Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘executive order’

Today’s TWO Politically INCORRECT Cartoons by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Phony Kamala

Biden has picked Kamala Harris as his running mate under pressure to choose a black woman.

Kamala Harris VP PickPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – COVID Relief

Trump COVID executive order sidesteps Democrats political hostage-taking.

Trump Executive OrderPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Lifesaver in Chief

Trump goes around Pelosi and Schumer playing politics to get needed relief to the people hurting due to.

Trump COVID ReliefPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.

WAYNE ROOT: Mr. President, We Can Save Economy and Stop Covid-19 with Executive Order


Written By Assistant Editor | Published July 14, 2020 at 12:17pm

By Wayne Allyn Root

Mr. President, this is the most important column I’ve ever written. We have a successful treatment for Covid-19. Now we need an Executive Order from you to put it into play.

More on that in a minute.

Let me first mention a few reasons we don’t need to panic. Covid-19 is not the end of the world, or America.

First, why was the liberal media playing up “deaths” for months…putting daily “death counts” on the front page of newspapers…yet now that the death count has dropped dramatically, they’re using “cases” as the new metric. Are they trying to create hysteria? Do they want the economy shut down?

Second, why isn’t anyone comparing Sweden with Michigan? Sweden is a country of 10 million that never closed their economy. Not for one day, not for one minute. Everyone went about their business and lived their lives. They have 5,545 dead.

Michigan is a state of about 9.9 million. The same size as Sweden. They locked down their citizens and closed all their businesses, tighter than any state in America. They have 6,075 dead. More than Sweden.

This proves there is no need to ever shut down our economy, or lockdown the people. It doesn’t work. Period. End of story. It’s the perfect apples to apples comparison. Sweden is the winner. Michigan is the loser.

People will get sick with Covid-19 no matter what we do. But when you close the economy, the cure is worse than the disease. Not just for the people who are broke, with their businesses closed, jobs gone, lives in shambles. Government has it even worse. Every state and city government in America is now hopelessly broke and desperate.

That’s the result of just one closure that lasted only two months. If we close again, we will destroy the US economy forever.

Third, and here’s the big one. I keep asking this question, and I’m still waiting for answer. What is the difference between Covid-19 and the Hong Kong Flu of 1968-69? By every measure it appears to be a carbon copy. It’s the same flu pandemic, from the same place, with the same results- over 100,000 dead at a time when America was dramatically smaller.

Nevertheless, we never closed the economy, or sports events, or concerts, or Vegas casinos, or schools, or anything. We let Woodstock go on in the summer of 1969, with over 400,000 young people having sex with strangers, playing on top of one another in the rain and mud. It didn’t ruin America. The media said nothing about it. There was no panic or hysteria. There were no lockdowns, or shutdown. It was the flu. Life went on. So, what’s the big difference today?

Other than Donald J. Trump as president.

Other than a mentally insane and vicious left with “Trump Derangement Syndrome.”

Other than a nation filled with liberal snowflakes, afraid of their own shadow.

Other than a Democrat Party willing to do anything to stop Trump- including destroy Trump’s economy, or lock us all in our homes, demand a mail-in ballot election, and steal the election from Trump and the Silent Majority (because they know that’s the only way they can win).

We need to go on with our lives- just like 1968-69.

Now to the solution. This solution saves the economy. It protects the elderly. It stops the panic and hysteria. No one ever again needs to fear leaving their home. We can all go to work. We can save thousands of lives. Because we have a treatment that works.

My guest on my national radio show “Wayne Allyn Root: Raw & Unfiltered” on USA Radio yesterday was Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, MD. This brilliant New York doctor has treated 2,200 Covid-19 patients. He’s had a success rate of 100% for low-risk patients…and a success rate of 99.3% for high-risk patients. By using Hydroxychloroquine, zinc sulfate, plus Z Pak antibiotic. He has named it “The Zelenko Protocol.” It’s the synergy that works. Without zinc and Z Pak, the drug hydroxychloroquine doesn’t work effectively.

The other key to success is to use this 3-part protocol within five days of symptoms appearing. It has to be used early, before the patient winds up in the ICU. That’s why several studies of Hydroxychloroquine have failed. They never used zinc sulfate and they started the protocol too late.

Only two out of 2200 of Dr Zelenko’s patients died. Of those two, one already had cancer. The other was very old and already very ill with Covid-19 before using the protocol. By that time, it’s almost always too late.

The President of Hondoras uses this “Zelenko Protocol” to prevent Covid-19. Dr. Zelenko advises him. The President of Brazil used this regimen to beat Covid-19. He’s a fan of Dr. Zelenko and heard him speak at a conference in Brazil. He followed Dr. Zelenko’s regimen. He is back to 100% healthy.

We all need to follow Dr. Zelenko’s regimen. It will save lives. It opens up the US economy for good. But we can’t. Doctors won’t prescribe the so-called “Trump drug.” Liberals, the media, the FDA, government bureaucrats- none of them want to give Trump the credit if it works. Politics is killing thousands of Americans.

Mr. President, we need an Executive Order. Immediately. Put the federal government’s money and resources behind a fair and honest study of “the Zelenko Protocol.” In the meantime, every sick American must have the freedom to choose this “Zelenko Protocol.” We have a right to choose. We have a right to live. But Mr. President, we need you to make it happen. Today.

Wayne Allyn Root is the host of the nationally-syndicated radio show, “Wayne Allyn Root: Raw & Unfiltered” on USA Radio Network from 6 PM to 9 PM EST M-F. Listen live at http://usaradio.com/wayne-allyn-root/

4 Key Points Nobody’s Addressing About Trump’s Federal Pay Decision


Reported By Fred Lucas | September 1, 2018 at

12:52pm

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/4-key-points-nobodys-addressing-trumps-federal-pay-decision/

President Donald Trump makes his way to board Air Force One before departing from Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland on Thursday.

President Donald Trump makes his way to board Air Force One before departing from Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland on Thursday. (Mandel Ngan / AFP / Getty Images)

President Donald Trump announced he’s not granting the usual 2.1 percent pay hike for federal employees, prompting staunch opposition from many Democratic lawmakers. It’s the latest move by the Trump administration to try to rein in excessive compensation packages for federal employees, after the president signed three executive orders in May.

“Specifically, I have determined that for 2019, both across-the-board pay increases and locality pay increases will be set at zero,” Trump’s letter notifying Congress said Thursday. “These alternative pay plan decisions will not materially affect our ability to attract and retain a well-qualified federal workforce.”

Here’s a look at what the pay freeze could mean.

1. Fiscal Impact

In his letter to Congress Thursday, Trump asserted the pay hikes would not be responsible at this time:

“I view the increases that would otherwise take effect as inappropriate.

“Under current law, locality pay increases averaging 25.70 percent, costing $25 billion, would go into effect in January 2019, in addition to a 2.1 percent across-the-board increase for the base general schedule. We must maintain efforts to put our nation on a fiscally sustainable course, and federal agency budgets cannot sustain such increases.”

However, the impact may be negligible, said Rachel Greszler, a research fellow in economics, budget and entitlements with the Heritage Foundation.

“Basically, it’s not the most efficient reduction in spending or excessive pay, but it’s all the administration can do on their own,” Greszler told The Daily Signal. “And pay increases shouldn’t be automatic.”

2. Current Federal Compensation

In recent years, the Congressional Budget Office and conservative think tanks the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute all produced reports finding federal compensation packages far outpace the private sector.

Further, the government watchdog group OpenTheBooks.com found that one in five of employees at the 78 largest federal agencies has a salary that is six figures. Another 30,000 rank-and-file career government employees earn more than any governor.

A 2017 CBO report estimated taxpayers compensate federal workers with 17 percent more than what similar employees – with comparable education, skills and experience – earn in the private sector.

The Office of Management and Budget during the Obama administration estimated the federal government would spend $337 billion in 2017 on the civilian federal workforce.

Also, with seniority comes at least two pay hikes for some years under the current system. All federal employees generally get a cost-of-living adjustment that is not based on performance. Second, federal employees are paid for each “step increase” they move up in the system based on seniority, which provides a 3 percent hike.

Federal employees get a retirement contribution of between 15 and 18 percent of their pay, while private sector employees average 3 to 5 percent, according to a 2016 Heritage Foundation study. Federal employees also contribute significantly less to their retirement, as taxpayers fund the bulk of the pensions.

3. Performance Pay

Greszler co-authored a 2016 Heritage Foundation study that estimated a performance-based system would reduce federal personnel costs by $26.7 billion.

In his letter to Congress on Thursday, Trump made what seemed to be a long-term point.

“In light of our nation’s fiscal situation, federal employee pay must be performance-based, and aligned strategically toward recruiting, retaining, and rewarding high-performing federal employees and those with critical skill sets,” Trump said. “Across-the-board pay increases and locality pay increases, in particular, have long-term fixed costs, yet fail to address existing pay disparities or target mission critical recruitment and retention goals.”

Simply holding off on raises won’t accomplish anything without broader civil service reform, said Robert Moffit, senior fellow in domestic policy studies at the Heritage Foundation.

“The federal pay system does not effectively reward the most talented and productive because the system is highly standardized,” Moffit told The Daily Signal. “Federal employees in many cases should be paid more and many should be paid less. We need more employees in some areas and less in others.”

4. What Trump Has Done So Far

In keeping with the president’s “drain the swamp” reform efforts, the Trump administration has pushed for civil service reforms in budget proposals to Congress with little action.

However, Congress did pass and the president signed a law to make it easier to fire bad employees at the Department of Veterans Affairs following the VA waiting list scandal in which employees had doctored lists, leaving some veterans to wait excessively long times for care.

Congress has left most of the rest of the federal bureaucracy untouched. However, on May 25, Trump issued an executive order to move the ball on civil service reform.

One order holds nonproductive workers more accountable by speeding up the disciplinary and appeals process. In many cases, it takes more than a year to remove an employee. The order also limits the grace period to shore up their performance from 120 days to 30 days. The order also limits the ability of federal managers from simply moving employees that engaged in poor performance or illegal activity from one agency to another.

Federal agencies would share performance reviews, and also consider performance in making layoff decisions. Previously, layoffs were based on the amount of time employed by an agency.

A separate executive order limits the amount of time a federal employees can spend on union activity during work hours to no more than one-quarter of their workday. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee found more than 12,500 federal workers took “official time” to work on union activities in 2017. Of them, 470 worked in the VA.

Fred Lucas is the White House correspondent for The Daily Signal and co-host of “The Right Side of History” podcast.

A version of this article previously appeared on The Daily Signal website under the headline “4 Key Points to Consider About Trump’s Federal Pay Decision.”

Federal Judge Secures Massive DACA Win For Trump… Changes Underway For Illegal Immigrants


Authored By Randy DeSoto | March 6, 2018 at 12:25pm

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/federal-judge-secures-massive-daca-win-trump-changes-underway-illegal-immigrants/

President Donald Trump lauded a win in a federal court affirming his authority to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. The program — initiated by former President Barack Obama by executive action in 2012 — allows those who arrived in the United States before they turned 16 the ability to apply for renewable two-year deferments on deportation.

“Federal Judge in Maryland has just ruled that ‘President Trump has the right to end DACA,’” Trump tweeted on Tuesday. “President Obama had 8 years to fix this problem, and didn’t. I am waiting for the Dems, they are running for the hills!”

Federal district court Judge Roger W. Titus found that Trump was fully within his authority to rescind Obama’s executive order last September and provide Congress six months to address the issue legislatively.

“(Trump’s) decision took control of a pell-mell situation and provided Congress — the branch of government charged with determining immigration policy — an opportunity to remedy it. Given the reasonable belief that DACA was unlawful, the decision to wind down DACA in an orderly manner was rational,” Titus wrote, according to The Washington Examiner.

Titus added that any rhetoric Trump may have employed regarding illegal immigration in the past was not relevant to reaching a legal ruling concerning DACA.

“As disheartening or inappropriate as the president’s occasionally disparaging remarks may be, they are not relevant to the larger issues governing the DACA rescission. The DACA Rescission Memo is clear as to its purpose and reasoning, and its decision is rationally supported by the administrative record,” the judge stated.

The Washington Examiner noted that Titus’ ruling does not override decisions made by federal courts in California and New York issuing preliminary injunctions from preventing the Trump administration from winding down the program for the approximately 700,000 currently enrolled.

Multiple legal experts told the Examiner the fate of DACA is likely on the fast track to the U.S. Supreme Court. The case is currently at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco and on its way to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City.

Last week, the Supreme Court declined the Trump administration’s request to bypass the appeals court level, but that decision in no way speaks to whether the court would take up the case in a matter of months following rulings at the circuit courts.

Trump had set March 5 as the deadline for Congress to act on DACA, which the federal court rulings in effect placed a hold on.

The president has accused Democrats several times of being unwilling to solve the DACA issue.

The deal Trump seeks is building a U.S.-Mexico border wall and an end to the Visa lottery program and chain migration.

Meanwhile Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill. has blamed Trump for creating the “crisis.”

As reported by The Western Journal, Fox News contributor Lisa Boothe reminded Durbin last month who was truly to blame for the DACA issue.

“It’s hard for me to take Sen. Dick Durbin seriously and lay this at the feet of Trump,” said Boothe, “because the reason why we are here right now is President Obama did something he himself said he did not have the legal authority to do in creating the DACA program.”

Advertisement – story continues below

“This is a temporary stopgap measure,” Obama said when he announced the policy.

Boothe pointed out that Obama’s decision to proceed with DACA in June 2012, during the heat of his re-election campaign, shows that to him, the issue was a political one.

Last fall, after Obama called Trump’s decision to end the program cruel,” Booth said it was time for the former occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue to “go away,” noting he had his chance.

The Democrats held both houses of Congress — including a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate — during Obama’s first two years in office, yet did nothing to address immigration, despite calls from Hispanic leaders to do so.

When asked about the topic during a 2010 Univision interview, Obama responded, “I am president, I am not king. I can’t do these things just by myself. We have a system of government that requires the Congress to work with the executive branch to make it happen.”

Travel Ban Back in Place, SCOTUS Halts Lower Court Injunctions


Reported by Ian Mason | 4 Dec 2017 | Washington, DC

URL of the original posting site: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/12/04/travel-ban-back-place-scotus-halts-lower-court-injunction/?

President Donald Trump’s travel ban executive order is once again to largely go back into effect after the Supreme Court of the United States stayed two lower courts’ injunctions Monday.

The orders come in response to filings by the Department of Justice Friday, asking the Supreme Court to stay the preliminary injunctions in the two main travel ban cases, Hawaii v. Trump in the Ninth Circuit and International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump in the Fourth Circuit. These cases have been proceeding up and down the federal court system for months.

The district courts, especially that of Barack Obama-appointed District of Hawaii Judge Derrick Watson, have repeatedly ruled that the bans must be blocked from going into effect or must, in the interim, be interpreted in such a way as to have little effect on the list of mostly Muslim majority countries from which travel is prohibited under the orders.

The petitions in the two cases were made to Justice Anthony Kennedy and Chief Justice John Roberts respectively. Only Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor declined to sign on to the orders staying the Fourth and Ninth Circuits.

“This a substantial victory for the safety and security of the American people,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in statement after the orders were announced.

He continued:

We are pleased to have defended this order and heartened that a clear majority Supreme Court has allowed the President’s lawful proclamation protecting our country’s national security to go into full effect.  The Constitution gives the President the responsibility and power to protect this country from all threats foreign and domestic, and this order remains vital to accomplishing those goals.

With the order, the third – permanent – version of the travel ban, promulgated in September after an interagency review of the dangers posed by the different countries included, will go back into effect while the case on the merits works its way through the court system. The Supreme Court had dismissed the earlier lawsuits based on the earlier, temporary versions of the ban because they had expired.

The government, represented by Solicitor General Noel Francisco, asked the justices to re-instate the ban based in part on the findings of the review, which provided new security-based justifications for the inclusion of Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen and, he argues, turns the likelihood of success against the plaintiffs.

President Donald Trump Signs Bill to Overturn Obama Rule Forcing States to Fund Planned Parenthood


waving flagdisclaimerAuthored by Steven Ertelt | President LifeNews.com |  Apr 13, 2017   |   11:37AM    Washington, DC

URL of the original posting site: http://www.lifenews.com/2017/04/13/president-donald-trump-to-sign-bill-to-overturn-obama-rule-forcing-states-to-fund-planned-parenthood/

After the House first passed the measure, the Senate voted 50-50 for the bill, with a couple of liberal pro-abortion Republicans joining Democrats in supporting the abortion giant and Republicans voting pro-life. The tie vote made it so pro-life Vice-President Mike Pence cast the tie-breaking vote to approve the measure.

Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser will be at the bill signing and talked with LifeNews.com about it.

“This week the pro-life movement had two huge victories: first, the swearing-in of Justice Gorsuch and now, President Trump will undo former President Obama’s parting gift to the abortion industry. The resolution signed today simply ensures that states are not forced to fund an abortion business with taxpayer dollars. Rather, states have the option to spend Title X money on comprehensive health care clinics that better serve women and girls,” she said.

“We thank President Trump, Vice President Pence, who cast the tie breaking vote last month, as well as the women who led this effort in Congress, Rep. Diane Black and Sen. Joni Ernst. Prioritizing funding away from Planned Parenthood to comprehensive health care alternatives is a winning issue. We expect to see Congress continue its efforts to redirect additional taxpayer funding away from Planned Parenthood through pro-life health care reform after the spring recess,” she added.

In recent years, several states receiving Title X family planning grants have opted to direct those funds to county health departments, community health centers, or other types of providers, in preference to organizations engaged in objectionable activities, such as Planned Parenthood, a mega-marketer of abortion that has also been involved in selling aborted baby parts.

H.J. Res. 43, once Trump signs it, would mean that states, if they chose, could continue to attempt to redirect Title X funds away from objectionable organizations like Planned Parenthood.

SIGN THE PETITION! Congress Must De-Fund Planned Parenthood Immediately

Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) and Rep. Diane Black (R-Tenn.) were behind the bills to overturn the rule.ATTA GIRL

“State legislatures around the country have spoken out about their preference for prioritizing more comprehensive primary and preventative care providers for the receipt of Title X funding,” the duo wrote in a joint op-ed for the Washington Examiner, “and their voice should be respected by bureaucrats in the federal government.”

“According to its 2014-2015 annual report, Planned Parenthood performed 323,999 abortion procedures in just one year. Taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize the abortion industry in this country. Nor should they be forced to foot the bill for an organization like Planned Parenthood that has displayed such blatant disregard for human life.”

“With a pro-life president in the White House and pro-life majorities in the House and Senate, we will continue to work together this year to undo the damage done by the Obama administration,” the women write.praise-the-lord-png

Leading pro-life groups like National Right to Life supported the bill. In its letter to House members, NRLC wrote: “Over one-third of all abortions in the U.S. are performed at PPFA-affiliated facilities. Longstanding objections to the massive governmental funding of PPFA have been reinforced by widely publicized undercover videos, which illuminate the callous brutality that occurs daily in these abortion mills.”

Other groups also applauded the House.

“President Obama’s parting gift to the abortion industry was in keeping with his Administration’s actions over the last eight years. At every turn, then-President Obama thwarted efforts by state and local authorities – who were acting on the will of the people – to prioritize taxpayer funding away from Big Abortion,” said SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser. “Obama’s legacy of forcing Americans to finance the abortion industry is being steadily dismantled by our new pro-life President and the pro-life Congress. We look forward to swift passage of this resolution in the Senate so that it can receive President Trump’s signature.”

She told LifeNews: “Planned Parenthood which, according to their latest annual report, performed 323,999 abortions in a single year, does not need or deserve taxpayer dollars. We thank Rep. Diane Black (R-TN) and Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) for leading the effort to overturn this unpopular rule. Their leadership reflects the truth that women largely support stopping taxpayer funding of the abortion industry and redirecting funds to centers that offer real health care.”

Recently, two new videos showed former Planned Parenthood employees discussing how women were “treated like cattle” and “herded” through clinics. In last week’s video, a former manager admitted Planned Parenthood had “abortion quotas” that, if met, would result in pizza parties. Other videos have exposed Planned Parenthood’s claim of providing prenatal services and demonstrated that ultrasounds are used almost exclusively for abortion.

Here’s an example of how Obama’s rule has prevented states from revoking taxpayer funding for the abortion company Planned Parenthood.

Under current state law, the state of Tennessee doles out Title X funding provided by HHS to county health departments, who then determine appropriate sub-grantees. All 95 counties have identified community health centers and other providers aside from Planned Parenthood who meet all Title X eligibility criteria to receive this funding, effectively cutting off Planned Parenthood’s access to Title X funds in the state of Tennessee.

The rule from HHS cites other examples of states such as Florida and Texas enacting or attempting to enact similar measures. The rule undermines such state laws, explaining that it “precludes project recipients [states] from using criteria in their selection of subrecipients that are unrelated to the ability to deliver services to program beneficiaries in an effective manner.”

The expose’ videos catching Planned Parenthood officials selling the body parts of aborted babies have shocked the nation. Here is a list of all thirteen:

  • In the first video: Dr. Deborah Nucatola of Planned Parenthood commented on baby-crushing: “We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part, I’m gonna basically crush below, I’m gonna crush above, and I’m gonna see if I can get it all intact.”
  • In the second video: Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Mary Gatter joked, “I want a Lamborghini” as she negotiated the best price for baby parts.
  • In the third video: Holly O’Donnell, a former Stem Express employee who worked inside a Planned Parenthood clinic, detailed first-hand the unspeakable atrocities and how she fainted in horror over handling baby legs.
  • In the fourth video: Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Savita Ginde stated, “We don’t want to do just a flat-fee (per baby) of like, $200. A per-item thing works a little better, just because we can see how much we can get out of it.” She also laughed while looking at a plate of fetal kidneys that were “good to go.”
  • In the fifth video: Melissa Farrell of Planned Parenthood-Gulf Coast in Houston boasted of Planned Parenthood’s skill in obtaining “intact fetal cadavers” and how her “research” department “contributes so much to the bottom line of our organization here, you know we’re one of the largest affiliates, our Research Department is the largest in the United States.”
  • In the sixth video: Holly O’Donnell described technicians taking fetal parts without patient consent: “There were times when they would just take what they wanted. And these mothers don’t know. And there’s no way they would know.”
  • In the seventh and perhaps most disturbing video: Holly O’Donnell described the harvesting, or “procurement,” of organs from a nearly intact late-term fetus aborted at Planned Parenthood Mar Monte’s Alameda clinic in San Jose, CA. “‘You want to see something kind of cool,’” O’Donnell says her supervisor asked her. “And she just taps the heart, and it starts beating. And I’m sitting here and I’m looking at this fetus, and its heart is beating, and I don’t know what to think.”
  • In the eighth video: StemExpress CEO Cate Dyer admits Planned Parenthood sells “a lot of” fully intact aborted babies.
  • The ninth video: catches a Planned Parenthood medical director discussing how the abortion company sells fully intact aborted babies — including one who “just fell out” of the womb.
  • The 10th video: catches the nation’s biggest abortion business selling specific body parts — including the heart, eyes and “gonads” of unborn babies. The video also shows the shocking ways in which Planned Parenthood officials admit that they are breaking federal law by selling aborted baby body parts for profit.
  • Unreleased Videos: Unreleased videos from CMP show Deb Vanderhei of Planned Parenthood caught on tape talking about how Planned Parenthood abortion business affiliates may “want to increase revenue [from selling baby parts] but we can’t stop them…” Another video has a woman talking about the “financial incentives” of selling aborted baby body parts.
  • The 11th video: catches a Texas Planned Parenthood abortionist planning to sell the intact heads of aborted babies for research. Amna Dermish is caught on tape describing an illegal partial-birth abortion procedure to terminate living, late-term unborn babies which she hopes will yield intact fetal heads for brain harvesting.
  • The 12th video in the series shows new footage of Jennefer Russo, medical director at Planned Parenthood in Orange County, California, describing to undercover investigators how her abortion business tries to harvest intact aborted babies’ bodies for a local for-profit biotech company and changes the abortion procedure to do so.
  • The 13th video: exposes a Planned Parenthood medical director admitting that babies born alive after abortion are sometimes killed.

Trump Is Taking America Back! Reverses Obama’s Transgender Bathroom Rules


waving flagPosted on February 15, 2017 by

He is the best! He stopped the crazy Obama rule that mandated to all schools and colleges to allow transgender bathrooms! In a clear shift away from his predecessor, President Donald Trump’s White House has asked a judge to cancel a crucial hearing in a legal appeal over an Obama-era rule regarding transgender bathroom use.

Former President Barack Obama issued a controversial administrative rule in May 2016 extending Title IX protections to transgendered individuals, ensuring their right to use the bathroom they claim aligns with their gender identity. Had state-funded schools, colleges and universities not complied with the directive, it could put public institutions at risk of losing federal funding.

As a result, U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor temporarily blocked the Obama directive nationwide in August. In his ruling, O’Connor said Title IX “is not ambiguous” about sex being defined as the biological and anatomical differences between male and female students as determined at their birth.”

Trump is going to bring back family values and Christian values to America again! It’s time this country to become conservative and normal again! We should stop with the promotion of liberal sick values, all that sick attitude, we have to be normal and sane and good people again!

No more transgender, gay, abortions, drugs, crimes, illegals etc… We have to have law and order, strong police, strong border, strong military, strong churches, more freedom, less socialism, less communism, less utopia, lower taxes, less regulation!

That is the Trump rule, that is the Trump philosophy, and we voted for that! And if he do that, America will be great again!

(h/t) The Blaze

Being Christian Doesn’t Mean Being for Open Borders. ‘It’s not a biblical command for the country to let everyone in who wants to be here’


waving flagJanuary 31, 2017 | Authored by Katie Nations | Updated 31 Jan 2017 at 9:38 AM

URL of the original posting site: http://www.lifezette.com/faithzette/christian-doesnt-mean-pro-refugees/
refugees

As the discussion over refugees being detained and immigrants being rejected continues to make headlines and evoke spirited debate, what is the responsibility of Christians when it comes to immigration and refugee programs?

Matthew 25: 35 is often quoted as a defense for immigration — legal or otherwise — among Christian groups. Jesus says, “For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in.”

However, is that the final answer when it comes to a decision that will potentially jeopardize the security and resources of our country? Must Christians give up their own well-being as an action of faith? Is the sanctuary of others, regardless of their motivation or origin, more important than our own safety?

Donald Trump signed an executive order on Friday, Jan. 27, that temporarily suspends immigration from certain countries: Syria, Iraq, Somalia, Iran, Sudan, Libya, and Yemen. The order also temporarily pauses the admission of refugees into the United States until vetting processes have been bolstered to meet a stricter standard. Also, it is a temporary period of probation, not a permanent one.

/* */

First of all, the facts must be clearly evaluated and not misrepresented. Media reported that airports were filled this weekend with travelers who were stranded as they tried to return to the United States. Celebrities attempted to stir emotions with moving speeches and claims of persecution. It is certainly accurate that lives were interrupted with the abrupt executive order. It is also imperative to understand that any definitive action will inevitably offer disadvantage to some while providing an advantage to others. This isn’t necessarily fair — but neither is life. It is what is believed to be the next step taken to protect our country and our citizens.

Related: Pro-Life Leaders: ‘An Exciting Time for the Movement’

It is easy to pick and choose verses or teaching from Scripture to make an argument. But a single verse does not provide an accurate response for all situations. The truth is that we as Christians are called to love one another, even our enemies. We are told to turn the other cheek, walk the extra mile, show everyone we encounter the love of Jesus by how we treat them.

Yet we are also called to be good stewards of what God has blessed us with — we have a responsibility to honor God with what He has bestowed upon us. There is no need for selfishness, but it is necessary to be diligent in protecting what He has bestowed upon us. This includes not only our own property, but our families, our infrastructure, our finances. amen

We are instructed to obey authority, believing that God has placed individuals in the positions they retain. God is the one who first introduced the idea of law and order to mankind when He provided the Ten Commandments. This was an understanding of obedience and submission. God does not desire chaos, disorder, or anarchy. Instead, He provided an example of the need for structure, policies, and law when it comes to the creation and maintenance of a country.

“It’s not a biblical command for the country to let everyone in who wants to come, that’s not a Bible issue,” Franklin Graham, the evangelist, told The Huffington Post. “We want to love people, we want to be kind to people, we want to be considerate, but … there are laws that relate to immigration and I think we should follow those laws. Because of the dangers we see today in this world, we need to be very careful.”picture7

Christians are not called to be naive. We must observe boundaries in order to maintain the land we have been blessed to possess in America. We need to be careful to evaluate those who come into our country but do not desire to assimilate to our way of life. At the same time, we share the desire to help the helpless and aid those in danger, utilizing our resources. Just as God is a balance of both love and justice — so our country must be governed with law and mercy.amen

Katie Nations, married for 15 years, is a working mother of three young children. She lives in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. 

Trump signs executive order to drastically cut federal regs


waving flagPublished January 30, 2017 | FoxNews.com

URL of the original posting site: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/30/trump-signs-executive-order-to-drastically-cut-federal-regs.html

President Trump signed an executive order on Monday to drastically reduce the regulatory burden on U.S. businesses, requiring federal agencies to effectively eliminate at least two regulations for each new one issued.

“We have to knock out a regulation for every two, but it goes far beyond that. This is a big one,” said Trump, in signing the order that makes good on his “one in-two out” campaign promise.

Trump has signed more than a dozen executive orders in his first 11 days in office.  

The order Monday specifically states that prior regulations must be “identified for elimination” when a new rule is put forward. However, the 900-word order makes clear that the costs associated with new regulations each year cannot go up. So they would have to be offset by eliminating “costs associated with at least two prior regulations.” 

For fiscal 2017, Trump told agency heads that the total cost of new regulations finalized this year “shall be no greater than zero” unless otherwise directed. 

“It is essential to manage the costs associated with the governmental imposition of private expenditures required to comply with federal regulations,” the document also states. 

“We will begin efforts to reduce federal regulations. We’ll be reducing them big time,” Trump said in concluding a White House meeting with small business owners before signing the order.

The military, national security and foreign affairs are exempt from the order, which puts the Office of Management and Budget in charge of the changes. Agencies must present OMB with new regulations and show what is slated for elimination. However, the order offers some flexibility:  allowing agencies to determine the cuts, maintaining White House input and giving the OMB director authority to make emergency exceptions. 

An administration official told Fox News that a recently issued White House memo on temporary regulation freezes remains in place and that the executive order establishes the process going forward. picture2

The Facts About the Dakota Access Pipeline That Protesters Don’t Want You to Know


waving flagAuthored by Rep. Kevin Cramer / / November 17, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://dailysignal.com/2016/11/17/the-facts-about-the-dakota-access-pipeline-that-protesters-dont-want-you-to-know/

A mix of 2,000-plus indigenous and nonindigenous water protectors rally in Foley Square, a park across the street from the Army Corps of Engineers who temporarily halted the Dakota Access pipeline’s construction, Nov. 16, 2016, New York City. (Photo: Pacific Press/Sipa USA /Newscom)

<!– A mix of 2,000-plus indigenous and nonindigenous water protectors rally in Foley Square, a park across the street from the Army Corps of Engineers who temporarily halted the Dakota Access Pipeline’s construction, Nov. 16, 2016, New York City. (Photo: Pacific Press/Sipa USA
/Newscom)
–>

For more than three months, thousands of protesters, most of them from out of state, have illegally camped on federal land in Morton County, North Dakota, to oppose the construction of a legally permitted oil pipeline project that is 85 percent complete.

The celebrities, political activists, and anti-oil extremists who are blocking the pipeline’s progress are doing so based on highly charged emotions rather than actual facts on the ground.

This 1,172-mile Dakota Access pipeline will deliver as many as 570,000 barrels of oil a day from northwestern North Dakota through South Dakota and Iowa to connect to existing pipelines in Illinois. It will do this job far more safely than the current method of transporting it by 750 rail cars a day.

The protesters say they object to the pipeline’s being close to the water intake of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. However, this should be of no concern as it will sit approximately 92 feet below the riverbed, with increased pipe thickness and control valves at both ends of the crossing to reduce the risk of an incident, which is already low. picture2

Just like the companies that run the 10 other fossil-fuel pipelines crossing the Missouri River upstream of Standing Rock, Energy Transfer Partners—the primary funder of this pipeline—is taking all necessary precautions to ensure that the pipeline does not leak.

But even if there were a risk, Standing Rock will soon have a new water intake that is nearing completion much further downstream near Mobridge, South Dakota.

From the outset of this process, Standing Rock Sioux leaders have refused to sit down and meet with either the Army Corps of Engineers or the pipeline company. The Army Corps consulted with 55 Native American tribes at least 389 times, after which they proposed 140 variations of the route to avoid culturally sensitive areas in North Dakota. The logical time for Standing Rock tribal leaders to share their concerns would have been at these meetings, not now when construction is already near completion.picture3

The original pipeline was always planned for south of Bismarck, despite false claims that it was originally planned for north of Bismarck and later moved, thus creating a greater environmental danger to the Standing Rock Sioux.

The real reasons for not pursuing the northern route were that the pipeline would have affected an additional 165 acres of land, 48 extra miles of previously undisturbed field areas, and an additional 33 waterbodies.

It would also have crossed zones marked by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration as “high consequence” areas, and would have been 11 miles longer than the preferred and current route.

North Dakotans have respected the rights of these individuals to protest the pipeline, but they have gone beyond civil protesting. Though these protesters claim to be gathered for peaceful prayer and meditation, law enforcement has been forced to arrest more than 400 in response to several unlawful incidents, including trespassing on and damaging private land, chaining themselves to equipment, burning tires and fields, damaging cars and a bridge, harassing residents of nearby farms and ranches, and killing and butchering livestock. There was even at least one reported incident where gun shots were fired at police.

The recent vandalization of graves in a Bismarck cemetery and the unconscionable graffiti marking on the North Dakota column at the World War II Memorial in Washington, D.C., are examples of how the protesters’ actions do not match their claims of peaceful demonstration.

Equally disturbing is the meddling by the Obama administration in trying to block this legally permitted project through executive policymaking. This has encouraged more civil disobedience, threatened the safety of local residents, and placed an onerous financial burden on local law enforcement—with no offer of federal reimbursement for these increasing costs.dr-evil

All that remains for the pipeline project to be completed is for the Army Corps of Engineers to issue a final easement to cross the Missouri River at Lake Oahe. With no legal reason remaining to not issue it, I am confident the Trump administration will do what’s right if it’s not settled before President Donald Trump takes office.

The simple fact is that our nation will continue to produce and consume oil, and pipelines are the safest and most efficient way to transport it. Legally permitted infrastructure projects must be allowed to proceed without threat of improper governmental meddling.

The rule of law matters. We cannot allow lawless mobs to obstruct projects that have met all legal requirements to proceed.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Rep. Kevin Cramer/

Portrait of Rep. Kevin CramerRep. Kevin Cramer is the U.S. representative for North Dakota’s at-large district. He serves on the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


Uncommon Ground

Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/11/uncommon-ground/

Consequences-600-LI

Dupe and Chains

By WhatDidYouSay.org

By WhatDidYouSay.org

Exclusive–Mitch McConnell: Harry Reid Must Allow Votes on House’s Anti-Executive Amnesty Bills


Complete Message

13 Aug 2014

Imperial President ObamaSenate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is calling on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to allow the U.S. Senate to vote on the two House-passed border crisis bills that would block President Barack Obama from continuing or expanding his executive amnesty via the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.

“The President seems to have forgotten that he does not possess the authority to re-write our immigration laws and that, on the contrary, the Constitution requires that he take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” McConnell said in a statement provided exclusively to Breitbart News. “The House has passed two bills to address the humanitarian crisis on our southern border, and the Senate should vote on them. That’s why I began the process of putting them on the Senate’s legislative calendar shortly before the current recess, and I urge Majority Leader Reid to schedule a vote on these bills as soon as the Senate returns.”

McConnell’s statement comes as Senate Budget Committee ranking member Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) is calling on Americans to melt the U.S. Senate’s phone lines and ask their senators, both Democrat and Republican, to demand a vote in the U.S. senate on the House-passed bills.

“Recent developments suggest the President’s planned executive amnesty could be increasingly imminent and broad in scope,” Sessions said in his Tuesday evening statement to Breitbart News, citing how House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has called on the President to give the “broadest possible” executive amnesty to perhaps as many as ten million illegal aliens.

Pelosie Needs to go to a home“House Democrat Leader Pelosi – clearly one of the White House’s closest allies – has just urged the President to issue ‘the broadest possible’ executive actions,” Sessions said.Open borders groups have grown bolder and louder in their unlawful demands, launching a campaign for the President to ‘go big,’ and demanding that he ‘stand up’ to Congress and ‘expand DACA.’”

Sessions said the Senate must vote on the House-passed bills. “The steps that must be taken are clear: the Senate must vote on the House-passed measure to stop these unlawful actions,” Sessions said. “It is true that Majority Leader Reid is blocking it from a vote. But Reid acts only with the blessing of his members in the Democrat conference – so the American people have the power to force it to a vote through their elected senators.”

Several other senior GOP senators, including National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) chairman Sen. Jerry Moran (R-KS), John Hoeven (R-ND), and Richard Shelby (R-AL), are also demanding Reid allow a vote on the House bills.

Reid spokesman Adam Jentleson hasn’t responded to a request for comment on whether he’ll allow such a vote in the Senate, but this is a politically vulnerable issue for Democrats—especially since the House passed a border crisis package before leaving for August recess while Reid’s Senate headed out to vacation without passing anything. The issue is also rattling several Democrats up for re-election like Sens. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Mark Pryor (D-AR), Mark Begich (D-AK), Kay Hagan (D-NC), and Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH).

Sessions told Breitbart News in a recent interview that “yes,” conservatives can beat Reid if they fight on this battlefield.

“I think the Majority Leader Harry Reid is the palace guard of the Obama agenda,” Sessions said. “He goes to work every day, blocking anything that exposes what Obama’s doing—particularly this unpopular immigration policy. How does he maintain that power? He maintains that power as a result of every single Democratic senator backing him. At some point, the American people need to know that—they don’t fully understand it right now. This kind of vote, this challenge on the immigration policy, can be the clear simple issue: Do you vote to block the President from doing this? Or do you vote to support him? That’s the only way that vote will be determined, and procedurally it will mean voting against Harry Reid—because he’s wedded to the Obama agenda. They’ve got to break ranks, and they can do that. There’s no reason why a Democratic senator has to vote with Harry Reid on every single vote and support President Obama on every single vote.”

 Article collective closing

Today’s Political Cartoon


CONSERVATIVE-BYTE-BANNER

“Order”

Posted on February 24, 2014

http://conservativebyte.com/2014/02/order/

Order

Executive Orders: Carving a Path to Dictatorship


http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/02/executive-orders-carving-path-dictatorship/#rusrVpLY02pqejd7.99

Posted by

Executive Orders, issued by the current sitting US President at the time, are nothing new to America.  In fact, our first President, George Washington, issued 8 of them during his presidency.  From my research, it is generally understood that Executive Orders stem from two areas of the US Constitution, and both references that substantiate Executive Orders are fairly weak.  As one website explains:

Presidents have been issuing executive orders since 1789 even though the Constitution does not explicitly give them the right to do so. However, vague wording in Article II Section 1 and Article II Section 2 gives the president this privilege. Executive orders also include National Security directives and Homeland Security Presidential Directives.

A well-referenced Wikipedia entry further illustrates the point:

Although there is no constitutional provision nor statute that explicitly permits executive orders, there is a vague grant of “executive power” given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, and furthered by the declaration “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” made in Article II, Section 3, Clause 5. Most executive orders use these Constitutional reasonings as the authorization allowing for their issuance to be justified as part of the President’s sworn duties, the intent being to help direct officers of the U.S. Executive carry out their delegated duties as well as the normal operations of the federal government: the consequence of failing to comply possibly being the removal from office

Throughout history, Executive Orders have been responsible, at times, for drastically altering the lives of the American populace.  Perhaps the most heinous example being EO 9066, issued by Franklin D. Roosevelt, which was ultimately responsible for the internment of more than 60,000 American citizens of Japanese descent, and over 10,000 of German and Italian ancestry. That seems like a lot of power in the hands of one man and his administration.  Unfortunately, it seems that the use of Executive Orders is set to increase, further eroding the Constitutional principles that this nation was founded upon.

In a recent article published by the Daily Caller, Democratic Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee has promised to give Obama a number of Executive Orders to sign; in fact, stating that Executive Orders should be number one on the agenda for her newly formed Full Employment Caucus.

To give you an example of how Obama has used this extraordinary power in the past, one only needs to look here.  In this case, Obama exercised Executive Privilege, but it really amounts to a de facto Executive Order.  The abuse of EO’s, by this administration, is particularly alarming when one discovers Obama’s history of deceit.

Are Executive Orders leading our nation into bondage?  I suppose that if for each one of us to decide.  I do know, however, whenever a president of any nation can rule by fiat, that their actions are protected by the very office that they serve, that nation is on a slippery slope to dictatorship.  Allow me to leave you with the words of one of our greatest Founding Fathers:

“Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day. But a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period, and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers (administrations), too plainly proves a deliberate systematic plan of reducing us to slavery.” – Thomas Jefferson  

About Jim White

Jim is the owner and editor of Northwest Liberty News.  He is a patriot who could no longer ignore the Founding Fathers whispering in his ear to take action and his goal is to inspire you to take action.

Santa Obama Gives Pay Raise to Federal Workers


http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/12/25/Christmas-Obama-pay-raise

by Ben Shapiro 25 Dec 2013

 

Just in time for Christmas, President Obama signed an executive order on Monday giving a 1 percent pay raise for federal employees. The raise follows a four year hiatus from salary increases for federal workers, although most federal employees have apparently seen their pay increase via promotion or performance. The first increased paycheck will kick in on January 1.

President Obama’s reward to the federal workforce follows his longstanding belief that government work ought to be a first option for Americans. Nonetheless, Obama’s decision to raise federal pay only widens the income inequality gap between federal workers and private sector employees;

  • as of 2011, the average private sector employee made $59,804 in salary, and $28,000 in benefits,
  • while the average federal workers made $74,436 in salary and $40,000 in benefits.

Furthermore, the gap between Washington, D.C. culture and the rest of the country is growing ever larger.

  • Between 2000 and 2012, according to Census Bureau statistics, Washington, D.C. household income jumped 23.3%; the rest of the country, by contrast, dropped 6.6%.
  • As the Wall Street Journal reported, “The Washington, D.C. metro area — which includes the surrounding suburbs in Maryland, Virginia and West Virginia — has it even better, with a median household income of $88,233 that ranks highest among the U.S.’s 25 most populous metro areas.”

But Washington, D.C. remains completely dichotomous, with the percentage of residents living 50% below the poverty line increasing 1% during that period.

President Obama’s Christmas present to his federal friends will amount to nothing more than another lump of coal in the rest of America’s stocking.

Ben Shapiro is Editor-At-Large of Breitbart News and author of the New York Times bestseller “Bullies: How the Left’s Culture of Fear and Intimidation Silences America” (Threshold Editions, January 8, 2013). He is also Editor-in-Chief of TruthRevolt.org. Follow Ben Shapiro on Twitter @benshapiro.

Rangel Wants Presidential Executive Orders for ‘Everything’


Now the Liberal Left has come right out and said through Charlie Rangel. They want “Dictator in Chief”. Read on.

Jerry Broussard

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

http://politicker.com/2013/11/rangel-wants-presidential-executive-orders-for-everything/

By Jill Colvin 11/23 3:32pm

Congressman Charlie Rangel on NY1. (Photo: NY1 screenshot)

Congressman Charlie Rangel on NY1. (Screengrab: NY1)

Congressman Charlie Rangel has a solution for bypassing gridlock in Washington D.C.: executive orders for “everything.”

In an interview last night with NY1, the congressman praised Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s decision to push through the so-called “nuclear option” to end filibusters on most presidential nominees. But he lamented the fact the work-around could not be used for legislation, suggesting the president turn to the executive orders–like the kind used to end the deportation many people who’d entered the country illegally as children.

“You know, the DREAM Act for the kids that came over here and didn’t know their home town, the president did that by executive order. What I did is I’ve taken out the language that he used and I’m gonna see why we can’t use executive orders for everything. What’s he gonna do? Make the Republicans angry? They’re gonna get annoyed? They’re not gonna cooperate?”

He went on to slam the Republican Party for refusing to cooperate–accusing them of acting against the interests of their own constituents.

“A police officer once told me when I was a kid that the worst criminal to deal with is one that doesn’t mind dying,” he said. “And if you take a look at what these Tea Party people have done–recognizing that there’s more sick and poor white folks then there is–but they still are resisting everything that the president wants to do so they can destroy the people in their district in terms of education and jobs, the Congress, the Republican name. And when we had the debt ceiling crisis, they were really prepared to let the United States of America fiscal policy to go in the tubes. How can you talk with people like this?”

He also defended the Affordable Care Act, arguing that far too much attention has been paid to the disastrous roll-out.

“They’re concentrating on the small misjudgments that have been made and nobody’s speaking for the 40 and 50 million people that have dreamed and hoped and prayed for that they could be included and insured. Not having insurance not only destroys your life, it destroys your fiscal life. It breaks up marriages. You cannot functions anywhere unless you have good health,” he argued, agreeing the president never should have apologized.

“I’d forget the apology,” he said. “The president should have said, ‘There’ll be a little quirks here, but we’ll take care of the quirks.’”

Follow Jill Colvin on Twitter or via RSS. jcolvin@observer.com

Pres. Obama “Fired Up” and Ready to Repeal Second Amendment


Written by  

http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/item/16604-pres-obama-fired-up-and-ready-to-repeal-second-amendment

Pres. Obama &quot;Fired Up&quot; and Ready to Repeal Second Amendment

On behalf of your children, President Obama plans to take the guns you own and make it harder for you to buy them.

During a speech September 21 at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation’s Phoenix Awards dinner, the president promised he was turning his attention back to his gun control agenda.

Referring to his failed efforts to irreparably infringe on the right to keep and bear arms begun after the massacre of 20 children and six adults at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, President Obama declared:

We fought a good fight earlier this year, but we came up short. And that means we’ve got to get back up and go back at it. Because as long as there are those who fight to make it as easy as possible for dangerous people to get their hands on a gun, then we’ve got to work as hard as possible for the sake of our children. We’ve got to be ones who are willing to do more work to make it harder.

There could hardly be a more receptive crowd, and the president’s remarks were met with cheers and applause.

Admitting that although there was so much to be done and the repeal of the Second Amendment would be a tall order, President Obama promised supporters that he was “still fired up.”

Given his penchant not only for ignoring the Constitution, but for zealously pursuing the permanent, piecemeal destruction of the roster of fundamental rights it protects, there is little doubt that this will be one promise that President Obama keeps.

Gun owners — the “dangerous people” being targeted by the president — have legitimate reasons to fear the federal government’s assault on the Second Amendment.

After the recent murders at the Navy Yard in D.C., White House spokesman Jay Carney reported that the president is committed to redoubling his efforts to enforce the score of executive orders he signed in the wake of the Newtown tragedy. “The president supports, as do an overwhelming majority of Americans, common-sense measures to reduce gun violence,” Carney said.

Prior to the shootings at the Navy Yard, Vice President Joe Biden announced that through “executive authority,” the president was closing two so-called loopholes in federal gun restrictions. First, corporations purchasing guns will be subject to a background check. Second, the re-importation of almost all surplus military weapons to private individuals will be banned.

His water carriers in Congress were no less anxious to use tragedy as a pretext for tyranny.

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) lamented the “litany of massacres,” asking, “When will enough be enough? Congress must stop shirking its responsibility and resume a thoughtful debate on gun violence in this country. We must do more to stop this endless loss of life.”

Ironically, that is the same question Americans are asking themselves about the federal government and its daily demolition of the Bill of Rights.

While many Republicans have so far successfully resisted wholesale gun grabs, the compromises by conservatives are stacking up and that which was once a right is become little more than a privilege.

It is undeniable that the requirement that one recur to the government for permission to do something that the Constitution protects as an inherent right of all men is an outright obliteration of the bedrock liberties upon which this Republic was founded.

Remarkably, there are many Republicans and other self-described “pro Second Amendment” politicians who accede to the notion that the government should be permitted to impose “reasonable restrictions” on the owning, buying, selling, and trading of weapons.

True constitutionalists recognize such unconstitutional concessions for what they are: reductions of rights protected by the Constitution. Furthermore, they understand that if we are to remain a free people, we must enforce every provision of the Constitution on every issue without exception; that includes those rights that may be politically unpopular or misunderstood en masse.

The hour is late, but there is still time to ride to the defense of the Constitution and the Second Amendment. Constitutionalists can let the president and their elected representatives in Washington know that they will hold them accountable for each and every attempt to curtail rights that are not theirs to dispose of.

Also, state lawmakers must be aware that voters will likewise hold their feet to the fire and demand that they unqualifiedly reject any effort by the federal government to enforce any act — be it congressional bill, executive order, or regulation — that exceeds the constitutional limits on its power.

As the applause faded at the banquet Saturday night, President Obama undoubtedly rode back to the White House determined to get rid of the guns and increase the surveillance of the “dangerous people” who currently own them.

Were he honest, however, President Obama would admit that the elimination of guns from the world is not the goal of the gun grabbers. Their hidden agenda, the one shared by the president and his fellow internationalists at the United Nations, is the consolidation of monopolistic control over firearms by the plutocrats on the Potomac and Turtle Bay.

Constitutionalists should now be on the lookout for the imminent announcement by Secretary of State John Kerry or by President Obama himself that the United States has signed the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty. That act will be a bellwether of the coming acceleration of the disarmament of the civilian population of the United States.

 Joe A. Wolverton, II, J.D. is a correspondent for The New American and travels frequently nationwide speaking on topics of nullification, the NDAA, and the surveillance state.  He is the host of The New American Review radio show that is simulcast on Youtube every Monday. He can be reached at jwolverton@thenewamerican.com

More Evidence Of President Obama’s Socialist Ideology


January 26, 2013

By Greg Campbell
TPNN Contributor

Noble Peace Prize nominee and humanitarian Dr. Jim Garrow is not known for outrageous accusations. Dedicated to his humanitarian work, he has not ventured into the spotlight for a moment other than to write a book about the trouble of China’s one-child policy. That has changed as he has recently divulged information he says he received from a former senior military leader in the Obama Administration.

Garrow announced,

“I have just been informed by a former senior military leader that Obama is using a new ‘litmus test’ in determining who will stay and who must go in his military leaders. Get ready to explode folks. ‘The new litmus test of leadership in the military is if they will fire on US citizens or not.’ Those who will not are being removed.”

Dr. Jim Garrow has spent the last 16 years rescuing baby girls from the harsh realities and near-certain death of China’s one-child-per-couple rule. From his efforts to raise awareness of the problem and his willingness to facilitate the adoption of these infants, it is estimated that he has saved 40,000 babies and has been considered for a Nobel Peace Prize. While he has not released who his source is, Garrow has maintained a pretty low profile and seems to not be associated with any fringe ideologies.

It is a bold accusation, but one that fits into a bigger picture. As America becomes, arguably, more and more polarized, states have discussed secession and state and county officials all across the country have publicly claimed that they will refuse to enforce executive orders that violate the Second Amendment.

Whether one agrees that America should be so polarized or not, the fact remains that this revelation comes at a time when America is deeply divided on a variety of issues ranging from gun rights to the basic question of how to solve any one of our fiscal crises. With such deep divides, the issue of secession has been discussed and people all across the country have expressed worry at a looming federal presence.

Added to the volatile mix of ideologies is the recent executive orders that were aimed at enacting gun control measures and the near-constant threat of outright bans on many firearms. Such speculation has fueled dissent and discussion amongst mainstream Americans as to how far the government ought to be allowed to go.

The Washington Free Beacon recently reported that the head of Central Command, Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis is being dismissed by President Obama and will leave his post in March. While unwilling to divulge the source, Garrow stated, “The man who told me this is one of America’s foremost military heroes.”

If what Garrow says is true, than this is sure to rouse anger and distrust from conservatives across the country who have accused the president of exceeding his authority on numerous occasions and have voiced concern over sweeping policies that are of dubious legalities. If Obama is preparing to stock his inner-circle with only those that will follow his orders beyond what should rightfully be expected from soldiers who have sworn to protect this nation, than America may see a turbulent four years.

The true irony of Obama’s presidency is that while reports such as the aforementioned have surfaced and as drone attacks continue across the globe and families mourn the loved ones lost as a result of the Justice Department’s flood of weapons to Mexican cartels, President Obama actually received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009.

“Absolutism”


28 January 2013 / 12 Comments

images-2

A nation should be concerned when it seems its leader has tired of the grueling work of democracy.

One of the most remarkable and frightening aspects of President Barack Obama’s inaugural address was his dismissal of his opposition – presumably the House Republican caucus – as “absolutists” who are without “principle.”

They are mucking up Obama’s agenda, and he won’t have it.

“For now decisions are upon us and we cannot afford delay,” Obama said. “We cannot mistake absolutism for principle, or substitute spectacle for politics, or treat name-calling as reasoned debate. We must act, knowing that our work will be imperfect.”

Absolutism, as defined by Merriam-Webster, is a form of despotism – “government by an absolute ruler or authority.” That the president of the United States is accusing his democratically-elected opponents of acting in a tyrannical fashion is a remarkable development with potentially profound implications.

Once the president’s opponents have been defined in the American mind as despotically inclined, unsusceptible to reason, and unwilling to play by the normal rules of politics, it is only natural that extreme measures are permitted in response.

This White House has already shown a propensity toward ruling by executive fiat – whether by executive action that effectively enacts rejected legislation, by refusing to enforce existing law, or by crafting rules for legislation to grant vast new powers to bureaucrats.

Once it has de-legitimized the opposition, the White House can claim it is left with no choice but to accelerate and expand its use of executive power. What else can they do, the president and his operatives will argue, when faced with the insanity of the Republicans?

The press, which avidly buys into the notion that much of the House Republican caucus is beyond reason, will lend a sympathetic ear to Obama as he struggles with the forces of darkness.

That reporters have been tapped to assist with Obama’s incipient GOP demonization campaign was made clear this week by White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, who in the handful of days since the inaugural, has already repeated the “absolutism” charge twice.

Read More:  http://www.politico.com/

‘Tyranny By Executive Order’


RED FLAG

http://redflagnews.com/

EXCLUSIVE: What the hell just happened? ‘Tyranny By Executive Order’ |

by Constitutional Attorney Michael Connelly, J.D

What the hell just happened? That is the question that many Americans should be asking themselves following the news conference where Obama unveiled his plan for destroying the Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution. At first glance it appeared to be a case of Obama shamelessly using the deaths of innocents, and some live children as a backdrop, to push for the passage of radical gun control measures by Congress. Most of these have no chance of passing, yet, Obama’s signing of Executive orders initiating 23 so called Executive actions on gun control seemed like an afterthought.

Unfortunately, that is the real story, but it is generally being overlooked. The fact is that with a few strokes of his pen Obama set up the mechanisms he will personally use to not only destroy the Second Amendment to the Constitution, but also the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments. It will not matter what Congress does, Obama can and will act on his own, using these Executive actions, and will be violating both the Constitution and his oath of office when he does it.

Here are the sections of the Executive Order that he will use:

“1. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background-check system.”

What exactly is relevant data? Does it include our medical records obtained through Obamacare, our tax returns, our political affiliations, our military background, and our credit history? I suggest that all of the above, even if it violates our fourth Amendment right to privacy will now be relevant data for determining if we are allowed to purchase a firearm.

“2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background-check system.”

This should be read in conjunction with section 16 of the order that says:

“16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.”

One of the few amendments successfully placed in Obamacare by conservatives does appear to prohibit doctors from asking such questions. Yet, with these two Executive actions, Obama is illegally amending an act of Congress and setting up a procedure for him to force doctors to gain information from patients about gun ownership, and to get our medical history.

Section 3 of Obama’s order states:

“3. Improve incentives for states to share information with the background- check system.”

Once again, what does this mean? What information does the Federal government want from the states? Copies of state personal and business income tax returns or court records of divorce and child custody cases are possibilities that come to mind as well as our voter registrations showing our party affiliations. How does any of this figure into our right to purchase a firearm?

One of the most dangerous and troubling sections of the Obama order in Section 4 that states:

“4. Direct the attorney general to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.”

This section directs Eric Holder, the architect of Operation Fast and Furious that illegally transferred several thousand semi automatic weapons to Mexican drug cartels and resulted in the deaths of hundreds of Mexican citizens and several U.S. border patrol agents, to now add people indiscriminately to the list of Americans ineligible to purchase firearms. Who might be added to the list?

Well, let’s look at the record of the Obama administration. Shortly after being appointed as the Director of the Department of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano sent a list of potential domestic terrorists to law enforcement agencies around the country. The list included individuals who were pro-life, who supported the Second Amendment, who had Ron Paul bumper stickers on their cars, and most disturbing, all members of the military returning from combat in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The list has recently been supplemented to include individuals who hoard more than a week’s supply of food and water, and those who support individual liberties and oppose big government. I belong on most of these lists and I suspect that Eric Holder will be adding all of us to the list of dangerous people not qualified to own guns. In other words, you will no longer have to be a convicted felon or mentally ill to make the list; you will qualify simply by being an American patriot.

This is not a conspiracy theory, at the United States Justice Foundation we are seeing increasing evidence that military veterans are being specifically targeted by the Obama administration when it comes to prohibitions against purchasing firearms. Any veteran diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is in danger of being banned from owning a firearm. Even those veterans suffering from mild depression are being added. None of these conditions constitute a mental illness that makes them a danger to themselves or others.

However, in Obamaland veterans who took an oath to “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic”, are definitely considered a threat to the new Fuehrer and must not be allowed to own firearms.

If we skip to Section 6 of the order we get a good idea of Obama’s real intentions when it comes to gun control. That sections states:

“6. Publish a letter from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.”

This is particularly interesting because one of the legislative proposals is to require universal background check requirements for any firearm transfer even between private citizens. In other words, you can’t sell your firearm or even give it to someone as a gift without Federal government approval. It is doubtful that this proposal will pass in the House of Representatives, yet Obama is already setting up the mechanism for enforcing the requirement. That is a clear signal that he doesn’t care what Congress does, he is going to violate the Constitution and bypass the Legislative branch in order to push his agenda to disarm the American people. I suspect he will ultimately use Executive orders to ban many weapons including most rifles and pistols.

There are numerous other actions dictated in the Obama order, but I think you get the idea. Our Second Amendment right is going to be taken from us for whatever reasons Obama decides. The simple act of opposing these actions can cause the Attorney General to place you on the list of “dangerous people”. Our privacy will be violated and all of this will be done without due process of law. That is what just happened.

Another Great Idea on Jobs and the Deficit


I was talking with my dad about what is going on in the news and he came up with a great idea to put over 500,00 people back to work now, and reduce the deficit. Ready?

  • Immediately approve all oil leases for pumping now. Order the wells that were shipped to Brazil to do deep water drilling, back to the gulf and start pumping as much as we can get of the ground.
  • Sign an executive order to develop and drill Anwar. In that order add that half of all the oil we pump out of Anwar be shipped to China to pay down our loans from them.

Based on the wells that are inactive, and the others that are about to hit, this action would immediately put almost 500,000 people back to work.

Maybe this could be one of the questions we should ask the Republican candidates?

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: