Tuesday, June 30, 2015

Gay Marriage Ruling Paves The Way for Concealed Carry National Reciprocity

AmmoLand Shooting Sports News ^ | June 29, 2015 | AWR Hawkins 

When the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that every state must recognize same sex marriages, they used a basis for judgement that will not easily stop at same sex marriage.
In fact, it is a basis for judgement that should offer itself to national reciprocity of concealed carry permits and permit holders.
The SCOTUS legalized same sex marriage by finding a right which Justices Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg , Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen G. Breyer, and Elena Kagan ruled as beyond a state-by-state prerogative via the 14th Amendment.
Crucial in this ruling is the fact that same sex marriage–now recognized by the SCOTUS–is not the only right the 14th Amendment shields from state-by-state prerogative and/or recognition.
Consider this pertinent aspect of the court’s Majority Opinion, written by Justice Kennedy and printed by the LA Times:
Under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, no State shall “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” The fundamental liberties protected by this Clause include most of the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights.
Now the question–Are 2nd Amendment rights among those “protected by this Clause”?
If we take the SCOTUS at its word, then yes, 2nd Amendment rights are protected under the 14th Amendment. After all, it was by viewing 2nd Amendment rights as incorporated under the 14th Amendment that the SCOTUS struck down Chicago’s gun ban in McDonald v Chicago (2010).
Moreover, two years earlier–in District of Columbia v Heller (2008)–the SCOTUS ruled that the 2nd Amendment rights were “fundamental” in and of themselves as well as “fundamental to the Nation’s scheme of ordered liberty” (IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law)
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...

Ted Cruz Has A Plan to Fight Judicial Tyranny – And Here It Is

The Political Insider ^ | Rusty Weiss 

Never has it been more evident that America needs a strong Constitutional conservative in the White House to help negate the last two terms of a radical left-wing President, the last six years of Republicans who bow down to Obama’s every whim, and now against a Supreme Court engaged in judicial tyranny.
Last week was a devastating blow for conservatives, but worse, it was a devastating blow to the Constitution, our Founding Fathers, and America in general.
Presidential candidate, Ted Cruz, put it in no uncertain terms – the Supreme Court rulings on Obamacare and same-sex marriage were “some of the darkest 24 hours in our nation’s history.”
Via the Daily Caller (HT Gateway Pundit):
Continuing his critique of the Supreme Court’s recent decisions on Obamacare and same-sex marriage, Sen. Ted Cruz said Friday that the rulings mark “some of the darkest 24 hours in our nations history.”
Cruz made the comments in an interview on Sean Hannity’s radio show Friday afternoon.
“Today is some of the darkest 24 hours in our nation’s history,” Cruz said.
“I couldn’t say it more eloquently,” Hannity responded.
“Yesterday and today were both naked and shameless judicial activism,” Cruz said. “Neither decision — the decision yesterday rewriting Obamacare for the second time. Six justices joined the Obama administration. You now have President Obama, Kathleen Sebelius and six justices responsible for forcing this failed disaster of a law on millions of Americans, and simply rewriting the law in a way that is fundamentally contrary to their judicial oaths.”
“And then today, this radical decision purporting to strike down the marriage laws of every state. It has no connection to the United States Constitution. They are simply making it up,” Cruz said. “It is lawless, and in doing so, they have undermined the fundamentally legitimacy of the United States Supreme Court.”
Anybody who knows Cruz knows he isn’t your typical RINO Republican, all talk and no action. After the Obamacare ruling was handed down, Cruz took to the chamber floor and blasted the “rogue justices” of the Supreme Court for upholding the policies of a “lawless” administration, adding that they too, had become “lawless.”
After declaring that justices who engage in activism should “resign and run for office,” Cruz is offering up a plan to make it happen – judicial elections.
In a column for the National Review, Cruz said “enough is enough.”
Judicial retention elections have worked in states across America; they will work for America. In order to provide the people themselves with a constitutional remedy to the problem of judicial activism and the means for throwing off judicial tyrants, I am proposing an amendment to the United States Constitution that would subject the justices of the Supreme Court to periodic judicial-retention elections. Every justice, beginning with the second national election after his or her appointment, will answer to the American people and the states in a retention election every eight years. Those justices deemed unfit for retention by both a majority of the American people as a whole and by majorities of the electorates in at least half of the 50 states will be removed from office and disqualified from future service on the Court.
Cruz warned that if Congress is unwilling to correct this lawlessness, “the movement from the people for an Article V Convention of the States — to propose the amendments directly — will grow stronger and stronger.”
Watchdog explains what that means:
If enough states act, a convention would be one means for reformers to rein in the reach of the federal government. Because the U.S. Constitution provides a means to hold one, doing so could help return the country to its roots of limited federal powers.
It’s clear from this past week that the country needs a strong conservative as President – to fight back against an out-of-control government ushered in under Obama.
Is Cruz that man? He’s sure acting like it.

TOPICS: Constitution/ConservatismGovernmentNews/Current EventsPolitics/Elections
KEYWORDS: cruztedcruz

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 next last

"If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures." - Alexander Hamilton
"We don't intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended. We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the Party over to the so-called moderates wouldn’t make any sense at all."-- President Ronald Reagan
"A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." - Thomas Paine 1792
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." - Samuel Adams
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams

Coolidge Was America’s Most Successful Conservative President

Human Events ^ | Monday Jun 29, 2015 9:57 AM | Garland S. Tucker III 

Americans love the 4th of July—and for good reason. Writing to his wife in July 1776, John Adams hailed the Fourth as “the day of deliverance” and predicted that it would be “celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival.” He correctly foresaw these annual celebrations “with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward forever more.” On the first anniversary in 1777, the celebrations started, and they have continued ever since.
The year 2015 will be no exception. But as Americans turn their thoughts this year to the blessings of Independence Day, we should add one additional—less well known—blessing to the list. In addition to Independence Day, July 4th is also the birthday of one of our great presidents, the 30th President, Calvin Coolidge.
On July 4, 1872, Calvin Coolidge was born in Plymouth Notch, a small village in rural Vermont. It was here that he learned the New England puritan virtues that would define his character. Coolidge spoke often of his father’s hard work and his “strong New England trait of great repugnance at seeing anything wasted.” He came to view any kind of waste as “a moral wrong.” Another New England characteristic that young Coolidge absorbed was a total lack of pretense—and a strong aversion to anything, or anyone, pretentious. In his words, “Country life does not always have breadth, but it has depth.” Hard work, independent thinking, lack of pretense, sense of duty, perseverance, and scrupulous truthfulness all constituted the essence of Coolidge’s boyhood life in Plymouth Notch and became the trademarks of Coolidge the adult.
After graduating from Amherst College, Coolidge married, settled in Northampton, Massachusetts, and began what became a steady ascent in political life. First, he was elected to a series of local offices, followed by election to the state legislature, Lt. Governor, and finally Governor of Massachusetts. In 1919, as Governor, Coolidge’s successful settlement of the Boston Police Strike catapulted him into national prominence. With these famous words, “There is no right to strike against the public safety by anybody, anytime, anywhere,” Coolidge was suddenly famous. As a result, the Republican convention nominated him for Vice-President, as Warren Harding’s running mate.
When President Harding died unexpectedly in 1923, the picture of Calvin Coolidge taking the oath of office became indelibly stamped on the country’s collective consciousness. Coolidge was vacationing at his father’s farm in Plymouth Notch when word of Harding’s death came late in the night. He took the oath of office from his father, Colonel John Coolidge, a notary, in the small family living room by the light of a kerosene lamp. It is impossible to imagine a more appropriate backdrop for Coolidge’s rise to the presidency. He was the product of rural America—a man without pretense—straightforward, frugal, and honest. This was Americans’ first glimpse of their new president—and they liked what they saw.
The country soon discovered that Coolidge was totally unlike any national politician it had encountered. He seemed consistently to eschew the conventional political necessities of warmth and congeniality; and even more surprisingly, he was truly a man of few words. He was at once both, in William Allen White’s words, a “throwback to the more primitive days of the Republic” and also a highly successful modern politician, who was the first president to use radio, photography, and public relations adroitly. It was remarkable that this physically unimpressive, undramatic, reticent New Englander could have so dominated his era, elicited the affection of the public, and modeled the virtues that gave it substance. For an America that was experiencing postwar disillusionment and a bewildering modern secularism, Coolidge offered faith in a mythic America of honesty, hard work, thrift, and religion. As White concluded, Coolidge was in fact a genius, but this genius was surprisingly—fascinatingly unconventional in every way.
Coolidge proved, in historian Paul Johnson’s words, to be “the most internally consistent and single-minded of presidents.” He oversaw a program of comprehensive tax reform, the reduction of the top marginal income tax rate from 70% to 24%, the removal of most Americans from the income tax rolls completely, the longest period of peacetime expansion and prosperity in U. S. history, and, astoundingly, an absolute reduction in the size of the federal bureaucracy. He was arguably America’s most successful conservative president.
On July 4, 1926, President Calvin Coolidge traveled to Philadelphia to commemorate the 150th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. He closed with these words: “The Declaration of Independence is the product of the spiritual insight of the people. We live in an age of science and of abounding accumulation of material things. These did not create our Declaration. Our Declaration created them. The things of the spirit come first. Unless we cling to that, all our material prosperity, overwhelming though it may appear, will turn to a barren scepter in our grasp. If we are to maintain the great heritage which has been bequeathed to us, we must be like-minded as the fathers who created them.”
We would do well to remember Coolidge’s words this Independence Day.

If You're Upset With The Supreme Court, Read Damon Root's 'Overruled'

Forbes ^ | June 30, 2015 | George Leef 

In late June of each year, the Supreme Court reveals many of its decisions in the cases argued that term. Inevitably, lots of Americans are upset over them. You may be one of those Americans, right now.
With all the furor over individual case facts and holdings, people are apt to miss a bigger picture – the judicial philosophies at work.
The clash of philosophies is the subject of an excellent recent book Overruled: The Long War for Control of the U.S. Supreme Court. Author Damon Root, a senior editor at Reason, explores the great divide between those justices who believe that, with only rare exceptions, they should defer to the presumed wisdom of the politicians when laws are challenged, and those justices who believe they should skeptically examine such laws with no deference given.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...

The Next Obamacare Battle Nobody is Talking About

Townhall.com ^ | June 30, 2015 | Alex Vargo 

Last week, the Supreme Court sided 6-3 with the Obama administration’s interpretation of the Affordable Care Act, ruling the law was written with the intent to provide subsidies through federal exchanges. To put it lightly, conservatives are less than thrilled.
But in our disappointment, let’s not forget that the subsidies are just one problematic element of many found in the 20,000-page law. While Congress may not be able to undo the Court’s recent ruling, that doesn’t mean they can’t address another serious issue with the Affordable Care Act: the employer mandate that defines a full-time workweek as 30 hours.
The youth unemployment rate is currently 13.6%, meaning nearly one out of every seven people between the ages of 18 and 29 are out of work. Of those fortunate enough to be employed, many see their work hours cut.
The Affordable Care Act’s employer mandate requires businesses who employ 50 or more full-time workers to insure all of their employees. While this requirement may be well-intended, its long-term economic consequences will be devastating. As the mandate is set to take effect in 2016, many businesses are already choosing between limiting their staff or cutting individual work-hours.
It’s estimated that 2.6 million Americans making under $30,000 a year are at risk of having their hours or wages cut. Of those 2.6 million, 60 percent of those people are between the ages of 19 and 34.
Take the food industry, for example, where the average employee age is 28 years old. Between wait staff, hostesses, busboys, line cooks, dishwashers, and others, restaurants easily reach staffs of over 50 employees with diverse skill sets. This being the case, restaurant owners – many of whom see thin profit margins already – have limited options and are forced to cut hours, reducing the size of people’s paychecks.
Because so many young people work in the food industry, they are being disproportionately clobbered by this provision. And that’s just in the restaurant industry. Retail stores and other business sectors face the brunt of the provision, too.
Forever 21 is one of the largest private employers in the country. Less than two years ago, in preparation for the employer mandate to kick in, the company announced its plans to reduce worker hours. Although the organization denied these cuts were directly related to the 30-hour provision, Forever 21 planned to transition some workers to 29.5 hours a week or less.
This mandate’s burden is clearly falling hardest on young people who are already experiencing the difficulty of finding gainful employment. But there is good news. Right now, Congress has the ability to vastly improve our generation’s opportunity to work by restoring the 40-hour workweek.
Specifically, the Senate should immediately consider the House-passed Save American Workers Act that changes the threshold of full-time employment from 30 hours per week to 40 hours. The House of Representatives passed this bipartisan bill in January, and now it’s up to the Senate to follow suit. This simple fix would make an enormous difference for young people desperately looking to advance in their careers.
Being employed, whether it’s waiting tables or performing an entry-level desk job, provides a young person with necessary income, crucial career development, and most importantly, a sense of pride and self-worth. Restoring the 40-hour work week should be the simple starting point of a larger conversation about how to help our generation’s job crisis.

Ted Cruz: States should ignore gay-marriage ruling

Politico ^ | 06/29/2015 | By ADAM B. LERNER 

Ted Cruz has some unsolicited advice for the states not specifically named in last week’s Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage: Ignore it.
“Those who are not parties to the suit are not bound by it,” the Texas Republican told NPR News’ Steve Inskeep in an interview published on Monday. Since only suits against the states of Ohio, Tennessee, Michigan and Kentucky were specifically considered in the Supreme Court’s Obergefell v. Hodges decision, which was handed down last Friday, Cruz — a former Supreme Court clerk — believes that other states with gay marriage bans need not comply, absent a judicial order.
“[O]n a great many issues, others have largely acquiesced, even if they were not parties to the case,” the 2016 presidential contender added, “but there’s no legal obligation to acquiesce to anything other than a court judgement.”
While Cruz’s statement may be technically true, federal district and circuit courts are obligated to follow the Supreme Court’s precedent and overrule all other states’ same-sex marriage bans as unconstitutional.
The Texas senator then went on to suggest that Republicans who have called for following the court’s decision are members of a “Washington cartel” and are lying when they say they do not support same-sex marriage.
“[Republican Party leaders] agree with the rulings from last week, both the Obamacare ruling and the marriage ruling,” Cruz said. “[T]he biggest divide we have politically is not between Republicans and Democrats. It’s between career politicians in both parties and the American people.”
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...

Rev. Graham on White House Gay Rainbow: 'May it Remind Us of God's Judgment to Come'

CNS News ^ | 6/29/15 | Michael W. Chapman 

Commenting on the White House being illuminated on Friday with gay-rainbow lights to celebrate homosexual marriage, Rev. Franklin Graham said it was "outrageous" and a "slap in the face" to millions of Americans who support real marriage, and added that because God gave the rainbow sign to Noah following the flood, it is an image forever "associated with His judgment" and a sign of "God's judgment to come."
Franklin Graham, son of world-renowned pastor Billy Graham, further said that "one day God is going to judge sin -- all sin" and "only those who are found righteous will be able to escape His judgment."
"The President had the White House lit up in rainbow colors to celebrate the Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage," said Rev. Graham in aJune 29 post on Facebook [1]. "This is outrageous—a real slap in the face to the millions of Americans who do not support same-sex marriage and whose voice is being ignored."

A June 29, 2015 Facebook post by Rev. Franklin Graham.
"God is the one who gave the rainbow, and it was associated with His judgment," said Rev. Graham. "God sent a flood to wipe out the entire world because mankind had become so wicked and violent. One man, Noah, was found righteous and escaped God’s judgment with his family. The rainbow was a sign to Noah that God would not use the flood again to judge the world."
"But one day God is going to judge sin -- all sin," said Rev. Graham. "Only those who are found righteous will be able to escape His judgment. That righteousness comes through faith, believing on the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ who took our sins and shed His blood on the cross for each and every one."
"So, when we see the gay pride rainbow splashed on business advertisements and many people’s Facebook pages, may it remind all of us of God’s judgment to come," he said. "Are you ready? Are your sins forgiven?"
The homosexual rainbow lights at the White House on June 26, the day the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that gay marriage is a right, was orchestrated by top Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett, according to The Washington Post [2]. Obama, when told of the gay-lights plan, reported The Post, said, "It's a great idea, if you can get it to work."
In a statement, the White House said [3], "Tonight, the White House was lit to demonstrate our unwavering commitment to progress and equality, here in America and around the world. The pride colors reflect the diversity of the LGBT community, and tonight, these colors celebrate a new chapter in the history of American civil rights."
In the New Testament in the gospel of Luke, chapter 17, Jesus Christ tells His disciples [4] about what the world will be like when He returns. "First He must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation," says Christ. "And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man: They ate, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all."
Christ continues, "Likewise as it was also in the days of Lot: They ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built; but on the day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all. Even so will it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed."
Franklin Graham, 62, is president of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and also runs the international Christian aid group Samaritan's Purse. He is married and has five children. Rev. Graham frequently preaches in evangelical Christian crusades in the United States and abroad.



Remove this!


Quite simple!


Four Boxes


Better News?


I wonder...


A Republican


One Day!


Mind your own business!


Mass Shootings


WTF, over?


Monday, June 29, 2015

10,535 pages of Obama Care condensed to 4 sentences

email | 6/29/2015 | Neil Cook 

This, unfortunately, is absolutely true:

1. In order to insure the uninsured, we first have to uninsure the insured.
2. Next, we require the newly uninsured to be re-insured.
3. To re-insure the newly uninsured, they are required to pay extra charges to be re-insured.
4. The extra charges are required so that the original insured,who became uninsured, and then became re-insured,can pay enough extra so that the original uninsured can be insured,so it will be ‘free-of-charge’ to them.

This is called "redistribution of wealth or, by its more common name, SOCIALISM - the politically correct name for COMMUNISM.

The Outer Limits


This generation


Don't mean shit!


The Law!




Turn about!


House of cards




Liberal Logic


Drug Testing


You might be a LIBERAL if...










Sunday, June 21, 2015

America, We Pay Way Too Much For the United Nations!

Fox News ^ | June 16, 2015 | Brett Schaefer 

Each year the United States gives approximately $8 billion in mandatory payments and voluntary contributions to the United Nations and its affiliated organizations. The biggest portion of this money – about $3 billion this year – goes to the U.N.’s regular and peacekeeping budgets.
If that seems like a lot, it is—far more than anyone else pays And it’s also, in some cases, bad value for money.
The U.N. system for calculating member nations’ “fair share” payment toward its regular and peacekeeping budgets has increasingly shifted the burden away from the vast majority of the 193 members and onto a relative handful of high-income nations, especially the U.S. Indeed some nations pay next to nothing
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...

Hillary an unethical, dishonest lawyer, a liar and conspirator says Watergate committee counsel

Coach Is Right ^ | 6/21/2015 | Suzanne Eovoldi 

Circulating throughout Conservative sites this week is information about Hillary being fired by her Watergate supervisor, US HOUSE Judiciary Watergate committee counsel Jerry Zeifman. A close analysis of this bold assertion puts the whole flap into real perspective. When asked in an interview why he terminated Hillary’s employment, Zeifman responded, “Because she was a liar. She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer; she conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the HOUSE, the rules of the committee and the rules on confidentiality.” A Rush Limbaugh transcript stays very close to this syntax. In an article written after a 2008 campaign appearance by candidate Hillary Clinton in Connecticut, Zeifman admitted his regret “…that, when I terminated her employment on the Nixon impeachment staff, I had not reported her unethical practices to the appropriate bar associations.”
But “Zeifman did not fire Clinton and did not have the power to do so,” claims the far left mediamatters.com. Retired Conservative radio talk host Neal Boortz did an interview with Zeifman on or about the time of the Rush Limbaugh April, 2008 program, and the Boortz transcript appears to be more precise. When Boortz asked Zeifman, “You fired her, didn’t you?,” the HOUSE investigator said, “Well, let me put it this way, I terminated her, along with some other staff members who were–we no longer needed and advised her that I would not–could not recommend her for any further positions.” Then Boortz asks him, “Why not?” “BECAUSE OF HER UNETHICAL CONDUCT,” (emphasis added) Zeifman told Boortz’ along with a nationwide listening audience! (pg. 5 of Boortz transcript)
Boortz: “How do you feel about her candidacy for president of the United States right now?” Zeifman: “Well, I think that for any intellectually honest Democrat, her–it would be a moral imperative to vote against her.” Boortz: “Because of her lack of ethics when she was working for you?” Zeifman: “Well, no. Frankly I had hoped when she eventually became first lady, I had hoped that we had taught her a lesson. And I had voted for Bill Clinton, knowing that he was advocating a two-for-one presidency.”
The Limbaugh interview explained how “Hillary proceeded to write a legal brief arguing there was no precedent for the right to representation by counsel (for Nixon) during an impeachment proceeding. But in fact, there was. William O. Douglas was granted legal counsel at his Supreme Court impeachment trial, his legal right.”
In order to support her claim, Hillary simply removed the Douglas files to her office which at the time was secure and not accessible to the public or evidently to the US HOUSE hearings! “SHE JUST STOLE THE DOCUMENTS, (emph. added) then wrote a fraudulent brief and she tried to hide the evidence.”
Hello, does anyone recall how the Rose Law Firm documents concerning the Clintons’ AK land purchases just sprouted legs and walked off stage? Is anyone paying attention to Hillary’s E-mail server scandal while she was Secretary of State?
After all is said and done, this week’s cyberspace zip-around of Hillary’s performance as a 27 year old staff attorney at the Nixon Watergate impeachment hearings certainly has cache many years later. Apparently she can still pick up protected information and do her magician’s trick with it. In reference to Hillary and the Douglas files, Zeifman told Boortz: “Yes, she removed them. And she brought them to her office which was in another building and it was secured; it was not accessible to the public. In retrospect, SHE WAS CORRUPTED, (emph.added) and I think that was a tragedy,” said Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat.
Whether she stashes information owed the American people in her private offices or on a private computer system, can we trust Hillary Clinton with WHITE HOUSE documents? Zeifman’s statement that “it would be a moral imperative to vote against her,” is still good advice for American voters!

