Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Michigan’

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Corn Pop Music

There’s Pop Music and then there’s Corn Pop Music by Joe Biden with “you Ain’t Black” if you don’t vote for him.

Biben, You Ain’t BlackPolitical 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. – 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.

Gov. Whitmer Just Called This Man A Racist, ‘As A Man Of Color All I Want Is My Dignity Back, I Just Want To…’


Monday, May 4, 2020

URL of the originating web site: https://redrightdaily.com/gov-whitmer-just-called-this-man-a-racist-as-a-man-of-color-all-i-want-is-my-dignity-back-i-just-want-to/

The Left and the media are now claiming that if you want to get back to work and not starve to death, you are a neo-nazi and a “racist.” CNN’s Jake Tapper asked an incredibly leading question asking Whitmer if she thinks the Americans (that are unemployed and starving) are in the same “vein” as Neo-Nazis in Charlottesville.

Here is how she responded…

Whitmer said, “We know that people are not all happy about having to take the stay-at-home posture, and you know what, I’m not either. The fact of the matter is we have to listen to epidemiologists and public health experts. Displays like the one we saw at the state capitol are not representative of who we are. There were swastikas, Confederate flags, nooses, people with assault rifles. That’s a small group of people. When you think about the fact that this is a state of almost 10 million people, the vast majority of whom are doing the right thing, that’s why we’ve seen our curve gets pushed down. We’ve saved lives in the process. We have to keep listening to the epidemiologists and experts and not listen to the partisan rhetoric, or these political rallies or tweets, for that matter. We have to keep doing the next right thing.”

She added, “Some of the outrageousness of what happened at our capitol this week, you know, depicted some of the worst racism and awful parts of our history in this country. The Confederate flags and nooses, the swastikas, the, you know, behavior that you’ve seen in all of the clips, is not representative of who we are in Michigan. The fact of the matter is, I mean, we’re in a global pandemic. This isn’t something we just negotiate ourselves out of, as a political matter. This is a public health crisis that’s taken the lives of almost 70,000 Americans, has put 30 million people into unemployment.”

Meet this man below an immigrant and a small business owner that Whitmer just called a Nazi and a racist. This man is as American as apple pie and what this country has been built on and the Democrat party is trying to destroy it. Please watch this video below and share it.

USA For The Win! Michigan Sheriffs DEFY Governor Whitmer’s Lockdown Orders, Vow to Protect Civil Liberties


Written by daniel | April 17, 2020

On Wednesday, Michigan residents banded together to protest against Governor Gretchen Whitmer’s wildly inconsistent stay at home orders that she’s been putting in place for the lockdown. Thousands of people gathered in this “drive-by” protest because they’re sick of Gov. Whitmer’s stupidity.

Keep in mind it was Whitmer who banned the use of hydroxychloroquine for people in Michigan who may benefit from using the treatment. This is against doctors even. The governor of a state has no business telling a doctor how to do his or her job.

Now a number of sheriffs in Michigan have vowed to defy the governors orders in the case of the measures that they say overstep her authority. Sheriffs Mike Borkovich, Ted Schendel, Ken Falk, and Kim Cole announced their decision Wednesday, telling the public that they take their oath to the U.S. Constitution seriously and consider themselves the “last line of defense in protecting your civil liberties.”

“We write today to inform the public for our respective counties of our opposition to some of Governor Whitmer’s executive orders,” the press release reads, as reported by Michigan Live.

“While we understand her desire to protect the public, we question some restrictions that she has imposed as overstepping her executive authority,” the sheriffs continued. “She has created a vague framework of emergency laws that only confuse Michigan citizens.”

Instead, the sheriffs “will deal with every case as an individual situation and apply common sense.”

As one person put it, “Quarantine is when you restrict movement of sick people. Tyranny is when you restrict the movement of healthy people.”

He added, “Every person has learned a harsh lesson about social distancing. We don’t need a nanny state to tell people how to be careful.”

And it’s very apparent that they have let this get out of control in other states as well. Mississippi was fining people for going to church and literally had to be told by the Department of Justice that they can’t do that!

This is why we fight for our freedoms because they have no problem taking them away.

I am glad to find this article today because I have been wondering what would happen if we told all these tyrannical politicians to take their draconian EXECUTIVE ORDERS and shove them. These Sherriff’s realize the difference between a “lawful” and “unlawful” order. Once again I remind you: EXECUTIVE ORDERS BY ANY POLITICAL EXECUTIVE HAS NO WEIGHT OF LAW.
I’m 73 years old. I’m breaking out of this “house arrest”.  

Michigan governor endorses Biden ahead of primary


Posted

Michigan governor endorses Biden ahead of primary / © UPI Photo

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) on Thursday endorsed Joe Biden for president, a significant boost for the former vice president ahead of next week’s primary in the Wolverine State. Whitmer, whose state’s primary will allocate 125 pledged delegates, cast Biden as an advocate for working families, citing his work on health care, bailing out the auto industry and more during his time in the Obama administration.

“Working families in Michigan need a president who will show up and fight for them, and Joe Biden has proven time and again that he has our backs,” she said in a statement. “Michiganders have grit. We’re tough. We know what it’s like to be overlooked and counted out. And we know that when you get knocked down, you pick yourself up and get back to work. Joe Biden has been right there with us in the tough fights.” 

“Joe Biden is the candidate we need to defeat Donald Trump in November. He’s always had our backs. Now, I’m proud to have his,” added Whitmer, who is also being named a national co-chair to Biden’s campaign.

Whitmer said in an interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” that Biden’s commitment to expanding health care was personal to her, noting that the same type of brain tumor killed both her mother and Biden’s son.

“I have commiserated about Joe about this very thing,” she said of her mother’s brain cancer diagnosis. “I know his commitment.”

Biden is set for up for a battle in Michigan next week with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who narrowly took the state’s primary in 2016 over former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

The Wolverine State is a key contest for both candidates’ claims of support from white working-class voters. The state was one of the key victories, along with others in the Rust Belt, for President Trump in the 2016 general election.

Whitmer, who was endorsed by Biden during her 2018 gubernatorial bid, has steadily gained a national profile after winning the gubernatorial election two years ago and delivering the Democratic Party’s response to President Trump’s State of the Union in February.  Her endorsement comes just one day after former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm also threw her support behind the former vice president.

They are just the latest in a slew of establishment Democratic figures falling in line behind Biden after resounding victories in South Carolina and several Super Tuesday states vaulted him back into the front-runner position in the primary.

Though Biden put up underwhelming showings in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada, a 30-point win in the Palmetto State and victories in 10 out of 14 Super Tuesday states have revived his campaign, setting him up to have a narrow delegate lead after all of California’s primary votes are tallied.

Sanders, meanwhile, won California, Colorado, Utah and his home state of Vermont on Super Tuesday.

Biden appears set to capitalize on his Super Tuesday resurgence in upcoming primary and caucus states, which consist heavily of demographics that appear to favor the former vice president. Six more states will cast ballots on Tuesday, with Michigan representing the heftiest delegate haul.

 

Hate Hoax: Prosecutors Charge LGBT Activist with Burning Down Own Home with Pets Inside


Reported by Joshua Caplan | February 25, 2019

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/local/2019/02/25/hate-hoax-prosecutors-charge-lgbt-activist-with-burning-down-own-home-with-pets-inside/

nikki-joly-mugshot
Jackson Police Department

The Detroit News reported Monday that law enforcement charge Joly, a transgender man from Jackson, Michigan, burned down her own home, killing five pets inside, in what was initially investigated by the FBI as an alleged hate crime in 2017. The newspaper, citing two individuals who worked along Joly at St. Johns United Church of Christ, where the Jackson Pride Center is based from, reported that Jolly, 54, had become “frustrated the controversy over gay rights had died down with the passage of the nondiscrimination law.”

The Detroit News reported:

The church officials, Barbara Shelton and Bobby James, when asked by police about a possible motive for the fire, said Joly was disappointed the Jackson Pride Parade and Festival, held five days before the blaze, hadn’t received more attention or protests.

Contacted by a reporter, James declined to comment. But Shelton quibbled with the way police characterized her remarks, saying she had no idea if Joly was frustrated by the lack of controversy.

“Not sure I said that,” she wrote in an email. “I have no idea about anything, never heard Nikki comment in any fashion about anything like that.”

Police officer Aaron Grove, who interviewed Shelton and James, said the pair described Joly as “‘very deceptive” and possessing “layers of manipulation.”

Joly, who was named MLive’s 2018 Citizen of the Year, spearheaded several LGBTQ-friendly initiatives and events, including the town’s first gay festival.

“It’s embarrassing,” said Travis Trombley, a gay resident of Jackson and former ally of Jolly. “How do you do it to the community you have put so much effort into helping?”

The paper reports that five pets — two German Shepherds and three cats — died in the fire. The body of one dog blocked a door as firefighters tried to enter.

The alleged hate hoax comes after Chicago prosecutors charged Empire actor Jussie Smollett for filing a false report with police in connection to staging a racist and homophobic attack on himself last month.

Smollett told police two masked individuals hurled bigoted insults and doused him with an unknown chemical substance while walking home from a sandwich shop at 2 a.m. on January 29. The actor also told police his assailants looped a thin rope around his neck and shouted “This is MAGA country!” before fleeing. He allegedly enlisted the help of two brothers — Abimbola “Abel” and Olabinjo “Ola” Osundairo — to stage the attack, paying them $3,500 by check.

Smollett returned to the Chicago set of Empire after posting bond for $100,000 at a Cook County courthouse hours prior. However, Smollett’s role on the hit FOX studios program is uncertain as executive producers considering recasting his character.

REVEALED: Top Democrat Paid Off Sexual Harassment Accuser With $27K In Taxpayer Money


Reported by Photo of Peter Hasson Peter Hasson | Associate Editor | 11:23 PM 11/20/2017

U.S. Representative John Conyers (D-MI) REUTERS/Rebecca Cook

A leading Democratic congressman settled a wrongful dismissal complaint for more than $27,000 in taxpayer funding after he allegedly fired the staffer because she would not “succumb to [his] sexual advances,” according to a new report.

The congressman, Michigan Rep. John Conyers, is described as a serial sexual harasser who would prey on his female staffers in sworn affidavits signed by four of his former staffers. BuzzFeed News first reported the bombshell allegations and accompanying settlement after right-wing blogger Mike Cernovich provided the website with the documents.

One former female employee filed a complaint with the Congressional Office Of Compliance in 2014, alleging that she was fired for rebuffing Conyers’ sexual advances. It was that employee who eventually received a $27,111.75 settlement in 2015, in exchange for a confidentiality agreement. The congressman did not admit to fault as part of the settlement agreement.

“In her complaint, the former employee said Conyers repeatedly asked her for sexual favors and often asked her to join him in a hotel room. On one occasion, she alleges that Conyers asked her to work out of his room for the evening, but when she arrived the congressman started talking about his sexual desires,” BuzzFeed reported. “She alleged he then told her she needed to ‘touch it,’ in reference to his penis, or find him a woman who would meet his sexual demands.”

Conyers regularly made sexual advances on female staffers and would ask them for sexual favors, according to the affidavits signed by his former staffers. “Rep. Conyers strongly postulated that the performing of personal service or favors would be looked upon favorably and lead to salary increases or promotions,” one former employee said in an affidavit.

He also allegedly abused taxpayer funds to shuttle in women with whom he had sexual relationships.

“One of my duties while working for Rep. Conyers was to keep a list of women that I assumed he was having affairs with and call them at his request and, if necessary, have them flown in using Congressional resources,” one affidavit states. Another staffer told BuzzFeed that Conyers, who is the longest-serving congressman, used taxpayer funds to fly women into see him.

The bombshell allegations come just days after it was revealed that the Congressional Office Of Compliance spent $17 million of taxpayer funding on harassment settlements, including for sexual harassment.

Breaking: Terrorist Shouted Allahu Akbar Before Stabbing Cop MI Airport


Published by ClashDaily.com | June 21, 2017

URL of the original posting site: http://clashdaily.com/2017/06/breaking-terrorist-shouted-allahu-akbar-stabbing-cop-mi-airport/

Yet another attack. This one was on US soil. Police took to Twitter to update the public on the situation.

It read:

“STABBING: Bishop Airport. Officer stabbed in the neck. Suspect is in custody. #Flint #FlintTwp #GCSDMedics”

Here is what we know so far:

An officer for Bishop International Airport was stabbed Wednesday in a possible terror-related incident in Flint, Michigan, sources told NBC News.

The attacker allegedly shouted “Allahu akbar” before stabbing Lieutenant Jeff Neville, who was bleeding from the neck, sources and witnesses at Bishop International Airport said.

Neville is a member of the airport’s Department of Public Safety and a retired Genesee County Sheriff’s Department lieutenant.

Law enforcement officials said the suspect is from Quebec and has a Canadian passport.

Police officers gather at a terminal at Bishop International Airport on June 21, 2017, in Flint, Michigan. Dominic Adams / The Flint Journal-MLive.com via AP.

Michigan State Police initially tweeted that the officer was in critical condition. Just after 1 p.m., officials confirmed Neville was out of surgery and was upgraded to stable condition. — read more

As for the condition of the cop:

Here is the FBI’s statement:

We note that the attack was in Flint Michigan. So we checked in with Michael Moore.

Moore displayed his typical grace and class:

This Farmer Won’t Host Same-Sex Weddings at His Orchard. Now a City Has Banned Him From Its Farmers Market.


URL of the original posting site: http://dailysignal.com/2017/05/31/this-farmer-wont-host-same-sex-weddings-on-his-orchard-now-a-city-has-banned-him-from-the-farmers-market/

Steve Tennes and his wife, Bridget, are banned from selling produce at a farmers market in Michigan because of their religious belief that marriage is the union of a man and a woman. (Photo: Facebook)

No one showed up to protest that August day last summer, though, and Tennes continued selling organic apples, peaches, cherries, and pumpkins at the seasonal market until October, as he had done the six previous years.

Nevertheless, East Lansing moved earlier this year to ban Tennes’ farm, the Country Mill, from participating in the farmers market when it resumes June 4. The city cited its human relations ordinance, an anti-discrimination law that includes sexual orientation. So Tennes and his wife sued the city for religious discrimination.

As a Marine veteran who is married to an Army veteran, Tennes told The Daily Signal, this was consistent with his philosophy of defending freedom:

My wife Bridget and I volunteered to serve our country in the military to protect freedom, and that is why we feel we have to fight for freedom now, whether it’s Muslims’, Jews’, or Christians’ right to believe and live out those beliefs.

The government shouldn’t be treating some people worse than others because they have different thoughts and ideas.

Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal aid organization, is representing the Tenneses.

Michigan farmers Steve and Bridget Tennes and their family. (Photo: Facebook)

Neither East Lansing’s public information office nor the city manager’s office responded Wednesday to phone calls about the case from The Daily Signal.

East Lansing Mayor Mark Meadows told the Lansing State Journal that the city’s decision to exclude Country Mill—also known as Country Mill Orchard—from the farmers market had nothing to do with religious beliefs, but with the farm’s “business decision” not to host same-sex weddings.

“This is about them operating a business that discriminates against LGBT individuals, and that’s a whole different issue,” Meadows said, referring to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans.

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday with the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan, says of Steve and Bridget Tennes’ perspective, in part:

Plaintiffs support the rights of citizens and other businesses to express their views about marriage. Plaintiffs simply seek to enjoy the same freedom.

Yet, East Lansing’s policy strips plaintiffs of their constitutional freedoms, including free speech and the free exercise of religion, by punishing plaintiffs’ viewpoint on marriage, going so far as to prohibit Country Mill from continuing its long history of participating in the farmers market because plaintiffs publicly stated their sincerely held religious view that marriage is a union between one man and one woman. 

The suit also says the farm has employed people from a wide variety of racial, cultural, and religious backgrounds, including members of the LGBT community.

Country Mill hosts a corn maze, birthday parties, weddings, and other events.

In 2014, two lesbians sought to be married in a wedding ceremony at Country Mill, but Tennes turned them down.

This occurred before the 2015 Supreme Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage across the country.

According to his legal complaint, Tennes had a “civil” discussion with the women, and said his venue didn’t host same-sex weddings because of his religious beliefs. But he referred the women to an orchard that held same-sex weddings. In 2015, the two women were married at another orchard. On Aug. 22, 2016, one of them wrote a Facebook post discouraging consumers from doing business with Country Mill. In response, Tennes initially said the farm would cease holding any weddings, writing on Facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fthecountrymill%2Fposts%2F1079728825396459%3A0&width=500

After this post, the East Lansing official asked Tennes not to sell produce at the market, saying he feared protests.

Tennes did anyway, and no protest occurred, according to the lawsuit.

In December, Tennes announced on Facebook that Country Mill would resume holding weddings:

This past fall our family farm stopped booking future wedding ceremonies at our orchard until we could devote the appropriate time to review our policies and how we respectfully communicate and express our beliefs. The Country Mill engages in expressing its purpose and beliefs through the operation of its business and it intentionally communicates messages that promote its owners’ beliefs and declines to communicate messages that violate those beliefs.

The Country Mill family and its staff have and will continue to participate in hosting the ceremonies held at our orchard. It remains our deeply held religious belief that marriage is the union of one man and one woman and Country Mill has the First Amendment right to express and act upon its beliefs. For this reason, Country Mill reserves the right to deny a request for services that would require it to communicate, engage in, or host expression that violates the owners’ sincerely held religious beliefs and conscience.

Furthermore, it remains our religious belief that all people should be treated with respect and dignity regardless of their beliefs or background. We appreciate the tolerance offered to us specifically regarding our participation in hosting wedding ceremonies at our family farm.

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fthecountrymill%2Fposts%2F1193828230653184&width=500

East Lansing city officials determined that these public statements violated the city’s 1972 human relations ordinance prohibiting discrimination. That law was the first in the state to recognize sexual orientation as a protected class from discrimination. But this brought up a jurisdictional issue on top of First Amendment concerns, the farmer’s lawsuit says.

East Lansing, the complaint says, “has no authority to enforce its ordinance based on Tennes’ religious beliefs and their impact on how he operates Country Mill.” The farm, it says, is 22 miles outside the city. The lawsuit also notes that the city has not taken action against a vendor that promoted same-sex marriage.

In March, East Lansing sent Tennes a letter denying Country Mill’s application to be a vendor at the 2017 farmers market:

It was brought to our attention that the Country Mill’s general business practices do not comply with East Lansing’s civil rights ordinances and public policy against discrimination as set forth in Chapter 22 of the City Code and outlined in the 2017 market vendor guidelines.

“As such,” the letter reads, “Country Mill’s presence as a vendor is prohibited.”

DEAR DEMOCRAT DUMBASSES: Guess WHO Voter Fraud In Michigan FAVORED


waving flagPublished on December 6, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://clashdaily.com/2016/12/dear-democrat-dumbasses-guess-voter-fraud-michigan-favored/

Jill Stein was an idiot before. She remains one now.

“Eighty-seven of Wayne County’s decade-old voting machines broke on election day, according to Detroit’s elections director, Daniel Baxter. He told the Detroit News, which first reported the story, that ballot scanners often jammed when polling place workers were trying to operate them. Every time a jammed ballot was removed and reinserted, he suspects the machine may have re-counted it.”Stop

In other words, in an area where the significant majority of people voted for Hillary Clinton, their votes may have been counted twice.

This means that Trump’s margin of victory in Michigan may be even larger than the 10,704 votes initially recorded. — The Guardian

And in Wisconsin? Trump’s lead is up by 26 votes.

THAT was a productive use of taxpayer time, energy and funds.

Yes, Jill Stein is in fact an idiot.

Hillary must be thrilled to lose some of her ‘Popular Vote’ lead.

DEAR CNN: Liberals ORDER Elector To Change His Vote Or They’ll KILL Him – Is That NEWS?


URL of the original posting site: http://clashdaily.com/2016/11/dear-cnn-liberals-order-elector-change-vote-theyll-kill-news/

Remember all that talk about a ‘Peaceful transition of power’. That’s out the window.

Michael Banerian, an Electoral College Voter in Michigan is a young Republican that has faith in our current system. He is set to cast his ballot on December 19 for Donald Trump but has been facing very disturbing pressure to become a ‘Faithless Elector’ by changing his vote.

Watch Banerian talk about it here:  http://www.detroitnews.com/videos/embed/94019000/?fullsite=true

On Dec. 19, the 22-year-old Banerian is scheduled to join 15 other Michiganians to cast their electoral votes for Republican President-elect Donald Trump. But Trump’s opponents have deluged Banerian and other GOP electors with pleas and nasty emails to reverse course and cast their ballots for Clinton, according to the Michigan Republican Party.picture1

“You have people saying ‘you’re a hateful bigot, I hope you die,’ ” he said. “I’ve had people talk about shoving a gun in my mouth and blowing my brains out. And I’ve received dozens and dozens of those emails. Even the non-threatening-my-life emails are very aggressive.”…

…“Even if I could, I wouldn’t be remotely interested in changing my vote,” said Banerian, a political science senior at Oakland University and youth vice chair of the Michigan Republican Party. “The people of Michigan spoke, and it’s our job to deliver that message.”…

…Even if Banerian or another elector had a change of heart, other Michigan electors would just cast another vote for Trump, according to the Secretary of State’s office.

In other states, some electors could change their minds and cast votes for Clinton, a prospect that is considered highly unlikely since candidates tend to recruit diehard supporters to be electors.

An online petition on change.org signed by more than 4.3 million people is calling on the nation’s electors to vote for Clinton instead of Trump…

…While some lobbying is peaceful, other electors report receiving intimidating emails or messages, Michigan Republican Party spokeswoman Sarah Anderson said Wednesday. The Detroit News couldn’t reach several electors on Wednesday.

“Hearing from them that they are also receiving threats, I’m interested in getting a consensus from the group … and seeing if it’s something that we should report to the police,” Anderson said. “It’s obviously something that we’re taking very seriously.”

Banerian said he has not yet reported any threats to the police but is considering doing so.
Read more: Detroit News

But wait! There’s more!

Electors in Michigan aren’t the only ones being targeted:

Electors across the country have been barraged with phone calls and emails from voters urging them to become ‘faithless electors’ on December 19 in a last-ditch effort to block Donald Trump from the presidency.

In the US, presidents are elected by the Electoral College rather than the popular vote, where Hillary Clinton is 2.2million ballots ahead of Trump.

In most states, electors must cast a vote for the winner of their state’s popular vote or face fines ranging from around $500 to $1,000.

Other states like Arizona, Idaho, and Georgia don’t have a rule against electors going rogue…

…’It is total harassment,’ Robert Graham, an elector and chairman of the state Republican Party, told the Arizona Republic.

Arizona elector Saron Geise estimates that she has received as many as 8,000 calls and says she has stopped picking up altogether.

Some electors like Banerian hope their votes will uphold the electoral system, while others are actively trying to dismantle it.

At least six Democratic electors have signed an agreement to try to block Donald Trump from securing the presidency with 270 Electoral College votes.

Michael Baca, a registered Democrat who supported Bernie Sanders, is considering rallying behind Mitt Romney or John Kasich if that means coaxing Republican electors away from Trump.

Even if he is unsuccessful in his efforts, Baca said: ‘I do think that a byproduct would be a serious look into Electoral College reform.’
Read more: Daily Mail

Here is Michael Baca of Colorado’s controversial scheme: http://interactive.tegna-media.com/video/embed/embed.html?id=2424913&type=video&title=Interview%3A%20Colorado%20electoral%20wants%20Electoral%20College%20to%20go%20against%20Trupm&site=73&playerid=6918249996581&dfpid=32805352&dfpposition=Video_prestream_external§ion=home

NOTE: Colorado law does have ‘pledged electors’ that are legally bound to vote with the state’s popular vote, but the penalty for becoming a ‘Faithless Elector’ is minimal.

The current Electoral College standings have Trump with 306 and Hillary at 232.

It would require a number of ‘Faithless Electors’ to drop Trump below 270, so having Hillary or a ‘moderate’ Republican win is a long shot.

The Electoral College voters aren’t suppose to pick a candidate that wasn’t on the ballot.

The Democrats are making this election into a circus because they don’t like the results.

They suddenly don’t like the Electoral College… again. Like they didn’t like it in 2000.

How far will they go?Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies

They don’t like the Presidential results and want to change the final national result.

Baca is looking to throw the Electoral College votes for Hillary to a ‘moderate’ Republican.

Colorado, a state that voted Democrat would then be voting for a Republican. Is that fair to the voters there?

They want to change the final state result.

Are they going to look county by county next?

How about polling station by polling station?

Maybe house to house?

Where does it end?

This State Offered Free College Education. Here’s What Happened.


waving flagReported by Norbert Michel / / February 22, 2016

Aside from the subsidy/cost issue, there are many other reasons why this is bad public policy. (Photo: istockphoto)

Norbert Michel studies and writes about housing finance, including the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as The Heritage Foundation’s research fellow in financial regulations. Read his research.

Several politicians have recently been offering free goodies to voters. One of the most popular of these, oddly enough, is something that several state governments have already tackled: free college tuition.

The details vary by state, but Oregon, Tennessee, Georgia, Michigan, and Louisiana (among others) all use tax dollars to pay for at least some of their residents’ college tuition.

Louisiana provides a great case study for advocates of similar federal policies.

Louisiana provides a great case study for advocates of similar federal policies. Louisiana just so happens to be in the news right now because the governor is threatening to suspend his state’s version of free college tuition for everyone.

Louisiana’s Tuition Program

Louisiana’s plan is called the Taylor Opportunity Program for Students, or, more commonly, TOPS. This extremely popular program uses tax dollars to pay full tuition (and some fees) at any of Louisiana’s public universities. Other than residency requirements, all high school students qualify as long as they have a C average (2.5 GPA) and at least an 18 on the ACT.

So the Taylor Opportunity Program for Students doesn’t cover every student’s tuition, but it ends up covering it for a large chunk of middle-/upper-class families.

How It Started

The program started out in the late 1980s as the brainchild of oil tycoon/philanthropist Patrick Taylor. The program, which wasn’t originally named for him, started out as a tuition assistance plan only for low-income individuals.

In 1997 the state removed the income caps. At that point, all Louisiana students, regardless of financial need, were made eligible for “free” tuition at any Louisiana public college. Once in college, students had to maintain a C average to keep their TOPS awards.

As of 2010, approximately 70 percent of Louisiana’s high school graduates headed to college within one year. That’s nearly 20 percent higher than the rate in 2000.

Who’s Paying for It?

It’s easy to call the program a success because of this increase, but it’s just as easy to point out that the program doesn’t really provide free education. In one way or another, someone pays for it.

In one way or another, someone pays for it.

The eventual implosion of the program was easy to predict back in 1997 for the same reasons that pretty much any similar subsidy is destined to fail. Subsidies don’t really lower the cost of products and services; they only lower the up-front price that some people pay.

(In 1997, this program inspired my very first public critique of a government policy. Back then, I thought it was a terrible idea.)

No Such Thing as Free Tuition

A person receiving “free” tuition may not see it (or even care), but subsides actually raise the total cost of an education. The core problem is that they remove the paying customer—in this case the student—from the equation.

Without the subsidy, the paying customer receives the direct benefit for the service and bears the direct cost. If that person doesn’t think the cost is worth it, they don’t pay.

Louisiana’s program replaces this paying customer with groups of government officials. These officials neither receive the direct benefit nor endure the direct cost of obtaining an education. These groups do, however, benefit a great deal from obtaining more of your tax dollars.

And they rarely bear any direct cost from either increasing your taxes or delivering a substandard education product. (The incumbency rate is fairly high for politicians.)

On a practical level, Louisiana’s program converts tuition payments into a state budget item. In other words, a large chunk of each school’s “tuition” becomes nothing more than revenue sent in by the state bureaucracy.

In Louisiana, four separate higher education systems—each its own bureaucracy—fight over these “tuition” payments. Smaller schools inevitably get the smallest shares, but that’s kind of another story.

A Burden on University Resources

When the influx of students hits—more people going to school when tuition is “free” is pretty much a foregone conclusion—it strains universities’ existing resources. So the transfer of money has the natural tendency to lead to expanded facilities, faculty, and staff.

But these increases call for a permanently higher level of funding, and all of these effects tend to reinforce each other. That is, school officials have a built in reason to ask for larger transfers, and politicians have a built in excuse to raise taxes.

When the state’s coffers are not flush with cash, the schools’ budgets get cut. Thus, universities have every incentive to raise more money from students who are not a part of the Taylor Opportunity Program.

Of course, for any given level of Taylor Opportunity Program students, a higher posted rate of tuition results in a larger transfer from the state. If the program covered full fees and tuition for literally every student, then taxpayers would bear the full cost. But it doesn’t, so non-TOPS students bear some of the cost.

(Pretty much every student ends up paying higher fees directly, too, but that’s almost an aside.)

Non-subsidized markets don’t work this way—prices can actually fall in response to changes in demand and supply. Subsidized systems, on the other hand, are destined to result in higher—not lower—tuition.

Recent numbers support this explanation. The Taylor Opportunity Program has nearly doubled in cost since 2008, and most of that increase has been due to higher tuition.

What I failed to fully appreciate in 1997 was how bad of a deal the Taylor Opportunity Program would end up being for the smaller schools. Then I spent almost a decade teaching at Nicholls State University, a regional state school in Thibodaux, La.

Small Universities Are Hardest Hit

In one sense, the Louisiana program amounted to a cruel trick for these institutions. Smaller schools are the ones least able to sustain the permanently higher costs associated with the new TOPS-generated revenue stream.

When the state budget goes south—and it always does in Louisiana—smaller schools get slammed. (Louisiana State University has more than 25,000 students, so small changes in per-student fees go a long way).

No matter how much we want it to, subsidizing something simply doesn’t make it more cost-effective.

The Taylor Opportunity Program does give certain people a better deal on tuition at one point in time, but then it makes up for it somewhere else.

Ironically, the earlier waves of Taylor Opportunity Program graduates are among those about to get hit with a tax increase. That’s what politicians mean by free.

Ironically, the earlier waves of Taylor Opportunity Program graduates are among those about to get hit with a tax increase. That’s what politicians mean by free.

Aside from the subsidy/cost issue, there are many other reasons why this is bad public policy.

First of all—and I know this sounds crazy—everyone should not go to college. Some people simply aren’t cut out, and many just don’t need to. Yes, people with college degrees tend to earn more than those without, but it does not follow that everyone should go to college.

When the program was started, Louisiana public universities offered students a good value because they were relatively inexpensive. Now that Louisiana taxpayers have spent more than $2 billion on the program, tuition rates are out of reach for many students that don’t qualify for the program.

While the best solution for Louisiana would be to get rid of the program altogether (unlikely since politicians love the program), the best residents can hope for now is an increase in the program’s academic standards and some form of means testing. At least these changes would better direct subsidies to academically prepared students with more financial need.

big Die Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

FBI says Michigan man pledged support to ISIS, father thwarted mass shooting at church


waving flagPublished February 06, 2016; FoxNews.com

A Michigan man allegedly threatened to kill police and churchgoers to show support for Islamic State, according to a federal criminal complaint unsealed on Thursday. Khalil Abu-Rayyan, 21, of Dearborn Heights, was allegedly talking to an undercover FBI agent about his support for the terror group and how he wanted to shoot up a church that has nearly 6,000 parishioners, according to the Detroit Free Press.

The newspaper, citing the affidavit, reported Abu-Rayyan planned to shoot up the church one day, but he was stopped by his father.

“I tried to shoot up a church one day. I don’t know the name of it, but it’s close to my job,” Abu-Rayyan told the agent, according to the complaint. “It’s one of the biggest ones in Detroit. Ya. I had it planned out. I brought a bunch of bullets. I practice a lot with it. But my dad searched my car one day and he found everything. He found the gun and the bullets and a mask.”Do you want

The man had wanted to shoot up the church because it would’ve been an easy target, the complaint said.

“It’s easy and a lot of people go there. Plus people are not allowed to carry guns in church. Plus, it would make the news. I regret not doing it. If I can’t do jihad in the Middle East, I would do my jihad over here.”

The FBI said he didn’t carry out the attack because he didn’t have the proper weapon to use for it. The agency said the church has up to 6,000 members and was only a half mile from where Abu-Rayyan worked.

The agency had been investigated since May 2015. Agents were tracking him through social media, phone calls and surveillance. The FBI said in the complaint he had two Twitter accounts on which he expressed support for ISIS, according to the Free Press.

Abu-Rayyan has not received any terror charges. According to Click On Detroit, he’s being held on gun and drug charges. He was stopped on Oct. 7, 205 for speeding when a Detroit police officer found a gun, sleeping pills and marijuana in his car.Why

He’s scheduled for a hearing on Monday.

Click for more from the Detroit Free Press.

Islam is NOT culture of deceit and lies Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

A Tale Of Two Rivers: Obama Condemns Flint Disaster After Ignoring Colorado Mine Spill


waving flagReported by Photo of Michael Bastasch Michael Bastasch, 01/26/2016

President Barack Obama was quick to condemn Michigan officials for letting high levels of lead contaminate Flint’s drinking water and promised millions of dollars in aid and justice for the city. The same cannot be said for his reaction to the thousands of people who had their drinking water tainted by the Gold King Mine spill in August — a spill caused by his own Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

It’s a tale of two rivers, both contaminated by government mismanagement, but only one provoked moral outrage from Obama. While Obama said Michigan’s government shouldn’t “shortchange basic services that we provide to our people,” he was virtually silent when his own administration polluted rivers flowing through western states and Indian territory.

Flint’s water is full of lead

“If I was a parent in Flint, I’d be beside myself over my kids’ health,” Obama told auto workers during a visit to Detroit, Mich., Wednesday. Obama had met the day before with Flint Mayor Karen Weaver where he “heard firsthand how the residents of Flint are dealing with the ongoing public health crisis,” according to the White House.

Obama declared a federal emergency and initially gave Michigan $5 million in aid for Flint. That was followed up by a promise of $80 million from the White House to help solve Flint’s water problems.

Obama’s outrage comes after news his own administration knew about lead in Flint’s water for months and did nothing about it. The head of EPA’s regional office resigned over the disaster, and the agency and the White House have launched investigations into the matter.

The White House appointed “a Health and Human Services Department official to lead federal efforts to help the city” last week, according to The Associated Press. EPA’s inspector general opened up its own inquiry into the agency’s handling of the water crisis. “EPA did its job but clearly the outcome was not what anyone would have wanted,” Gina McCarthy told reporters while at an event at a D.C. soup kitchen earlier this month.Leftist Propagandist

“So we’re going to work with the state, we’re going to work with Flint,” McCarthy said. “We’re going to take care of the problem. We know Flint is a situation that never should have happened.”

Flint’s water crisis began in 2014 when the city switched its water supply over from Lake Huron to the Flint River. It was a money-saving effort proposed by state managers while the city was going through massive financial troubles because of its public employee pensions.

The Flint River’s water is more corrosive than Lake Huron’s, meaning treatments were required to keep the water from corroding lead pipes. But Michigan regulators applied the wrong standards, and Flint’s water became contaminated with high levels of lead.

Susan Hedman was made aware of the problems in April after a draft report on the issues was released. Flint’s mayor became aware of the draft report, but Hedman downplayed concerns while she waited for a “legal opinion” on how to proceed.

“The preliminary draft report should not have been released outside the agency,” Hedman wrote to Flint’s former mayor Dayne Walling in a July email. “When the report has been revised and fully vetted by EPA management, the findings and recommendations will be shared with the city and DEQ will be responsible for following up with the city.”Picture2

In October 2015, state officials finally admitted to applying the wrong water treatments to Flint’s drinking water. By January, Hedman had resigned and the Obama administration was moving quickly to give Flint money and investigate the situation.

EPA literally contaminated drinking water in three states

Compare the Obama administration’s response to Flint with its response to a disaster it actually caused.

In August 2015, EPA workers looking to stop mine wastewater leaks from abandoned mines near Silverton, Colo., accidentally ended up unleashing three million gallons of wastewater into the Animas River. The huge orange plume got into the San Juan River and made its way through three states and tribal territory, contaminating drinking water for thousands of people.

EPA did move to work with state officials to combat the spill, but the agency would not tell state and local officials information on how the spill happened or the federal contractors who caused it. The agency also did not notify affected communities for more than 24 hours after the spill happened.Hate Merchants

Obama, however, did not issue an emergency declaration, even though Colorado’s governor did. The president also did not make a speech expressing moral outrage at the fact his own administration polluted drinking water for thousands of people with heavy metals — which could stick around in the water for decades.Hate Merchants

In August, Obama issued four other disaster declarations for areas hit with heavy flooding and wildfires. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) even rejected pleas from Navajo Nation to help mitigate the damage from the mine blowout — tribal members along the San Juan River are heavily reliant on river water.

The Wall Street Journal eventually broke news on who the federal contractor was onsite when the mine blew out in August. To date, EPA has still been silent on the contractors involved in the spill, citing a nondisclosure agreement. In fact, EPA paid the contracting company, Environmental Restoration LLC, nearly $2.7 million after it caused the massive mine blowout, according to reporting from The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Ethan Barton.Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies

EPA released an internal review of the mine blowout in August claiming the incident was “likely inevitable” despite admitting agency workers ignored “expensive and technically challenging” procedures that could have prevented workers from blowing out the mine that day.

The finding was seen as an attempt by the agency to downplay its role in spilling millions of gallons of mine waste into people’s drinking water. EPA’s report was contradicted by an Department of the Interior technical review of incident, which found the blowout was completely preventable.Picture3

What’s more interesting is that, to date, no EPA employee or contractor has been punished or fired for the incident, despite the fact the agency took responsibility for the incident in August. No criminal investigations have been launched by the government into the incident. Instead, EPA officials have been accused of trying to undermine their own inspector general’s investigation into the spill. The nature of the IG’s investigation is unknown, as they don’t comment on details in ongoing investigations.

“[T]he Committee on Natural Resources is troubled by the EPA’s disclosure last week that it had recently interviewed two material witnesses to the EPA’s activities at Gold King Mine,” Republican Reps. Rob Bishop (R) of Utah and Louie Gohmert (TX) – R wrote to EPA’s inspector general.

“Specifically, the Committee is concerned that the EPA’s interview did not follow best investigative practices and may have interfered with the OIG’s ongoing investigation,” the lawmakers wrote to the agency.

stupid In God We Trust freedom combo 2

In Wake of Paris Terrorist Attacks, Here’s a Map of the States Shutting Their Doors to Syrian Refugees


waving flagReported by Kelsey Harkness / / November 16, 2015

On Monday and into Tuesday, more than two dozen governors moved to block Syrian refugees from entering their states. (Photo: Kelsey Lucas/Visualsey)

In the aftermath of Friday’s terrorist attacks in Paris, governors across the United States are attempting to shut their doors on Syrian refugees looking to find a safe haven in the country. As of Monday evening, more than two dozen governors announced opposition to policies that would permit Syrian refugees to enter their states amid concerns they could have ties to terrorists.

Thus far, states whose governors oppose more Syrian refugees include Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, GeorgiaIdahoIllinoisIndiana, IowaKansas, Louisiana, MaineMassachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Maryland, NebraskaNew HampshireNew Jersey, New MexicoNorth Carolina, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, TennesseeTexas, and Wisconsin.

Kentucky Gov.-elect Matt Bevin, who will take office Dec. 8, also said he opposes resettlement efforts.

The movement, which was overwhelmingly spearheaded by Republican governors, came after French prosecutors discovered a Syrian passport on one of the suspected Islamic State suicide bombers in Paris. That finding raised concerns that terrorists are embedding with refugees to enter Europe and other nations.Do you want

The series of attacks in Paris on Friday night left more than 130 dead and hundreds others injured. French President François Hollande called the attacks an “act of war” and launched airstrikes against ISIS.

President Barack Obama sharply pushed back against the growing number of states attempting to undermine his policies surrounding Syrian refugees, saying Monday at a press conference in Antalya, Turkey, that it would be “shameful” and “not American” to close America’s doors on Syrian refugees.

“When some of those folks themselves come from families who benefited from protection when they were fleeing political persecution, that’s shameful,” he said. “That’s not American. That’s not who we are. We don’t have religious tests to our compassion.”DELUSIONAL

In September, Obama vowed to accept 10,000 Syrian refugees into the United States next year.

As of Nov. 3, there were more than 4 million registered Syrian refugees, according to the U.N. Refugee Agency.

Those issuing executive orders to block refugees pushed back on the president’s narrative while announcing their decision.

“Michigan is a welcoming state, and we are proud of our rich history of immigration,” said Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder. “But our first priority is protecting the safety of our residents.”

In a letter addressed to the president, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said, “Neither you nor any federal official can guarantee that Syrian refugees will not be part of any terroristic activity. As such, opening our door to them irresponsibly exposes our fellow Americans to unacceptable peril.”Islam is NOT

While their responses send a clear message to the president, John Malcolm, a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, said the practical implications blocking refugees are limited.

“Governors can certainly order state agencies to stop doing anything to assist federal authorities with their resettlement efforts, but they cannot stop federal authorities from continuing those efforts, nor can they stop immigrants who are lawfully admitted to this country from moving to and settling in those states,” Malcolm said. “They can, however, ask state law enforcement authorities to keep an eye on the refugees who settle in their states, so long as those authorities do so within the bounds of the Constitution.”

“It’s abhorrent for the federal government not to consult with and consider the interests of the states,” added Jim Carafano, a foreign policy expert at The Heritage Foundation. “Particularly the views of governors, as it impacts the welfare and public safety of their citizens.”America Never Forget

Florida Gov. Rick Scott addressed those concerns in a letter sent to House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Leader Mitch McConnell. In that letter, dated Nov. 16, Scott wrote:

[I]t is our understanding that the state does not have the authority to prevent the federal government from funding the relocation of these Syrian refugees to Florida even without state support. Therefore, we are asking the United States Congress to take immediate and aggressive action to prevent President Obama and his administration from using any federal tax dollars to fund the relocation of up to 425 Syrian refugees (the total possible number of refugees pending for state relocation support at this time) to Florida, or anywhere in the United States, without an extensive evaluation of the risk these individuals may post to our national security.AMEN

muslim-obamaIn response, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., introduced legislation on Monday afternoon that would suspend issuance of visas to refugees from countries with a high risk of terrorism until the U.S. Department of Homeland Security meets certain standards. Those standards include fingerprinting and screening all refugees, implement a tracking system “to catch attempted overstays,” and enhancing security measures that are already in place.

“The time has come to stop terrorists from walking in our front door. The Boston Marathon bombers were refugees, and numerous refugees from Iraq, including some living in my hometown, have attempted to commit terrorist attacks,” Paul said in a press release.

Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, also called to suspend the refugee program.

“The Syrian refugee program should be suspended until the American people are satisfied that they know exactly who the president is admitting into the country via this program,” Burr said. “There is simply too much at stake, and the security of the American people should be our top priority.”

This article and its accompanying map has been updated to reflect the growing number of governors who do not wish to permit Syrian refugees into their state. of domenstic terrorist

In God We Trust freedom combo 2

THIS U.S. CITY: Moves To Start A Muslim Government – And The Media Is SILENT


waving flagWritten by Thomas Holmes on November 5, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://clashdaily.com/2015/11/this-u-s-city-moves-to-start-a-muslim-government-and-the-media-is-silent/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=subscriber_id:9760859&utm_campaign=This%20U.S.%20City%20Moves%20To%20Start%20A%20Muslim%20Government%20%E2%80%93%20And%20The%20Media%20Is%20SILENT

America Never Forget

And so it begins. I guess America was feeling a little left out of all the Muslim influence in western democracies like Britain and Australia. We want our fair share of Islamic indoctrination too. And now, a suburb of Detroit has stepped up and elected the first Muslim majority city council in American history. The Polish settled town of Hamtramck, Michigan voted Muslim in four of the six council elections in what is generally considered a reflection of the town’s changing demographics. It wasn’t even that close. Muslims were the top three vote getters.

city

Got-Quran_thumb1-300x228To be fair, two of the Muslims were actually re-elected. And while we’re not talking about the Islamists who boycotted the police in Australia, this is the same city that saw no problem voting unanimously in 2004 to allow the mosques to broadcast the Muslim call to prayer. Look, I’d love nothing more than to report this as a great step for new believers in America and immigrants who reflect constitutional ideals. Unfortunately, last I checked, this is still the same religion whose highest leadership defines its faith on Sharia Law and destroying America.

Beside the questions about empowering people of a dangerous and violent faith, despite their individual integrity, there’s the issue of diversity. Of course, don’t tell this reporter that there’s a diversity problem. As he rambles on about Hamtramck’s new reflection he seems happy to ignore the fact that the city council’s “diversity” is 67% one faith and ethnic background. Don’t even get into the question of political diversity.

Apparently, ethnic majorities are only a problem when were dealing with Caucasian males.Islam is NOT In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Court says Police Can’t Force Christians to SHUT UP Just because Muslims are Violent


waving flagBy / 2 November 2015

Often, when there is a confrontation of free speech in the public square and one side becomes violent, police want to step in and instead of dealing with the violent party, they will remove the law-abiding citizens “for their own safety.” It is clearly a violation of the right of the people to assemble, as well as a free speech violation. Now, a US Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled constitutionally when it comes to police attempting to remove Christians from public areas just because Muslims threaten them with violence.

Bob Unruh reports:

The case was brought by Bible Believers, Ruben Israel, Arthur Fisher and Joshua DeLosSantos against Wayne County, Michigan, Sheriff Benny Napoleon and deputies Dennis Richardson and Mike Jaafar.

It cited the plaintiffs’ messages on signs and T-shirts that included “Islam Is A Religion of Blood and Murder,” “Turn or Burn,” “Fear God,” “Jesus Is the Way, the Truth and the Life. All Others are Thieves and Robbers” and “Prepare to Meet Thy God – Amos 4:12.”

The Christians also began their walk carrying a pole with a pig’s head attached to the top, further angering the Muslim crowd.

The opinion noted that two types of speech are unprotected, incitement to riot and fighting words.

The judges found any advocacy for the use of force or lawless behavior is “absent from the record in this case.” And the judges found regarding fighting words, “the average individual attending the festival did not react with violence, and of the group made up of mostly adolescents, only a certain percentage engaged in bottle throwing.”

The opinion cited the “heckler’s veto” concept of one person or group silencing others by threatening violence.

Cops Remove ChristiansWhile lower courts ruled that police could issue unlawful commands to Christians to remove themselves from the public square because of lawless threats against them by Muslims at the International Arab Festival in Dearborn, Michigan, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned those rulings by stating, “We find that defendants violated the Bible Believers’ First Amendment rights because there can be no legitimate dispute based on this record that the [county and officers] effectuated a heckler’s veto by cutting off the Bible Believers’ protected speech in response to a hostile crowd’s reaction.”

“The First Amendment offers sweeping protection that allows all manner of speech to enter the marketplace of ideas,” the ruling added. “This protection applies to loathsome and unpopular speech with the same force as it does to speech that is celebrated and widely accepted. The protection would be unnecessary if it only served to safeguard the majority views. In fact, it is the minority view, including expressive behavior that is deemed distasteful and highly offensive to the vast majority of people, that most often needs protection under the First Amendment.”

The incident in question occurred in 2012. Many Christian apologists attend the festival to share the Gospel with Muslims who are willing to listen. However, often the confrontations are not exactly positive, but do become violent. Take a look at this video from 2012 at the festival in which Muslims assaulted Christians with milk crates, glass bottles, eggs and whatever else they could get their hands on.

The American Freedom Law Center co-founder and Senior Counsel Robert J. Muise, who worked on the case said, “This was a complete victory for the Constitution and for all freedom-loving Americans who enjoy the protections of the First Amendment. This decision makes clear that the First Amendment protects speech critical of Islam and that when the government seeks to suppress such speech by enforcing a heckler’s veto that favors the violent Muslim mob over the free speech rights of Christians, the government will pay dearly for this egregious violation of the Constitution.”Different Free Speech Ideologies

“Kudos to Judge Clay and the majority. Judge Rogers’s dissenting opinion, on the other hand, speaks volumes about how progressives (be they Republicans or Democrats) view the Bill of Rights,” added AFLC co-founder and Senior Counsel David Yerushalmi.  “For Judge Rogers, there is one constitution for minorities and quite a lesser document for those perceived to be in the majority. The former’s speech is protected; the latter’s is protected only up to the point that some minority – especially Muslims – protests or, as in this case, engages in violence by attacking the speaker. In this case, the Christians and the Constitution did not lie down and roll over. This is an example where lawfare, fought on behalf of liberty, has moved the proverbial mountain and buried the jihadi’s heckler’s veto six feet under.”Free Speech Definition

In 2013, the City of Dearborn actually had to apologize to Christians for arresting them “for their own safety” at the Arab festival.

This is a huge win for Christians in the public square. Now, if we can just get those who are entrusted to keep the peace to actually do that by arresting those who act unlawfully and protecting those who are doing good, then all will be well.

from Freedom Outpost

In God We Trust freedom combo 2

States move to counter gay marriage ruling


By Tim Devaney06/30/15

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/246582-states-move-to-counter-gay-marriage-ruling

burke

More than a dozen states that saw gay marriage bans struck down last week by the U.S.  Supreme Court are vowing to protect religious liberty, even though they grudgingly accept that the ruling is now the law of the land.

  • In the wake of Friday’s decision, Texas’s attorney general told county clerks in the state that they have a statutory right to refuse marriage licenses to same-sex couples if they have religious objections to gay marriage.
  • In Alabama, state Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore — a staunch opponent of same-sex marriage — said a new state court order could temporarily delay the practice, only to walk back the remarks.
  • And in Louisiana, the attorney general contends there is nothing in the Supreme Court’s ruling that renders it effective immediately, raising questions about how soon the state would have to comply. Leftist Giant called Tyranny

Many other states across the South and upper Midwest are criticizing the ruling as an encroachment on states’ rights and religious freedom, though most acknowledge they cannot ignore it. “Ultimately, my position is that the state should have been legally entitled to define marriage,” South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley told The Hill. “I feel the state has traditionally held that role, and certainly when it’s in the state’s constitution it should be respected.” “But we are a nation of laws and we must respect that,” he added.

Before the Supreme Court’s ruling last Friday, those states and 11 others — Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio and Tennessee — had laws prohibiting same-sex marriage. Though not outright defying the high court’s decision, states are now seeking to make clear the limits of its scope. “The ruling does not tell a minister or congregation what they must do, but it does make clear that the government cannot pick and choose when it comes to issuing marriage licenses and the benefits they confer,” said Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway.Giant Government Compliance Officer

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said the state would issue exemptions to county clerks, judges and justices of the peace who express religious objections to issuing gay marriage licenses, promising to “defend their religious beliefs.” The government cannot force them to conduct same-sex wedding ceremonies over their religious objections,” Paxton said, accusing the Supreme Court of “ignoring the text and spirit of the Constitution to manufacture a right that simply does not exist.”

In cases where there are objections, however, other public officials would issue the documents.

A federal judge ruled in May that Alabama’ s same-sex marriage ban was unconstitutional and stayed her opinion until the Supreme Court ruled on the issue. This week, Moore — the state Supreme Court’s chief justice — initially said a new motion in the earlier case would effectively table Friday’s U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage, a case known as Obergefell v. Hodges.
But same-sex marriage advocates argued that the order has no tangible effects thanks to a federal injunction, and Moore later backed away from the assertion. “In no way does the order instruct probate judges of this State as to whether or not they should comply with the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell,” he said.SCOTUS GIANT

Still, Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange accused the Supreme Court of “overturning centuries of tradition and the will of the citizens.” “I expect the focus will now turn to the exercise of one’s religious liberty,” Strange said.

A number of attorneys general also complained that the Supreme Court’s decision infringes on states’ right to define marriage how they see fit. Louisiana Attorney General Buddy Caldwell said the court’s ruling “overturns the will of the people of Louisiana, and it takes away a right that should have been left to the states.”

Caldwell is threatening to essentially disregard the Supreme Court’s ruling for the time being, saying there is “nothing in [the] decision that makes the court’s order effective immediately. Therefore, there is not yet a legal requirement for officials to issue marriage licenses or perform marriages for same-sex couples in Louisiana.”

Gay rights activists warn that any acts of perceived defiance would threaten to undermine the legal system. “It’s a dangerous message for southern governors to disobey an order from the Supreme Court,” said Marc Solomon, national campaign director at Freedom to Marry. “The notion that public employees get to pick and choose which laws they follow based on their religious beliefs is a really dangerous precedent and a terrible public policy,” he added. “If you’re a public official, you need to carry out those laws, and you don’t get to decide whether they’re right or wrong.”
Big Gay Hate Machine
The attorneys general in North Dakota and Mississippi both said they are waiting on other court cases to be resolved before they enforce the Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage. Other states like Ohio and Nebraska expressed disappointment that the Supreme Court was interfering with their marriage laws but also indicated they would respect the ruling.

And top officials in a handful of states that formerly banned gay marriage are now welcoming the Supreme Court’s ruling. Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster said he would move swiftly to recognized same-sex marriage in the wake of the court’s ruling. “The history of our country has always been one of moving toward inclusion and equality,” Koster said in a statement. “I applaud the court for their courage and strong sense of fairness. Missourians should be seen as equals under the law; regardless of their gender, race, or whom they love.”It HasNever Been About Marriage

Austin Yack, Hanna Krueger, Kate Hardiman and Rachel Ravina contributed.

freedom combo 2

Supreme Court Rules Same-Sex Couples Have Right To Marry Nationwide


Supreme Court Decision

WASHINGTON (CBSDC/AP) — The Supreme Court declared Friday that same-sex couples have a right to marry anywhere in the United States. Gay and lesbian couples already could marry in 36 states and the District of Columbia. The court’s 5-4 ruling means the remaining 14 states, in the South and Midwest, will have to stop enforcing their bans on same-sex marriage. Gay rights supporters cheered, danced and wept outside the court when the decision was announced.

The outcome is the culmination of two decades of Supreme Court litigation over marriage, and gay rights generally. In the majority opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote that same-sex marriage must be allowed under the United States Constitution.

“No union is more profound than marriage,” Kennedy wrote, joined by the court’s four more liberal justices.

“From their beginning to their most recent page, the annals of human history reveal the transcendent importance of marriage. The lifelong union of a man and a woman always has promised nobility and dignity to all persons, without regard to their station in life. Marriage is sacred to those who live by their religions and offers unique fulfillment to those who find meaning in the secular realm. Its dynamic allows two people to find a life that could not be found alone, for a marriage becomes greater than just the two persons. Rising from the most basic human needs, marriage is essential to our most profound hopes and aspirations,” Kennedy wrote.want_rel_liberty_r

Kennedy also wrote the court’s previous three major gay rights cases dating back to 1996. It came on the anniversary of two of those earlier decisions. As Kennedy read his opinion, spectators in the courtroom wiped away tears after the import of the decision became clear. One of those in the audience was James Obergefell, the lead plaintiff in the Supreme Court fight. Outside, Obergefell held up a photo of his late spouse, John, and said the ruling establishes that “our love is equal.” He added, “This is for you, John.”Big Gay Hate Machine

President Barack Obama placed a congratulatory phone call to Obergefell, which he took amid a throng of reporters outside the courthouse.

Kennedy was joined by the four liberal justices of the court: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Stephen Breyer.

Chief Justice John Roberts, along with Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented, and all wrote separate dissents.

Alito wrote, “Today’s decision usurps the constitutional right of the people to decide whether to keep or alter the traditional understanding of marriage.”

Roberts said gay marriage supporters should celebrate, but don’t celebrate the Constitution.

“If you are among the many Americans—of whatever sexual orientation—who favor expanding same-sex marriage, by all means celebrate today’s decision. Celebrate the achievement of a desired goal. Celebrate the opportunity for a new expression of commitment to a partner. Celebrate the availability of new benefits. But do not celebrate the Constitution. It had nothing to do with it,” Roberts wrote.

Scalia wrote his dissent “to call attention to this Court’s threat to American democracy.”

“Today’s decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a  majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court. The opinion in these cases is the furthest extension in fact—and the furthest extension one can even imagine—of the Court’s claimed power to create “liberties” that the Constitution and its Amendments neglect to mention. This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves,” Scalia wrote.

Thomas wrote, “Aside from undermining the political processes that protect our liberty, the majority’s decision threatens the religious liberty our Nation has long sought to protect.”

Obama called the ruling a “big step in our march toward equality.” In a statement in the Rose Garden, Obama said that justice arrived like a thunderbolt. “This ruling is a victory for America,” Obama said. The president thanked gay rights supporters who worked tirelessly for this cause. “America’s a place where you can write your own destiny,” he said.tyrants

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton weighed in, calling the ruling a “historic victory for marriage equality.”War on Christians

Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush said in a statement that the Supreme Court should have allowed the states to decide. Guided by my faith, I believe in traditional marriage. I believe the Supreme Court should have allowed the states to make this decision. I also believe that we should love our neighbor and respect others, including those making lifetime commitments,” the former Florida governor said. “In a country as diverse as ours, good people who have opposing views should be able to live side by side. It is now crucial that as a country we protect religious freedom and the right of conscience and also not discriminate.”

D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser celebrated the ruling saying the court’s recognition of same-sex marriage as a right in every state “affirms our democratic values, that each of us is equal.”Clinton Democrat Party

The ruling will not take effect immediately because the court gives the losing side roughly three weeks to ask for reconsideration. But some state officials and county clerks might decide there is little risk in issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The cases before the court involved laws from Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee that define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Those states have not allowed same-sex couples to marry within their borders and they also have refused to recognize valid marriages from elsewhere.

Just two years ago, the Supreme Court struck down part of the federal anti-gay marriage law that denied a range of government benefits to legally married same-sex couples. The decision in United States v. Windsor did not address the validity of state marriage bans, but courts across the country, with few exceptions, said its logic compelled them to invalidate state laws that prohibited gay and lesbian couples from marrying.

The number of states allowing same-sex marriage has grown rapidly. As recently as October, just over one-third of the states permitted same-sex marriage.

There are an estimated 390,000 married same-sex couples in the United States, according to UCLA’s Williams Institute, which tracks the demographics of gay and lesbian Americans. Another 70,000 couples living in states that do not currently permit them to wed would get married in the next three years, the institute says. Roughly 1 million same-sex couples, married and unmarried, live together in the United States, the institute says.

The Obama administration backed the right of same-sex couples to marry. The Justice Department’s decision to stop defending the federal anti-marriage law in 2011 was an important moment for gay rights, and Obama declared his support for same-sex marriage in 2012.

(TM and © Copyright 2015 CBS Radio Inc. and its relevant subsidiaries. CBS RADIO and EYE Logo TM and Copyright 2015 CBS Broadcasting Inc. Used under license. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.)The Lower you go burke freedom combo 2

Individual Health Plan Costs On The Rise Due To Obamacare


waving flagJune 5, 2015 By

Screen Shot 2015-06-05 at 11.42.37 AM

Complete MessageIf you live in a state without its own Obamacare health exchange, you can expect to see individual insurance premiums rise sharply in anticipation of an upcoming Supreme Court’s decision on the legality of federal subsidies to consumers there.

Such is the case in Michigan, in which seventeen of 21 health insurers selling coverage at HealthCare.gov. are requesting rate hikes. Premium increases  from 5% to a whopping 37% are being sought by more than half of the insurers beginning in January under the Affordable Care Act, the Michigan Department of Insurance and Financial Services said Monday.  The requests require approval of the state insurance agency.

The nation’s highest court is expected to rule this month on the King v. Burwell case concerning the legality of federal subsidies paid to customers in the 36 states that use the federal Health Insurance Marketplace at HealthCare.gov; 14 states have their own marketplaces.

88% of consumers on Michigan’s health exchange receive some kind of subsidy according to Rick Murdock, executive director of the Michigan Association of Health Plans, which represents most insurers in the state. More than 341,000 Michiganians purchased insurance on the health exchange. The average premium paid by consumers was $130, with a savings of $236 because of the premium tax credit, according to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid. Murdock suggested that insurers may be adjusting for a potential loss of business if federal subsidies are eliminated and consumers abandon their policies.

Similarly, North Carolina’s largest insurer, Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina, stated that it seeks to raise individual healthcare premiums by 13.5% for Obamacare compliant plans, affecting some 315,000 consumers in that state.

Nationwide, insurance companies want rate hikes of over 10% in 37 states.

According to the CMS, more than 8 in 10 individuals who selected a 2015 plan through HealthCare.gov qualified for an average advanced premium tax credit of $263 per person per month. That is $263 per month- or $3,156 per year- that taxpayers must subsidize per person for over 80% of consumers on Obamacare approved plans.  These are plans that must include unnecessary coverage of myriad specialty drugs and procedures under the federal government’s one size fits all mandates.

The Democrats just had to “pass the bill to find out what was in it,” and we are now witness to the unintended (or perhaps intended) consequences of a disastrous bill designed to provide health insurance to the 10% of uninsured Americans, all at the expense of the 90% who were perfectly happy with the plan they had.

While Obama insisted that premiums would decrease by $2500 per person, the reality is much different; rising healthcare premiums for all, along with unsustainable subsidies in the form of tax credits to enlarge the ever increasing entitlement class in a country holding more than $18 trillion in national debt.Liberalism a mental disorder 2
The looming Supreme Court will hopefully rule that the federal government has acted illegally in forcing taxpayers nationwide to subsidize residents of states which have chosen to not be party to the one of the most audacious pieces of legislation ever passed.  What happens afterwards is anybody’s guess, but one thing is certain; increasing premiums and chaos in the US healthcare system are imminent.

Please Sign the Tea Party petition HERE to send a message and demand once again that our Congressmen repeal the (Un)Affordable Care Act NOW.

freedom combo 2

Snyder signs suspicion-based drug testing bills


Associated Press 7:18 p.m. EST December 26, 2014

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2014/12/26/snyder-sigsn-suspicion-based-drug-testing-bills/20918625/

LANSING — Gov. Rick Snyder signed legislation today that creates a drug-testing program for adult welfare recipients who are suspected of using drugs.

The Republican-backed proposals, House Bill 4118 and Senate Bill 275, were among several bills approved by Snyder. The one-year pilot program will be implemented in three counties that have not yet been determined.

Under the program, welfare recipients or applicants suspected of drug use will be required to take a substance abuse test. Refusal to take the test will result in being ineligible for benefits for six months.

A positive drug test would lead to referrals to treatment programs. If an individual refuses to participate in the program or fails to submit to periodic substance abuse testing required under the program, their assistance will be terminated. Benefits can be restored after a person passes a substance abuse test. 

“We want to remove the barriers that are keeping people from getting good jobs, supporting their families and living independently,” Snyder said in a press release. “This pilot program is intended to help ensure recipients get the wrap-around services they need to overcome drug addiction and lead successful lives. We’ll then have opportunity to assess effectiveness and outcomes.”

Opponents of the legislation, including the Michigan League for Public Policy, have said similar programs in other states haven’t saved taxpayers money. The nonpartisan Senate Fiscal Agency estimated a statewide program would cost roughly $700,000 to $3.4 million, while potentially saving $370,000 to $3.7 million in caseload reductions.

The American Civil Liberties Union has said the program would promote ugly stereotypes of poor people and discriminate against a group that doesn’t use drugs at a rate significantly higher than the general population.

“We give out tax credits to schools, we give out tax credits to students, we give out tax credits to police and fire (departments),” Sen. Vincent Gregory, D-Southfield, said earlier this year on the Senate floor. “And yet the only (group) that we are now saying is subject to drug screening are the poor — the poorest of the poor.”more evidence

Michigan has roughly 80,000 welfare recipients, 21,000 of them adults age 18 and older who could be subject to drug testing depending on which counties are selected for the pilot.

The pilot program must be completed by Sept. 30, 2016.

Snyder also signed bills Friday that extend the Michigan film credit program by seven years to 2021; update who can administer the oath of office for state representatives and senators to include the secretary of the Michigan Senate and clerk of the Michigan House of Representatives; and allow cemetery owners to recover burial rights for abandoned burial plots.

He vetoed legislation that would have established procedures for naming Michigan delegates and alternates to a federal constitutional convention, in the event one is called.Picture1

By WhatDidYouSay.org

By WhatDidYouSay.org

School Assignment on Islam Left This Mother in Disbelief


Obamacare

by / on October 6, 2014 at 9:27 am

Jennette Hall, whose 10th grade daughter attends Jenison Public School in Jenison, Michigan, was astonished after she saw the assignment her daughter received in her World History class on Islam.

School Assignment on Islam Left This Mother in Disbelief

The assignment directed students to make a pamphlet which would then be created to fit curriculum suitable for third graders.

“It was an assignment given to my 10th grade daughter in her World History class. The assignment was to make a pamphlet geared toward a third grade audience. They did not actually hand them out to third graders. This assignment upset me because they are teaching that Allah is the same God of the Christians and Jews. This paper, in my opinion, is promoting Islam by describing Allah’s names as beautiful. To me this is not simply factual as it should be. I have a meeting on Tuesday with the principle of Jenison High School to discuss my concerns.”

school 01

school 02

Imperial Islamic President ObamaNot only was the assignment riddled with inaccuracies where it states that Christians, Jews, and all other religions worship the same “god” as Muslims, it is full of propaganda — stating that the Muslims’ god “Allah” is the “ONE and ONLY GOD.”

The assignment then goes on to paint the prophet Muhammad as the wonderful and peaceful messenger of “God” whose spiritual revelation produced Islam. They leave out the historical FACTS, however, that Muhammad was a mass murderer, terrorist, misogynist, cult leader, rapist, torturer, assassin, narcissist, and not to mention a pedophile — who married his child bride Aisha when she was just six years old.

Below is a the text version of the assignment the students received:

Part 1: Introducing Islam

Islam and Muslims- The name of this religion is Islam, the root of which is SILM and SALAM, which means “peace.” SALAM may also mean, greeting one another with peace. One of the beautiful names of god, is that he is the peace. It means more than that; submission to the ONE GOD, and to live in peace with the creator within oneself, with other people, and with the environment. Thus, Islam is a total system of living. A Muslim is supposed to live in peace and harmony with all these segments; hence, a Muslim is any person, anywhere in the world whose obedience, allegiance, and loyalty are to god, the LORD of the universe.

Part 2: Muslims and Arabs

The followers of Islam are called Muslims. Muslims are not to be confused with Arabs. Muslims may be Arabs, Turks, Persians, Indians, Pakistanis, Malaysians, Indonesians, Europeans, Africans, Americans, Chinese, or other nationalities.

An Arab could be a Muslim, a Christian, a Jew, or an Atheist. Any person who adopts the Arabic language is called an Arab. However, the language of the “Quran” the holy book of Islam, is Arabic. Muslims all over the world try to learn Arabic so that they can read the Quran and understand its meaning. They pray in the language of the Quran; namely, Arabic.

Supplications to god to be in any language. While there are 1 billion Muslims in the world, there are about 200 million Arabs. Among them, approximately about 10 percent are not Muslim. Thus, Arab Muslims constitute only about 20 percent of the Muslim population of the world.

Part 3: Allah The One and the Only God

Allah is the name of the one and only god. Allah has 99 beautiful names, such as: the gracious, the merciful, the beneficent, the creator, the all-knowing, the all-wise, the lord of the universe, the first, the last, and others.

He is the creator of all human beings. He is the god for the Christians, the Jews, the Muslims, the Buddhists, the Hindus, the Atheists, and others. Muslims worship God whose name is “Allah.” They put their trust in him, and they seek his trust and his guidance.

Part 4: Muhammad

Muhammad was chosen by God to deliver his message of peace, namely Islam. He was born in 570 CE (Common Era) in Makkah, Arabia. He was trusted with the message of Islam when he was at the age of 40 years. The revelation that he received is called the Quran, while the message is called Islam.

Are you outraged yet? It looks as though the mom is handling the situation adequately so far, with her plans to pay the principal of the school a little visit and voice her concerns. If students are taught anything about Islam, it should be based on facts and current events. If the school wants to show the truth about Islam, perhaps they should show the students a couple of beheading videos so they can see first hand what this “peaceful” religion is truly all about.why

Article collective closing

Nanny State Pushes Sex On Children


New Medical Law Mandates “Private” Conversation With Child Before Every Doctor Visit

Parental authority being eviscerated by the state

by Paul Joseph Watson | June 6, 2014

When Michigan mother Christine Duffy brought her 17-year-old daughter into her physician’s office for a minor foot injury, she was told that a new medical access law required a nurse to have a “private” conversation with her child, another example of how parental authority is being eviscerated by the state.

Duffy’s experience is best explained in her own words;

“I was there last week for an appointment for Amy. She hurt her foot, which makes dancing difficult, so we had to get that checked out. Amy is 17; I asked if this policy was in effect and if so, how could I opt out. The receptionist told me it’s a new law and there is no opting out. Working to keep my cool, I said, “I’m sure there is.” She said, “No, there isn’t.” At which point I asked if I needed to leave and go to the urgent care center because I was not submitting my daughter to such a conversation.’

“That did not go over well.’

‘The receptionist closed the window. Almost immediately, the office manager turned the corner and said, “Mrs. Duffy, may I speak with you?”’

“She said there was a new policy that would allow a child to access his/her medical records online and the child would be allowed to block a parent from viewing the website. The nurse would also inform my children that the doctor’s office is a safe place for them to receive information about STDs, HIV and birth control. That is what the nurse would be chatting about with my children without any pesky parental oversight.’

“I kindly informed her that no one would be talking with my children privately, and I needed to know how to opt out of this policy before bringing Amy back for her physical next month. (Yay for physicals! Amy is so excited.)’

“By this time, the doctor was ready to see Amy so I had to cut the conversation short because I was not letting my girl out of my eyesight or earshot. Not when it was clear that these people were angling to undermine my parental authority.’

“Does that sound a bit dramatic to you? It shouldn’t. Because that is exactly what they are trying to do.”

police_state

Duffy went on to assert her right as a parent to decide what her daughter should be told about sex or birth control. She also cited the potential of teenage boys being given condoms by doctors in defiance of parental encouragement to abstain from having sex before marriage.

In addition to the conversation about birth control and STDs, previous examples have taught us that nurses sometimes quiz children about domestic abuse, to the point where an accident or an incident where the child was spanked can escalate into a full blown CPS investigation.

This case highlights how the state, primarily via the schooling system and health care, is moving aggressively to curtail parental authority and set the precedent that the government is responsible for protecting children from their own parents.

“We are living in a new America, one in which officials and their subordinates will stop at nothing to control every aspect of our lives, as well as those of our children,” writes Mac Slavo, adding, “With tens of thousands of laws on the books and more coming, it is only a matter of time before the government will have given themselves permission to do whatever they like with you… and your children.”

Last month we reported on how EMS workers told a mother who homeschooled her children that they were “agents of the state,” before proceeding to conduct an inspection of her home.

The increasing effort to characterize children as property of the state was perhaps best emphasized in a recent MSNBC promotional video which featured host Melissa Harris-Perry decrying the “private notion of children” and that “kids belong to their parents or their families” in favor of a “collective notion” that “kids belong to whole communities.”

msmbc

Sounds Like

Liberals will make their perverted believes the norm in society.

Alex Jones covers the new medical laws in Michigan that says Drs will have a confidential meeting with children privately without parental supervision to turn them into Nanny-State snitches for the system. See Alex below:

nanny

30 Witnesses disappearSorry YetVOTE 02

We are Getting Closer to a “Convention of States”


Did Michigan just trigger ‘constitutional convention’? Bid gains steam

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/02/rare-option-forcing-congress-to-meet-change-constitution-gains-momentum/

constitution_internal.jpg

National Archives

Momentum is building behind what would be an unprecedented effort to amend the U.S. Constitution, through a little-known provision that gives states rather than Congress the power to initiate changes.

At issue is what’s known as a “constitutional convention,” a scenario tucked into Article V of the U.S. Constitution. At its core, Article V provides two ways for amendments to be proposed. The first – which has been used for all 27 amendment to date – requires two-thirds of both the House and Senate to approve a resolution, before sending it to the states for ratification. The Founding Fathers, though, devised an alternative way which says if two-thirds of state legislatures demand a meeting, Congress “shall call a convention for proposing amendments.”

The idea has gained popularity among constitutional scholars in recent years — but got a big boost last week when Michigan lawmakers endorsed it.

Michigan matters, because by some counts it was the 34th state to do so. That makes two-thirds.

In the wake of the vote, California Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter pressed House Speaker John Boehner on Tuesday to determine whether the states just crossed the threshold for this kind of convention. Like Michigan lawmakers, Hunter’s interest in the matter stems from a desire to push a balanced-budget amendment — something that could potentially be done at a constitutional convention.

“Based on several reports and opinions, Michigan might be the 34th state to issue such a call and therefore presents the constitutionally-required number of states to begin the process of achieving a balanced budget amendment,” Hunter wrote.

“With the recent decision by Michigan lawmakers, it is important that the House – and those of us who support a balanced budget amendment — determine whether the necessary number of states have acted and the appropriate role of Congress should this be the case.”

If two-thirds of the states indeed have applied, the ball is presumably in Congress’ court to call the convention.

But Article V is rather vague, and it’s ultimately unclear whether 34 states have technically applied. In the past, states like Oregon, Utah and Arizona have quietly voted to approve the provision in their legislature.

But some of the 34 or so have rescinded their requests. Others have rescinded, and then re-applied.

Alabama rescinded its request in 1988 but in 2011, lawmakers again applied for a convention related to an amendment requiring that the federal budget be balanced. It was a similar story in Florida in 2010.

Louisiana rescinded in 1990 but lawmakers have tried several times, unsuccessfully, to reinstate the application since then.

It’s unclear whether the applications still count in these scenarios.

Some constitutional scholars like Gregory Watson, an analyst in Texas, say once states ask, there may be no take-backs.

“There is a disagreement among scholars as to whether a state that has approved an application may later rescind that application,” Watson told The Washington Times. “If it is ultimately adjudicated that a state may not rescind a prior application, then Ohio’s 2013 application for a Balanced Budget Amendment convention would be the 33rd and Michigan’s 2014 application would be the 34th on that topic.”

Others say if a state changes its mind, it can no longer be part of the 34.

Even if the requisite number of states have applied, questions remain about how such a convention would work — and whether, as Michigan wants, such a convention could be limited to only discussing a balanced-budget amendment.

It still may be a long shot, but some analysts are warning about the unintended consequences of such a move.

In Louisiana, Budget Project Policy Analyst Steve Spire argued against the state’s resolution, saying the convention could permanently damage the nation’s political system.

The last time there was a successful amendment was more than four decades ago – the 26th Amendment which changed the voting age to 18. States ratified the 27th Amendment on congressional pay increases, but it took more than 200 years to do it.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: