Tuesday, May 31, 2016

AG Lynch Dances to Ogbjma's Tune : Free Speech IS A Crime

That these Senators wrote this letter to the AG demanding a group of 15 states attorney generals cease and desist from attacking people and organizations for their freedom of speech is commendable, but the fact that the AG doesn't give a hoot and holler about what these Senators demand is just business as usual for the Ogbjma department of justice.

Ms Lynch knows her duty to the Ogbjma administration's agenda and ideology and to which she will carry it out flawlessly and seamlessly. That the targeting of individuals and organization for their right under the law of free speech as stated in our Constitution in the first amendment is no concern for AG Lynch.

When you have to dance on end of a string, you're options are limited.

Senators to AG: Stop Targeting Opponents of Obama’s Energy Policies
Hans von Spakovsky / /     

On Thursday, five U.S. senators sent a letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch demanding that she stop using Justice Department “law enforcement resources to stifle private debate on one of the most controversial public issues of our time—climate change.”

Sens. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, Mike Lee, R-Utah, Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., David Perdue, R-Ga., and David Vitter, R-La., expressed their concern over the response that Lynch gave at an oversight hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee in March. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., was pressing Lynch to criminally investigate anyone who refuses to accept man-induced climate change as an unassailable fact.

The response of the chief law enforcement official of the United States should have been that it is the duty of the Justice Department to fairly enforce the law in a dispassionate, non-ideological manner based on facts, not to investigate those who hold disfavored views regarding scientific controversies and an unproven scientific theory. Instead, to the senators’ “astonishment,” Lynch said that the “matter has been discussed” and she had “referred it to the FBI to consider whether or not it meets the criteria for what we could take action on.”

The senators also refer to a “coalition of environmentalists and lawmakers” who asked the Justice Department in 2015 to investigate a “private sector company” over its views on climate change for violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. This is the 1970s-era law that was passed by Congress to target mob organizations. And they express their concern over the actions by certain state attorneys general to go after other private parties, including subpoenaing universities, scientists, and nonprofit organizations for all of their research and communications on climate change.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute is one of the think tanks that was subpoenaed by the Virgin Islands attorney general, Claude Walker, for all of its research.

Walker apparently delegated his prosecutorial authority to a well-known plaintiffs’ firm, Cohen Milstein, which he hired to handle his investigation. Just recently, Walker decided to withdraw the subpoena after the Competitive Enterprise Institute put up fierce opposition to complying with it and Walker received widespread criticism for his behavior, including questions raised by the attorneys general of Texas and Alabama about the contingency fee arrangement Walker has with the law firm.
Such an arrangement raises grave due process and conflict of interest concerns because it gives private attorneys that represent the government “a financial stake in the outcome.”

As the senators note, all of these actions “provide disturbing confirmation that government officials at all levels are threatening to wield the sword of law enforcement to silence debate on climate change.” The senators say that is “a blatant violation of the First Amendment and an abuse of power that rises to the level of prosecutorial misconduct.” The Justice Department should not be issuing “intrusive demands targeting individuals who represent the parts of civil society that are most dependent on free inquiry and debate.” The senators then request that Lynch confirm within 14 days that the Justice Department:
  1. Has terminated all investigations or inquiries arising from any private individual or entity’s views on climate change, and
  2. Will not initiate in the future any such investigations or inquiries.
Additionally, the senators ask Lynch to “explain what steps you are taking as the federal official charged with protecting the civil rights of American citizens to prevent state law enforcement officers from unconstitutionally harassing private entities or individuals simply for disagreeing with the prevailing climate change orthodoxy.”

This is a final shot across Lynch’s bow. Not only are these senators demanding that she refrain from having the U.S. Justice Department apply the RICO law to First Amendment-protected speech, they want to know what she is going to do to stop state attorneys general from similarly exercising their governmental authority to interfere with Americans’ exercise of their First Amendment rights.

If Lynch fails to respond to this letter or fails to act, it will be another sign of how this administration—and this Justice Department—are willing to interject ideology and politics into their prosecutorial decisions.

Ogbjma Bathroom Directive Has Other Objectives : What's Knew!

One has to wonder just how far Mr Ogbjma will go to make sure our way of life no longer exists and to what extent he finds our Constitution a problem that stands in his way for "fundamental transformation'' of our society.

That Mr Ogbjma would demand that there is no longer any need for the sexes to be separated for privacy concerns is beyond our ability to comprehend such demands from someone that is supposed to represent all of the people.

This video explains the deeper meaning of what Mr Ogbjma intends for all of us.

What Obama’s Bathroom Directive Really Does
Kelsey Harkness / /

On May 13, the Obama administration sent a letter to public schools on the topic of transgender students and where they use the restroom. But the directive, issued as “significant guidance,” didn’t just apply to the bathrooms. It also entered the space of locker rooms, showers, dorms, overnight hotels, and other places you might not expect. Watch the video to see The Daily Signal break down where exactly the Obama administration’s bathroom directive applies, and where it doesn’t.


Mr Ogbjma Pushes 'New World Order' In Japan : America Is Guilty

Exactly what was the purpose for Mr Ogbjma's trip to Hiroshima Japan? It's not clear he intended to just to bring awareness of the horrors of war, but it was a clear statement that we, the United States can be seen as aggressors that are unthinkingly willing to slaughter thousands, and at the same time never mention the real aggressors that started the killing in the first place.

It's seem clear that the trip to Japan was just another effort to make clear the American people are guilty of sins against the world populations that do not have the power of arms that we do, and how we are willing to use it against anyone to gain and maintain world supremacy.

It's about creating confusion and chaos in our citizens and among the worlds populations as Mr Ogbjma explains our need for power and control has clouded our conscience and therefore our inability to become a modern world partner for peace and prosperity for everyone. 

It's about his ideology for the transformation of our society. A changing of who we actually are. Sadly, millions of Americans are ready and willing to accept the new world order ideology instigated in this country and around the world by Mr Ogbjma and the progressives.

Obama’s Hiroshima Speech Reflects His Unrealistic View of History
Bruce Klingner /

President Barack Obama’s speech at Hiroshima was a poignant discourse on the horrors of war. He spoke eloquently of the death of innocent lives and the hope for a better tomorrow. But his trip is fraught with the potential for misinterpretation.

As the end of his presidency approaches, Obama sought to resurrect his utopian vision of a world without nuclear weapons that he first articulated in 2009. The Obama administration promised that the president’s trip would be focused on the future. But by delivering his remarks at Hiroshima, he needlessly resurrected painful and contentious historic issues.

In his remarks, the president did not explicitly apologize for the U.S. decision to use atomic weapons to end World War II as some had advocated. But he implicitly criticizes the “terrible force unleashed” at Hiroshima and laments “how often does material advancement or social innovation blind us to this truth? How easily we learn to justify violence in the name of some higher cause.”

His comments reflect an aloof view disdainful of all violence, lumping aggressors and defenders together. Hiroshima was a tragedy but so were all the lives lost in the preceding years of conflict.
Visiting the National World War II Memorial in Washington, D.C., is a sobering experience. The cascade of gold stars adorning the walls are a heart-rending depiction of the 400,000 American service members who died in both the Pacific and European theaters of war. Each of the 4,048 stars represents 100 American deaths—sons, fathers, and brothers who never came home. Imagine the human tragedy if the number of gold stars were doubled, which would result from a full-scale Allied invasion of Japan.

Nor does Obama mention the millions of Japanese lives spared by the events at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In his memoir, President Harry Truman wrote that after Japan rejected another plea for surrender, he had no qualms about his decision to drop the bombs “if millions of lives could be saved … I meant both American and Japanese lives.”

Emperor Hirohito announced to his subjects that he based his decision to end the war on the “new and most cruel bomb … Should we continue to fight, it would … result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation.” In addition, there are estimates that 100,000 to 250,000 non-combatants in occupied Asia would have died for every month that the war was extended.

Hiroshima reflects the tragedy not just of a weapon of war, but of aggressive regimes and the wars they impose. Rather than a utopian quest to eliminate nuclear arms, he should have called on nations to band together against the despots who still threaten to impose their will over weaker neighbors.
As Americans prepare to enjoy the Memorial Day holiday, we should reflect on the meaning of the day.

We honor the brave men and women of the U.S. military who for centuries have fought and made the ultimate sacrifice for freedom for ourselves and others overseas subjugated to despots. Many of those did so during the four years brought on by the attack on Pearl Harbor. Rather than describing an idealistic vision of the future, perhaps Obama should have pondered George Orwell’s comment that “People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.”

As President Ronald Reagan declared in his inauguration speech, “The price for this freedom at times has been high, but we have never been unwilling to pay that price.”

Republican - My Vote Was Accidental? : Maloney Amendment

Why should we accept this statement as truthful in the wake of nearly everything else that comes out of our government is managed information or outright lies? After all he is a member of congress and therefore subject to outside pressures that might derail his next election if he doesn't vote like he is told. Imagine not being able to continue to feed at the trough of the taxpayer would be totally depilating. A nightmare beyond comprehension.

Maybe he did accidently hit the wrong button when he voted for the amendment,  but at this point in time, I don't really care what his explanation is, and for the time being, I will see him as 'one of them' and not one of us.

The scariest part that faces us to day, we know who the progressive socialist liberal democrats are and what they intend, it's thinking we know who and what the Republicans are but in reality they might be someone completely different then advertised.

As the saying goes, 'hold your enemies close and your friends even closer'.

Republican Says He Accidentally Voted for LGBT Amendment
Philip Wegmann / /     

Make that 42, not 43, Republicans who voted with Democrats for the controversial LGBT amendment in the House of Representatives.

When the amendment passed late Wednesday night, 223-195, Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill., voted for the measure but only by accident. The next day, Shimkus entered a statement into the congressional record to clarify his gaffe “My position on this issue has not and will not change,” Shimkus said in a press release. “I’ve consistently defended religious liberty and I always will. During a series of 14 votes on the House floor, I accidentally cast a ‘yea’ vote for the Maloney amendment when I intended to vote ‘nay.’”

Though the veteran Illinois representative did not cast the deciding vote and while the underlying bill with the LGBT amendment attached ultimately failed, Shimkus added that he “regrets the mistake.”
The apparent blunder comes during the middle of an unforeseen and controversial battle that threatens to derail the entire appropriations process.

 Battle Over LGBT Amendment Threatens to Stall Entire Appropriations Process

Shimkus is not the first representative in Congress to unknowingly cast the wrong vote. The House of Representatives records votes using an electronic system first introduced in 1973. Small and narrow voting buttons allow a member to vote yea, nay, or present.

Supporters describe the amendment—introduced by Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney, D-N.Y.—as an effort to prohibit federal contractors from discrimination against members of the LGBT community on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Opponents characterize the measure as a violation of conscience rights. An intentional vote for the Maloney amendment would mark a significant shift for Shimkus. The Illinois representative voted against the amendment when it was first introduced to a separate appropriations bill.  Shimkus also supported other legislation to curb President Barack Obama’s transgender bathroom directive.

Commentary: Don’t Let the 43 Republicans Who Voted for Obama’s Transgender Agenda Spin Their Vote

Monday, May 30, 2016

Freedom Is Not free : Someone Bought it and Gave It To You

A great memorial day reminder that anything that's worth having will have a price tag, and freedom is the most sacred and expensive thing we have.
This has been around, but a reminder at this time won't hurt anyone !

In September of 2005, on the first day of school, Martha Cothren, a History teacher at Robinson High School in Little Rock, did something… not to be forgotten. On the first day of school, with the permission of the school superintendent, the principal and the building supervisor, she removed all of the desks in her classroom. When the first period kids entered the room they discovered that there were no desks. 
'Ms. Cothren, where are our desks?'
She replied, 'You can't have a desk until you tell me how you earn the right to sit at a desk.' They thought, 'Well, maybe it's our grades.' 'No,' she said. 'Maybe it's our behavior.' She told them, 'No, it's not even your behavior.'
 And so, they came and went, the first period, second period, third period. Still, no desks were in the classroom. Kids called their parents to tell them what was happening and by early afternoon television news crews had started gathering at the school to report about this crazy teacher who had taken all the desks out of her classroom.
The final period of the day came and as the puzzled students found seats on the floor of the desk-less classroom. Martha Cothren said, 'Throughout the day no one has been able to tell me just what he or she has done to earn the right to sit at the desks that areordinarily found in this classroom. Now I am going to tell you.'
At this point, Martha Cothren went over to the door of her classroom and opened it. Twenty-seven (27) U.S. Armed Services Veterans, all in uniform, walked into that classroom, each one carrying a school desk. 
The Vets began placing the school desks in rows, and then they would walk over and stand alongside the wall. By the time the last soldier had set the final desk in place those kids started to understand, perhaps for the first time in their lives, just how the right to sit at those desks had been earned.
Martha said, 'You didn't earn the right to sit at these desks. These heroes did it for you. They placed the desks here for you. They went halfway around the world, giving up their education and interrupting their careers and families so you could have the freedoms you have. Now, it's up to you to sit in them. It is your responsibility to learn, to be good students, and to be good citizens. They paid the price so that you could have the freedom to get an education. Don't ever forget it.'
By the way, this is a true story. And this teacher was awarded the Veterans of Foreign Wars Teacher of the Year for the State of Arkansas in 2006. She is the daughter of a WWII POW.
Do you think this email is worth passing along so others won't forget either, that the freedoms we have in this great country were earned by our U.S.   Veterans? ................... I did.
Let us always remember the men and women of our military and the rights they have won for us.

Hillary's Coming to Jesus : Negligent Homicide - Benghazi

Why is this important? Does it mean anything if it can be proved that a candidate for the presidency of the United States is guilty of negligent homicide?
Yeah I know Teddy Kennedy got away with it but he was Kennedy after all and no one with any native intelligence would accuse a Kennedy of anything let alone negligent homicide or even worse, a calculated act of homicide in the death of the Kopechne girl.
Hillary is of course a Clinton, but by an stretch of the imagination not rising to level of blind hind sightedness used by the media of the Kennedys.
Hillary fell to the lowest that any person can go when she bold faced lied to the parents and family members right in front of the dead knowing full well the truth.


Ronald Reagan's Memorial Day Speech - 1986 : Leardership! (Video)


This is what leadership looks and sound like lest we have forgotten!!

‘They Stood For Something and We Owe Them Something’: Reagan’s 1986 Memorial Day Speech
Video Team /     

America’s beloved 40th president, Ronald Reagan, spoke at Arlington National Cemetery on Memorial Day in 1986. His speech reminds us to be thankful for the valor of others and that Memorial Day is a time to remember the “splendor of America” and those who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country.



Keeping A True Friend Close : A Real Winning Move

This is a good way to start your week on a sound footing. If you never have another friend, keeping this one close will be your best bet!

Productive Acitivity Relative to Police Activity : The Graphics

Interesting graphic that tells a story of the total ineptness and contempt for citizens of America that depend on leadership to sustain our success and prosperity into the future. What they got instead of conscientious leadership demanded by our Constitution is at best corruption and failure at all levels of government, or worse a designed and concerted ideological effort by Mr Ogbjma to destroy, transform our society. Thank you Barry (Barack) Ogbjma and the progressive socialist liberal democrats and the 'new world order' agenda.
Prod Growth copy

Chart of the Week: Productivity and Police Action
Posted on by Steven Hayward in Crime, Economy

Actually, here are two useful charts. With the first quarter’s economic growth being revised upward from the previous 0.5 percent annual rate to 0.8 percent annual rate, the Obama era continues its record as the weakest economic expansion in history. One reason is shown in this chart from the Financial Times, showing U.S. productivity growth turning negative in the first quarter:

Police Shootings copyYou can see that productivity growth has been slow for the last five years. At this rate, the median income household can look forward to a meager rise in real wages around the year 2040 or so. James Pethokoukis has further thoughts here.

Meanwhile, Bill Galston and Elizabeth McElvein of the Brookings Institution put out a short paper a while ago with some facts and figures about the criminal justice reform debate, and this chart jumps out: 

Galston and McElvein comment:
Although police killed a disproportionate number of minority individuals relative to the racial composition of the U.S. population, the best available data are too limited to substantiate claims of racial bias.

Republicans Demonstrate Moral Weakness : 43 Voted for A Transgender Outrage

It looks like the Republicans are true to form by demonstrating their collective shameless move to approval an executive order from Mr Ogbjma that is clearly problematic if not unconstitutional on the face of it. Even to make this worse, by a large majority, the voters do not approve of these tactics used by the White House to make socially controversial edicts that are moral outrageous that represent the majority.

And yet we see those that we, in the trenches, elected to protect the very foundations of society from attack by those that wish to ''transform'' our most endeared religious and moral ethical tenants of our society that have produced exceptional success and prosperity for our country, have now shown themselves to be unworthy of calling themselves representatives of the public interest or Republicans for that matter.

Our elected have demonstrated they do not represent us as we thought they would when we elected them. Therefore they must be defeated at the first opportunity and elect someone that will do the bidding of the people.

43 Republicans Join Democrats to Support Obama’s Transgender Agenda
Ryan T. Anderson / /

On Wednesday night, 43 Republican members of Congress joined the Democrats to vote for President Barack Obama’s transgender agenda. Whereas last week Congress voted to reject this proposal—known as the Maloney amendment—last night they voted to ratify Obama’s 2014 executive order barring federal contractors from what it describes as “discrimination” on the basis of “sexual orientation and gender identity” in their private employment policies.

And, of course, “discrimination” on the basis of “gender identity” can be something as simple as having a bathroom policy based on biological sex, not gender identity, as we learned last week from Obama’s transgender directives. And “discrimination” on the basis of “sexual orientation” can be something as reasonable as an adoption agency preferring married moms and dads for orphans, than other arrangements.

Indeed, in the past few weeks we’ve seen additional examples of what counts as “discrimination” on the basis of “gender identity.”

  • The New York City Commission on Human Rights issued official legal guidance saying employers can be fined up to $250,000 for not addressing employees by the pronoun of their choice—including pronouns such as “ze” and “hir.” As UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh explains, this would require “employers and businesses to prevent [the use of “wrong” pronouns] by co-workers and patrons and not just by themselves or their own employees.”
    • A public school district in Oregon paid a teacher $60,000 because colleagues declined to use the pronoun “they” to describe the teacher. The teacher, Leo Soell, does “not identify as male or female but rather transmasculine and genderqueer, or androgynous.” As Volokh explains: “Soell wants people to call Soell ‘they,’ and submitted a complaint to the school district objecting (in part) that other schoolteachers engaged in ‘harassment’ by, among other things, ‘refusing to call me by my correct name and gender to me or among themselves’ (emphasis added).”
    • The 4th Circuit Court has said a Virginia school district must allow bathroom access based on “gender identity” not biology. The school district created a policy that says bathroom and locker room access is primarily based on biology, while also creating accommodations for transgender students: only biological girls can use the girls’ room, only biological boys can use the boys’ room, and any student can use one of the three single-occupancy bathrooms, which the school created specifically to accommodate transgender students. But the court said this commonsense policy was itself “discrimination” on the basis of “gender identity.”
    Congress should not be ratifying Obama’s radical transgender agenda and imposing these outcomes on private employers just because they contract with the government. All Americans should be free to contract with the government without penalty because of their reasonable beliefs about contentious issues. The federal government should not use government contracting to reshape civil society about controversial issues that have nothing to do with the federal contract at stake.

    Obama’s executive order and the Maloney amendment treat conscientious judgments about behavior as if they were invidious acts of discrimination akin to racism or sexism. But sexual orientation and gender identity are not like race. Indeed, sexual orientation and gender identity are unclear, ambiguous terms. They can refer to voluntary behaviors as well as thoughts and inclinations, and it is reasonable for employers to make distinctions based on actions. By contrast, “race” and “sex” clearly refer to traits, and in the overwhelming majority of cases, these traits (unlike voluntary behaviors) do not affect fitness for any job.

    Congress tried to minimize the damage of the Maloney amendment with two provisions last night. One provision, introduced by Rep. Joe Pitts, R-Pa., amended the Maloney amendment to say that it couldn’t violate the U.S. Constitution. Another provision, the Byrne Amendment, attempted to attach existing religious liberty protections to the bill. Neither adequately protects against the damage of Maloney.

    Liberal activist judges will do all they can to ensure that sexual orientation and gender identity policies will trump religious liberty protections. This is why Congress should not be elevating sexual orientation and gender identity as a protected class garnering special legal privileges.
    Here is a list of the 43 Republicans who voted for the amendment:
    Justin Amash, Mich.
    Susan Brooks, Ind.
    Mike Coffman, Colo.
    Ryan Costello, Pa.
    Carlos Curbelo, Fla.
    Rodney Davis, Ill.
    Jeff Denham, Calif.
    Charlie Dent, Pa.
    Mario Diaz-Balart, Fla.
    Bob Dold, Ill.
    Daniel Donovan, N.Y.
    Tom Emmer, Minn.
    Michael Fitzpatrick, Pa.
    Rodney Frelinghuysen, N.J.
    Chris Gibson, N.Y.
    Joe Heck, Nev.
    Will Hurd, Texas
    Darrell Issa, Calif.
    David Jolly, Fla.
    John Katko, N.Y.
    Adam Kinzinger, Ill.
    Leonard Lance, N.J.
    Frank LoBiondo, N.J.
    Tom MacArthur, N.J.
    Martha McSally, Ariz.
    Pat Meehan, Pa.
    Luke Messer, Ind.
    Erik Paulsen, Minn.
    Bruce Poliquin, Maine
    Tom Reed, N.Y.
    David Reichert, Wash.
    Jim Renacci, Ohio
    Tom Rooney, Fla.
    Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Fla.
    John Shimkus, Ill.
    Elise Stefanik, N.Y.
    Fred Upton, Mich.
    David Valadao, Calif.
    Greg Walden, Ore.
    Mimi Walters, Calif.
    David Young, Iowa
    Todd Young, Ind.
    Lee Zeldin, N.Y.

    Sunday, May 29, 2016

    America's Freedom to Chose : God Bless Those That Gave All For Us

    Why is love of country seen as a weakness to so many outspoken pundits in the main stream media?

    During the next two days it seem appropriate to put aside the riggers of the day and reflect on just how blessed we are to be living in America, and how it all came to be.

    Anything that's worth having always has a price tag, and for us living in the greatest county in the world the price has been the sacrifice of good people that believe making the ultimate decision to put themselves in harms way to secure a place in freedoms embrace for others, can never be unappreciated or forgotten.

    On this Memorial day, there isn't much we, the benefactors of others standing guard every where in the world, that we can do or say to recognize these people that in many case have made the ultimate sacrifice, giving their lives of us back home. How do you tell them we understand what you have done for us with their sacrifice other then to stand up on this day, face the our flag which represents who we are and what so many before us have died to preserve, and declare our allegiance to our country that guarantees our freedoms as a right by law for everyone to enjoy.

    While most countries around the world are in some kind of turmoil and chaos these days, all we have to worry about in America is what we will have for dinner or what's on television tonight. Even the poorest in America have so much more then millions of other people around the world that live with fear and hunger.

    But here in America we have all of the things that make life worth while. Free speech, freedom of movement without government intervention, freedom to choose our next decision on how we will conduct our lives under the law.

    We in America are blessed to have a document that guides us, which is in no small part a gift from God, our Constitution. I also believe our Constitution is second only to the Bible as a defining instrument for success and survival that no other nation on earth has, and it works for everyone that  believes in personal freedom to choose ones own destiny as the single most important aspect making America that shining city on the hill that everyone from around the world sees as salvation from corruption and pestilence. Little wonder so many want to come to America.

    So with all this in mind, take some time to reflect on our blessings, no matter who you are or what you are experiencing, one has to realize without living in America everything would so much worse.

    As the saying goes, and I love this so much I use it here as a defining statement at the head of this blog, ''Freedom means having nothing else to lose''.

    God bless you and your family, and God bless our great country, The United States of America.

    Gitmo Detainees Dumped In US? : Ogbjma To Return Gitmo to Cuba? No? Wait and See

    What's going here, I believe, is Mr Ogbjma has the intention, in his last several months in office, to empty Gitmo and then give it back to the Cubans. What better way to support Mr Ogbjma's ideology for his 'new wave jihad' then to stick it the America by taking American property and give to the communists. Mr Ogbjma secures a front seat for terrorists with lawyers to demand retribution for illegal imprisonment with financial reparations and freedom from more imprisonment.

    A win win situation for Mr Ogbjma's ideological jihad that seeks to bring pain suffering to America for past sin against the world.

    But wait, why empty Gitmo, just turn it over to the communists along with the terrorist so the communists can use them to attack America? Mr Ogbjma should be pleased with that scenario, right?

    And what's even better for Mr Ogbjma, congressional Republicans will scream and wave the arms around demanding he can't do this, it's illegal and it is of course, but congressional Republicans will do nothing to stop him. It's what they have become. It's who they are.

    The democrats in congress will be conflicted, but being good soldiers will remain silent. Congressional democrats understand, if they oppose anything the ''One'' does, their careers and families will be put at risk. Also, It's who they are.

    Welcome to the 'new world wave' of  our politics.

    Gitmo Detainees Coming to US? Not So Fast
    Cully Stimson / /

    It’s almost summer, so that means that the United States Senate and House of Representatives will take up—again—more legislation related to the terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo Bay (Gitmo), Cuba. Gitmo legislation has been a favorite political football for both parties, regardless of which party is in the majority. And this year is no different. But I want to focus on one controversial amendment: Section 1023 of the National Defense Authorization Act titled “Designing and Planning Related to Construction of Certain Facilities in the United States.”

    At first blush, it looks like the amendment breaks the legislative logjam, starting back in 2009 and enacted into law every year since, that prohibits the expenditure of federal funds for the construction, acquisition, or modification of a facility in the United States for the purpose of housing Gitmo detainees. But it does no such thing.

    First, some history. Since 2006, the Pentagon has been studying various sites inside the United States where Gitmo detainees could be safely detained as law of war detainees. President George W. Bush, in 2006, said that he would like to move to the day when the detention facility at Gitmo was closed. And although over 500 Gitmo detainees were transferred or released from the island compound during his presidency, Bush never ordered the facility to be closed.

    President Barack Obama signed an executive order in his first week in office in 2009, directing the facility to be closed within a year. He failed to do so, in large part because he was not willing to spend the political capital necessary to do so, as I explained in detail here.

    Recall that the Democrats were in the majority in the House and Senate in 2009 and 2010. But instead of forcing its closure with his own party, he spent his early political capital on the TARP, the stimulus, and on the controversial Obamacare. Nevertheless, the process of surveying possible sites in the United States continued, and indeed intensified.

    Department of Defense experts, and others from other federal agencies, conducted site surveys in several states up until two years ago. Approximately two years ago, however, Department of Defense lawyers interpreted new congressional restrictions on the expenditure of funds to forbid site surveys.
    In other words, the last site surveys of possible locations in the United States are over two years old.
    Section 1023 simply allows Department of Defense to expend funds for “designing and planning related to construction or modification of such facilities.”

    Section 1023 does not repeal or modify the other provisions related to the use of funds for the construction or modification of facilities in the United States, nor does it effect the legislative bar on expending funds to bring Gitmo detainees to the United States. It simply allows them to use appropriated funds to start the planning and designing phase. To some, this is a crack in the legislative dam, and is a dangerous slippery slope on the way to closing the facility and importing Gitmo detainees into the United States.

    Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., filed Section 4068 to strike Section 1023. He also filed Section 4069 strengthening the obligations on the administration to certify the transfer or release of Gitmo detainees from Gitmo. There is no way of knowing, at this point, whether Section 1023 will pass.

    If it makes it through the House/Senate conference, and is signed into law, we should know very soon which facility or facilities the administration has their eye on in the United States, as activity around those places will increase in the public eye.  Stand by.

    Saturday, May 28, 2016

    Renewable Energy Destroys the Environment : It's Really All About the Money & Control

    Vermont Billboard Ban copyAnd it's not just Vermont - it's everywhere one looks these days. The windmills have infested the landscape that at one time was so precious to the environmentalist fascists that they literally attacked anyone that even thought they might soil the ground with their presence.

    But now the environmental fascists are conspicuously absent when it comes to wind turbines that litter the landscapes in neatly every state and for good reason. It's all about what's right for the planet and their bank accounts. And then it's their hypocritical proclamation of their collective sanctimonious ideology of ridding the country of fossil fuels like coal and natural gas that they falsely claim is killing the planet.

    As with any ideology that uses fear and violence to obtain their demands for obedience, like the progressive socialist liberals, the progressive environmentalists attack the source of their collective well being, the taxpayers, with the fears all will be lost if they don't keep the research money flowing, and attacking the politicians to make sure they legislate laws and regulations that ensure fossil fuels will no longer be a major source of energy in this country.

    It all feels so right and proper, especially this fall when the new Mercedes come out.

    After all it's all about the planet, right? It's not at all about the money and the power to demand more money and more power to control. The fact that more then 45% of all our power for our homes and industry comes from fossil fuels now is of no importance. And according any estimate on renewables, renewable energy will not be a reliable source of energy for another twenty or thirty years.

    So $billion more will be needed for research and development of  energy resources that will in the very near future save us from our own destruction.


    Bernie's People : A Free Ticket to Ride

    Bdernie Popularity copy
    Here is a good example of millions of American people and especially the youth and there staggering ignorance of how the world works.

    After watching the huge crowds that attend the Bernie rallies, one has to wonder do these people understand how this country came to be, and how those people attending were able to afford to make the trip to see someone that wants to turn the lights out in that shining city on the hill?

    Have we fallen this fall from where we were just 10 years ago? Especially over the last 7 years were we went 7 $trillion further in debt?

    Young Socialists2 copy

    President Trump Makes His Move : Day 4 Action

    If this was a poker hand, one would have to believe the dealer was working the bottom of the deck. Or maybe someone's wildest dream or nightmare. But no, it for real, even the characters are not fictional. All willing participants ready for another fundamental transformation of America. And worse, no one is sure what that transformation will look like. But no matter, here we go again playing follow the leader. Remember the last guy that said he will 'transform'' America, and as a result of that ideology, the country is headed for the ditch and the world is on fire? Exactly how much better will this next guy be then the one that just plowed us under?
    Trump Day 4 copy

    From Reagan to Ogbjma : Choosing Freedom or Obedience?

    Tear Down this Stall copyIt was pointed out by many pundit Conservatives that Mr Ogbjma was madman when he first took the stage at the democratic party convention in 2004, but it didn't matter. Millions of voters wanted someone to tell them what to do next.

    When the Republicans and Conservatives were in control, people had to make decision on their own to whether they succeeded or failed. For the most part it was the free market that ruled the day. This was way to difficult for many among us, and of course, unfair.

    And what better person then a progressive black man that says he wants to ''fundamentally transform America''. This was a win win situation for everyone that wanted never be seen as a racist and that had to have someone in control of their lives. A vote for Mr Ogbjma was a vote for a new day, as new beginning for America. Mr Ogbjma was all things to all people.

    Remember, Mr Ogbjma was 'the ''One'' we have been waiting for'. And even now that historical events have been proven the pundits correct, Mr Ogbjma is truly a madman, a domestic political terrorists, it still doesn't matter to those that are sitting in the front pew of the church of ideological progressive socialism. And if the truth be known, Mr Ogbjma has a world wide ideology of jihad that is far worse then just progressive socialism.

    And wonders of wonders, the media poles show his popularity growing. Little wonder Bernie and Hillary's strategies are moving farther and farther left. It appears the American people are ready and willing to be subservient.

    Author Decides She Can Fix Organized Fantasy : A Taking of Free Stuff

    I don't know if this is a true author or not and I don't care. It's been around for a while on the net, but I agree with the premise of the author, if you want to escape from realty, then you have to obey the rules of living a fantasy.
    A fantasy of taking free stuff and living the good life without taking any responsibility.
    What are the rules for taking free stuff? Hey, every endeavor has rules no matter who or what you are when you decide you want to join that organization to live the life in that chosen fantasy.
    If you decide rules are for others and not you, then expect to be placed in a special place where you will have to suffer the horrible consequences for your decisions.
    The consequences are having to take personal responsibility for your own decisions.
    You will actually have to live according to the dictates of those that are paying for your personal existence. The decision is entirely up to you as to how to proceed.
    This was written by a 21 yr. old female who gets it. It's her future she's worried about and this is how she feels about the social welfare big government state that she's being forced to live in! These solutions are just common sense in her opinion.
    This was in the Waco Tribune Herald, Waco , TX
    PUT ME IN CHARGE . . .
    Put me in charge of food stamps. I'd get rid of Lone Star cards; no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away. If you want steak and frozen pizza, then get a job.
    Put me in charge of Medicaid. The first thing I'd do is to get women Norplant birth control implants or tubal ligations. Then, we'll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine. If you want to reproduce or use drugs, alcohol, or smoke, then get a job.
    Put me in charge of government housing. Ever live in a military barracks? You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair. Your "home" will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried. If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then get a job and your own place.
    In addition, you will either present a check stub from a job each week or you will report to a "government" job. It may be cleaning the roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you. 
    We will sell your 22-inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the "common good."
    Before you write that I've violated someone's rights, realize that all of the above is voluntary. If you want our money, accept our rules.  Before you say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self-esteem," consider that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone else's money for doing absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self-esteem.
    If we are expected to pay for other people's mistakes we should at least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices. The current system rewards them for continuing to make bad choices.

    I love this one. AND While you are on Gov't subsistence, you no longer can VOTE! Yes, that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check. 
    If you want to vote, then get a job.

    Friday, May 27, 2016

    Youth of Yesterday Innovated : Youth Today Wait for Results

    I believe it was a gift from God that when we grew up television was an oddity and dial phones were new.

    To innovate wasn't the exception, it was the order of the day. It came naturally. There was always something to do, all we had to do was look around the next corner.

    Daughter of Transgender Dad : Gender Can't Be Changed

    Reality is a harsh teachers and to ignore those teachings will result in catastrophic failure. Our society is tending towards ignoring realty, deciding instead common sense and logic no longer apply to making decisions that will result in success.

    It's kind of a throwback to the 60's where the motto was 'if it feels good, do it', and we know how that turned out for our society, we are living today in that nightmare of such insanity as a result.

    My Dad Was Transgender. Why I Still Think Gender Can’t Be Changed.
    Denise Shick /     

    Maybe parallel universes really do exist. Maybe, as my husband and I hiked through the deep, dark forest a few years ago, we somehow crossed through a portal, a stargate into another dimension—a universe that, superficially at least, looks quite similar to the one I’d known most of my life.
    I almost hope that’s true. I’d like to believe it, because in the world I now inhabit—which outwardly resembles the one I remember—everything seems to have been turned inside out and become utterly bewildering.

    Yes, I find myself wanting to believe that weird matrix explanation and to resist the more likely truth that the world I grew up in could have changed so completely. I’d like to believe that somewhere back there the world I accidently exited still exists—that world where gender was a fixed biological fact, determined at conception.

    But no, this is not the Twilight Zone; it is not an inexplicable parallel universe. This is 21st century America, and, according to an ABC news article on guidelines recently handed down by the U.S. Departments of Justice and Education:
    There is no obligation for a student to present a specific medical diagnosis or identification documents that reflect his or her gender identity, and equal access must be given to transgender students even in instances when it makes others uncomfortable, according to the directive.
    Yes, we really do live in a nation in which our government tells us girls and boys should be able to share restrooms and locker rooms. We really do live in a culture that values transgender rights over basic morality and children’s safety. But the very hard reality in this topsy-turvy world is that transgender people are hundreds of times more likely to attempt suicide than the general U.S. population. And what does our enlightened culture do about this very sad statistic?

    Well, we make it easier for people to transition to this sad and depressing lifestyle. Helping them struggle down the hard road of facing reality is just too judgmental; it’s better to let them move into a make-believe life in which they face a 4-in-10 chance of attempting suicide.

    My father gave in to his make-believe transgender impulses and became Becky. He’d spent most of his life dreaming of making that transition. When he finally left his family and got what he’d long desired, he still wasn’t fulfilled. He considered suicide, but, thankfully, resisted. But later, pumped full of unnatural hormones and chemicals and adorned in women’s clothing, he died a sad, confused, forgetful, and regretful old man.

    I missed Harold, the one who, during his periods of resisting his impulses, treated me as a father should treat his daughter. I miss him dancing with my little feet placed on top of his, his big hands reaching down to clasp my little five-year-old hands. I miss those days of his sexual sobriety when we worked together at his father’s seed company and went to lunch together. I miss all those times when he accepted the reality that he was Harold, a man—a husband, father, and grandfather.

    I don’t miss Becky, or those transition times when my father gave in to his transgender impulses. I don’t miss him telling me, when I was just nine years old, of his desire to become a woman and then requiring me to keep that confession a secret. I don’t miss the fanciful alternate world he transported into, leaving my mother emotionally distraught and financially destitute.

    My father was the one who had entered another dimension, a make-believe dimension. And rather than returning to the real world, he wanted the real world to accommodate his make-believe world.
    That’s what this small but vocal minority and their enablers want from the rest of the real world.

    I’d like to believe that world in which truth is objective, and children’s modesty and safety is more important than being politically correct still exists and somehow I might find the portal to return to it. Back to that world where adults looked out for children’s best interests, even if doing so meant saying no and then dealing with rather than succumbing to the resultant temper tantrum. I’d like to think that, in that parallel universe I inadvertently ambled out of, women and children’s safety is still more important than appeasing a tiny-but-very-vocal minority.

    But it appears I’m no longer in that universe. I’m in one where choices—no matter how illogical—trump obvious facts. I find myself in a world in which stating a very plain and evident biological fact is now considered a form of hate speech.

    I’m now in a world that tells me I must not only tolerate but also celebrate behaviors that in just a relative eye’s blink before were condemned as detrimental to society.

    Ben Rhoads's Eco Chamber : Climate Changers Dupes Millions

    This is a never ending story of how easily the masses can be duped into believing just about anything. No? How about Ben Rhoads's echo chamber? The press will believe anything they are told to believe and then print it all like they are told.

    For those of us in the trenches, this is just more insanity from the progressive left socialists that are on a rampage for all they can get before the "One" leaves office. Once Mr Ogbjma is gone and set to take the reigns power at the United Nations as Secretary General as supreme leader of the world, he will be well on his way to fulfill his dream of a world wide jihad that will ''transform'' all societies that are not currently in obedience with the law of his god.

    There can not be any other option for Mr Ogbjma. What he wasn't able to accomplish as president of the United States, we will bring about as the world's supreme leader at the United Nations.

    Is ‘Game of Thrones’ Secretly About Global Warming?
    Nicolas Loris / /

    Is winter actually never coming again?
    A new Vox video portrays a theory that the hit fantasy drama “Game of Thrones” is actually all about catastrophic manmade global warming. However, a more accurate connection is that both are simply science fiction.

    In “Game of Thrones,” White Walkers—terrifying humanoid/zombie ice men so fearsome that they change the weather to snow and ice by their mere presence—pose an existential threat to the Seven Kingdoms. The Vox commentary suggests that “like climate change, the White Walkers are a threat the whole human race.”

    Different noble houses in the Seven Kingdoms are too busy arguing amongst themselves and even denying the existence of the threat to come to common action. As a result, the ones who suffer most are the poor and defenseless. Similarly, Vox says, developed and developing nations have struggled to set aside political competition, sacrifice a little up front, or even recognize the existential threat of global warming. Meanwhile, the poorest of the world stand to suffer the most. If you watch the show, you may be saying to yourself, “I can see it.” But like many fan theories, the idea fails when the facts bear out.

    The Vox video claims that “climate change is this massive global threat” where manmade carbon dioxide emissions have led to skyrocketing temperatures since the Industrial Revolution and will lead to rising flood levels, more droughts, increased ocean acidification. In fact, according to the United Nations’ latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report on climate science, did not find any such evidence when looking at the data.
    Heritage has addressed each of these and much more in greater detail with a new paper: The State of Climate Science: No Justification for Extreme Policies.  Climate change is certainly not science fiction but doomsday scenario predictions are increasingly fantastic.

    We’ve been told that by 2030 the spring season would start in January. Al Gore said the North Pole would be ice free by 2013. The United Nations predicted in 2005 that by 2010 there would be 50 million climate refugees. Others said there would be no more snow.

    But are the poor suffering from the negligence of world leaders?

    Vox connects those allegedly marginalized by global warming with the “Game of Thrones’” Wildlings (or Free Folk), barbaric humans who live outside the Seven Kingdoms, who suffer most from ignoring the White Walkers. The world’s poorest do face a threat, but not for the reasons Vox suggests. The reality is the world’s poor are more likely to suffer from global warming policies, not global warming itself, because they’ll be denied access to reliable energy and the better standards of living energy supports. Seventeen percent of the world’s population does not yet have access to electricity and 35 percent don’t have clean cooking facilities. Even if global warming does become a problem, environmental minister of India, Prakash Javadekar, frames the issues correctly: “Unless we tackle poverty, unless we eradicate poverty, we cannot really address the climate change.”

    Whatever the current or next global challenge is, higher levels of wealth and access to more resources will more effectively solve it. And because the developing world is unlikely to commit to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, stringent reductions by the developed world will have little to no effect on global temperatures whether you believe global warming is the White Walker of the real world.
    All of this is to say, let’s “hold the door” on pushing through with costly global warming policies that are a non-solution to an unlikely problem. We don’t know what the next great global challenge may be.

    Maybe it will be manmade global warming, though the evidence as it stands doesn’t indicate so. It could be an asteroid or dangerous dictators with nuclear weapons. Let’s hope it’s not really White Walkers unless you’ve got a stockpile of dragon glass at your house.