Saturday, June 20, 2015

Mexican Government Upset Donald Trump Running; U.S. Media Silent

Breitbart ^ | 19 Jun 2015 | by Alex Swoyer 

Hillary Clinton, the Mexican government and the American media all seem to be “nervous about something,” following Donald Trump’s recent presidential announcement.
The GOP presidential candidate referenced the need to close the southern border to keep illegal aliens from entering America across it.
“They’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people,” Trump said during his announcement speech.
Just two days after Trump’s presidential announcement and following the tragic shooting at a church in Charleston, South Carolina, 2016 Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton hinted in an interview that Trump’s speech would incite more violence and somehow linked his presidential launch to the horrific event. An adviser to Trump responded to Clinton’s statements saying she lacks credibility when she uses the tragedy as an opportunity to attack a political opponent.
“She must be nervous about something,” he added.
(excerpt, please see full article here:) http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/19/mexican-government-upset-donald-trump-running-u-s-media-silent/
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

Every Mass Shooting Shares One Thing In Common & It’s NOT Weapons

http://www.ammoland.com/2013/04/every-mass-shooting-in-the-last-20-years-shares-psychotropic-drugs/#axzz3dbQmg5jt ^ | April 1, 2013 | Dan Roberts 

Nearly every mass shooting incident in the last twenty years, and multiple other instances of suicide and isolated shootings all share one thing in common, and its not the weapons used.
The overwhelming evidence points to the signal largest common factor in all of these incidents is the fact that all of the perpetrators were either actively taking powerful psychotropic drugs or had been at some point in the immediate past before they committed their crimes.
Multiple credible scientific studies going back more than a decade, as well as internal documents from certain pharmaceutical companies that suppressed the information show that SSRI drugs ( Selective Serotonin Re-Uptake Inhibitors ) have well known, but unreported side effects, including but not limited to suicide and other violent behavior. One need only Google relevant key words or phrases to see for themselves. www.ssristories.com is one popular site that has documented over 4500 “ Mainstream Media “ reported cases from around the World of aberrant or violent behavior by those taking these powerful drugs.
The following list of mass shooting perpetrators and the drugs they were taking or had been taking shortly before their horrific actions was compiled and published to Facebook by John Noveske, founder and owner of Noveske Rifleworks just days before he was mysteriously killed in a single car accident. Is there a link between Noveske’s death and his “outting” of information numerous disparate parties would prefer to suppress, for a variety of reasons ?
I leave that to the individual readers to decide. But there is most certainly a documented history of people who “knew to much” or were considered a “threat” dying under extraordinarily suspicious circumstances.
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...

Ann Coulter Waves Goodbye [To the America we once knew]

American Thinker ^ | 06/20/2015 | Richard Kirk 

Goodbye to the prosperous country founded by overwhelmingly Protestant colonists in the 18th century. Hello to the third-world multicultural mélange with a distinctly Mexican accent, appalling cultural norms, and a clearly leftist political orientation. Such is the vision of the United States given by no-holds-barred pundit Ann Coulter in her latest book, Adios, America: The Left’s Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole.

Coulter’s subtitle summarizes her basic thesis -- that America’s immigration policies since the decisive Edward Kennedy immigration bill in 1965 have altered our demographic makeup so radically that the nation will be unalterably degraded if immediate changes aren’t made to our legal and illegal immigration practices. Despite assurances to the contrary, Kennedy’s legislation became the vehicle for fundamentally transforming America’s immigrant population from largely European to overwhelmingly Third World in origin.

Coulter observes in her heavily annotated work that about 50 million Mexicans, more than a quarter of that nation’s population, has already migrated, either legally and illegally, to America -- a figure derived by employing data other than census forms that folks unlawfully in the country clearly don’t complete at the postulated 90% rate. Thanks to family reunification policies and notoriously lax enforcement of sanctuary laws, “since 1970, nearly 90% of all legal immigrants have been from the Third World.”  Accordingly, the country now accepts “more immigrants from Nigeria than we do from Britain.”

The devastating consequences of accepting millions of immigrants from cultural backwaters are evident in crime statistics -- stats that Coulter says are incredibly hard to secure since it’s now deemed racist to ask how many incarcerated folks are foreign born. Despite the virtual blackout on such data, it’s clear that immigrants (legal and illegal) constitute disproportionate percentage of the nation’s prison population.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...

Hilarious: NY Times chronicles Hillary's problems hiding her wealth and elitism!

American Thinker ^ | 06/19/2015 | Thomas Lifson 

I have got to hand it to Amy Chozick of the New York Times for her deadpan article on Hillary Clinton’s “quandary” over what to do about the Hamptons this summer. You see, she and Bill have for years vacationed there, among the show business and Wall Street elites who rent or own fabulous mansions along the shore of eastern Long Island, mingling with one another. It takes a lot money:

 In 2011 and 2012, there was the eight-bedroom, 12,000-square-foot East Hampton rental with a heated pool that the couple took for part of August, the kind of house that typically goes for $200,000 per month, according to local real estate listings.

Then, in 2013, they opted for an equally pricey six-bedroom mansion in Sagaponack with a private pathway to the beach. (Mrs. Clinton worked on her memoir, “Hard Choices,” from a sunny office with an ocean view.)

It takes more than a village. But of course, this kind of dough is no big deal for the Clintons, who can deliver a 20 minute off-the-cuff address and cover a month’s rent. But the reason it is a quandary is:

…the Clintons’ go-to vacation spot for the last several summers now seems problematic, as Mrs. Clinton, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for president, delivers a populist economic message that the deck is stacked in favor of the wealthiest Americans and that she plans to “reshuffle the cards.”
Thus, it may not be ideal for Mr. and Mrs. Clinton to be photographed mingling at summer cocktail parties with the likes of Jerry Seinfeld, Alec Baldwin, Steven Spielberg and other wealthy Hamptons regulars.

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...

Hillary outclassed again: How Condoleezza Rice could teach her a thing or two about charity!

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2015/06/18/hillary-outclassed-again-how-condoleezza-rice-could-teach-her ^ | 6.19 | nobama123 

A 2014 speech by Hillary Clinton to the Boys and Girls Club of Long Beach shows the stark difference between the former secretary of state and the woman who preceded her, Condoleezza Rice. When Rice gave a speech at the annual luncheon for the charity in 2009, she collected a $60,000 speaking fee, and donated almost all of that fee back to the club. Hillary – naturally – was not as generous. She charged $200,000 and “donated” the entire fee to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton foundation. The cost to the Boys and Girls Club – which has an annual budget of less than $3 million – was blasted by some organizers of the event, according to Politico. A Boys and Girls Club organizer who helped plan Clinton’s 2014 appearance said the arrangement “felt more like a pay-to-play type thing.” “With Hillary, it was more businesslike,” said the volunteer. Between her speaking fee, and the fact that her entourage took up a large portion of the available seating, the charity was only able to raise a mere $106,000 at the lunchtime event – a 25-year low for the organization. What did Gowdy get out of Blumenthal about Hillary? Supporters of the Boys and Girls Club also told Politico that they were disappointed by Clinton’s decision not to socialize with any of the youth that the charity focuses on helping. Rice’s 2009 appearance, by contrast, made a very different impression. Rice spent the morning before her speech touring the facility and talking with children in the club about the importance of staying in school. Her modest speaking fee, and the fact that she donated it back to the organization, also helped the charity raise more than $250,000 during the luncheon.
(Excerpt) Read more at bizpacreview.com ...

Obama looking to blame someone for church killings? Look in the mirror!

http://www.bizpacreview.com ^ | June 18, 2015 | Carmine Sabia 

In the wake of the Charleston shooting that claimed the lives of nine innocent victims in a Bible study class Wednesday, many people, including liberals like President Obama, have blood on their hands. The shootings were carried out by Dylann Roof, one man, but many have played a role in what has become an epidemic of violent mass murders in America. There are many things we as a society can blame for this tragedy, but lack of gun control laws is not one of them
A look at history will show that as gun control has increased, so has the propensity for Americans to commit mass homicide.
The first major gun legislation, like most gun legislation, came in response to a tragic event because liberals have always believed what Rahm Emanuel said in November 2008, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.” The Gun Control Act of 1968 created more control of interstate trafficking of firearms after Lee Harvey Oswald used a gun purchased through the mail to kill President Kennedy, NPR reported.
In 1986, the Firearm Owner’s Protection Act prevented felons from owning guns or ammunition and banned ammunition that can penetrate a bullet proof vest.
The Brady Handgun Violence Act was passed in 1993 and created the National Instant Criminal Background Check System gun dealers must use before selling a firearm to a customer, and in 1994 the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act banned the sale, use, manufacturing and import of 19 types of “assault weapons.”
As all of these gun laws have compiled over the years, only one thing has been a constant. Gun violence and mass murders have increased.
In the 1960s, there were six mass shootings, 13 in the ’70s, 32 in the ’80s, 42 in the ’90s, 28 in the 2000s and since January 2009, so far, there have been more than 110 mass shootings, according to the Washington Post and MSNBC. In 1950, with nearly no gun laws on the books there was a grand total of one mass shooting.
Yet, almost before the bodies of the nine people savagely murdered in Charleston were cold, President Obama was on TV talking about the need for more restrictive gun laws. For what?
Gun laws have obviously not prevented these events, and could well have been a catalyst for them because assailants have no fear as they know they are shooting at unarmed prey. But that isn’t where the culpability of Obama and his cohorts stops.
For six years, this president, former Attorney General Eric Holder, the ubiquitous Al Sharpton and a related cast of characters have been doing everything in their power to divide Americans into groups by race, sexual orientation and economic standing and pitted us against each other. Then when a crime of racial violence occurs, they look for someone to blame, but they need look no further than the mirror.
What’s even more insane is that for the entirety of this administration, Obama and his race hustlers have told Americans, particularly minorities, that they cannot trust the police. Now, they want to sell them on the idea that the only people that can be trusted with guns are the police. While we mourn the loss of the nine people killed in Charleston, let us not be led astray by the hucksters who seek to use this tragedy, and the blood of these victims, to push their own failed agenda.

Friday, June 19, 2015

FCC votes to subsidize broadband connections for low-income households!

BetaNews ^ | June 18, 2015 | Mark Wilson 

Today the FCC voted in favor of updating its Lifeline program to include broadband. This would mean that households surviving on low incomes would be able to receive help paying for a broadband connection. It might not be as important as electricity or water, but having a broadband connection is seen as being all but essential these days.
From helping with education and job hunting, to allowing for home working, the ability to get online is seen as so vital by some that there have been calls for it to be classed as a utility. The Lifeline program has been running since the 80s, and originally provided financial help to those struggling to pay for a phone line. It was expanded in 2008 to include wireless providers, and it is hoped that this third expansion will help more people to get online.
Announcing the decision to modernize the program, the FCC points out that less than half (48 percent) of households with an income under $25,000 had an internet connection at home. While it could be argued that internet access is possible through smartphones, the commission reveals that half of low income consumers have their mobile connections suspended or cancelled due to financial difficulties.
Broadband has become essential to participation in modern society, offering access to jobs, education, health care, government services and opportunity. Unfortunately, income remains a significant barrier to broadband adoption.
The broadband subsidy would remain at $9.25 and there are plans to "reduce waste, fraud and abuse". A third party would be used to verify the eligibility of households, and it would be required to retain documentation to allow for easier auditing. This would help to take pressure off ISPs, something that could be improved further by the use of subsidies being delivered directly to customers through the use of vouchers.

Among the Faithful Conservatives, Cruz Shines!

The Weekly Standard ^ | June 18, 2015 | Michael Warren 

It’s no accident that Texas senator Ted Cruz sounds like a minister on the stump. His father, Rafael, is an evangelical pastor, after all. And as the Republican presidential candidate displayed before the faith-focused crowd at the Faith and Freedom Coalition’s Road to Majority conference in Washington this week, his pastoral pedigree may be paying off.
“The Word tells us,” Cruz said Wednesday afternoon, rounding back toward the podium like a preacher returning to the Bible during a sermon. “ ‘Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh the morning.’ And I’ll tell you this.”
Cruz’s voice became more intense and purposeful. “Morning is coming,” he said. “Morning is coming.”
It was by far the best received address among the three presidential candidates speaking at the conference Wednesday at Washington’s Omni Shoreham hotel. Cruz had been preceded by his fellow senators Marco Rubio and Rand Paul, and they all hewed closely to their stump speeches. Paul and Rubio performed well, though the latter stumbled over a few frequent lines that he ought to have down pat. But Cruz’s soaring rhetoric, his focus on religious liberty, and his natural affinity for the crowd made him a standout on the conference’s first day....
(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...

Democrats Underestimate Scott Walker at their Own Peril

Twin Falls Times Idaho ^ | June 18, 2015 | Gene Lyons 

Economically speaking, all 237 GOP presidential candidates are selling the same Magic Beans.
Everybody knows the script. Tax cuts for wealthy “job creators” bring widespread prosperity. Top off Scrooge McDuck’s bullion pool, and the benefits flow outward to everybody else. The economy surges, budget deficits melt away, and the song of the turtledove will be heard in the land.
Almost needless to say, these “supply side” miracles have never actually happened in the visible world. State budget debacles in Kansas and Louisiana only signify the latest failures of right-wing dogma. Hardly anybody peddling Magic Beans actually believes in them anymore. Nevertheless, feigning belief signifies tribal loyalty to the partisan Republicans who will choose the party’s nominee.
However, with everybody in the field playing “let’s pretend,” a candidate needs another way to distinguish himself. I suspect that Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin may have found it. See, Walker won’t just put money back in “hardworking taxpayer’s” pockets.
Like a latter-day Richard Nixon, Walker will also stick it to people they don’t like: Lollygagging schoolteachers, feather-bedding union members and smug, tenured college professors who think they’re smarter than everybody else. If he lacks charisma, there’s an edge of ruthlessness in Walker’s otherwise bland demeanor that hits GOP primary voters right where they live.
No less an authority than Uncle Scrooge himself — i.e. David Koch of Koch Industries, who with his brother Charles has pledged to spend $900 million to elect a Republican in 2016 — told the New York Observer after a closed-door gathering at Manhattan’s Empire Club that Walker will win the nomination and crush Hillary Clinton in a general election “by a major margin.”
Viewed from a distance, the determination of prosperous, well-educated Wisconsin to convert itself into an anti-union, right-to-work state like Alabama or Arkansas appears mystifying. To risk the standing of the University of Wisconsin system by abolishing academic tenure, as Walker intends, is damn near incomprehensible.
Attack one of America’s great public research universities for the sake of humiliating (Democratic-leaning) professors over nickel-and-dime budgetary issues? Do Wisconsinites have no clue how modern economies work?
Maybe not. But Walker’s supporters definitely appear to know who their enemies are, culturally speaking. Incredulity aside, it would be a mistake not to notice the craftiness with which he’s brought off the transformation. Not to mention that Walker’s won three elections since 2010 in a “blue” state that hasn’t supported a Republican presidential nominee since Ronald Reagan.
Wisconsin’s 10 electoral votes don’t mean much by themselves, but throw in Michigan and Ohio, Midwestern states also trending similarly, and you’ve definitely got something.
Act 10, the 2011 law that took away collective bargaining rights for many public employees in Wisconsin — except, at first, for police and firefighters — brought crowds of angry teachers (also mostly Democrats) to the state capitol in Madison for weeks of angry demonstrations. As much as MSNBC was thrilled, many Wisconsinites appear to have been irked.
In the end, the state ended up saving roughly $3 billion by shifting the funding of fringe benefits such as health insurance and pensions from employer to employee, costing the average teacher roughly 16 percent of his or her compensation. Mindful of budget shortfalls, the unions had proposed negotiations, but that wasn’t enough for Gov. Walker.
For the record, Act 10 was an almost verbatim copy of a bill promoted by the Arlington, Virginia-based American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a think tank largely funded by, you guessed it, the brothers Koch.
Four years ago, a documentary filmmaker caught Walker on camera telling wealthy supporters that the new law was just the beginning. “The first step is, we’re going to deal with collective bargaining for all public-employee unions,” he said, “because you use divide-and-conquer.”
“If we can do it in Wisconsin, we can do it anywhere — even in our nation’s capital,” Walker wrote in his book, “Unintimidated,” notes Dan Kaufman in the New York Times Magazine. Elsewhere, Walker has boasted that as president, he could take on foreign policy challenges, because “If I can take on 100,000 protesters, I can do the same across the world.”
Ridiculous, of course, but it plays.
Meanwhile, rueful trade unionists who endorsed Walker in 2010 because they never imagined that having vanquished the women’s union he’d come after the ironworkers and the electricians in their pickup trucks, are crying the blues. Divided, they’ve been conquered.
So right-to-work it is: Salaries are already diminished, with job security, pensions, health and safety regulations inevitably to follow.
More bullion for Scrooge McDuck’s pool.
So now it’s the professors’ turn. Walker, a Marquette dropout, has described his new law as “Act 10 for the university.” Tenure’s a dead letter in cases of “financial emergency ... requiring program discontinuance, curtailment, modification or redirection.”
So who gets redirected first? Left-wing culture warriors or climate scientists? Hint: Scrooge is a fierce climate-change denier.
Meanwhile, Democrats underestimate Scott Walker at considerable peril.


Sexual harassment complaints at State Department soar under Clinton, Kerry (nearly tripled)!

The Washington Times ^ | Thursday, June 18, 2015 | Guy Taylor and John Solomon 

In a disclosure that could have political implications for election campaigns, the State Department’s chief watchdog reported Thursday that worker harassment complaints have nearly tripled inside the department during the tenures of Hillary Rodham Clinton and John F. Kerry — but the department still doesn’t have mandatory training for all employees.
“A significant increase in reported harassment inquiries in the Department of State over the past few fiscal years supports the need for mandatory harassment training,” the department’s inspector general warned in an oversight report that reviewed the agency’s Office of Civil Rights.
The report states that formal harassment claims rose from 88 cases in 2011, during Mrs. Clinton’s third year as America’s top diplomat, to 248 in 2014, Mr. Kerry’s second year as secretary. Hundreds more informal complaints were lodged during the same period.
Last year, 43 percent of the new complaints alleged harassment or unfair hirings or promotions, while 38 percent raised sex discrimination or reprisals, the report said.
While the increase in claims is dramatic, OIG officials maintained that it may actually be attributed to growing knowledge and awareness among employees about sexual harassment issues and the procedures for reporting it.
But Thursday’s report also appeared to chide current Secretary of State Kerry and Mrs. Clinton — who served as secretary from January 2009 through early 2013 — for failing to order department managers to require that all employees receive both initial and regularly updated training on such issues.
In addition to roughly 13,000 career foreign service officers, the department employs some 11,000 contractors and more than 45,000 locally hired employees at embassies and diplomatic posts in nearly every corner of the world.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...

America: We had a good run while it lasted!

wnd.com ^ | 6/19/2015 | Burt Prelutsky 

Every time you turn around these days, there’s a new Clintonian scandal in the news. Among conservatives, the scandals raise hackles, while among liberals, they don’t even result in a raised eyebrow.
It’s unfortunate that liberals only care what you say, not what you do, but, unfortunately, that’s the only way it can work with that crowd. Once you sign on to be a Democrat, the contract demands that you never dare question why, for instance, Barack Obama has kept all of his documents under lock and key or why Bill Clinton has never served time for sexual assault, accepting bribes or fudging on his income taxes.
So long as politicians on the left utter the customary pieties about urban blacks, illegal aliens, Muslims, public schools, homosexuals, unions and single women, while blaspheming religious people, corporations, gun owners and conservatives, they will continue to hold their own in national elections.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...

Hawaiian public schools must teach contraception, sodomy in sex ed classes!

LifeSiteNews ^ | 6/18/15 | Dustin Siggins 

HONOLULU, HI, June 18, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) – A state education board ruling will force all public schools in Hawaii to teach "comprehensive sex education" – but one activist told LifeSiteNews that they haven't even figured out what they're going to teach yet.
"Hawaii's BOE voted to change the policy for sex ed without having any curricula to show parents," said Susan Duffy of the Hawaii Parent Coalition. "Neither were they able to provide parents with some idea as to what the standards would be. A couple of parents asked but were told that they could only 'testify' and not ask questions of the board."
Duffy says that the new standards, in addition to requiring Planned Parenthood-approved education on contraceptives and abortion, will have a section on sodomy.
A Planned Parenthood spokesperson said she was "elated" with the changes. “This ensures that every Hawaii public school student will receive accurate, complete and life-saving information,” said Sonia Blackiston, director of education and training for Planned Parenthood of Hawaii.
It is not just the change in education standards that is leading to parental criticism of the board; it's also the procedures surrounding the program's instructions. According to Civil Beat reporter Jessica Terrell, Hawaii had previously been "one of 10 states that did not mandate that students be offered sex education or taught about HIV and AIDS."
Prior education standards had given the parents the option to "opt-in" to programs, while the new ones default to student involvement unless parents pull their children.
Terrell reports that a number of parents and board members differed on what the new sex education program will look like. Parents expressed concern that sexual ideologies were being promoted, and that students would be encouraged to engage in sexual activity. Board members pushed back against such concerns, but both Terrell and Duffy note that the curricula is not yet known – even by the board.
One of the options is the controversial Pono Choices curriculum, which had parents in an uproar earlier this year.

Teenage pregnancies have declined since the 1990s, and teens are less likely to engage in sexual relations in Hawaii compared to other states. However, the state also has the 10th-highest rate of teenage pregnancy in America, and the 12th-highest chlamydia infection rate.
Duffy noted that "Hawaii just made news for its low abortion rates" and "lower rates of teen pregnancy. And all this has occurred under the current abstinence based policy. Why would anyone fix a policy that seems to be working?"
In short, says Duffy, "There was no burning crisis here in our state with regard to sex education. There's been no clarion call by the community for a change to the policy. In fact, my guess is that most parents here have no idea what's just happened. They will today because it is on the front page of this morning's paper but they really won't understand the full impact."
The state's Board of Education has been previously criticized for not disclosing details of its sex education program. In January 2014, American Life League's Rita Diller reported that two elected officials were denied access to information on the programs.
 The full changes can be seen here.

Five day 'fasting' diet slows down ageing and may add years to life!

telegraph.co.uk ^ | Sarah Knapton 

A five day diet which mimics fasting could slow down ageing, add years to life, boost the immune system and cut the risk of heart disease and cancer, scientists believe.
The plan which restricts calories to between one third and a half of normal intake has been developed by academics at the University of Southern California.
But now they have found that a calorie-restricted diet comprising of vegetable soups and chamomile tea has the same affect. And dieters only need to follow the Fasting Mimicking Diet (FMD) for five days a month, eating what they like for the rest of the time.
“Strict fasting is hard for people to stick to, and it can also be dangerous, so we developed a complex diet that triggers the same effects in the body,' said Professor Valter Longo, USC Davis School of Gerontology and director of the USC Longevity Institute.
“I've personally tried both, and the fasting mimicking diet is a lot easier and also a lot safer.
“I think based on the markers for ageing and disease in humans it has the potential to add a number of years of life but more importantly to have a major impact on diabetes, cancer, heart disease and other age-related disease.”
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...

The Loonies


Chocolate Lab


Jenner's Cat!


The weakest link!


Just want it!


Define Racist




This is progress?


Democrat Fake




Old School


I identify with...


Whiter than Wonder Bread!


Out of sight!


We Majored in...