madison to William Bradford (November 9, 1772), in 1 James Madison, The Letters and Other Writings of James Madison 5-6 (New York: R. Worthington 1884).
 Letter of Madison to William Bradford (September 25, 1773), in 1 James Madison, The Papers of James Madison 66 (William T. Hutchinson ed., Illinois: University of Chicago Press 1962).
 The Proceedings of the Convention of Delegates, Held at the Capitol in the City of Williamsburg, in the Colony of Virginia, on Monday the 6th of May, 1776, 103 (Williamsburg: Alexander Purdie 1776) (Madison on the Committee on May 16, 1776; the “Declaration of Rights” passed June 12, 1776).
 1 The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States 451, 1st Cong., 1st Sess. (Washington, D. C.: Gales & Seaton 1834) (June 8, 1789).
 1 Debates and Proceedings 758-759 (1834 ed.) (August 15, 1789).
 1 Debates and Proceedings 109 (1834 ed.) (April 9, 1789).
 Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States 1325, 12th Cong., 2nd Sess. (Washington: Gales & Seaton 1853) (“An Act for the relief of the Bible Society of Philadelphia. Be it enacted, &c., That the duties arising and due to the United States upon certain stereotype plates, imported during the last year into the port of Philadelphia, on board the ship Brilliant, by the Bible Society of Philadelphia, for the purpose of printing editions of the Holy Bible, be and the same are hereby remitted, on behalf of the United States, to the said society: and any bond or security given for the securing of the payment of the said duties shall be cancelled. Approved February 2, 1813.”)
 1 James D. Richardson, A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 1789-1897, 513 (Published by Authority of Congress 1899) (July 9, 1812), 532-533 (July 23, 1813), 558 (November 16, 1814), and 560-561 (March 4, 1815).
Austan Goolsbee is the former Chief White House Economic Adviser for President Obama. Last week Goolsbee pelted Sean Hannity with the latest Democrat Party talking point, that Obama is a fiscal conservative because he cut the deficit in half!
In FY2007, the last year Republicans had total fiscal control the yearly deficit was 188 billion and Democrats to this day go on and on as to what big spenders Republicans were under Bush.
Democrats take over the Congress and in FY2008 the yearly deficit goes to 500 billion.
Obama is elected and FY2009 through 2013 the YEARLY deficits are 1200 – 1400 billion per year.
This year the yearly deficit is projected to be just over 680 billion.
“”OMG LOOK WE CUT THE DEFICIT IN HALF!! See how conservative we are!””
This is the kind of twisted logic spoiled children use to get their way. We don’t tolerate it from them, so don’t tolerate it from those in power.
BUT WAIT THERE’S MORE!
How corrupt is the Florida State GOP?
Aside from the fact that the Florida Republican leadership worked to get Allen West out of office in spite of the record amount of money he raised for them, read below via Jennifer Gratz:
Today the Florida Senate rules committee takes up legislation that would force breweries to sell our beer to a distributor, let the distributor mark it up and then sell it back to us before we could sell it in our tasting rooms. Adding insult to injury, the beer would never have to leave the brewery, the distributor wouldn’t have to actually distribute. Talk about getting paid for nothing. What a racket. Little faith in our government these days.
Must See Video: How Chicago TEA Party Leader Saved Outspoken Cancer Patient and Was Targeted by the IRS
In the video blow you will see Bill Elliot, who lost his insurance due to Obamacare, could not afford the new Obamacare premiums and deductibles, had resigned himself to die:
Along comes C. Steven Tucker, Chicago TEA Party Leader and also one of the top insurance brokers in the country. Tucker reached out to Bill Elliot and this is how he saved Mr. Elliot’s life, but the IRS was not amused about telling their story on Fox News:
Here are some “Ukrainian Separatists” in Eastern Ukraine – ALL with new military equipment, uniforms that are unmarked and top of the line RPG-30’s which we are sure they made in their own back yards out of household appliances.
by Chuck Norton
UPDATE – Aside from the comment section below which has several links, videos and comments, Mark Levin went more in-depth into the BLM’s deliberate abuse of power, creating a legal quagmire to destroy the lives of ranchers, coal miners, small farmers, and commercial fisherman. The audio is here:
UPDATE II – Fox News’ Sean Hannity reported today that the Chinese Solar plant Sen. Harry Reid broke ground on is not 213 miles from Clive Bundy’s ranch, it is 35 miles.
Levin explained in his April 11th broadcast how Bundy had agreements with the State of Nevada before the BLM claimed jurisdiction.
Originally Bundy and the other ranchers in the area cooperated with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). They negotiated water rights and grazing rights, building of roads and irrigation all with the approval of the state and BLM.
BLM was collecting fees from Bundy and the other ranchers in the area when BLM reneged on their earlier agreements [including agreements with Clark County H/T Michele Fiore]. BLM began a systematic and deliberate campaign to drive ranchers out of Southern Nevada. Levin said that while the BLM had granted itself the power to behave in such a way to make it “legal”, BLM’s war on local ranchers is a deliberate abuse of power.
Among the tactics used by BLM was a mandate for “environmental” reasons that Bundy and the other ranchers in the area decrease their cattle herd to 150 head, which would put every rancher out of business and did, including 52 ranchers in Clark County alone, leaving Cliven Bundy the last rancher standing.
BLM demands that ranchers sign a contract agreeing to new terms before they take payment. While BLM was successful in driving every other rancher out Cliven Bundy refused to agree to the new terms, stopped paying BLM and a 20 year legal battle began, with Bundy not being able to afford attorney’s for a drawn out legal battle (so much for due process). [NOTE: Cliven Bundy's English is so bad and so broken that he can barely manage to express himself.]
Another tactic that BLM engaged is was to declare much of the land off-limits because they said that the Desert Tortoise was endangered, while at the same time the population of Desert Tortoises was so abundant that the government initiated a program to hunt them.
Levin’s entire April 11th broadcast can be downloaded at the following link:
Late on April 11th, bloggers searching public documents discovered that Nevada Senator Harry Reid, whose former long-term aid now directs BLM, has been negotiating a deal with a Chinese energy firm to build a $5 billion solar energy facility on the land near the Bundy Ranch. Harry Reid’s son represents the Chinese firm looking to develop said land.
[NOTE: While the ground zero point of the Chinese Solar facility is
200 miles from the Bundy Ranch, it is within the area of the many dozens of ranchers the BLM has driven out in recent years as well as the associated public grazing land. Also water rights can easily be affected by such a large development 200 35 miles away (See Update II above). In any case, the overpopulated Desert Tortoise means that horses and cattle can't graze, but a massive solar facility ....well that is great for the so-called "endangered" tortoise?]
After the news of Harry Reid’s involvement in plans to seize and develop these lands with the Chinese had begun to go viral on the internet, the following morning the BLM agreed to pull its 200 armed men out and return seized cattle to Cliven Bundy. At the time of this writing the BLM had not indicated if the arrival of nearly 2000 (many armed) citizens was a factor in their motivation to stand down.
Has the political class has taken lands in the West much the same way they stole the land from the Indians and slaughtered them? What politician ran on “I am going to seize control of 86% of Nevada”?
They did it by a thousand cuts, incrementalism, and before you know it they have taken control of 86% of the land for no other reason other than they got away with it.
This is the problem, the Congress over time has handed so much “regulatory” authority to the executive branch that they can make up and change “the law” as they go at a whim. We have witnessed the wholesale breakdown of separation of powers.
Is not civil disobedience, the First Amendment right to protest, parts of Article V, and the Second Amendment all checks against the deadly power of lawmaking under such circumstances?
It is important to keep in mind that one of the government’s tactics in takings cases is to drag out court proceedings and make your legal bills so high that you run out of money and give up, which is why Cliven Bundy represented himself in court. Can one honestly say that Cliven Bundy got his due process in federal court with no legal team to help him?
Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:
From The Washington Free Beacon, Lachlan Markay. Press release follows.
Internal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) emails show extensive collaboration between top agency officials and leading environmentalist groups, including overt efforts to coordinate messaging and pressure the fossil fuel industry.
The emails, obtained by the Energy and Environment Legal Institute (EELI) through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, could fuel an ongoing controversy over EPA policies that critics say are biased against traditional sources of energy.
Emails show EPA used official events to help environmentalist groups gather signatures for petitions on agency rulemaking, incorporated advance copies of letters drafted by those groups into official statements, and worked with environmentalists to publicly pressure executives of at least one energy company.
View original 935 more words
At Benghazi the Al-Qaeda mortar teams had each building zeroed in which takes time and training. Distances measured to the meter, advanced scoping of the targets etc. Who brings mortars to a protest?
And this was after Al-Qaeda made coordinated attacks against the British, the Red Cross and other Western targets in Benghazi and took credit for them. We also know from wires to the State Department that our own people on the ground predicted an Al-Qeada attack was inevitable.
- Signed, the editor of this blog who has military munitions experience and everyone else who has had the requisite military training who isn’t paid to lie for you.
Whatever the status of the terrorists, there’s now widespread agreement even among Obama admin that they weren’t spontaneous protesters.
This was a piece I wrote in May that I think still holds up pretty well as far as describing Obama admin views: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57584921/officials-on-benghazi-we-made-mistakes-but-without-malice/ …
The NYT’s Hillary for President activism begins today.
Legendary Kate Smith Introduces God Bless America in 1938 /w a Special Appearance of President Reagan!
Awesome intellectual smackdown, Christmas style :)
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Christmas Greeting – 2013
I saw this and am I impressed. What a guy:
By Chuck Norton
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures. – 17th Amendment to the US Constitution
One might think off the cuff, what is so bad about that? You mean we didn’t used to directly elect our own Senators?
Before the 17th Amendment Senators served at the pleasure of your state legislators and could be recalled at any time should the Senator work against the interests of your state. So how did changing that take power from you?
What they didn’t tell you is that the way the political parties have structured themselves in the Congress, the direct election of Senators made political party leadership virtually all powerful.
In the Senate today the Majority Leader, Harry Reid holds that position, is near all powerful. He can hold up any and all legislation, he can stop the approval of any executive appointees, he can make rules to allow or restrict any amendments to bills, he can have debate ruled out of order by controlling the rules committee, and by using the power of the Majority Leader position he can change the Senate Rules to almost anything he wants. In the case of Harry Reid, he has shirked his constitutional duty by not allowing a federal budget to be passed for years. Since the passage of the 17th Amendment there is virtually no recourse.
If the Speaker of the House is in the same political party, party leadership (all of two people) will have total control over Conference Committees which shape how legislation in its final form is voted on; such power is near impossible to check.
Does this sound democratic to you? Is this what you have in mind when you think of a congress?
It gets worse….
The Majority Leader uses his power to modify legislation to aid party supporters, to steer appropriations and favorable legislation to Senators who will obey, and punish Senators who do not. As a result Senators are much more responsive to big money interests and K Street lobbyists than their own constituents. Senators get millions of dollars from out of state to run ads which are often used to trick voters with dishonest messaging. This goes quintuple for the Majority Leader. With his power to craft, steer, and modify legislation and the appropriations process he becomes a fund raising behemoth. The Majority Leader will control a “Leadership PAC” to dump campaign money into the coffers of Senators who obey his will.
How many of you have ever had a Senator who could care less what you had to say or your problems? How many of you have asked for constituent service from your Senator only to have his staff blow you off and tell you that is what your House member is for?
Look at states such as Virginia, who have state legislatures that oppose the expensive disaster that is Obamacare, have an elected Attorney General who sued in court to help stop parts of Obamacare and won, when when the people of the state and the members of the state legislature beg their two Senators for relief they are told to go fly a kite.
After learning all this it is no surprise why the 17th Amendment is considered one of the “Progressive Amendments” along with the income tax and other federal power grab amendments designed to centralize power in Washington DC. [Note: Progressives and statists love to create the illusions and trappings of public input and a democratic process - "You will have to pass the bill to find out what is in it" - former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi]
The Senate was created to represent the states and now they represent big money interests. If the State Legislatures control the Senators said Senators would have no choice but be responsive to the will of the people and the state, it would gave the states real representation in the central government once again, it would take the power away from out of state big money interests and power away form K Street lobbyists.
Citizens who wish to talk directly with their state legislator can just simply to his house or call him directly on the phone because the districts are small. State legislators are responsive to the voice of the people because the nature of their small districts forces them to be, thus amplifying your voice in the central government, not diminishing it.
Note: Mark Levin has proposed 11 Amendments to restore the checks and balances that have been broken down by dishonest courts and a Congress that has yielded most legislative power to unelected bureaucrats: http://www.amazon.com/The-Liberty-Amendments-Restoring-American/dp/1451606273
As is made self-evident in the trailer Steve Rogers (Captain America) is working for SHIELD with Natasha Romanoff (Black Widow). Rogers begins to question SHIELD’s motives and extra-constitutional way of business.
Rogers visits a WWII museum which features some of his exploits from the war. Rogers seems to be reflecting on who he is and what Captain America really stands for. Notice the kids idolizing him just as they did back in WWII.
Rogers, at some point in the film, decides that he has to part ways with SHIELD and they try to take him into custody. The people Rogers fights in the elevator are SHIELD agents who work for a division of SHIELD called STRIKE. They have STRIKE pins, badges and one has a a STRIKE patch on his arm. Notice that the two men in the quinjet with Rogers and Romanoff at the beginning are two of the men in the elevator.
In the screenshot below you can see both Rogers and Romanoff in civilian clothes. This seems to take place after Rogers leaves SHIELD.
Does Romanoff agree with Rogers and decide to go with him or is Romanoff just playing along to keep tabs on Rogers? We will have to wait for the film to find out. Romanoff is a ruthless liar and killer, but as we saw in The Avengers she is trying to find and establish a moral compass.
Below we see an old SHIELD logo from the late 1940’s. Notice it has the Stars & Stripes shield in the center much like Captain America’s first shield made of iron.
Cap sheds his new SHIELD issued uniform and puts on his old 1940’s uniform. Cap is obviously making it clear that he is Captain AMERICA, he is Captain Steve Rogers U.S. Army; not Captain SHIELD and not Captain international surveillance state. All surveillance state’s become states ran by fear, just as we are seeing in our own government here in the real world. In the trailer Falcon is also seen in battle against a SHIELD quinjet.
As a matter of absolute clarity, SHIELD is an agency with much more than its fair share of liars and killers; they most certainly do violate human rights (in the Marvel Universe). As far as we know, little stands in SHIELD’s way other than people such as Agent Coulson who do have some moral compass.
In episode one of Agents of SHIELD, Agent Ward asked Coulson if he should “scratch off” – meaning murder – members of “The Rising Tide”, an idealistic hactivist group. Coulson’s reaction was one of shock…fortunately.
Those who watch Agents of SHIELD on ABC television are being lulled into a false sense of security. Agent Coulson is a good man, and I suspect that because he IS a good man they have him working assignments on The Bus to keep him, and any would be objections from him, out of the way. Coulson is a threat to SHIELD because if any one man has the influence to turn the Avengers against SHIELD it is Phil Coulson.
While SHIELD is the hero in the show, let us not forget that in several ways they are also an anti-hero (a key dynamic that makes SHIELD so interesting). Power corrupts …and not every SHIELD authority figure is Agent Coulson.
Stark, Banner, Rogers and Thor were and do remain skeptical of SHIELD. SHIELD Director Nick Fury lied to their faces about just wanting the Tesseract to be a “warm light for all mankind”. Fury was in mid-sentence lying to Rogers’ face about using the Tesseract to make weapons when Jarvis finished hacking SHIELD and Stark said, “What were you lying?”
This writer has always liked Captain America because he keeps it real, he keeps things in perspective, he does not let agendas trump principles – in short he IS good. I am impressed that Joss Wheadon is exploring how truly on the edge of dangerous SHIELD is to its own charter.
Government shutdown veiling an assault on separation of powers, oversight, and the budgetary authority of Congress
by Chuck Norton
UPDATE – Just as we predicted, Democrats in the Senate are floating a bill to allow the President to raise the debt limit in direct violation of Article I of the Constitution. The Democrats have written the bill so that it would take a super majority in both chambers to block the President from giving himself an unlimited credit card.
Congress is not a rubber stamp. What President Obama and the Democrats are doing is a frontal assault on separation of powers, Congress’s power and responsibility of oversight of the Executive Branch, and the budgetary authority of Congress
The Democratic Party is pining for a powerful post-constititional Executive Branch that can illegally line item veto, pick and choose who laws will and wont apply to – Chicago style, and seize power to legislate on its own.
Legislating On His Own
Since the passage of the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, President Obama has taken it upon himself to change the law in ways he sees fit, a power that only Congress has under the Constitution. President Obama has given over 1,400 waivers to political allies be it groups or businesses which is illegal and corrupt.
The Grassley Amendment mandates that the Affordable Care Act apply to Congress just as it would to regular citizens; a law the President has waived under no constitutional authority whatsoever. He has done this in collusion with some in the congressional leadership and over the objection of some Republicans who believe doing so is unfair.
If a Republican president had behaved such a way Democrats and their friends in the praetorian media would be screaming for impeachment and enough Republicans would likely agree to get it done. Until this recent assault on the constitutional authority of Congress, Republicans have been somewhat timid in fear of being called “racist” by the praetorian media.
While Democrats would claim that Obama’s actions fall under the regulatory authority granted to the Executive Branch by Congress, regulatory authority is for the purpose of creating due process in carrying out the laws passed by Congress. It is not license to change the law or invent new laws unilaterally, nor is such authority permission to pick and choose winners and losers by deciding what parts will apply to who and who it will not. The President is seizing the power to legislate on his own and has been doing this more and more be it immigration laws, voting laws, domestic spying, and the list goes on.
UPDATE – Newt Gingrich: The President has decided that he wants to be “Legislator In Chief” – http://tiny.cc/wrtw4w
Many things are negotiable, equality under the law is not.
Assault on the Oversight and Budgetary Authority of Congress
Normally, under the regular order of appropriations and budgeting, committees in Congress will hold hearings on and then vote on how your money is spent, how much is spent, and review the stewardship of that spending after the fact with its constitutionally mandated power of oversight. This is how government is accountable to you and the representatives in Congress that you elect.
Through the committee and appropriations process the separate segmented appropriations measures are put together into a budget which sets the taxing and spending limits of various parts of the government. Next, the parts of the budget are reviewed and combined by certain standing committees in Congress such as the Budget Committee; that budget is then voted on by the entire House and Senate. Once passed the Budget is published and anyone can examine it. This is the process that Congress has generally used for the last 200 years and is why this process is called “regular order“.
Regular order makes sense. When you look at your budget at home, you look at each line item, see where your expenses are going and you make priorities to adjust your expenses so that you don’t over spend, right?
When President Obama was elected the Democrats began to refuse to even consider passing a budget, abandoning all regular order. Since the Democrats control the Senate no budgets have been passed.
The Democratic Party Majority Leader in the Senate, Harry Reid, has said again and again that the House of Representatives has no right to pick and choose what it will fund and what it will not. Then Harry Reid and the Democrats started calling Republicans in the House hostage takers, anarchists, arsonists, terrorists, and every other “ists” you can think of. At the same time the Democrats have said they want an all or nothing blank check in the form of a continuing resolution instead of a budget.
The Constitution of the United States says:
Article I Section VII – All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives
Article I Section VIII – The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
Article I Section IX – No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.
The Constitution is clear that all bills dealing with revenue must originate in the House of Representatives; which also must pay the debts, set taxes, borrow money and as Section IX makes clear that the records must all be in a budget for the people to see.
By claiming that the House of Representatives does not have the right to do exactly what the Constitution instructs in plain English, the Democrats are trying to make an unconstitutional “new normal” where there are no budgets, no oversight as we have known it for two centuries, and just write gargantuan blank checks in the form of massive continuing resolutions(CR) for President Obama to spend as he sees fit.
It is for these reasons that there is nothing clean about the Democrat’s demand for a “clean CR”.
Senator Mike Lee, who is well-known to be one of the top lawyers in the country, speaks of this:
Now Democrats are combining the two power grabs above by saying that Congress has no right to revisit Obamacare because it was passed (without a single republican vote) after Obama was elected and that only President Obama has the right and the power to (illegally) change the law on his own.
Of course the very idea Democrats and their friends in the praetorian media are pushing, that Congress can never revisit a law, is silly on its face. Social Security and Medicare are laws that have been on the books for decades and Congress has changed those programs many times.
It is the job of each new Congress to look at existing law and make changes where the people’s representatives see fit. The very notion that one Chief Justice or one President can decide Obamacare’s fate and that the Congress cannot is laughable and yet the praetorian media has been advocating this very point of view every night since the partial government shutdown.
In an effort to keep members of his own party in line President Obama has illegally changed the law by executive fiat to give Members of Congress and their staff a 72% subsidy if they buy the expensive coverage on the Obamacare Exchange, other portions of the law do not apply to Congress as well.
Strong Arm Tactics
Aside from constant smear tactics, name calling, and lies crafted in such a way to sound oh so reasonable, the President has ordered his administration to cause as much pain and disruption on the American people as possible.
The Obama Administration ordered federal police to close the open air WWII Memorial and went so far as to rent “barrycades” to keep visiting WWII vets out.
Republican Members of Congress assisted the aged vets in “storming” their own memorial. Park Rangers, who are veterans themselves, refused to lay a hand on our WWII heroes:
The Obama administration ordered Park Police to close even privately funded memorials, private businesses adjacent to them, and even ordered elderly couples to be ejected from their homes which are adjacent to Lake Mead. In doing so Democrats have blamed Republicans for these outrages and for the most part the praetorian media has gone along with it. None of these parks or memorials were closed in the 17 previous government shutdowns since 1976.
The administration has threatened military priests who attempt to give Mass during the partial shutdown with arrest, and the administration has ordered that thousands of Department of Defense workers be furloughed in spite of the fact that the Defense Department has already been paid for with a separate continuing resolution. Of course President Obama has ordered the military to keep his personal retreat at Camp David open while cutting football and baseball coverage from the Armed Forces Television.
Speaker Boehner is outraged by the administration’s behavior:
President Obama has deliberately tried to spook the markets which affects the savings of millions of Americans in hopes to damage the economy even worse so that he can also blame that on Republicans.
The latest attempt to spook the markets is to threaten default on the national debt if the House of Representatives doesn’t give him all of the power that he wants. The 14th Amendment demands that the President make the scheduled payments on the debt. The Treasury takes in almost $240 billion a month which is much more than enough to pay the debt, Social Security etc. President Obama would have to willingly decide to default on the debt.
President Obama has also said that it is unprecedented for the Congress to attach strings to a raising of the debt ceiling. In fact, Congress has done so dozens of times as that is their enumerated power under the Constitution. When Obama was a Senator he favored just such a tactic himself. The President’s lie was so over the top that McClatchy News, Forbes, The Wall Street Journal, Politico, and Fox News have all reported that the President’s claims are bunk.
The New Republic, a political magazine that favors the Democratic Party, has suggested that President Obama use the military against TEA Party activists. Other media outlets who have historically slanted reporting to favor the Democratic party have found President’ Obama’s rather obvious falsehoods a threat to their own credibility and thus are sending messages that their willingness to spin for him has limits.
NBC’s Chuck Todd grilled Jay Carney on why the White House won’t accept some of these individual continuing resolutions passed by the House to fund portions of the government that will put some people back to work:
A New York Times reporter has said that the Obama admin is, “most closed, control-freak administration I’ve ever covered.”
While Obamacare may offer an expensive policy, which is implemented more like a massive tax, in exchange for “deductible not met”, “claim denied”, & “procedure not covered”; this fight is about much more than Obamacare, it is about power. A massive swing of power from the representatives of the people to the President. This is genuine third world style authoritarian power play.
One might not feel the authoritarian chill as of yet, but just wait until the next debt ceiling or government spending fight that leads to a partial shutdown and the President decides to abuse the power of Obamacare to halt payments for medical visits and prescription drugs as leverage to get his way. It is not a matter of if, it is a matter of when.
Editor’s Note: A reader sent a note asking, “What about the budgets that President Obama proposed and what about the budget that Harry Reid put up in March 2013?”
These are good questions but the answer is well known to those who have followed politics.
President Obama’s budgets got next to no support from his own caucus in the Senate as they were so outrageous that Democrats did not want to sign their name on it or be associated with it. Since the Senate Democrat Caucus would not back the House GOP budgets or the President’s budgets they died in the Senate.
After taking criticism for the abandonment of Regular Order for not passing any budgets for four years, Senate Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid put up an outrageous budget last March (2013) that was completely unserious, was opposed by four Democrat Senators, violated the Sequestor Law, and amounted to a political gag – as explained by The Hill:
The Senate-passed budget has $975 billion in new taxes, does not balance, and does not cut spending when the fact it turns off sequestration is taken into effect.
The Constitution is clear that tax bills MUST start in the House. Any tax increase that is not approved by the House first is a non-starter. Harry Reid putting up a budget that violated the Sequestor Law and imposes almost a trillion in new taxes was out of Regular Order. Of course Reid knew it, and so did those four Democrats who voted against such a stunt. Reid put up that “budget” to create the illusion of supporting Regular Order when the heat was on. This was no secret as press reports and political blogs reported as much.
UPDATE – Obama campaign manager David Plouffe accuses House Republicans of TREASON for not handing Obama a blank check CR http://tiny.cc/cs7q4w
UPDATE – Obama Administration hires private armed thugs to ring Independence Hall http://tiny.cc/9ybr4w
UPDATE – ‘Gestapo’ tactics meet senior citizens and foreigners at Yellowstone as armed men on orders from the Obama Administration round them up and lock them up – http://www.eagletribune.com/local/x1442580353/Gestapo-tactics-meet-senior-citizens-at-Yellowstone
UPDATE – Senator Mike Lee: The best argument against Obamacare is the behavior of the Obama administration during the “shutdown”; DO WHAT I SAY OR ELSE: