Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

My Own Two Cents

Everyone needs to remember that our Founders gave us a “Representative Republic”, NOT a “Democracy”. You need to research and have a clear understanding of the difference.

The reason our Founders gave us the “Electoral College”, was to eliminate what the Leftist want to establish. The Electoral College is there to ensure that the bigger States in the Union cannot conspire to elect every President. It gives EQUAL say to the smaller States in the election process.

What you are about to read is an attempt of the EXTREME Left to do away with the original purpose of the Electoral College and replace it with simple majority elections, the exact thing the Founders wanted to guard against.

WE MUST STOP THIS. WE CANNOT LET THIS STAND. Please fight with me to eradicate this from our country.

Jerry Broussard

Three Star Line

Democrats Conspiring to Rig Electoral College, Law Passed in 9 States So Far

Tuesday, 15 Apr 2014 09:26 AM

By Dick Morris

Tyranney Alert

A plan, now stealthily making its way through state legislatures with astonishing speed, would junk the Electoral College and award the presidency to the winner of the popular vote.

The plan involves an Interstate Compact where states would commit to select electors pledged to vote for the national popular vote winner regardless of how their own state voted. When enough states pass this law — sufficient to cast the Electoral College’s majority 270 votes –  it will take effect.

The Electoral College will become a vestigial anachronism.

So far, nine states and the District of Columbia — casting 136 electoral votes — have joined moving half way to the 270 needed to put the compact into effect. The ratifying states are: Maryland, New Jersey, Illinois, Hawaii, Washington, Massachusetts, DC, Vermont, California, and Rhode Island.

Both houses in New York have passed it and its on Governor Cuomo’s desk.

And, it has already passed one house in: Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, and Oregon. These states, plus New York represent 107 votes. Combined with the others they are up to 242 votes . They need 270.

Who is pushing this?

All of those ratifying voted for Obama as did eight of the 10 one-house states.

Tyranney Alert

The Movement is funded, in part, by the Center for Voting and Democracy, a George Soros-funded election group. (Is that enough reason for you to help stop this?)

 Essentially, it is an end run around the regular constitutional amending process. Rather than get a two-thirds majority of each house of Congress and three-quarters of the states, this proposal would take effect when a simple majority approve it.

 Why are Democrats pushing this plan?

Tyranney Alert
Democrats usually see a smaller percentage of their people go to the polls than Republicans do.

Under the electoral vote system, they figure why beat the drums to get a high turnout in New York City when the state will go Democrat anyway? But, if its the popular vote that matters, the big city machines can do their thing — with devastating impact.

And think of the chances for voter fraud! Right now, the biggest cities, the ones most firmly in Democratic control (e.g. Washington DC, New York, Detroit, Chicago, San Francisco, etc.) are all solidly in blue states. Not only does this make it unnecessary to maximize turnouts there, but it also makes it unnecessary to promote double voting, fraudulent voting, and all the other tricks of the trade at which Democrats excel.

But if the popular vote determines who will be the next president, we can bet that the machines will be out in force lining up voters, real and phony, to pad their statistics.

Some Republicans, particularly in non-swing states, are inclined to back the proposal simply so that they get their fair share of attention. They are tired of delegating to Ohio, Florida, Nevada, Virginia, et al the power to choose the president. And they can’t remember when a candidate for that office last favored their state with his presence.

But don’t let our “Attention Deficit Disorder” lead us to give away the store. The popular vote is what the Democrats do best. Fighting them on it is, in Winston Churchill’s words, “like going into the water to fight the shark.”

Republicans need to kill this proposal and they better get busy doing it. Some small states are backing it because they are tired of all the attention being focused on swing states. But Republicans must stand firm and not yield to the temptation to back it.

How can we stop the Democrats from ravaging our political system? The key battles are coming up in Arkansas and North Carolina. In both states, one house has passed the Compact. We need to stand firm in these two red states and block the Compact from taking effect. Republicans in Minnesota and Wisconsin, both blue states, need to stop ratification in their states.

And, Republicans should focus on stopping the second house from ratification in those states where only one house has acted.

 Our democracy depends on it.

Read Latest Breaking News from
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

Written by Allen West on April 15, 2014


As a matter of fact, according to Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), since taking office in 2009, President Barack Obama has formally proposed a total of 442 tax increases, according to their analysis of Obama administration budgets for fiscal years 2010 through 2015. The 442 total does not include the 20 tax increases Obama signed into law as part of Obamacare.

The number of proposed tax increases per year is as follows:

  • 79 tax increases for FY 2010
  • 52 tax increases for FY 2011
  • 47 tax increases for FY 2012
  • 34 tax increases for FY 2013
  • 137 tax increases for FY 2014
  • 93 tax increases for FY 2015

Perhaps not coincidentally, the Obama budget with the lowest number of proposed tax increases was released during an election year. In February 2012, Obama released his FY 2013 budget, with “only” 34 proposed tax increases.

Tyranney Alert

In addition to the 442 tax increases in his annual budget proposals, the 20 signed into law as part of Obamacare, and the massive tobacco tax hike signed into law on the sixteenth day of his presidency, Obama has made it clear he is open to other broad-based tax increases.

During an interview with Men’s Health in 2009, when asked about the idea of national tax on soda and sugary drinks, the President said, “I actually think it’s an idea that we should be exploring.”

Tyranney Alert

In 1913 America moved from taxation based upon goods consumption to a progressive taxation based upon income earnings — funny, a progressive tax is one of the points in Marx and Engel’s Communist Manifesto. Doubly funny, the progressive tax code came about during the first “progressive” American presidency, that of Woodrow Wilson.

I have stated before that taxation has become a weapon of mass destruction — far worse than climate change, John Kerry — enabling a fiscally irresponsible government to expand beyond its constitutional limits.

It has also become a political battering ram used in a dangerous game of bribery for more largesse from the public treasury in exchange for votes — as we endure the insidious progressive socialist class warfare themes of fair share, economic equality, income inequality, shared prosperity, ad nauseum, ad infinitum.

I invite you to hold up a dollar to our misguided liberal progressive comrades and ask, “how much of this should a hardworking American get to keep?” My answer is no working American should give more than 30 percent of his or her income to the government (local, state, federal). This must be sufficient for effectiveness and efficiency. And we must no longer have a percentage of Americans who are not “paying any share” in the functions of government.


Here is my tax reform proposal.

  • We immediately move to a flat tax system with two tiers. The top tier paying between 20-22 percent and the lower tier paying 15 percent. There should be only two deductions: mortgage interest and charitable contributions.
  • The income level cut line between the two tiers? I’d have to ponder that one a little more, but since liberals seem to like the $200,000 number, perhaps it’s an acceptable “compromise.” As for the corporate business tax rate, it would be 25 percent, with no deductions. We would eliminate capital gains, dividends, and death taxes.
  • The goal of this tax proposal is growth and opportunity, not government largesse and dependency. Therefore, government reform is an integral part of this tax reform proposal, along with a balanced budget amendment which would force the federal government to prioritize its spending and spend only what it takes in — economic history demonstrates there would likely be increased receipts.
  • In addition, we would need to have regulatory reform because increased regulations are a form of taxation on our private sector businesses.
  • For those of you who prefer a Fair Tax — consumption based — that could be a possibility, but we don’t want to give the federal government any ideas of going towards a Value Added Tax (VAT). We need to reduce our debt and deficits first as well as control the debt to GDP and federal government spending to GDP ratios. I would propose we keep federal government spending less than 22 percent of our GDP.

Common sense tax, regulatory and government reform are what we need, because I wish for the day when Americans didn’t dread April 15th, but were proud to support their government because it is effective, efficient, and fiscally sound. Sound good to you?

My Own Two CentsI hope you can understand now why General West is my first choice for President of the United States. This is a genuine leader with genuine leadership experience, education and government service experience. I encourage you to prayerfully consider joining me in encouraging General West to run, and then support him to win.

Jerry Broussard

By / 15 April 2014


As the Easter season approaches, it is time to reflect on our faith and stand in awe of the miracle that is Jesus Christ.

I am given to remember a song titled “Wonder of Wonders” by Charles B. Wycuff.

It was recorded by The Inspirations, one of my favorite gospel groups from Bryson City, NC.

This is the line I find most impressive in the beautiful hymn:

“The wonder of wonders, oh how could it be, that God became flesh and was given for me. The Almighty came down and walked among men. The wonder of wonders he died for my sin.”


If you think on that line, God’s sacrifice is almost too much to imagine, and that is not even getting into His crucifixion.

He came down and walked among men. He left heaven to come and live here on earth with us.

When I hear that, I wonder how He saw the difference in this earth with its’ carnal ways. How difficult it would be, if we put ourselves in His shoes, would we be willing to do it?

Just as a most simplistic comparison, would you or I be willing to leave our comfortable, clean, well-appointed homes to live in squalor in a third world country for 33 years just because our father asked us to do it?

How much more did Jesus give up to come here, knowing how long He would be here and how horrifically He would die, yet still willing to do his Father’s will?

This past Sunday was Palm Sunday, the day Jesus entered the city. He knew he would be killed in a very violent way within the week.

He was made flesh and felt all things as we do. He asked His Father to let it pass from him in prayer, yet ultimately accepted His fate with serenity.

If you only think of these examples of His exemplary life, disregarding all of the rest, you cannot help but marvel and praise.

The very least we can do is stand up for His name and His church in everything we do.
It is not something reserved for the Holy Week, but should be a lifestyle.

As you gather with your family and friends this Holy Season, remember to keep it holy.
Honor Him and thank God for His Son who did what we would shrink away from doing.

Image: Courtesy of:

About the author: Candace Hardin

 Candace Hardin resides in Atlanta, Georgia. She fluent in Spanish and a student of Latin and history. She is a columnist on and has a blog, Originally from North Carolina, her writing and beliefs have been heavily influenced by the Appalachian culture and tradition.


Posted By on Apr 15, 2014

welfare state 

Thanks to the evaporation of American employment options,  the devaluation of the American dollar, and the expansion of government largesse, American citizens are even more dependent on the civil government than ever. In fact, statistics from 2011 and 2012 indicate that there are more people on food stamps than there are women working full-time jobs.

This is the first instance on record where this has been the case in back-to-back years. But I find even the framing of the statistic troubling. Notice what it does not say. It doesn’t say that women receiving food stamps now outnumber women working full-time jobs. It says that people receiving food stamps now outnumber women with full-time employment.

Why would that even be a meaningful statistic?  The only thing I can think is that a considerable amount of people on food stamps are actually single mothers. Or, at least, that single mothers are more likely to be on food stamps. Consider that, in 2012—the last reported year on record—45% of all single mothers received food stamps (formally called SNAP benefits). That’s a huge percentage of single mothers.


The entire system is really at fault here. For one, where are the fathers? Why are there millions of mothers out there raising children on their own? Because of the absenteeism and profligacy of the American man, women are in a position where they feel they must go to the State for help. And the State offers two kinds of help in most cases: abortions and welfare.

Think about how integrated the socialist system is. The whole debate over abortion, welfare, dependency, national budgets, etc. could be resolved if the majority of men would do one simple thing: stay with their kids and the mothers of their kids and work to provide for them.

It’s amazing how simple the solution is. We say we want the civil government to decrease. It can’t until American fathers increase.

Posted By on Apr 15, 2014

solyndra crony capitalism 

It seems like Obama would try to be a little less transparent about the crony capitalism that has marked his administration. But apparently, it doesn’t matter to his supporters what he does. A tip for big corporations jockeying for favors from Obama’s DoJ: Make sure you donate heavily to the Democratic Party and/or Obama favorites. If you do, you’ll get huge favors. But if your executives contribute to opponents of Obama, you’re not getting anywhere.

If this correlation were not so well-documented, I would be hesitant to make such a blanket statement. But I’m actually not exaggerating in the least. A report in Frontiers of Freedom outlines just a few of the most egregious examples of Obama’s crony capitalism at work: from Solyndra to Quality Software Services to Big Labor, the Obama administration has been perfectly faithful to reward its big donors and supporters. And, on the other hand, Obama has been equally faithful to punish its detractors.

Take the failed 2011 merger of AT&T and T-Mobile:

Processing of the application by the Federal Communications Commission and the Department of Justice was expected to take at least twelve months.  But five months later, the Department of Justice announced it would file a lawsuit blocking the friendly merger.

Leading the merger quest was AT&T CEO Randall L. Stephenson.  Mr. Stephenson is well known to be a Bible Belt, pro-free market, Republican with a reputation as a fierce executive with a head for numbers.  He is a proponent of tax reforms that include broadening the tax base and lowering tax rates as a formula for economic growth, rather than the Administration’s position of making the rich pay more of their “fair share” while government makes subjective decisions about redistributing the wealth of the working class.

If only Stephenson had been an Obama supporter, he would been assured the success of his merger. Just look at Comcast and Time Warner. The merger looks like a shoe in, in spite of the fact that the merger is worth a few billion more dollars than the AT&T merger and would also result in a 40% market share for one company. The only significant difference between the cell phone merger and the cable company merger (aside from the fact that the Comcast merger has even more severe consequences to consumer choice) is that AT&T is led by a Republican and Comcast/Time Warner are headed by Democrats.

Community Organizer Two

Complete Message

The senator’s plan for solar farms in Nevada wasn’t just limited to the shelved project near Laughlin

Kit Daniels
April 14, 2014

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who was exposed last Friday as the mastermind behind the Bureau of Land Management’s persecution of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, can be seen in this March 2014 photo breaking ground for a new solar farm near the Bundy Ranch, emphasizing that the senator’s plan for solar projects in Nevada wasn’t just limited to the shelved solar farm near Laughlin.

Credit: First Solar Media press release via Business News

Signaling the first day of construction of the Moapa Southern Paiute Solar Project, which is about 35 miles from the Bundy homestead in Bunkerville, Nevada, Sen. Reid joined representatives from the Moapa Band of Paiutes, executives from First Solar, Inc. and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power for the groundbreaking ceremony on March 21.

“First Solar is thrilled to celebrate this important milestone with Sen. Reid and distinguished guests, and honored to work with the Moapa Band of Paiutes on this landmark project,” Jim Hughes, the CEO of First Solar, said at the time.

The development of solar farms just like this one is exactly why Sen. Reid was using the BLM, whose director is Reid’s former senior advisor, to push Bundy out of the Gold Butte area his family has worked for over 140 years.

As we revealed last Friday in an article that became the #1 news story in the world for 24 hours, the BLM specifically stated that it wanted Bundy and his cattle out of the area as part of the agency’s regional mitigation strategy for the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone.”

The BLM attempted a cover-up by deleting documents exposing the plan from its web site, but fortunately contributors at the Free Republic were able to save them for posterity.

Others have attempted to whitewash the situation by suggesting that the solar farm development was only limited to the shelved 2012 deal between Sen. Reid and Chinese-owned ENN Energy Group in Laughlin, Nev., but by reading the BLM’s own documents it is quite obvious that this is not the case.

“The BLM’s current action builds on the Western Solar Energy Plan, a two-year planning effort conducted on behalf of the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Energy to expand domestic energy production and spur development of solar energy on public lands in six western states,” the BLM announced in a March 14 press release. “The Western Solar Energy Plan provides a blueprint for utility-scale solar energy permitting in Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Utah by establishing Solar Energy Zones with access to existing or planned transmission, incentives for development within those Solar Energy Zones, and a process through which to consider additional Solar Energy Zones and solar projects.”

“The Regional Mitigation Strategy for the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone is the first of several pilot plans to be developed by the BLM,” the press release added.

In summary, the BLM, acting under Sen. Reid’s corrupt interests, wants Cliven Bundy out of the 600,000 acre Gold Butte area so the agency can use the land for future solar projects and de facto buffer zones surrounding the solar farms.

This is crony capitalism at its finest and Bundy’s supporters, who numbered in the thousands, knew it.

Articles of interest:

Reid smelling anything but rosy in ranch fight – World Net Daily
Nevada ranch standoff could leave dirt on Harry Reid’s reputation – The Washington Times


This article was posted: Monday, April 14, 2014 at 12:58 pm

Ron Paul 
Former Congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul spoke with Neil Cavuto on FOX News’ Your World with Neil Cavuto on Monday to discuss the Bundy Ranch standoff (see video below). Paul tells Cavuto that he is pleased with the outcome of the feds backing down, but reminds us that “governments don’t give up their power easily,” and because of that historic fact, government may return with more force as they did in the Waco, TX siege during Democrat Bill Clinton’s administration:

“I’m hoping this is very positive of things to come, with people standing up and objecting to the federal government’s intrusion into our lives and everything that we do.  And when the people do get together and stand up, I think government will be forced to back down. But the other thing is, is that governments don’t give up their power easily, and they may well come back with more force like they did at Waco with the Davidians. So, I don’t know which way it’s going, but so far so good.”

Paul told Cavuto that he was “delighted” that the standoff had thus far ended non-violently and that he hopes that it will continue to be non-violent:

“I was delighted that they got through those couple days and there wasn’t any shooting and no killing, because I really encourage, you know, the demonstration against unfairness by our government, but I’d like to see it all non-violent and that weekend, so far, turned out to be a good step.” 

Paul then made the point that the dispute was caused by federal government overreach and usurpation of state land, noting that when the government says they own land, “everybody owns it, yet nobody owns it.”

“They had virtual ownership of that land because they had been using it….but it’s not clean enough, I think land should be in the states and I think the states should sell it to the people, it’s worked out quite well in big states,” stated Paul while pointing out that publicly owned land encourages multiple special interest groups to fight over it.

Paul thinks that the federal government should get completely out of owning land for the sake of owning land, and that their involvement will lead to more problems in the future.

“You need the government out of it and I think that’s the important point, if you don’t look at that you can expect more of these problems, especially when our economy gets into more trouble,” said Paul, adding that the real enemy is “bad ideas and bad politics that we have to change.”

Ron Paul

About Matthew Burke

Matthew BurkeMatthew Burke is a former Financial Advisor/Planner for 24 years. He was a 2010 Constitutional Conservative candidate for U.S. Congress in Washington State. View all Posts by Matthew Burke


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 275 other followers

%d bloggers like this: