Coastal Carolina Taxpayers Association (CCTA)

John Hood's Daily Journal: Turning Judicial Selection Over to Special Interests

2012-02-11T16:01:00.000-05:00

By Daren Bakst.

There’s an ongoing debate about the best way to select judges in North Carolina. Some people prefer partisan elections. Others prefer gubernatorial appointments. Still others want to see a system mixing appointments with retention elections. The list of possible scenarios could grow even longer.

But a recent development related to judicial vacancies outside of the election process should concern everyone interested in good government.

The North Carolina Constitution gives the governor exclusive power to fill judicial vacancies that arise between elections. Through a recent executive order, Gov. Beverly Perdue effectively has placed this appointment power in the hands of special-interest groups and partisan insiders.

The governor created an 18-person commission that will nominate three candidates for each judicial vacancy. The governor, regardless of whether she agrees with the slate of nominees, must select one nominee to fill the vacancy. Because Perdue is required to choose one of the commission’s nominees, it is the unelected and unaccountable special-interest groups and insiders who will be picking judges, not the governor.

The commission’s composition is completely political in nature. Eight special-interest groups nominated three attorneys each, one of whom the governor was required to pick for the commission. She chose the 10 remaining members herself. While there’s nothing unusual in a governor being influenced by partisan interests in performing her duties, she shouldn’t formally abdicate power to her political allies.

This is akin to the governor issuing an executive order compelling her to let special-interest groups pick three bills, one of which she must veto, or to let special-interest groups identify three prisoners, one of whom she must pardon.

In these situations, the governor is delegating away her express power to private and unaccountable interests. Citizens would not accept the governor passing the buck on those types of important decisions, and they should be even more outraged at Perdue’s attempt to avoid accountability for the selection of members of our judiciary.

If the commission merely made recommendations that the governor could accept or reject at her pleasure, there wouldn’t be a problem. Instead, Perdue is compelling herself by law to pick one of the commission’s appointees. This shows a lack of confidence in her own abilities and a disrespect for the state Constitution that has given her, and not anyone else, especially private parties, the power to execute the governor’s powers.

The executive order is just one part of an ongoing attack on our judicial system. The N.C. Bar Association has been pushing to amend the state constitution and implement a comparable commission model as a way to eliminate completely the citizens’ right to select appellate judges.

Under the proposed amendment, the governor would be forced to select one of two nominees appointed by a judicial nominating commission. The only person who could challenge the appointee in a subsequent election would be the other individual nominated by the commission. Either way, the commission gets a person it wants. The public would have no say as to who would be eligible to sit on the bench and would have to choose from candidates selected by special interests.

The proposed scheme would be far more political than our current election system because it would encourage — and, in fact, would require — behind-the-scenes lobbying as opposed to transparent elections.

http://www.carolinajournal.com/jhdailyjournal/

NetRight Daily: The ‘deadbeat’ bailout

2012-02-11T15:45:00.000-05:00

Deadbeat homeowners who weren’t making payments on their mortgages are receiving a bailout. Yes, you read that correctly.

Check out this piece from Charles Gasparaino on the matter:

It’s hard to imagine a less-deserving group of victims: people who gambled during the housing bubble by purchasing homes with borrowed money that they knew or should have known they couldn’t afford, but who are now able to stay in the homes they should have never bought because of what amounts to paperwork errors on the part of the nation’s big banks.

But that’s essentially what went down yesterday, thanks to the Obama administration’s latest re-election gimmick — the nationwide mortgage-foreclosure settlement.

Everyone — from the president, to officials at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, to at least some of 49 state attorneys general who cobbled together the pact, including New York’s Eric Schneiderman — took the all-too-familiar class-warfare route in selling the deal to the public and national media. They’d like us to believe that the nation’s largest banks are finally paying for their bad behavior during the housing bubble and its aftermath, when millions of Americans either lost or were in jeopardy of losing their homes.

That’s because the banks will cough up $26 billion for various abuses, including illegal foreclosures. Many “victimized” home-owners will get relief, mostly in the form of refinancing of underwater mortgages. So, they can stay in their homes, at least for a while.

It’s such a win-win, the administration is boasting, that even those people not part of the specific victimized class will benefit because the deal creates a stronger housing market. If banks can’t foreclose on properties, the theory goes, they can’t depress housing prices more by selling these properties on the cheap.

Problem is, almost all of the “logic” behind the deal isn’t logic, but a combination of half truths and outright lies. Even worse, the settlement will likely prolong the housing slump and set the stage for it to happen again.

CONTINUED:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/deadbeat_bailout_LBRdYWq9BHXu4kIFTgHL1M

Americans for Prosperity: Hands Off My Health Care Rally

2012-02-10T15:13:00.000-05:00

February 10, 2012

March marks an important and unfortunate anniversary. It will have been exactly two years since President Obama forced his unpopular health care takeover onto the American people. Americans for Prosperity has educated the public about the dangers of government interference in the health care market for the past several years, and now the Supreme Court is set to hear arguments and make a ruling on that very issue.

As you are most likely aware, the U.S. Supreme Court will be considering the constitutionality of several elements of the President's health care bill. This may be our best chance to overturn this offense against our health care freedoms. That's why Americans for Prosperity will be hosting a Hands Off My Health Care rally for free-market grassroots activists from North Carolina and across the country near the Supreme Court on March 27th. Details can be found below.

Americans for Prosperity - North Carolina will host bus rides to DC from the following locations the day of the event:

Bolivia, Charlotte Area, Fayetteville, Goldsboro, Greensboro, Raleigh, Rocky Mount, Sanford, Southern Pines, Wake Forest, Wilmington, Wilson.

Click here to register for the Hands Off My Health Care Rally now!

Hands Off My Health Care Rally

Near the United States Supreme Court, Washington, D.C.

March 27th at 1:00PM

Over the past few years, Americans for Prosperity has been the premier grassroots group educating the public on the dangers of the President's health care bill. AFP's Hands Off My Health Care Tour criss-crossed the nation in 2009 hosting over 300 events and rallies. Then, in late 2009, over 5,000 activists gathered for AFP's Code Red Rally in Washington.

We must remind the Court and all of Washington (including the President and Congress) that the President's health care takeover is an affront to free-market principles and our Constitution. Not only is the individual mandate unconstitutional, but it forces consumers to enter the health insurance market against their will. Click here to read more about the individual mandate.

Click here to register for the Hands Off My Health Care Rally now!

Sincerely,
Dallas Woodhouse
State Director
Americans for Prosperity - North Carolina

Americans for Prosperity® (AFP) is a nationwide organization of citizen leaders committed to advancing every individual's right to economic freedom and opportunity. AFP believes reducing the size and scope of government is the best safeguard to ensuring individual productivity and prosperity for all Americans. AFP educates and engages citizens in support of restraining state and federal government growth, and returning government to its constitutional limits. AFP has more than 1,900,000 members, including members in all 50 states, and 34 state chapters and affiliates. More than 90,000 Americans in all 50 states have made a financial investment in AFP or AFP Foundation. For more information, visit http://www.americansforprosperity.org/

Message from NC Senator Richard Burr

2012-02-10T14:05:00.000-05:00

February 10, 2012

This Week in Washington: Unemployment Benefits Reform Act
This week, I introduced a bill called the Unemployment Benefits Reform Act of 2012 which would individuals who have been unemployed for six months or more to complete 20 hours of public service and 20 hours of active job search or other work related activities per week as conditions for receipt of federal extended unemployment benefits. The United States economy is suffering, and we are experiencing record levels of sustained unemployment. Being unemployed for an extended length of time can be demoralizing for people looking for work, but engagement in volunteer service will encourage unemployed workers to maintain job skills, marketability, and a sense of self-worth while providing for the betterment of their communities. Even more, the active job search requirement will enhance the integrity of the unemployment system and its ability to identify and serve those most in need.

Public service may be fulfilled by working for a 501( c ) (3) organization or a federal, state or local agency, and the bill protects government workers from displacement by only permitting volunteering with a governmental agency when permitted by current law. However, with nearly 13 million unemployed Americans and potentially limited opportunities for voluntary service, states would have the discretionary power to waive the requirement for individuals who had made a concerted effort to volunteer. In addition, unemployed individuals may be exempt from the public service requirement due to illness, family emergency, or if they are unable to perform public service due to child care responsibilities or lack of transportation.

Work related activities include subsidized private sector employment; subsidized public sector employment; work experience (including work associated with the refurbishing of publicly assisted housing); on-the-job training; job readiness assistance; vocational educational training, education directly related to employment, receiving a high school diploma or a certificate of high school equivalency; and providing child care services to an individual who is participating in a community service program.

Not only will this bill improve the stability of our unemployment system, it will also keep the morale, and more importantly, the employability, as high as possible for those looking for work.

Religious Freedom Restoration Act

On Thursday, I signed on as a cosponsor of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 2012, a bill introduced by Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) that would repeal the recent mandate under the President’s health care law that violates religious liberties and conscience rights of faith-based institutions by forcing them to offer employees insurance coverage for contraception free of charge. This mandate is an example of the White House’s complete disrespect for religious beliefs, which has deeply offended many Americans and institutions who do not want to have to choose between providing health insurance for their employees and abandoning the religious beliefs and morals they hold dear.

Religious liberty is one of the most valued freedoms upon which this nation was founded, and I hope that President Obama will reverse this unprecedented federal mandate that conflicts with long-standing religious freedoms and conscience protections.

http://burr.senate.gov/public/

NEWS AND OBSERVER: Norman Sanderson to run for Senate

2012-02-10T13:57:00.000-05:00

Rep. Norman Sanderson has announced that he seek the state Senate seat currently held by fellow Republican Jean Preston, who has said she will not seek re-election.

Sanderson, who owns a child care business in Havelock, won in House seat in 2010 when he defeated Democratic incumbent Alice Graham Underhill.

Read more here: http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/norman_sanderson_to_run_for_senate#storylink=cpy

Why Congress should reject the highway bill

2012-02-10T13:48:00.000-05:00

We're expecting debate to start on Monday or Tuesday in both the House and Senate on the infamous Highway bill. The legislation is how Congress plans to inefficiently fund transportation projects all across the country over the next few years, and it's a decidedly inept process.

The Club for Growth has been all over this from the beginning. They have issued Key Vote Alerts against BOTH the House and Senate versions.

Republican leaders in the House are claiming that their bill is a positive step forward because it doesn't include earmarks, but it's still remarkably inefficient. It contains no spending cuts and is paid for by dubious and uncertain offsets. It's also a bailout, paid for by you and me, for all of the poor funding decisions made in the past. The Senate version was written, in part, by Sen. Barbara Boxer, so you know it's not a recipe for limited government. One of the dumbest provisions, thanks to Sen. Max Baucus, would use auto import tariffs to pay for more spending. If that passed into law, the floodgates would open for new tariffs to pay for new highway spending!

Why Congress Should Reject the Highway Bill

Washington Examiner, Andy Roth
February 9, 2012

Everyone knows that if you take the bacon off a greasy cheeseburger, it’s still packed with tons of calories and saturated fat. So why do members of Congress think cutting pork from the 2012 Highway Bill should suddenly make it appetizing to fiscal conservatives?

The Highway Bill — the last one expires at the end of March — traditionally uses gas tax receipts to fund highway construction and maintenance, but it also finances “enhancement projects” like bike paths, transportation museums, and the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere.” Just over the past seven years, reckless spending on pork projects like these have caused the federal government to bail out the Highway Trust Fund three times to the tune of nearly $30 billion, according to the Heritage Foundation.

GOP leaders are claiming that fiscal conservatives should support the current bill because it does away with these projects. They’re even including expanded oil drilling as a sweetener to the deal, even though it has nothing to do with the Highway Trust Fund. But the bill is still a huge waste of money. It doesn’t cut any spending. It still requires higher-than-market wages that are a sop to labor unions. Worst of all, it perpetuates a system based on central planning from Washington.

CONTINUED:http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/2012/02/why-congress-should-reject-highway-bill/253041

OBAMA'S ATTACK ON THE CONSTITUTION

2012-02-10T13:21:00.000-05:00

Obama's attack on the Catholic church is just one more attack on our Constitution and our First Amendment rights! Our right to Freedom of Religion as the founders new--is an unalienable NATURAL LAW right, that comes from God.

It is time to contact your representatives and flood them with calls to take action against Mr. Obama.

His attemp to 'walk back' the issue this morning, is nothing more than a play of words!

CALL

Press Release from the Craven-Pamlico Christian Coalition

2012-02-09T14:55:00.001-05:00

PRESS RELEASE

February 9, 2012

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Jerry Schill, Co-Chair ; 252-514-0381

PRO-LIFE ACTIVIST TO SPEAK TO CHRISTIAN COALITION
Comments to be offered at Golden Corral on February 20, 2012

Mr. John McCastle will be the guest speaker at the February 20th meeting of the Craven-Pamlico Christian Coalition at the Golden Corral in New Bern.

He has been involved with the pro-life movement for over 20 years serving as a pregnancy center director in Kalamazoo, Michigan and St. Louis Missouri. He served as founder and director of the Alliance for Life-Missouri for over five years, a statewide affiliation of pregnancy centers. The group was an affiliation of pregnancy centers and pro-life organizations. He has been instrumental in assisting several communities establish pregnancy centers and implement ultrasound services, the most recent in Havelock, NC. Mr. McCastle’s commitment to pregnancy centers continues as he is a Heartbeat International consultant, training in the area of Board leadership. He volunteers with Life International, Ultrasounds For Life and is on the board of the his local pregnancy center. He and his wife Robin, live in North Carolina with their two sons, Matthew and Christopher.

Other agenda items to be discussed include:
* The Obama administration’s mandate to provide all contraception, including abortion-inducing drugs, in their health care plans;

* The North Carolina Marriage Protection Amendment that will be on the ballot in May 2012.

The meeting begins promptly at 7:00pm and is open to everyone. Those who wish to eat prior to the meeting are encouraged to arrive between 6:00 and 6:30pm to foster fellowship and informal discussion.

For more information, contact Jerry Schill, 252-514-0381.

-end-

The Craven-Pamlico Christian Coalition was established in 1994. Mission Statement: To inform and educate the public on issues of moral & political concern; To restore to all levels of government the Judeo-Christian values upon which this nation was founded; To encourage and activate pro-family voters.

The ‘People’s’ Convention?DNC in Charlotte to Feature Million-dollar tickets, luxury suites, concierge services for the 1 Percent

2012-02-09T14:46:00.000-05:00

BY: Andrew Stiles - February 9, 2012 5:00 am

The organizers of the upcoming Democratic National Convention are doing everything possible to get around the same financial restrictions they once promoted in a concerted effort to make sure that America’s wealthiest individuals, corporations, and lobbyists contribute their “fair share” to the convention.

Host committee spokeswoman Suzi Emmerling, formerly of the liberal think tank Center for American Progress, insisted that convention leaders were not attempting to sidestep the fundraising restrictions. Democratic National Convention Committee CEO Steve Kerrigan, she said, had simply been “educating Beltway types about the new rules.”

“All of this is brand new,” Emmerling tells the Washington Free Beacon. “A convention has never been funded this way before, so there are a lot of false assumptions about what we’re doing.”

Democrats are billing the upcoming Democratic National Committee’s annual convention as a “People’s Convention,” funded by “the people.” At President Obama’s request, the host committee in Charlotte—which must raise $36.6 million to pay for the convention—has promised to refuse donations from corporations, lobbyists or other special interest groups, including unions. Individual contributions are limited to $100,000.

But living up to these ambitious self-imposed rules is proving more difficult than party leaders expected. Local sources say the DNC is approaching wealthy Bank of America executives in an effort to unload some of its premier convention packages. A number of these executives have been shocked at the audacity of the proposition, given the administration’s attacks on not only the bank but also on wealthy Americans in general. President Obama and his Democratic colleagues have repeatedly charged that wealthy Americans are not “paying their fair share” to the federal government in the form of taxes.

Steve Kerrigan, the committee CEO, recently convened a meeting with lobbyists and other Beltway power brokers at the Jefferson Hotel in Washington D.C. Democratic sources told Bloomberg that Kerrigan, a former national political director for Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), touted an expensive array of convention “packages” that were aimed at attracting ultra-wealthy donors.

One of the options is the $1 million “Presidential” level, which includes a “premier uptown hotel room” and “concierge services,” as well as the $500,000 “Gold Rush” package.

CONTINUED:
http://freebeacon.com/concierge-convention-in-charlotte/

33 Members of Congress Directed Federal Projects within 2 Miles of Own Property

2012-02-09T14:38:00.000-05:00

Thursday, February 09, 2012

Sen. Harry Reid Another example (33 to be precise) of why earmarks are a bad idea has come by way of a Washington Post investigation.

After going through congressional records on spending, the newspaper found 33 representatives and senators had directed more than $300 million in earmarks and other spending provisions to public projects located next to or within about two miles of the lawmakers’ personal property.

Among the lucky legislators are:

· Senator Harry Reid (D-Nevada), who brought in $21.5 million to build a bridge over the Colorado River to link the gambling resort of Laughlin, Nevada, with Bullhead City, Arizona, where Reid owns 160 acres of undeveloped land.

· Representative G.K. Butterfield (D-North Carolina), who obtained $817,500 to revitalize buildings less than three-quarters of a mile from 19 properties he owns.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE HERE:
http://www.allgov.com/Top_Stories/ViewNews/33_Members_of_Congress_Directed_Federal_Projects_within_2_Miles_of_Own_Property_120209

Atheists Demand NC Town Remove Ten Commandments From Town Hall--

2012-02-09T14:01:00.000-05:00

Atheists now have their sights set on Newland, North Carolina, where the secular Freedom From Religion Foundation has sent a letter demanding that the town remove a Ten Commandments plaque from a government office building. In a letter sent to town manager Brenda Pittman, the group said that a local individual saw the display, was offended and would like it taken down.

The letter, written by FFRF staff attorney Patrick Elliot reads, in part, “I’m writing…to urge you to immediately remove the Ten Commandments plaque from Newland Town Hall…Anyone entering the building for necessary government business will be confronted by it.”

CONTINUED:http://www.theblaze.com/stories/atheists-demand-nc-town-remove-ten-commandments-from-town-hall/

SENATE to Take Action on Bill to Grant 10,500 Additional Work Visas

2012-02-09T13:56:00.000-05:00

SENATE to Take Action on Bill to Grant 10,500 Additional Work Visas--Call Your Senators and tell them the U.S. does not need more guest workers!

Sens. Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Scott Brown (R-MA) are trying to get legislation to the Senate floor this week that would add at least 10,500 annual guest worker visas for Irish nationals. This bill, an amended version of S.1983, would double the number of E-3 visa holders to the U.S. each year. The number of workers brought into the country could grow exponentially once an unlimited number of visas are handed out to the spouses and children (up to the age of 21) of these visa holders.

This legislation not only hurts Americans because it brings in more guest workers at a time of high unemployment, it represents terrible immigration policy because it carves out a special rule for one particular nationality. Moreover, to qualify for this visa, aliens would need to meet only nominal requirements. The legislation, as amended, only requires visa recipients to have two years of work experience in a particular field, OR to have obtained a high school diploma or its equivalent. Employers are not required to look for U.S. workers first before sponsoring an E-3 visa holder.

CALL your Senators TODAY and tell them: You oppose S.1983;

The U.S. should NOT add an additional 10,500 guest workers to compete with the already 13 million unemployed Americans seeking jobs; and

Congress should not be in the business of carving out special rules for members of a single nationality. Congress should draft immigration law so that it is uniform in application and is blind to the home country of an alien applicant.

Find your Senators' phone numbers here: http://capwiz.com/fair/dbq/officials/

PATRIOT POST: ALEXANDER'S ESSAY

2012-02-09T13:52:00.000-05:00

February 9, 2012

FBI Terrorist Alert: Beware of Those Who 'Reference the Constitution or Bible'--Memo to Ron Paul supporters -- and anyone else interested in restoring constitutional integrity

"Wherever the real power in a Government lies, there is the danger of oppression." --James Madison (1788)

The FBI held a press conference this week on a terrorist alert bulletin, which it sent to every federal, state and local law enforcement agency across the country. Unfortunately, that bulletin continued a trend of "terrorist profiles" issued since Barack Hussein Obama has been in office. This particular alert identified such broad ideological characteristics that it can be construed to include the activities of tens of millions of law-abiding Americans.

CONTINUED:
http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2012/02/09/fbi-terrorist-alert-beware-of-those-who-reference-the-constitution-or-bible/

Sun Journal Letter to the Editor: Rules for Radicals by CCTA Chairman, Nancy Murdoch

2012-02-09T09:58:00.001-05:00

February 8, 2012

One would expect local Democrats to defend President Obama in our local paper, but Saul Alinsky? For readers not familiar with Alinsky, he was a radical of the ’60s and ’70s known for his community organizing to achieve his far left agenda. His book, “Rules for Radicals” (originally called “Rules for Revolution”) was dedicated to the first radical, Lucifer. Alinsky based his strategies on those of Neo-Marxist, Antonio Gramsci, an Italian Communist. Gramsci believed that the revolutionary plan of Lenin and Stalin wouldn’t work in the West; instead he favored an assault on Biblical absolutes and Christian values that would allow the new face of Communism to flourish.

Many people have read Alinsky to discover how to effectively engage with those using “Rules” and to render them ineffective. After all, one of Sun-Tzu’s Rules of War is to know your enemy. The primary premise of “Rules” is the means justify the ends, and the lowest, vilest tactics may be used to weaken or destroy ones’ adversaries. Most Conservatives are too decent and principled to actually use these tactics, but feel it necessary to be aware of what kind of tactics the left will employ and be able to recognize them for what they are. Radicals prefer destroying to building; whether it is people or a system of government with which they disagree. Alinsky may not have been a Marxist or Communists, but he knew quite a few, had dealings with them, as well as other radical types like the Black Panthers. His beliefs were not important; only the tactics.

An apt description of Alinsky would be master manipulator. His goal was to figure out what people wanted to hear and then give it to them, disguising the true goal, achieving as much power as possible. He rejected the unkempt hippies of the ’60s, and favored a bath, haircut, and a nice suit in order to infiltrate the system from within.

Many of the academic elite, the main stream media, and a number of politicians were students of Alinsky. Hillary Clinton wrote her doctoral thesis on Alinsky, and President Obama taught the “Rules” principles in his community organizing days. Democrats can deny the relationship between the left and Alinsky, but the facts indicate otherwise. When a candidate speaks of “fundamentally transforming the United States of America”, prudent Americans would be wise to listen.

Nancy Murdoch, Havelock, NC

http://www.newbernsj.com/articles/alinsky-104194-local-familiar.html

AP News Break: Official: 10 states get ed waiver (No Child Left Behind)

2012-02-09T09:40:00.000-05:00

President Barack Obama on Thursday will free 10 states from the strict and sweeping requirements of the No Child Left Behind law, giving leeway to states that promise to improve how they prepare and evaluate students, The Associated Press has learned.

The first 10 states to receive the waivers are Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oklahoma and Tennessee. The only state that applied for the flexibility and did not get it, New Mexico, is working with the administration to get approval, a White House official told the AP.

The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the states had not yet been announced. A total of 28 other states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico have signaled that they, too, plan to seek waivers — a sign of just how vast the law's burdens have become as a big deadline nears.

No Child Left Behind requires all students to be proficient in reading and math by 2014. Obama's action strips away that fundamental requirement for those approved for flexibility, provided they offer a viable plan instead. Under the deal, the states must show they will prepare children for college and careers, set new targets for improving achievement among all students, reward the best performing schools and focus help on the ones doing the worst.

In September, Obama called President George W. Bush's most hyped domestic accomplishment an admirable but flawed effort that hurt students instead of helping them. He said action was necessary because Congress failed to update the law despite widespread bipartisan agreement that it needs fixing. Republicans have charged that by granting waivers, Obama was overreaching his authority.

The executive action by Obama is one of his most prominent in an ongoing campaign to act on his own where Congress is rebuffing him. No Child Left Behind was primarily designed to help the nation's poor and minority children and was passed a decade ago with widespread bipartisan support. It has been up for renewal since 2007. But lawmakers have been stymied for years by competing priorities, disagreements over how much of a federal role there should be in schools and, in the recent Congress, partisan gridlock.

For all the cheers that states may have about the changes, the move also reflects the sobering reality that the United States is not close to the law's original goal: getting children to grade level in reading and math.

CONTINUED:
http://news.yahoo.com/apnewsbreak-official-10-states-ed-waiver-110202341.html

STOCK ACT

2012-02-09T09:36:00.000-05:00

CANTOR’S TAKE: The version of the Stock Act the House will debate today is significantly different from the government ethics package the Senate passed last week. The biggest difference is that the bill Cantor unveiled late last night has no provisions requiring the people in the “political intelligence consulting” industry to register like lobbyists. Senators added such language to their version last week, and since then the grumbling from K Street and financial services companies — which use such intelligence reports to shape their trading decisions — has grown intense, in part because the provision was written to define intelligence-gathering in a pretty vague and expansive way.

Unlike the Senate bill, Cantor’s measure would deny government pensions to lawmakers convicted of a felony. It would expand restrictions on how executive branch officials handle negotiations with prospective private-sector employers and make it a crime for those officials to retaliate against companies that don't hire them. It is more specific than the Senate’s about the new disclosures it would require of executive branch officials — and makes clear that it would apply to about 30,000 administration officials. And it essentially would prevent lawmakers from participating in initial public offerings — language clearly written to poke at Pelosi, whose husband bought stock in the 2008 Visa IPO while she was Speaker and the House was considering a bill to lower credit card fees. Both bills, however, are the same at the core: They would make clear that lawmakers and aides are subject to prosecution (or ethics committee punishment) if they trade securities based on information about legislative strategies or pending decisions that aren’t available to the public.

The bill is likely to sail through the House tomorrow — because members are eager to do something that sounds like they get the message about why the public holds Congress in such low regard — although Democrats will complain loudly that they were not consulted by Cantor even though the legislation's central piece really was their idea first.

Legislative Update: February 3, 2012

2012-02-08T15:56:00.000-05:00

Provided by Tea Party Patriots!

PASSION TO ACTION!!

The House voted last week to repeal the CLASS Act – a piece of Obamacare and another unsustainable entitlement – and now it’s the Senate’s turn. Starting Monday, February 6, we started asking all patriots to call the Senate and tell them to bring the CLASS Act Repeal to a vote, and to vote YES! (**See the Passion to Action Add-On at the end of the update!)

Federal Budget

 Surplus? No way: Did you know that in January 2007, the CBO published its ten-year budget projections covering 2008 to 2017. This report projected an $800 billion surplus over ten years, including surpluses every year from 2012 to 2017. Four years later, in January 2011, the $800 billion projected surplus from 2008 to 2017 turned into an $8.8 trillion deficit over this same period.

 No budget yet: Wednesday, February 8th will mark the 1015th day since the Senate has passed a budget. Just this week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said, “We do not need to bring a budget to the floor this year — it’s done, we don’t need to do it.” The Democrats are trying to say that they passed a budget when the debt ceiling deal was passed – but this is false. Did the debt ceiling deal allow them to continue discretionary spending? Yes. Was it an actual budget resolution? No. Let’s break it down:

“But if what Reid and Schumer are saying is that they’ve followed the law and submitted a budget resolution, then they’re flat-out wrong. The Congressional Budget Act requires the president to submit a budget to Congress by Feb. 1 every year. The Senate Budget Committee is to report a budget resolution to the full Senate by April 1. The House and Senate are to reach agreement on a concurrent budget resolution by April 15. Senate Budget Democrats haven’t submitted a budget since 2009. Here’s why it matters: The Appropriations Committee determines levels of discretionary spending. Approps don’t touch mandatory spending. But mandatory spending constitutes about 60 percent of all federal spending — and mandatory programs like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security drive our deficits and debt. Without the imposition of budget discipline, these programs grow on autopilot.”

 No budget? No paycheck: Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) has introduced a bill called the Budget or Bust Act (HR 3883). This bill would force the House and the Senate to pass a budget or risk not receiving their paychecks! It would also remove the President from the budgetary process and return the power of the purse to Congress completely.

 President’s failure: Remember this as well about the President’s failure to offer a budget:

o In just one term, President Obama has missed the budget deadline more than any other President.

o In the 90 years covering FY1923 through FY2013, President Obama is the only President to miss the deadline two years in a row. He is the only President who has missed the deadline in three of the four years of a term. And, he holds the record for the longest delay (at 98 days).

o Since the statutory deadline was extended to the first Monday in February, with the exception of the first budget for a new President, this deadline has only been missed three times: Clinton FY1998; Obama FY2012; and Obama FY 2013.

o The President’s flagrant disrespect for budget deadlines extends beyond the late submissions of his annual budget request. The President is required to submit a Midsession Review no later than July 16 each year. The President is required to submit a Financial Report of the U.S. Government no later than December 15. The President is required to submit a plan to shore up Medicare’s finances within 15 days of a funding warning by the Medicare Trustees. Not once has President Obama adhered to any of these deadlines. Read the full analysis here.

 Budget process reform: Two of the budget process reform bills were passed in the House this week. They are:

o HR 3582, The Pro-Growth Budgeting Act of 2012 – This bill would require that for major legislation that CBO prepare an analysis of the effect that the legislation would have on the U.S. economy. This macroeconomic impact analysis would be supplemental information in addition to the official congressional cost estimate of the legislation.

o HR 3578, The Baseline Reform Act of 2012 – Under current law the baseline assumes ever higher spending as discretionary accounts are annually increased by inflation and for a number of other factors. This legislation levels the playing field and removes this pro-spending bias.

o The third budget process reform bill did not come up for a vote this week. No word yet on when it will. It is:

 HR3581, The Budget and Accounting Transparency Act of 2012 – This bill increases transparency in federal budgeting by reforming the way certain costs are calculated and requiring that certain costs incurred by the Federal government are included in the budget.

 Deficit: The CBO released its annual Budget and Economic Outlook this week, projecting that the federal government’s budget deficit will exceed $1 trillion for the fourth year in a row. With the debt on pace to grow to unsustainable levels in the years ahead, the CBO estimates that economic growth will remain slow and that the unployment rate will exceed 9 percent next year. Key facts from their report:

o Real economic growth is projected to be to 2.2 percent in 2012, falling to just 1.0 percent in 2013;

o The unemployment rate is expected to reach 8.8 percent in 2012, 9.1 percent in 2013, and 8.7 percent in 2014;

o The FY2012 budget deficit is projected to equal $1.079 trillion, the fourth consecutive year with the budget deficit above $1 trillion;

o Total debt is projected to reach $15.99 trillion in 2012, with debt held by the public to eclipse the $11 trillion mark in 2012 (72.5% of GDP);

o Debt held by the public is projected to exceed $15.3 trillion by 2022.

Obamacare

 Obamacare snuffs out small business job creation

 Catholic bishops vow to fight against 1st Amendment violations

 Repeal of the CLASS Act was essential

 CBO report shows Obamacare costs rocket out of sight

 Crony capitalism & Obamacare lead to job losses

 Down with the state exchanges!

 Doctors do not support Obamacare

 Ramping up for rationing

Education

 Union Radicals Harass Teacher Who Dared to Support Governor Walker. A teacher with the courage to speak out: Teachers like LaCroix do not turn against their unions for the fun of it. They do so after years of watching a very political, power-hungry organization suck the life out of public schools and kill opportunities for students. LaCroix is one of those teachers who just want to teach, without the constant distraction of organized labor.

Illegal Immigration

 Documentary: TPP North Carolina State Coordinator Mark Hager assisted with the documentary titled, “Invasion: Freedom Under Fire!” about the struggles of American citizens who live along the southern border. If you would like to order a copy, please click here for more information.

 Waivermania: Kansas’ Agriculture Secretary is asking the Department of Homeland Security for a waiver so that agricultural businesses in Kansas could hire illegal immigrants. The agriculture businesses and others in the business community are supporting this effort. So far the Obama administration have handed out healthcare waivers and educational waivers. Are illegal immigrant waivers next? When waivers become the law of the land, there is no law.

 Alabama too: The Attorney General in Alabama is trying to get the legislature to gut their new, stricter laws dealing with illegal aliens because he doesn’t want to have to go to court to fight for it. The Chamber of Commerce and the agricultural businesses are also supportive of the attempt to gut the laws.

Agenda 21

 Redevelopment Reform: Read: "Redevelopment: The Unknown Government" to understand why this is so detrimental to your property rights and fiscal responsibility.

 Petition to Speaker Boehner: Tom DeWeese and the American Policy Center created a petition to alert Boehner to the recently passed resolution of the RNC, acknowledging Agenda 21 and vowing to oppose it. Sign here.

 RNC Resolution: Many counties across America are jumping all over the RNC resolution. The state of TN and GA have also created resolutions. Start talking to your county commission and Republican party leaders and get your county/state on the list.

 Rio 20 years later: It is obvious where this report is leading. More pressure on the US to send more money to the UN.

 Must-see video: This is a 30-minute TV interview with Heather Gass from CA. It speaks to what is going on in CA regarding Sustainable Development and Regionalization. This is happening everywhere; it is just further ahead in CA. But these issues are the issues we will deal with in the future if we don't stop the plans now.

 Smart meters: American Academy of Environmental Health is calling for a complete and immediate moratorium on the deployment of Smart Meters in California. Smart meters emit continuous radiation and could have serious effects on health. Objectors who are concerned about health and side effects may actually have to pay not to have a smart meter. This is absurd.

 More university indoctrination: The "STARS" program is a propaganda program to persuade college kids into believe in the left’s ideas of “sustainability,” social justice, and social engineering.

House of Representatives – what are your thoughts on these bills?
Summaries provided by the RSC

 CLASS Repeal: On Wednesday, the House approved H.R. 1173, the Fiscal Responsibility and Retirement Security Act by a vote of 267-159. The bill repeals title VIII of Obamacare, which established the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) Program—a national, voluntary long-term care insurance program for purchasing community living assistance services and supports. Title VIII also authorized and appropriated funding through 2015 for the National Clearinghouse for Long-Term Care Information first established in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. H.R. 1173 replaces those appropriated funds for the clearinghouse for 2013 through 2015 ($9 million) with funding subject to future appropriation actions. CBO estimates that enacting the bill will have a budgetary effect of reducing direct spending by $9 million and subsequently increasing spending subject to appropriation by $9 million over the 2012-2021 period.

 Welfare Integrity and Federal Pay: Also on Wednesday, the House considered three bills under Suspension of the Rules. The first, H.R. 3567, called the Welfare Integrity Now for Children and Families Act, prohibits TANF funds from being accessed at ATMs in strip clubs, liquor stores, and casinos. In California alone, almost $5 million of TANF benefits were withdrawn from casinos during the three and a half years from January 2007 to the middle of 2010. This provision is enforced by requiring states to report back to the Secretary that they are implementing the provisions of the legislation, or lose 5 percent of TANF funds. The House approved this bill 395-27. The second, H.R. 3835, extends the pay freeze for Members of Congress and federal employees through the end of 2013. This bill passed 309-117. The third, H.Res 496, cuts funding to Congressional committees by 6.4% for this year, except for Appropriations, Armed Services, and Ethics. This bill passed by voice vote.

 Pro-Growth Budgeting: Thursday, the House passed H.R. 3582, the Pro-Growth Budgeting Act by a vote of 242-179. The bill requires the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to prepare a supplemental estimate of the macroeconomic impact of any major bills reported by a House or Senate committee—what conservatives usually refer to as dynamic scoring. Under H.R. 3582, a “major bill” would be defined as legislation with any one-year estimated budgetary effect of more than one-fourth of one percent (0.25%) of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in that year. Once it is established that legislation is “major,” CBO would be required to dynamically score the legislation relative to a current policy baseline, which assumes that current tax policies are continued into the indefinite future, much like CBO's alternative fiscal scenario baseline. According to a Budget Committee report, CBO already has the necessary analytical tools and expertise to conduct dynamic scoring. CBO has occasionally provided such reports for certain legislation or policies, though currently this analysis is done on an ad hoc basis, or by request only. Implementing H.R. 3582 would cost about $2 million over the 2012-2017 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, according to CBO estimates.

 Baseline Reform: Friday, the House approved H.R. 3578, the Baseline Reform Act by a vote of 235-177. The bill removes the automatic annual inflation adjustment from CBO’s discretionary baseline spending projections, thereby removing the automatic assumption that discretionary spending will increase each year. The bill requires CBO to project future discretionary spending “at the level provided for the budget year in full-year appropriations acts,” requiring CBO to use “zero baseline” budgeting for discretionary spending projections. According to a Budget Committee report, current law requires CBO and OMB to assume that discretionary federal spending will continue over the course of the ten-year budget window and increase at the rate of inflation. These requirements added approximately $1.4 trillion in outlays (over ten years) to the discretionary baseline in 2011. This assumption of additional spending in the baseline is a bias toward higher spending. Baseline budgeting also creates the ridiculous Washington scenario where a decrease in a spending increase—one that still allows spending to increase—is called a spending cut. This bill would remove that bias.

The week ahead – what are your thoughts on these bills?

 Line-Item Veto: Next week the House is expected to consider H.R. 3521, the Expedited Line-Item Veto and Rescissions Act. According to the Budget Committee, the bill would give the President an important tool to target unjustified spending, while also protecting Congress’ constitutional authority to make spending decisions. This authority would allow the President to specify spending provisions within an appropriations bill, while requiring stand-alone consideration of these rescission proposals by Congress. Legislation implementing the proposed spending cancellations would receive expedited floor consideration and an automatic up-or-down vote in both chambers of Congress. If this bill is enacted, every dollar of savings would be devoted to deficit reduction.

 Budget Transparency — Also next week the House is expected to consider H.R. 3581, the Budget and Accounting Transparency Act. Among other things, the billwould formally bring Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac on-budget and require their debt issuance to be accounted for in the calculation of the federal debt; and would require fair value accounting for federal credit programs to appropriately evaluate the level of risk being absorbed by the taxpayers. The bill would also require fair value accounting for federal credit programs. The executive branch and Congress would be required to use “fair value” accounting in calculating the costs of federal credit programs that consider not only the borrowing costs of the Federal government, but also the costs of the market risk the Federal government is incurring by issuing a loan or loan guarantee. This reform would bring federal budgeting in line with private sector cost-estimating practices.

 Civilian Property Realignment Act — Next week the House will likely consider H.R. 1734, the Civilian Property Realignment Act. H.R. 1734 is modeled after the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process and would require an examination of federal real property across government, used and un-used, and make decisions based on the best return to the taxpayer. This cost-saving initiative would achieve a reduction in the size of the federal real property inventory through selling or redeveloping underutilized properties, increasing the utilization rates of existing properties, and expediting the disposal of surplus properties. For example, in fiscal year 2009, the federal government spent $1.7 billion in annual operating costs for under-utilized buildings and $134 million, annually, for excess buildings. According to CBO, the bill would save $600 million over five years.

 STOCK Act—(THURSDAY, Feb. 9) Also next week the House will likely consider a version of S. 2038, the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act of 2012. As drafted in the Senate, the bill would amend the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 and the Ethics in Government Act to require the Senate and the House of Representatives to implement an electronic filing system for financial disclosure forms, as well as provide the public with on-line access to that information in a searchable database. The bill also would make clear that Members of Congress, Congressional employees, and federal employees are prohibited from using nonpublic information for personal financial benefit. In addition, the legislation would require more timely reporting of information about financial transactions by Members and staff. The Senate approved S. 2038 yesterday by a vote of 96-3.

**Remember though – this bill may not go far enough**

Senate

 STOCK Act: The Senate passed the STOCK Act by a vote of 96-3 on Thursday. If so many of them voted for this bill now, why did it take them so long to figure out that they shouldn’t be trading stock based on information gleaned from their positions? Check out this link that goes over which amendments were accepted and which were rejected. Some of the rejected ones show us how much of a commitment to honesty these members really have (or don’t have).

 Possible: Additional legislative items which are possible this work period include: FAA Conference report; Postal reform; Highway bill (current extension expires 3/31/12); and the Payroll Conference report (if completed before the recess).

 So-called recess appointments: 40 Senate Republicans have said they will sign on to a court challenge to Obama’s so-called “recess” appointments to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the National Labor Relations Board.

PASSION TO ACTION ADD-ON!

**When you call the Senate offices, urging them to repeal the CLASS Act, take one extra moment to ask them to join in the court challenge against President Obama’s unconstitutional appointments. You’ve already got them on the line, this will only cost you thirty seconds more, but you’ll make a big impact.**

TPN—David DeGerolamo: Stand Up for Your Convictions - No Matter How You Are Labeled

2012-02-08T15:26:00.000-05:00

If ever the Time should come, when vain & aspiring Men shall possess the highest Seats in Government, our Country will stand in Need of its experienced Patriots to prevent its Ruin. ~Samuel Adams.

The above premise accurately describes the government in Washington, DC. Power and greed have replaced honor and duty. Do we have experienced Patriots to prevent our ruin? Who would you classify as a statesman on the level of Patrick Henry or Thomas Paine? Who would you follow into harm's way in your own town or community to secure your children's freedom?

Like the thief in the night, our politicians have eroded our freedom by enslaving us in debt that can never be repaid. Half of "We the People" receive a government check for assistance and the "public sector" has become the engine for tyranny through excessive taxation, fear and regulation. The solution will not be found in the next election: the solution is an awakening in the people.

The final change in government has already happened. The 2008 election of Obama in conjunction with a Democrat controlled Congress through 2010 overthrew the last vestiges of our founding principles. The 2010 elections which resulted in a Republican majority in the House did little more than slow the march to Socialism:

1.We still have no budget
2.We still have national health care
3.Unemployment is still over 9% (another example of the government's lack of respect for the people by manipulating information)
4.Our debt ceiling raises were ceded to the executive branch by John Boehner in August
5.The NDAA destroyed the fabric of the Bill of Rights with the "blessings" of both parties
6.The president used the State of the Union to outline his vision for dictatorial powers in order to "streamline" government

CONTINUED:http://www.teapartynation.com/profiles/blog/show?id=3355873%3ABlogPost%3A1836098&xgs=1&xg_source=msg_share_post

REPORT: Craven County Commissioners Meeting, February 6, 2012

2012-02-08T15:19:00.000-05:00

Dear CCTA Members and Friends,

The last meeting of the Craven County Board of Commissioners was held on 6 Feb 12 at the River Bend Town Hall. I believe it was attended by the most people I have ever seen at a CC BOC meeting except the one at Havelock where the football team was introduced. Team members and family and fans made a big crowd. Anyway, I am proud to say that many CCTA members were at the River Bend meeting to protect the principles we believe in.

The meeting got off to a strange start in that the traditional invocation was missing. It was a while before we found out why. The reason is that the ACLU had just won a big victory over Forsyth County and the taxpayers of that county ended up picking up the tab for the ACLU's legal fees of $200,000. The County Attorney, Jimmy Hicks, said he had already been informed by the ACLU of possible lawsuits against two other counties he represents (not Craven). Our Board of Commissioners do not want to risk being involved in such a lawsuit, thus the lack of an invocation.

I feel angry at the ACLU and disappointed in our Board of Commissioners that they have sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution and yet allow a bunch of lawyers to facilitate this infringement on our 1st amendment rights by prohibiting the free exercise of our religion. I realize that among those lawyers are Supreme Court judges. I believe that the Congress should impeach any federal official who flouts the Constitution. Apparently, Forsyth County Commissioners have decided to continue to have prayers that are to God only (not to Jesus). I don't like that either, but, in my mind, it is a better solution than completely eliminating the invocation. At the very least there could be a moment of silent prayer.

A Mr. Michael McMillan gave a good account of activities of the Religious Community Services organization that he heads. They do a great deal of very worth while work, there is no disputing that. At the end of his presentation, Commissioner Dacey reminded him that he and his organization had been forewarned that the county may not be able to continue it's financial support in light of the belt tightening needed for fiscal prudence in these tough time. Commissioner Dacey asked what measures they were taking to obtain private financing to replace the taxpayer funding. The answer he got was that they raise money privately and had done some belt tightening themselves, but had not given up on taxpayer support. I believe I speak for most CCTA members when I say that the government should get out of charity work. It is not right to take what one citizen has earned and give it to another. When will we ever have enough elected representatives with the courage to live by that to affect a change?

The Commissioners also adopted a Child Abuse Prevention Month Proclamation. It was obviously written by a strong advocate of spending as much taxpayer money as possible on this program. You would think from reading it that child abuse can not possibly be prevented except by a large financial commitment from the community as a whole. For instance "child maltreatment occurs when parents find themselves in stressful situations without community resources and unable to cope." I dare say that kids get slapped around without the offender even thinking about seeking community resources. And the proclamation itself asks several community groups and organization to increase their participation in our (the Board of Commissioner's) efforts to prevent child maltreatment. I think the word "our" should have been struck and hoped a commissioner would suggest that, but none did.

The Tax Administrator, Mr. Ronnie Antry asked the Board to credit back almost $12,000 of taxpayer money. One item was $3,259 to one taxpayer for personal property taxes on a boat. Mr. Antry said they had assessed the boat too high. Commissioner Dacey asked if they thought it was the Queen Mary. The tax man sure wants to hit us hard. He seems determined that if he errs it will be on the side of too high.

A public hearing has been set for the James City Community Development Block Grant program again. This time at the next meeting which is at 8:30 AM on Monday, 20 February 12. I thought most public hearings were set for the evening meetings when more people can attend. Anyway, some good changes have been made in this program. Taxpayers will no longer pick up the tab and just hand someone the keys to a new house. Instead, taxpayer money will buy lots in the James City area, and a group of citizens such as Habitat for Humanity will build a house on it. The anticipated owner will have to either help build the house or have volunteers who do. Then there will be an affordable mortgage on the house. Most taxpayer money will be expended on the infrastructure such as drainage, public water and sewer, streets, lighting, etc. All appropriate functions of government. Personally, I wish the federal government would just get out of that business and leave local communities alone, but this is a step toward eliminating the total rip off of the taxpayer by this program.

The Department of Social Services found another $252,708 of State taxpayer money lying around, and the Board voted to spend it in Craven County as it has been offered up to us. Aren't we lucky? And, oh yeah, Health Family Planning got another $25,000 to spend on Contraception to include birth control pills, depo-provera (a birth control shot). I wonder how many kids get this stuff so they can have sex without fear of pregnancy. I'm glad I was born 50 years before kids had the freedom to screw their lives up like this. Aren't we taxpayer lucky to be able to pay for this?

Last, but not least, was the appropriate calling of the Sheriff on the carpet (in absence) for the terrible safety record of his department, poor accident investigation, and his refusal to do anything about it. It seems Commissioner Taylor is leading the charge on this with some help from Commissioner Dacey and others. There seems to have been seven wrecks involving deputies lately causing one death and the destruction of at least two vehicles belonging to the taxpayer and the Sheriff says "well, they drive a lot of miles and stuff happens." Well, that is not good enough. I was there when the Sheriff did appear before the Board and gave a toe tap around instead of really presenting a driver training program. Now he is just defying the Board. I hope he sees the light when the Board reviews his budget in the coming months. It also came to light that the Sheriff's department is short about $10,000 of funds in an account set up so that prisoners could make purchases at the prison canteen. Prisoners put money into the account and spend it somehow at the canteen. The account is now empty and, as I said, should have about $10,000 in it. Someone obviously absconded with the funds. It is being investigated.

I'm sure I missed a few transgressions, but I guess that will do for now.

Hal James
Watchdog and Issues Chairman
CCTA

Hal James: 2nd Amemdment Threatened

2012-02-08T15:09:00.000-05:00

Dear CCTA Members and Friends,

When will people stop infringing on our 2nd amendment right to bear arms? I'm sure most of you have received Lou Call's email informing us that the River Bend Town Council is about to vote to amend the Town Code to do just that!

The meeting is to take place on Thursday, February 16th at 7:00 PM. Let's have a large turnout to "stand up for our rights before a small liberal progressive group tramples on our 2nd amendment rights" as Lou so aptly put it.

Hal James
Watchdog and Issues Committee Chair
CCTA

CCTA monitors and reports on key issues to you, the taxpayer. Informative programs begin each monthly meeting. We sponsor Tea Parties, educational seminars, and candidate forums. CCTA espouses lower taxes, smaller government, adherence to the Constitution, a strong free enterprise system, and personal freedoms with personal responsibility.

Religious Clergy & Employees Involved in ‘Worship’ & ‘Proselytizing’ Cut Out of Fed Student Loan Forgiveness

2012-02-08T11:50:00.000-05:00

As education costs continue to rise, many Americans find themselves in a great deal of student-loan debt upon receiving their degrees.

It is this dynamic that led to specific provisions in the College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007, a bill intended to help students grapple with the high costs of modern-day education. But as the government continues to clarify the details of its federal loan forgiveness program for public service workers, it seems there’s one cohort that the government won’t be helping — those engaged in “religious instruction, worship services, or any form of proselytizing.”

Still think there is no war on faith?
~Lynn

CONTINUED:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/religious-clergy-employees-involved-in-worship-proselytizing-cut-out-of-fed-loan-forgiveness/

Right Angles: "Right Angles JLF Triangle Blog My new congressman gets Washington Post attention"

2012-02-08T11:30:00.001-05:00

Februay 7, 2012, by Jon Ham

G.K. Butterfield, who will be my new congressman if the redistricting maps of the GOP legislature pass legal muster, got some attention this morning from The Washington Post:

Butterfield has helped obtain $817,500 over the past few years toward revitalizing buildings in Wilson, N.C. The lawmaker owns 19 properties within three-quarters of a mile of the project. The congressman’s spokeswoman said his properties are outside of the revitalization area. “The location of the Downtown Wilson buildings in no way influenced his decision to support the projects,” she said. “The City of Wilson developed these projects without his consultation or input, and there is no potential for Butterfield to personally benefit.”

YEAH, Right!

CONTINUED:
http://triangle.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=13661

Wall Street Journal: A Fairness Quiz for the President

2012-02-08T10:46:00.001-05:00

Is it fair that some of Mr. Obama's largest campaign contributors received federal loan guarantees?.

By STEPHEN MOORE

President Obama has frequently justified his policies—and judged their outcomes—in terms of equity, justice and fairness. That raises an obvious question: How does our existing system—and his own policy record—stack up according to those criteria?

Is it fair that the richest 1% of Americans pay nearly 40% of all federal income taxes, and the richest 10% pay two-thirds of the tax?

Is it fair that the richest 10% of Americans shoulder a higher share of their country's income-tax burden than do the richest 10% in every other industrialized nation, including socialist Sweden?

Is it fair that American corporations pay the highest statutory corporate tax rate of all other industrialized nations but Japan, which cuts its rate on April 1?

Is it fair that President Obama sends his two daughters to elite private schools that are safer, better-run, and produce higher test scores than public schools in Washington, D.C.—but millions of other families across America are denied that free choice and forced to send their kids to rotten schools?

Is it fair that Americans who build a family business, hire workers, reinvest and save their money—paying a lifetime of federal, state and local taxes often climbing into the millions of dollars—must then pay an additional estate tax of 35% (and as much as 55% when the law changes next year) when they die, rather than passing that money onto their loved ones?

Is it fair that Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, former Democratic Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, former Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel and other leading Democrats who preach tax fairness underpaid their own taxes?

Is it fair that after the first three years of Obamanomics, the poor are poorer, the poverty rate is rising, the middle class is losing income, and some 5.5 million fewer Americans have jobs today than in 2007?

Is it fair that roughly 88% of political contributions from supposedly impartial network television reporters, producers and other employees in 2008 went to Democrats?

Is it fair that the three counties with America's highest median family income just happen to be located in the Washington, D.C., metro area?

CONTINUED:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204369404577206980068367936.html?mod=googlenews_wsj#printMode

South Carolina AG Sues Eric Holder Over Blocking State Voter ID Law

2012-02-08T10:34:00.000-05:00

COLUMBIA, S.C. (The Blaze/AP) — The U.S. Justice Department was wrong to block South Carolina from requiring voters to show government-issued photo identification to vote, the state’s top prosecutor argued in a lawsuit filed Tuesday.

Enforcement of the new law “will not disenfranchise any potential South Carolina voter,” Attorney General Alan Wilson argues in the suit against U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder. “The changes have neither the purpose nor will they have the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race, color, or membership in a language minority.”

The Justice Department in December rejected South Carolina’s law requiring voters to show photo identification at the polls, saying tens of thousands of the state‘s minorities might not be able to cast ballots under the new law because they don’t have the right photo ID. It was the first such law to be refused by the federal agency in nearly 20 years.

CONTINUED:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/south-carolina-ag-sues-eric-holder-over-blocking-state-voter-id-law/

Nationwide NDAA 2012 Congressional Protest

2012-02-07T19:50:00.000-05:00

Congressional Offices Throughout the CountryTHIS IS A MONTHLY PROTEST THAT STARTED ON FEB. 3RD AND WILL CONTINUE ON THE FIRST FRIDAY AND SATURDAY OF EACH MONTH UNTIL NDAA 2012 IS REPEALED.

Americans will gather at congressional offices and other public places the first Friday and Saturday of each month to protest NDAA 2012 (H.R. 1540). The organizers of each protest should decide which location is best for their area. Look at the links below to find out how your congressmen voted (under house and senate) and their local office locations.

This is a new page to help organize protests across the country: http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.280660888662374.65795.248343955227401&type=3

House
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2011-932

Senate
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2011-230

Office Locations for Congressmen
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?OrderBy=state&Sort=ASC
http://www.house.gov/representatives/

More info on NC Renegade
http://ncrenegade.com/

AFA ACTION ALERT--NC Marriage Amendment

2012-02-07T19:42:00.000-05:00

Information on North Carolina's Marriage Protection Amendment

February 7, 2012

As you likely know, the North Carolina Legislature voted to put a Marriage Protection Amendment before voters on the May 8, 2012 primary ballot.

The NC marriage protection amendment will protect against redefining marriage by placing our current definition of marriage - the union of one man and one woman - directly into the state constitution. That's the only way to make sure that liberal state judges or a future legislature are not able to redefine marriage. It makes sure that voters will always be in charge of the definition of marriage in North Carolina because marriage could only be changed by voters themselves.

Thirty states have adopted marriage amendments preserving marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Every state to consider a marriage amendment has adopted it. North Carolina is the only southern state not to have yet voted on a marriage amendment. This is our one and only chance to preserve marriage from being redefined by activist judges and aggressive special interest groups.

Our friends at VoteForMarriageNC.com have put together these resources that can be distributed to friends, family and church members:

Fact sheet: http://www.voteformarriagenc.com/docs/nc_mpafactsheet.pdf

Frequently Asked Questions: http://www.voteformarriagenc.com/docs/nc_faq.pdf

Please forward this message to everyone on your email list and encourage them to...

Vote "YES" on the Marriage Protection Amendment

Sincerely,

Tim Wildmon, President
American Family Association

BEAUFORT PATRIOT TEA PARTY MEETING FEBRUARY 16 at 7:00 PM

2012-02-07T19:27:00.000-05:00

Mount Olive College--Washington, NC

Our guest speaker will be Judge Rusty Duke who is a true Conservative and Scholar on the US and State Constitution. You will not want to miss his moving message.

Judge Duke is a true Conservative with Christian Values. He is a most inspiring speaker whose words come from the heart.

We have exciting announcements for our group that you will not want to miss.

Please bring a friend to this important meeting.

SUN JOURNAL NEW BERN: Prayers hushed at county government meetings

2012-02-07T19:16:00.000-05:00

February 7, 2012
The Cowardly Commissioners!
RIVER BEND – Craven County Board of Commissioners didn’t start their Monday meeting here with a prayer.

It may not have been the first time for the board but it was unusual. It is expected to now be the norm on the advice of the county’s lawyer, Jim Hicks.

In January, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal of an American Civil Liberties Union suit against Forsyth County Board of Commissioners. That let stand a 2011 ruling by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that a government group’s prayer policy allowing mostly Christian prayers violates the U.S. Constitution.

Hicks, who represents Craven, Pamlico, and Jones counties and six area municipalities, said the ACLU has already contacted him regarding policies of two of his clients, including Jones County.

Hicks said, “Most elected officials are very, very frustrated” with the lower court decision but “it is not new law.” The Supreme Court has allowed prayer using only the name of God as the deity, not Jesus, which would be only for the Christian religion.

CONTINUED:http://www.newbernsj.com/news/hushed-104169-meetings-prayers.html

CCTA MONTHLY MEETING--DATE CHANGED

2012-02-07T16:11:00.002-05:00

Hi all,

We originally thought we were going to have our February meeting on February 28--as opposed to the usuals 3rd Tuesday of the month.

As luck would have it -- we are changing it back to the usual 3rd Tuesday of the month which is February 21st!

CCTA WILL MEET TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 21st at 7:00 pm at the Healing Grace Church.

Special film, "Sick and Sicker"--will give us a preview as to what is ahead with Obamacare.

Lynn

Frank Palombo for Congress: Announces Town Hall, February 8, in Jacksonville, NC

2012-02-07T15:15:00.001-05:00

FYI,

Please join me Wednesday, February 8th in Jacksonville for a Town Hall Meeting. I would like to hear about your concerns and priorities so that I can best serve as your next Representative in Congress.

The event will be held at the Jacksonville Commons Recreation Center from 6:30pm until 8pm. The event is open to the public. Come on out and bring a friend.

Visit the Event Page of my website for more details.

Yours truly,
Frank Palombo

Candidate for Congress
3rd Congressional District, NC

http://palomboforcongress.com/events/upcoming_events/

RIVER BEND TOWN COUNCIL--WANTS TO SQUASH 2nd AMENDMENT

2012-02-07T14:48:00.001-05:00

On Thursday, February 16th @ 7pm there will be another attempt on the part of a local municipality to challenge our 2nd amendment rights.

The River Bend Town Council will attempt to amend Town Code, Title XIII General Offenses, Chapter 13.01 Section 13.01.008 Weapons on Town Property

The proposal is drafted in such a way that it is very broad and non-specific and essentially nullify the benefits received from the recent Castle Doctrine/Parks Carry law changes. Your presence in the audience will show a strong showing in support of the Castle Doctrine. I would also encourage you to sign up to speak and express your views and forward this on to anyone who shares our views..

It's time we stand up for our rights before a small liberal progressive group tramples our 2nd amendment rights. See you on the 16th.

The attached ordinance for the Town of River Bend, NC (Craven County), has had

the first reading and is scheduled for public hearing and VOTE ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 2012, AT 7 P.M. in River Bend Town Hall. As you can see the proposal is drafted in such a way that it is very broad and non-specific and
essentially nullify the benefits received from the recent Castle Doctrine/Parks
Carry law changes. I would very much appreciate anything you can do to publicize
this.

Thank you for your excellent efforts to educate and inform North Carolina citizens regarding our right to keep and bear arms.

ENC TEA PARTY--VENUE CHANGE

2012-02-07T14:18:00.000-05:00

NOTE: Because of the great response, we are moving this event to Queen St Deli and Bakery at 115 S Queen St in Kinston (1/2 block from the Courthouse).

You have heard of Agenda 21, Do you know what it entails?

Join Eastern NC Tea Party as we Host Louis Stannard and Donna Yowell, Experts on Agenda 21 from Feet to the Fire

February 20, 2012 at 6:30 pm, Queen Street Deli and Bakery, 115 S. Queen St, Kinston NC. Dessert and Beverages will be available for purchase.

RSVP: Linda Harper, M. Ed, President, Citizens for Constitutional Liberties (Wayne County Tea Party), 919-751-1090.
citizensforconstitutionalliberties.org
so-sewdesigns.org

SUN JOURNAL LETTER TO THE EDITOR: A Passing Thought, by CCTA Member Carlton Melvin

2012-02-07T13:17:00.000-05:00

February 06, 2012 8:57 PM

President after president (both parties), term after term have failed historically to arrest illegal immigration along our southern borders. Indifference has always prevailed.

The only real solution is for those aliens to prefer to remain in or return to their own country, to be free to prosper, in lieu of coming to America. A free market society is the key.

Mexico is a land of crony-corrupt corporate fascist capitalism, forcing most Mexicans to live in 12th century poverty. Consider that the richest man in the world is Mexican Carlos “Slim” Helú with his $74 billion gained primarily with state-protected monopolies. A true free market economy would enable Mexicans to eventually become prosperous in their own right and in their native country.

The next president could create a real legacy by undertaking two major initiatives for a start: (1) Institute a “Radio Free Mexico”, such as Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty that helped bring freedom to the Soviet bloc, using satellite TV and websites, which would teach free market and small business economics to the populace. And (2) in the interim while step (1) is being implemented and proving successful, use the National Guard, seriously armed and well trained, to secure the borders. Consider if drone strikes are so good at killing terrorists they should be pretty good at ferreting out and killing Mexican drug cartel leaders. The evil and brutal cartels must be eradicated or all is for naught!

Do we pressure the next regime or continue the hand-wringing? There exists those clandestine profiteers who advocate the latter.

Carlton Melvin, Havelock

http://www.newbernsj.com/articles/term-104153-president-illegal.html

Thanks A Lot Georgia, For Shredding Our Constitution

2012-02-04T19:47:00.000-05:00

On Friday, February 3, 2012 the death knell of America the Beautiful tolled across the fifty states and around the world. An administrative judge in the state of Georgia rewrote the Constitution and ruled in favor of putative president Barack Hussein Obama declaring him a Natural Born Citizen and eligible to be on their state ballot.

Our rule of law is no more. Our Constitution is no more. Obama, Soros, state media, activist judges and all the ‘powers that be’ of a New World Order sealed our fate. The United States is a land of liberty no more.

When Georgia State Judge Michael M. Malihi released his shocking ruling we were stunned. This couldn’t possibly be true. On the eve of the hearing Obama’s lawyers had written a thinly- veiled threat letter to Brian Kemp, GA Secretary of State, demanding that Kemp stop Judge Malahi from moving forward with the three lawsuits challenging Obama’s eligibility to be on the state ballot. This letter followed another sent days earlier by Obama’s Atlanta attorney Michael Jablonski to Judge Malihi demanding he stop the January 26th hearing and advised the GA judge that Obama would not be attending anyway citing it would interfere with the president’s duties. Malihi replied quickly to the first letter: the hearing would go on. SOS Kemp responded within 2 hours of receiving his letter stating, “…if you and your client choose to suspend your participation in the OSAH proceedings, please understand that you do so at your own peril.”

At the very least when Obama or his lawyers failed to show up in court a default judgement, earlier considered by the judge, should have denied Obama’s placement on the ballot. Not only did Malihi rule in favor of Obama he completely destroyed the credibility of the plaintiffs, their lawyers, witnesses and evidence that the judge found “unpersuasive.”

CONTINUED:
http://www.westernjournalism.com/thanks-a-lot-georgia-for-shredding-our-constitution/

CCTA ACTION ALERT! RE: National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA_

2012-02-04T14:45:00.000-05:00

CCTA is urging everyone to contact the NC Speaker of the House Thom Tillis and House Majority Leader, Paul 'Skip' Stam and urge them to take up this resolution during the upcoming "short session!" Read below, and if you agree here is the contact information!

Contact Info:
Speaker Tillis: 919-733-3451 and email Thom.Tillis@ncleg.net
House Majority Leader, Paul 'Skip' Stam: 919-733-2962 and email Paul.Stam@ncleg.net.
Rep. Glen Bradley [NC-49] 919-733-5860 and email Glen.Bradley@ncleg.net or ncsenate@glenbradley.net. Website: http://glenbradley2012.com/
Look up your represntative here: http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/members/memberList.pl?sChamber=House

Beaufort Observer: Rep. Glen Bradley to introduce resolution in N. C. Legislature against "Indefinite Detention"

by Jeff Lewis, National Director Patriot Coalition and FIRE

North Carolina Rep. Glen Bradley, (R-49), a founding member of Oath Keepers confirmed today his intention to introduce a resolution in the General Assembly to address the unconstitutional provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, which authorizes the "indefinite detention" of U.S. Citizens, "indefinitely expands" the Authorization for the Use of Military Force, " and essentially designates America as part of the "battlefield," thus placing the United States under the "law of war." President Obama signed the 2012 NDAA into law on Dec. 31, 2011.

In his signing statement , President Obama stated, "…I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens." The President did not say that he "could not" detain U.S. citizens "indefinitely," he said he would not. The "requirement" for military to detain in H.R. 1540's conference report, Section 1022 is not a "prohibition" against it.

In his signing statement, President Obama, expressing his dissatisfaction with several sections of the bill stated, "…should any application of these provisions conflict with my constitutional authorities, I will treat the provisions as non-binding. " If the President thought parts were unconstitutional, why did he sign it?"

MORE:
http://www.beaufortobserver.net/Articles-NEWS-and-COMMENTARY-c-2012-02-03-258489.112112-Rep-Glen-Bradley-to-introduce-resolution-in-N-C-Legislature-against-Indefinite-Detention.html

Back in forth in the New Bern Sun Journal!

2012-02-03T14:55:00.000-05:00

Recently, our chairman Nancy Murdoch read the following letter in the Sun-Journal:

January 31, 2012
New Bern by rail

I recently came to New Bern Jan. 21 on the Amtrak train from New York to Wilson, NC. I was there to visit my mother wishing her a happy 76th birthday with family and a host of friends. After riding eight hours on the train, a friend of the family picked me up in Wilson to take me to my final destination, New Bern. The ride took two hours. I enjoy coming to New Bern with all the historical sites; I will visit as many as I can. Someone please tell me why with all the train tracks in North Carolina, there’s not a train coming into New Bern, James City, Cherry Point or Kinston. I understand there’s a nearby airport, but many seniors and disabled people cannot fly and many as myself have a problem with flying. Who can I voice my concerns to?

Shirley Aikens, Brooklyn, N.Y.
http://www.newbernsj.com/articles/rail-103996-bern-letter.html

THEN.. our Nancy responded with the following letter:
February 01, 2012
Amtrak and Democrats

I read with interest the letter written by the lady from Brooklyn wondering why there is no train from Wilson and points beyond. Her question draws attention to why we have a national debt quickly approaching the $16 trillion mark. Perhaps she is unaware that Amtrak is subsidized by the rest of the taxpayers, most of whom will never ride the train. Eastern NC is not New York nor Europe. I can’t fathom how much it would cost to have Amtrak come to New Bern or how many people would use it. I would guess that the first amount would be astronomical, and the second number would be quite low. And I’m fairly confident the present administration would think it a grand idea; nothing beats spending taxpayer money for boondoggle projects that serve a few. If the fair lady from Brooklyn is a Democrat, she should write the President. With the right sized contribution to the Democrat party and the reelect Obama campaign, she might see her dream come true.

Nancy Murdoch, Havelock

And then that letter solicited the following response:

February 02, 2012
Be Civil

I am troubled by what I see as a lack of civility in the language being used in a number of Letters to the Editor. A recent example is the Feb. 2 letter titled “Amtrak and Democrats.”

The first part of the letter raised legitimate concerns about the cost of operating Amtrak and extending the line to New Bern. Fair enough. The part that I find troubling is: “If the fair lady from Brooklyn is a Democrat, she should write the President. With the right sized contribution to the Democrat (sp) party and the reelect Obama campaign, she might see her dream come true.”

The editor I feel has a responsibility to control the tone of the letters being written to and published in the paper. Unless the editor will allow the person who is being chided to respond to the negative/sarcastic language, then the editor should edit out such language. The editor states at the bottom of the Letters to the Editor: “All letters may be edited or abridged by the editor.”

To those who write using sarcasm before hitting the send button, ask yourself the following question: Would you want to be on the receiving end of what you are writing and how would you feel about it?

I fear that as this election cycle moves on the sarcasm will only get worse. Let’s not be like the candidates running for the presidency and the negativity of their language. Let’s be above that and treat each other with respect.

Tom Balsanek, New Bern

Dog gone it, I did not even realize just how sarcastic and uncivil Ms. Nancy was! Of course I get confused sometimes cause liberals can call us tea baggers, terrorists, bigots and racists. I just can't keep up!
~ Lynn

Message from NC Senator Richard Burr

2012-02-03T13:53:00.000-05:00

FYI!

February 3, 2012

Votes this Week: STOCK Act

Our country is facing a grave economic crisis, unemployment is rampant and continues to rise, and our country is further in debt than ever before. Unfortunately, Congress seems unwilling to tackle these pressing, vital issues. The American people are counting on the federal government to pass legislation that will improve our economy and create jobs, and Washington should be voting on policies that will attract capital and get investors off the sidelines so they can create jobs and spur growth.

Much to my dismay, however, the Senate has spent the greater part of this week debating the STOCK Act, a law that would codify what existing law already says. I voted against this bill because it goes without saying that laws regarding insider trading that apply to the American people also apply to members of Congress and their staff. Members of Congress are elected to serve the people, not make money for themselves, and any Member or staff member who breaks the already existing insider trading laws should be held responsible. Rather than wasting time codifying laws that already exist, Washington should take up real legislation focused on what’s most important to American citizens – jobs and the economy. (Mmmmm..not sure I buy that Senator, were they not 'exempt'?)

On Thursday, I spoke with Jerri Jameson on WWNC about my opposition to the STOCK Act, the economy and other news of the day. In case you missed it, you can listen to the interview here or read the full transcript.

Honest Budget Act: Restoring Accountability in Spending

Instead of tackling our economic crisis head on and instituting job-creating policies that restore certainty and predictability, Washington continues to throw money at the problem. Continued levels of high unemployment have shown that this pattern of egregious spending and expanded government have failed and are worsening our current crisis. Our economy is suffering, and now we have record-level debt on top of it.

Washington must learn to live within its means, and this starts with passing an annual budget to fund the federal government. It has been over 1,000 days since Senate Democrats passed a budget, and without one we have no blueprint for our nation’s spending priorities. (1010 to be exact!)

Last fall, I cosponsored the Honest Budget Act which would help restore honesty and accountability in government spending by putting an end to budget gimmicks that make it easier for Washington to spend money it does not have. On Wednesday, my colleagues in the House of Representatives introduced their version of this bill. We owe it to our nation’s taxpayers to govern responsibly and be transparent about how their hard earned dollars are being spent, and this legislation to eliminate dishonesty in the budget process is a step in the right direction.

Keystone XL Pipeline: Energy Security & Job Creation

In another effort to turn our economy around, on Monday I joined 43 other Senators in introducing a bill to continue construction on the Keystone XL pipeline, a project that would take great steps towards improving our energy security as well as create jobs for thousands of American workers. Despite claims that promoting energy security and creating jobs are top priorities, President Obama rejected the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline earlier this month.

Rather than support a project with the potential to create thousands of jobs for American citizens, while also increasing energy supplies from friendly neighbors, the President continues to place politics over policy. Since the President has failed to lead on the issue, our bill would authorize construction on this project under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. You can read more about the bill on my website.

Caring for the Victims of Water Contamination at Camp Lejeune

Those of you who are regular readers of this newsletter are well aware of the decades of water contamination at Camp Lejeune that caused many of the Marines, sailors, and their family members who lived or worked on base to become sick, and in some cases die, with various forms of cancer as a result of their exposure to this toxic water. Recently, the U.S. Marine Corps asked the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) to remove parts of its recent study on this issue citing national security concerns. The information they wanted removed has been publicly available for several years, and it is unclear why it suddenly became a security threat and had to be removed from the report.

I fear that removing this information may jeopardize ongoing and future studies of the water contamination at Camp Lejeune, and also worry that this sets a dangerous precedent of withholding information from scientific studies for reasons of national security without adequate legal justification. Last week, I sent a letter to the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), along with Senators Hagan (D-NC), Rubio (R-FL), and Nelson (D-FL) and Congressmen Miller (D-NC) and Dingell (D-MI), asking him to look into the legal soundness of the USMC’s request to redact this previously public information. The men and women of the Camp Lejeune community were sacrificing for our country when they were exposed to harmful chemicals without their knowledge, and we owe it to them to continue investigating how they were affected, spur greater health awareness, and provide them the compensation and care they deserve. To learn more about a bill I introduced to provide care for these men and women, you can read about the Caring for Camp Lejeune Veterans Act on my website.

Making Veterans’ Court of Appeals More Efficient for Veterans

Also this week, I introduced a bill that would require all judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims to reside within 50 miles of Washington, D.C., in order to increase the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the Court. It is no secret that things tend to run more smoothly when those people integral to the day-to-day operations of the Court are present, and if Veterans Court judges have to travel across the country to get to their offices, it could make it extremely difficult for them to fully engage in their case work, manage their staff, and carry out their judicial functions. Our nation’s veterans could suffer from these inefficiencies. By requiring judges to live near the court’s office, we can help ensure that veterans receive the timely decisions from the Court that they deserve and we can keep down costs that result from judges working remotely and regularly traveling to and from Washington.

March for Life

Finally, last week I had the pleasure of meeting with hundreds of North Carolinians who traveled to Washington to take part in the March for Life. It was truly inspiring to see so many individuals and families stand together and rally in support of the sanctity of human life. To view pictures from this year’s March for Life event, click here.

Conservative Leadership Conference (CLC)

2012-02-03T13:18:00.000-05:00

March 2-3, 2012: Conservative Leadership Conference (CLC) at the Marriott Crabtree Valley in Raleigh, NC.

The Conference is designed to energize, train, and equip citizens and leaders in our state. North Carolina will be a battleground state like never before. We face battles in local elections, a constitutional amendment, and races for Governor, the NC General Assembly, and U.S. Congress.

This Conference will train, prepare, and motivate the citizens of North Carolina. We will have speakers and trainers from Heritage and Heritage Action, American Enterprise Institute, Americans for Prosperity, Civitas, and Texas Watchdog, along with radio personalities from the local and national level including Fox News Contributor, Dr. Charles Krauthammer. We hope that you will join us at this exciting and important Conference. For more information or to register, contact The Civitas institute at 919-834-2099 or visit http://www.battlegroundnc.org/.

A Message from NC Congressman Walter Jones

2012-02-03T13:03:00.000-05:00

FYI!

February 3, 2012

Dear Fellow Eastern North Carolinian,

This is a critical time for Eastern North Carolina, our nation, and our armed forces. As we begin this new session of the 112th Congress, I wanted to quickly brief you on what President Barack Obama is proposing, why I think he is badly off the mark, and ways that I believe we can responsibly address the deficit while still preserving and modernizing our military strength.

I don’t need to remind you that America is $15 trillion in debt and running annual deficits of over $1 trillion. Last week the Obama Administration rolled out a new budget proposal to cut military spending by $487 billion over 10 years. Meanwhile, last year’s compromise bill to raise the debt ceiling – which I strongly opposed and voted against – requires an additional $500 billion in military “sequestration” cuts over 10 years starting in 2013.

While there is no doubt that there are billions of dollars of wasteful spending in the Defense Department (DOD), and that taxpayers’ money must be spent much more efficiently, I oppose both the President’s defense cut proposal and the ‘military’ sequestration cuts, and I’d like you to know the reasons why.

I make no apologies for being a leader in the fight to cut wasteful federal spending and eliminate the debt. Among other things, I have been a champion of and always voted for a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution; I voted against the President’s $1 trillion ‘stimulus’; I voted against the bailouts for Wall Street and Detroit; I voted against every foreign aid bill in the last 16 years; I was one of only 8 members to vote against the pork-filled Highway Bill that included the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere”; I voted against Obamacare; and I am proud to be the only member of the House of Representatives to have voted against every single increase in the debt limit in the past 8 years.

Going forward, I believe there are many steps we should be taking to eradicate deficit spending and the debt. Those steps include eliminating foreign aid, the Department of Education, the National Endowment for the Arts, and the taxpayer bailouts of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and profligate European governments; repealing Obamacare; and downsizing many other federal agencies. But attempting to balance the budget through devastating, disproportionate cuts to our military is not the way to go.

Before the Obama Administration even thinks about proposing to take jobs, services and benefits away from our troops and veterans, or about slashing crucial programs like the F-35B fighter jet – two cost reduction proposals which I have strongly opposed throughout my career in Congress – they need to eliminate the waste, fraud and abuse of taxpayer dollars in the Pentagon.

For instance, did you know that DOD has never audited its own books even though it was statutorily required to do so over 20 years ago? As a result, a recent DOD Inspector General (IG) report demonstrated that wasteful spending at the Pentagon is out of control. In some cases taxpayers are paying nearly $1700 for items that cost $7. That’s ridiculous! Finalizing the audit of DOD and reforming the defense procurement process to cut wasteful spending and give taxpayers more bang for their buck should be this Administration’s top priority – reducing pay, benefits and services for our troops and veterans and making major cuts to the F-35B should be off the table.

I also oppose the Administration’s request for another round of domestic military base closures (BRAC). Amazingly, right now, President Obama is opening a new base in Australia and increasing our military presence in the Philippines – while at the same time threatening to close bases in the United States. The fact is that DOD already has 622 overseas sites. Before anyone talks about closing bases here at home, we need to evaluate and eliminate any overseas sites that are no longer in our national security interest.

Finally, it is no secret that I disagree with President Obama’s decision to keep our troops in Afghanistan through 2014. America is borrowing $10 billion a month from the Chinese and other foreigners – over $120 billion a year – and then sending that money back overseas to spend on that operation. At a time when this nation is over $15 trillion in debt, we simply can’t afford it. The reality is that if the President weren’t spending that money in Afghanistan, military spending reductions of any kind would be much, much less necessary.

Since being elected to Congress in 1994, I have taken my responsibility to represent Eastern North Carolina’s values seriously. As one of the most senior members of the House Armed Services Committee, I fully understand how critical our military facilities are to our economy and way of life. During the last BRAC round in 2005, I was able to use that seniority to successfully protect Camp Lejeune Marine Base, Cherry Point Marine Air Station, the Naval Air Depot at Cherry Point (NADEP) and Seymour Johnson Air Force Base. And with this seniority I will have significant input into how the recent defense cut proposals play out. Please rest assured that I will use my position to continue to do everything in my power to fight for Eastern North Carolina’s military installations and for the courageous men and women – past, present and future – who protect our freedom.

Please know that I will never forget what an honor it is to represent you. If I can be of service to you and your family, please don’t hesitate to contact me at any time. Thanks for all you do to make America the greatest nation the world has ever known.

Sincerely,
Walter B. Jones
Member of Congress (NC-03)

Beaufort County Conservative Republican Club Meeting

2012-02-02T17:13:00.002-05:00

Thursday, February 9, 2012, Food at 6:00 pm, Program at 6:45 pm
Mount Olive College, US 264 West of Washington, NC

Dinner is $6.00 for Pizza, Salad and Drink.

Mattie Lawson--Candidate for NC House District 6 andother candidates will be there for Q&A
More on Beaufort County Health Department
Local politics, budget, fraud
Discussion on Constitutional Forum

Please bring a friend, you do not have to be a member to attend. Call 975-3472 for more information.

Think about it.......

2012-02-02T17:05:00.002-05:00

"The house of representatives ... can make no law which will not have its full operation on themselves and their friends, as well as the great mass of society. This has always been deemed one of the strongest bonds by which human policy can connect the rulers and the people together. It creates between them that communion of interest, and sympathy of sentiments, of which few governments have furnished examples; but without which every government degenerates into tyranny." --James Madison, Federalist No. 57, 1788

Wilson NC Tea Party Monthly Meeting Tonight

2012-02-02T12:25:00.000-05:00

Time: February 2, 2012 from 6:30pm to 8:30pm

Location: Western Sizzlin Steak House
Organized By: Joel Killion

Purpose: To fellowship, encourage one another, strengthen communication, and strategize.

We meet EVERY month (unless otherwise noted on the EVENTS page of this website) and want to encourage everyone to come if they are interested in getting involved with their local Tea Party group. Together, as one, as a team, as a family, we can restore the dream of America, as delivered by God through the hearts and lives of our Founders and Framers.

Consider the following...

"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it." Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4,1777

"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt." John Philpot Curran: Speech upon the Right of Election, 1790

"Maybe I did well and maybe I led the battle but nobody ever said we were going to win this thing at any point in time. Eternal vigilance is required and there have to be people who step up to the plate, who believe in liberty, and who are willing to fight for it." Milton Friedman, Economist

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." Samuel Adams

"Voting is no substitute for the eternal vigilance that every friend of freedom must demonstrate towards government. If our freedom is to survive, Americans must become far better informed of the dangers from Washington -- regardless of who wins the Presidency." James Bovard

"No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant in its preservation." Gen. Douglas MacArthur

FREEDOM IS NOT FOR THE TIMID.

See more details and RSVP on Wilson NC Tea Party:
http://www.wilsonncteaparty.com/events/event/show?id=5407582%3AEvent%3A24403&xgi=2TMOeXrYyMNIGL&xg_source=msg_invite_event

MEMO: Obama ‘Recess’ appointments Unwarranted, Unnecessary and Unconstitutional

2012-02-01T15:38:00.000-05:00

On January 4, President Obama purported to appoint three individuals to be members of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) (two of whom were only nominated two weeks before and had not even completed the necessary questionnaire required by Senate) and one person to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). All of these positions require confirmation by the U.S. Senate.

ISSUE-IN-BRIEF: The Constitution allows the President to make “recess Appointments—bypassing the Senate under only one circumstance: “The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate.” But the Senate did not adjourn its session and still had officers to receive nominations from the President. Again, the Constitution is very clear on this point: “Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days.” In December the House did not consent to the Senate taking a recess.

There are three objections to what are basically illegal appointments by President Obama:

CONTINUED:
http://netrightdaily.com/2012/02/memo-obama-recess-appointments-unwarranted-unnecessary-and-unconstitutional/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NetrightDaily+%28NetRight+Daily%29

The politics of who pays taxes

2012-02-01T15:29:00.000-05:00

Why does Barack Obama play the politics of division on the income tax question? At the State of the Union Address Obama was at it again, quick to point out that “Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary.”

It’s not that hard to understand once one looks at the numbers. It’s less about who pays taxes, or how much they pay, than it is about who doesn’t. Most voting-age Americans do not pay income taxes — approximately 50.6 percent. That includes 53.91 million Americans who pay nothing in income taxes, and 64.7 million who get refunds in excess of what was owed. That’s 118.61 million out of 234.6 million Americans 18 years and older, based on data compiled by the Joint Committee on Taxation and the U.S. Census Bureau.

As a subset, the non-income taxpayers include 35.1 million who do pay payroll taxes but do not make enough or have enough deductions and credits that they do not have an income tax liability, based on data compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics showing 148.8 million Americans who have jobs full-time and part-time.

That leaves 116 million Americans who do pay income taxes, 49.4 percent of the voting-age population.

Further weighing the argument in his favor, when Obama talks about raising taxes on the upper-income brackets, he’s talking about just 3.9 million Americans who make $200,000 or more in Gross Adjusted Income according to the Internal Revenue Service. When he invokes the Buffett Rule, proposing raising capital gains taxes for those who earn more than $1 million, he’s only talking about 450,000 Americans.

That’s less than 2 percent of the voting-age population. And Obama’s betting that even if every single one of them voted against him, appealing to the 98 percent of voters whose tax rates would remain the same will help him get re-elected.

That is, if the tax rates of the wealthy become a front and center issue in the 2012 election. If they do, the political advantage will shift to Obama.

To disarm the Obama class warfare strategy, Republicans in 2012 will need to focus not on fairness in the tax code or over who pays taxes — which is to fight the battle on Obama’s terms — but to shine the spotlight on Obama’s lousy economic and fiscal record.

The fact is, the Obama economy has failed to create enough jobs to even keep pace with the growth of the population. Since Obama took office, the civilian labor force participation rate has dropped from 65.7 percent to just 64 percent, resulting in a loss of about 4 million people from being counted as unemployed even though they are of working age — because they’ve given up.

If those 4 million were included in the labor force, the effective unemployment rate would be closer to 11 percent, and the underemployed rate 17 percent, instead of 8.5 and 15.2 percent, respectively. Overall, there’s about 27 million working age adults who cannot find full-time work but would like to.

CONTINUED:
http://netrightdaily.com/2012/02/the-politics-of-who-pays-taxes/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NetrightDaily+%28NetRight+Daily%29

Sen. Mike Lee: The Inconvenient Constitution

2012-02-01T14:18:00.000-05:00

As a United States Senator, I have sworn an oath to support, defend, and bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States. Complying with this Oath is not always convenient. Sometimes this requires voting against legislation that embodies policies I agree with, other times it requires taking a stand when doing so may not be popular. The Constitution itself is not a document of convenience. It specifies an onerous process – bicameralism and presentment – with which the government must comply to enact legislation. And it imposes separation of government powers and a system of checks and balances between the different branches.

Among those checks and balances is the requirement that the President’s nominations of federal judges and executive officers receive the Advice and Consent of the Senate before they take office, unless they are nominated during a Senate recess.

Events of the last few weeks show just how inconvenient the Constitution can be for politicians who want to get their way at any cost. On January 4, 2012, President Obama attempted to bypass the Senate and unilaterally “recess appoint” those nominees even though the Senate was not in fact in recess.

These are brazen actions with real consequences. As a duly sworn United States Senator I feel duty bound to resist these actions, regardless of the difficulty.

In taking a stand against the President’s unconstitutional assertion of executive power, I have already been targeted by the President himself. In his weekly radio address, the President singled me out, suggesting that I am playing politics with the judicial nominations process.

The Constitution is not partisan. I will oppose any president, regardless of party, who attempts to ignore constitutional limits on executive power. The Senate has an important role in the appointment of federal judges and officers. All members of Congress should be deeply concerned when the executive encroaches on that constitutional function.

CONTINUE READING:http://www.redstate.com/senmikelee/2012/01/31/the-inconvenient-constitution/

Representative Norman Sanderson Will Seek State Senate Seat

2012-02-01T10:12:00.000-05:00

With the recent announcement that State Senator Jean Preston will not seek another term, her legislative colleague Norman Sanderson announced today that he will seek election to the District 2 State Senate seat. "Senator Preston has set the bar high when it comes to hard work, ethical standards and sound fiscal accountability," Sanderson said. "I assure the people of the 2nd District that I will uphold that legacy as I strive to be their next State Senator."

Sanderson has served Craven and Pamlico Counties in House District 3 and sees the move as a logical progression. "It has been my honor to serve the people of Craven and Pamlico Counties, and I look forward to expanding that service to the people of Carteret."

In the State House, Sanderson has distinguished himself as a "Common Sense Conservative", drawing on his business background and strong faith to guide him through one of the most difficult legislative sessions in memory. Sanderson plans to serve out his term in the House, honoring his commitment to his constituents.

Sanderson has already compiled an impressive list of local leaders who have thrown their support behind his candidacy. In addition to the formal endorsements, members of the area Republican Party leadership (prohibited from endorsing prior to filing) have expressed strong support for the Sanderson Senate run. "I am extremely pleased with the outpouring of support that has been directed toward my run for the State Senate," declared Sanderson.

From the Committee to Elect Norman Sanderson NC House

Obama eligibility challenges spread to 6 states

2012-01-31T14:26:00.002-05:00

A judge in Georgia could decide this week whether voters convinced him Barack Obama's name should be removed from the 2012 presidential ballot because he is not qualified to hold the office. But win, lose or draw, the fight won't be over, as other cases are erupting across the nation.

http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/obama-eligibility-challenges-spread-to-6-states/

January 30, 2012: Legislative Update

2012-01-30T21:49:00.000-05:00

Federal Budget & Spending

Still No Budget: Earlier this week marked the 1,000th day since the Senate has passed a real budget. Some on the left are trying to deny this by saying that the Senate has passed budgets and that the GOP controlled House is standing in the way. The facts are this: Obama signed one actual budget that was passed by the Democrat controlled Senate and House in 2009, when he first became President. Even though the Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress in 2010 as well, they refused to pass a budget and only passed Continuing Resolutions (CR). This was probably due to the fact that they had massively increased spending and writing a real budget would alert voters to this, while CR’s hid the increased spending. After the GOP took control of the House, they passed a real budget in 2011, only to see it die in the Senate. The Senate also voted down – unanimously – the President’s own budget. With the Senate’s refusal to pass anyone’s budget, the House and Senate passed more CR’s. Eventually the debt ceiling mess arose, and the deal worked out between the leadership of both the Democrats and the GOP was titled, “The Budget Control Act.” Using the word “budget” here does not mean it was actually a budget. For all intents and purposes, this was just another CR. It is absolutely false to state that the Senate has passed an actual budget. The only two budgets they have even voted on were both rejected.

• In just one term, President Obama has missed the budget deadline more than any other President.
• In the 90 years covering FY1923 through FY2013, President Obama is the only President to miss the deadline two years in a row. He is the only President who has missed the deadline in three of the four years of a term. And, he holds the record for the longest delay (at 98 days).
• Since the statutory deadline was extended to the first Monday in February, with the exception of the first budget for a new President, this deadline has only been missed three times: Clinton FY1998; Obama FY2012; and Obama FY 2013.
• The President’s flagrant disrespect for budget deadlines extends beyond the late submissions of his annual budget request. The President is required to submit a Midsession Review no later than July 16 each year. The President is required to submit a Financial Report of the U.S. Government no later than December 15. The President is required to submit a plan to shore up Medicare’s finances within 15 days of a funding warning by the Medicare Trustees. Not once has President Obama adhered to any of these deadlines. Read the full analysis here. http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Missing_in_Action_The_Presidents_Record_on_the_Budget.pdf

Budget Process Reforms: Part of the spending problem in DC stems from the way the budget is created. Some House members have proposed reforms to the budget process in order to make it easier to cut spending. There are three bills introduced with this in mind:

• HR 3582, The Pro-Growth Budgeting Act of 2012 – This bill would require that for major legislation that CBO prepare an analysis of the effect that the legislation would have on the U.S. economy. This macroeconomic impact analysis would be supplemental information in addition to the official congressional cost estimate of the legislation.
• HR 3578, The Baseline Reform Act of 2012 – Under current law the baseline assumes ever higher spending as discretionary accounts are annually increased by inflation and for a number of other factors. This legislation levels the playing field and removes this pro-spending bias.
• HR3581, The Budget and Accounting Transparency Act of 2012 – This bill increases transparency in federal budgeting by reforming the way certain costs are calculated and requiring that certain costs incurred by the Federal government are included in the budget.

It would take up too much room to post the complete summaries of these bills here, so please click here to read about these reform bills and let us know what you think. http://budget.house.gov/BudgetProcessReform/

EU Bank Bailouts: Hidden in the “Cash for Clunkers” bill was a loan to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for $100 billion, which would go towards bailing out the European Union and their banks (http://hotair.com/archives/2012/01/17/will-the-eu-tap-american-taxpayers-for-a-100-billion-bailout/) After the outrage Americans felt at bailing out our banks, and the false outrage expressed by the Obama administration, this is a totally unacceptable action on the part of our government. The GOP in the House has introduced a bill that would prevent US tax dollars from going to the IMF for any bailouts. The bill is HR 2313, sponsored by Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) with 89 cosponsors. It has been referred to the Financial Services and Appropriations Committee. The next step would need to be the Chairman calling it up for a hearing or markup. Here is an older article about the bill (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=44474). Should we put pressure on the House to pass this bill?

Regulations, Economic Growth, & Jobs

• Taxes & Regulations Report: The Mercatus Center continues to offer excellent policy ideas and analysis. Read about their recommendations for how to restore economic growth through tax reform and regulatory reform. Check out their Regulatory Report Card which includes links to a regulatory primer, lists of regulations that are in open-comment periods, ways to track regulations, and so much more. Read an op-ed that was published by The Hill discussing lawmakers’ plans always fall short of addressing real, long-term fiscal reform. What do you think of their ideas? Are they helpful?
• Fast Facts: Look at this chart about “America Then and Now” to see how far things have fallen in just three short years.
• Keystone Pipeline: President Obama rejected the Keystone Pipeline permit in an attempt to soothe his eco-radical base. Some labor unions, manufacturers, the unemployed, energy security experts, and many more were hoping that the President would approve the pipeline as it would create over one hundred thousand good paying jobs; it would allow us to become more energy independent, and it would provide ethical oil from Canada rather than oil drilled from hostile and tyrannical regimes from around the world. In other news, it turns out that Obama supporter Warren Buffett stands to make a huge profit off of Obama’s decision to reject the pipeline. It turns out that Buffett partially owns some of the railways that are used to currently transport oil, and would be abandoned if the pipeline were built. So rather than create jobs and energy security, Obama has once again chosen to reward his extremist environmentalist base and his very well connected friends. Even his fellow Democrats were upset by his politically convenient choice to reject the Keystone Pipeline permit. Crony capitalism strikes again!
• Manufacturers Stand Up to Obama: Manufacturers have also put out press releases opposing President Obama’s call for tax increases, as well as asserting that overregulation harms job creation and is stifling economic growth.
• EPA Regulations: Due to EPA regulations, six coal-fired power plants in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Maryland by September 1, 2012. Remember, this was not accomplished through legislation, but rather through unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats. What will happen to the jobs? How will we replace the energy these plants produced?

Constitutional Issues

• So-called Recess Appointments: RSC members are introducing two pieces of legislation. One is a resolution and the other is a bill. When we have more information, we will pass it on. There is also supposedly a coalition led by the Heritage Foundation, working to fight these appointments. We have asked to be plugged in to this, and are awaiting information.
• Rep. Jeff Landry (LA): Executive Appointment Reform Act
• Rep. Diane Black (TN): Resolution Opposing President Obama’s Illegal Appointments
• Executive Orders: Rep. Jenkins of Kansas will soon be introducing a concurrent resolution expressing the sense of Congress that any Executive Order that would require federal spending has no binding effect until it is enacted into law through the legislative process. This resolution would therefore clarify congressional authority, as detailed in the Constitution. When we have more information, we’ll pass it along.
• NDAA: There is currently an effort underway to amend the NDAA law that passed recently to ensure that the language is clear about upholding American citizens’ right to due process. When we have more information we will pass it on.

Education

• State Reforms: Jindal Announces Most Ambitious Education Reform Package In U.S. History (http://thehayride.com/2012/01/jindal-announces-most-ambitious-education-reform-package-in-u-s-history/. In a bold move for sweeping education reform, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal announced one of the most ambitious reform packages in US history. In it, Jindal outlined the 3 pillars of education reform:

 Putting a highly effective teacher in every classroom
 Giving parents and students an equal opportunity in education and
 Giving school leaders more flexibility to spend their dollars on policies that improve student achievement

According to Jindal, “our children do not have time to wait. They only grow up once and they have one shot to receive a quality education. We can’t wait for another generation of students to graduate from high school unprepared for the workforce and higher education – or to dropout before they even get there.”

 Contact: To find out how you can help bring true reform to education, contact Bruce Gardner (bruce@teaforeducation.com) or Beverly Elliott (beverly@teaforeducation.com) or visit our website at http://www.teaforeducation.com to find a state or regional coordinator near you. America’s children need your help. Will you answer the call?

Agenda 21, Sustainability, & Property Rights

 RNC Winter Meeting: All the resolutions passed at the RNC Winter Meeting are on the RNC Website under the link to counsel's office. Our information is that the Resolution Exposing UN Agenda 21 will be proposed as a national GOP platform plank. This is very big news. Read more here. http://www.republicanassemblies.org/rnc-adopts-resolution-exposing-agenda-21/
 Anti-Delphi Training: Resist being marginalized! Have your voice heard! Session 2 of 6: This Saturday, January 28, 2-3 Eastern. Email Shelly Kennedy at shellykennedy@yahoo.com for call-in information.
 Saturday, Feb. 4: Fred Kelly Grant from Idaho teaches the Coordination Strategy - via all-day webinar at a cost of only $55! REGISTER HERE by 1/27. Includes all-day seminar and hard copy workbook. http://www.trademarkamerica.org/webinar_120204_info.htm
 National Federation of Republican Affiliates Resolutions:
 Opposing UN comprehensive land use planning--http://www.republicanassemblies.org/nfra-resolution-opposing-united-nations-comprehensive-land-use-planning/?navcat=4
 Protecting American sovereignty and individuals’ 2nd Amendment rights
 Calling for the immediate and complete withdrawal from the UN
 New Hampshire: NH House Bill 1834 - banning membership in ICLEI statewide.
 Name Change Alert: Now that we are all familiar with Agenda 21 and we decided we would expose it far and wide, they decided to rename it, as per usual. Now, they call it Millennium Development Goals. Watch for it in your communities.
 Candidates on Agenda 21: An older, out-of-date blog post with video of the Presidential candidates and their positions on Agenda 21 and “sustainability.”

Illegal Immigration

 National Call: There is a weekly national call hosted by the Tea Party Immigration Coalition. If you would like to sign up to receive general information or an invitation to participate on the calls, please email immigrationteaparty@gmail.com.
 Documentary: TPP North Carolina State Coordinator Mark Hager assisted with the documentary titled, “Invasion: Freedom Under Fire!” about the struggles of American citizens who live along the southern border. If you would like to order a copy, please click here for more information.

House of Representatives – The week ahead

The House is not in session on Monday, January 30th.

 The bill to repeal the CLASS Act (HR 1173) will be on the floor next week, probably Wednesday, February 1st.
 Two of the budget process reform bills will also come to the floor next week, probably on Thursday, February 2nd – the Baseline Reform Act (HR 3578) and the Pro-Growth Budgeting Act (HR 3582).
 Check out the RSC’s two-pager that provides a brief history of deficits and surpluses in the United States.
 As part of the open government initiative led the GOP and in accordance with House rules, the Clerk of the House of Representatives has launched a new website (docs.House.gov) where legislative data “will be posted in an XML format,” reports CQ.
 Next Recess: February 20th – February 24th.

Senate – The week ahead

 The Senate will reconvene on Monday, January 30th.
 Reid filed for cloture on the motion to proceed to S. 2038, the Stock Act on Thursday night, January 26th. The Senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S.2038, followed by a vote on cloture on the motion at 5:30 p.m on Monday. Members expect cloture will be invoked. McConnell is pushing for an open amendment process on this bill, and the expectation is that the bill will be on the floor most of next week.
 Legislative items that are possible during this work period include: FAA Conference report, Highway extension, and the Payroll conference report (if completed before the recess).
 Next Recess: February 20th – February 24t.

Diane Rufino: VOTING REFORM: A PROGRESSIVE VOTING SCHEME

2012-01-30T20:37:00.000-05:00

January 30, 2012

This article follows the one I previously wrote, entitled “Who is Really Disenfranchised?” In that article I talked about the incessant claims of ”disenfranchisement” of minority voters when no such disenfranchisement exists nor any intent to do so. I argued that those Americans who are really “disenfranchised” today in this country are the taxpayers. These are the Americans who really have a “fairness” and “equality” argument. These are the ones whose interests are not being fairly or equally protected by a government that is required to do so. These are the Americans that government wishes to exploit and the ones that fellow Americans want to take advantage of.

In this article, I will offer a remedy to safeguard their legitimate constitutional rights.

Claims of “disenfranchisement” of minority voters lack merit and are based on a hypothetical negative impact that common sense, neutral, and necessary voter laws may possibly have upon minorities. It is another attempt to find racial intent where none exists. Voter ID laws require a voter to present an ID in order to vote (with suitable provisions should a person not have one), yet Democrats and civil rights groups fight such laws with great energy. Common sense Americans want protective laws to ensure the integrity of the voting system, so that we have “one person, one vote” and every vote counts equally. The laws are reasonably related to the problem of voter dilution where a person’s legitimate vote is diluted by those cast fraudulently. No one should lost the full force of their vote because Mickey Mouse casts a vote or because dead people are voting. Most people don’t see any undue burden on a person to show an ID to vote. People can barely get by in today’s world without one. For example, a person needs to show an ID to get a driver’s license, open a bank account, buy alcohol, buy cigarettes, apply for welfare, apply for food stamps, sign up for healthcare, cash a check, write a check, purchase a firearm, make a significant credit card purchase, rent an apartment, be admitted to a hospital, enter certain federal buildings, and get a marriage license. Yet having to produce one to vote once every couple of years is somehow a problem. They claim it’s ‘racist.’ This is assuming that minorities don’t feel they need to get any ID at all in their lives, even though every single American needs an ID to conduct some kind of business or in general to simply prove that he is who he says he is. This is a speculative argument and one that most people don’t buy. Yet the tax laws that require working Americans at a certain income level to turn over a chunk of their earned income to the government are an outright disenfranchisement of property. There is no speculation. This is the government determining that some Americans must work about 4 months of the year – from January until April, sometimes May – for the government and there is nothing they can do about it. They must work, as indentured servants, to pay Uncle Sam. The risks are criminal penalties and incarceration.

The liberal media doesn’t talk about this “disenfranchisement” because their party is of the belief that they have a RIGHT to take whatever money they need from Americans who are condemned to be taxpayers. Everyone talks about the 14th Amendment and the “Equal Protection” clause, but no one talks about the 13th Amendment (which abolished slavery and indentured servitude). The “disenfranchised” have no meaningful advocates. They are soon to be “minority” upon which the majority will soon completely oppress. It is their lot in life to support a government that rarely gives them anything in return, other than roads, public parks, and decaying public schools. It is their lot in life to support others who they have nothing in common with and in fact, are ones they have little respect for. It is their lot in life to support government programs that stand for everything that they abhor - programs that dumb down society, remove personal responsibility, lead to increasing levels of crime and decay, result in moral depravity, and yes, highlight racial differences by establishing different sets of rules for different groups – all in the name of “equal opportunity.” It is their lot in life to finance the destruction of the United States by taking us from the once-proud “Land of the Free and Home of the Brave” to “Land of the Depraved and Home of the Enslaved.”

Actually, the liberal media does talk about those ‘disenfranchised’ Americans. It wants them to pay more. As the number of persons paying federal income tax to support a rapidly growing US population decreases, the amount of money needed will increase. Democrats won’t require their voters to pay (because once an “entitlement” is given, it is very hard to take it away), so they will look for ways to soak more out of those who are working and earning enough. “Enough’ is the key term. Those men and women working hard to support their families, who have put the time and energy into their education and have sacrificed to develop a career, and who are trying to realize the “dream” that they so diligently sacrificed for, have no say in what is “enough.” What is “enough” for them and their family has no relevance. The fact that they might want to have more children (which would require them to buy a larger house and put more and more money aside for college educations) means nothing to the government. The fact that they might have $100,000 in school loan debt which they want to pay off as fast as possible means nothing. Doing the right thing, investing in education, buying and improving property, and raising responsible children means nothing to the government.

“Class Warfare” is the new term for “Equality.” The poor can only improve their lot by making the richer less well-off. That sounds fair, doesn’t it? In whose eyes? For which party? In some cultures, it is unheard of to look at the finances and the “stuff” that other people have. In fact, that was the mindset of our earlier (legal) immigrants. That was the attitude of my parents and grandparents. That was the mindset of our Founders. They wisely protected all those opportunities for individuals to attain the same station in life. We aren’t supposed to covet the things that others have.

“Three years after the ‘Hope and Change’ president took office, Hope turns out to mean high taxes and lots of regulations, and Change consists of celebrating the government’s takeover of General Motors.. The Great Uniter is all about class warfare… It’s one thing to beat up on the big banks that caused the financial crisis; it’s another to hammer any family that earns a combined income of $250,000 a year as “millionaires,” pretending they didn’t work for their success and thus ought to pay the government more hard-earned money.” (Charles Gasparino).

Barack Obama based his entire State of the Union address around envy, pointing to tax disparity as proof. As Gasparino says: “The tax code is indeed a glaringly obvious problem. It pits every constituency against the rest, and Leftists are especially adept at exploiting that to wage class warfare.” Obama’s tired rhetoric continues to be that the rich don’t pay their “fair share.” In his State of the Union address, he stated: “If you make $100,000 – 250,000 a year, like 98% of American families do, then your taxes shouldn’t go up.” Where did he get that data? If that were indeed the case, we wouldn’t need entitlements and there would be no class warfare, right? Obama continued: “You’re the ones struggling with rising costs and stagnant wages. You’re the ones who need relief.” What he neglected to mention is that it is his administration’s own policies that are causing such struggles. In other words, he wants the wealthy to do more to support his failing government policies. He wants the wealthy to relieve his corrupt policies of blame.

The money that goes to the federal government is a combination of income tax and payroll taxes. Those who want the rich to pay more attack the amounts they pay in capital gains and estate taxes. They pay too little, they cry. Obama mislead the American people by alleging that Warren Buffett pays as much in income tax as his secretary. He provided a new sound-bite for the class-warriors when he said: “You can call this class warfare all you like, but asking a billionaire to pay as much as his secretary is simply common sense.” First of all, Buffett’s secretary, whom Obama deceptively tried to pass off as being in the same category as the typical office secretary that many of our mothers were, is believed to earn between $200,000 and $500,000 per year. I have a PhD, 2 Masters, and assorted other degrees and I will never see that kind of salary in my life. Second of all, the amount each person pays is automatically progressive according to that person’s income. A billionaire who pays 30% in taxes clearly pays tons more in taxes than a secretary who pays 30% on $200,000. It’s just simple math. Buffett says that the rich have lobbyists to try to lower the estate and capital gains taxes and that’s why they should be vilified and that’s why the middle and poor class are right in hating them, but he misses the point. Everyone paying taxes is paying at least a “fair share,” even if they are all paying the same percentage and sometimes even if they are paying even a little less. What “services” does a man get back from the government when he pays $9 million in taxes, for example [30% of $30 million in taxable income]. The bottom line is that everyone paying taxes receives the same benefits from the government. Well, that isn’t exactly true, right? Those who don’t work and those earning below the poverty limit certainly receive a whole lot more services and benefits.

Mitt Romney has released his tax records and is being criticized as having paid “too little in income tax.” Certainly he is a wealthy man; he earned more than $20 million in taxable income in each of the last two years for which he released returns. But he paid exactly what he was required under the law. Because his income was entirely from short-term capital gains (the money earned on the profit realized on the sale of a non-inventory asset that was purchased at a lower price), his tax rate was around 15%. Unnoticed and therefore not taken into consideration by those criticizing him, however, is that most of that money was taxed already at the corporate rate of 35% before it was ever paid to him. So the government certainly got its money. While Democrats criticize Romney’s unfairly low burden and point to this as the very reason to attack the rich, when John Kerry paid only 13% in 2004, they remained noticeably silent. Americans have to get over the mindset that just because a man is wealthy, he must have become so because he screwed over poorer people and therefore it’s OK to hate him, envy him, and take his money. We could easily say the reverse.. Poorer people tend to stay in their socioeconomic class and not move upward because they’re screwing over richer people.

The sad thing is that Americans are so out of touch with their founding documents and have become so ignorant with respect to the values on which our country was founded that they aren’t posing the most fundamental question of all: “Why should the government even have the right to tax so many aspects of an individual’s property?” The layers of taxation is incredible. The government is charged with securing an individual’s “life, liberty, and property,” and should always be looking for ways to allow Americans to keep what is theirs under natural law and not for more and more ways to “convert” the people’s money to its own uses. Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute, is bothered by the fact that most people only seem to care about the fairness of the tax system as it relates to how much taxes rich people are paying. He explains: “When a government that has overspent for years turns to tax increases instead of spending cuts simply for the sake of “fairness,” it weakens free enterprise, lowers opportunity and impoverishes us in many ways.”

According to Obama and his supporters, there are Americans who aren’t paying “their fair share.” But the facts and figures simply don’t back him up. The top 1% of Americans pay 38% of the federal income tax burden. The top 5% of Americans pay 60% of the federal income tax burden. The top 10% of Americans pay at least 70% of the federal income tax burden. The middle class pays 15.1% of the federal income tax burden. And half of Americans don’t pay any federal income taxes at all and contribute essentially nothing to the funding of our government. In fact, a good chunk of that last category actually “makes money” under our current tax system. It is, after all, a wealth redistribution scheme. And that, by definition, is forcing some people to work to support others, which is unfair and unconstitutional. But perhaps Obama was referring to the capital gains tax not being high enough. The short-term capital gains tax is already 33% - the highest since 1978. (Long-term is 15%, which was a result of the 2003 Bush tax cuts, and then extended by Congress through 2012).

How dare US politicians exploit and intensify class warfare. It was class warfare – the hatred for the rich – which led to the 16th Amendment and then the vast expansion of government. Why single out the rich? Why not look at ordinary tax cheats? According to documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, more than 450,000 active and retired federal employees failed to file tax returns in 2005. Those taxes totaled over $3 million. Timothy Geithner, Obama’s Treasury Secretary, failed to pay his taxes, and so did Rep. Charles Rengel. There are many others. Former IRS Commissioner Charles Rossotti testified back in 2002 that there is a “tax gap,” which is the amount of tax owed that will never be collected. In 2002, that amount was a whopping $30 billion. Recently, the IRS reported that 36 of Obama’s executive office staff owe some $833,970 in back taxes, and thousands of federal employees owe back taxes totaling $3.4 billion. Why aren’t tax cheats the subject of the president’s economic recovery policy? Isn’t this what we are talking about – or should be talking about – when we refer to those “not paying their fair share.” Why is it always the rich who are to blame when there isn’t enough money for government to spend recklessly?

Note the hypocrisy of our President. On Dec. 5, 2008, Obama’s transition team told Finance Committee staff that Geithner had not paid social security or self-employment taxes on income received from the International Monetary Fund from 2001 to 2004. In 2005, the IRS audited Geithner for tax years 2003 and 2004, and he was ordered to pay back taxes and interest — but no penalties!! Imagine that. Even after a pattern of willingly and intentionally not paying taxes for 4 years, he was not required to pay any penalties, which would have totaled $16,732. But wait a minute, the IRS only looked at 2003-2004. Geithner was not compelled to pay taxes for 2001 and 2002. [The statute of limitations had expired, and the IRS did not have the authority to enforce any policies in these years.] The Senate Finance Committee characterized those errors as “honest mistakes.” Does this sound reasonable or does it sound like political cronyism? In all fairness (cough, cough), when Obama was getting ready to nominate him to the Treasury position, Geithner was “pressured” to voluntarily pay those taxes, but all he paid was $25, 970 as a total for both years.

Tim Geithner repeatedly failed to adhere to tax law, from 2001 through 2004. He is a bona fide serial tax cheat. If it weren’t for an IRS audit, he would never have paid any taxes. He was hoping to take advantage of the statute of limitations and cheat the system. Only when the opportunity to become Treasury Secretary presented itself did Geithner pay his back-taxes from the former two years. Learning of his pattern of cheating, President Obama chose to ignore them and nominated him to the post anyway – with the Senate’s consent, of course.

And what about charitable giving? In 2011 alone, Mitt Romney gave more than 19% of his income to various charities, including the Mormon Church. He donated more in charitable giving than in federal taxes, although the latter wasn’t a donation but rather a legal obligation, under penalty of fines and jail time (that’s only because he’s not a Democrat). The Obamas, on the other hand, gave just 1% of their income to charity between 2000 and 2004, but increased it to 5% by 2007. Joe Biden gave $369 (you read that correctly) the year before becoming vice president, and just $5,350 in 2010. ”A reasonable conclusion is that because “liberals” are so miserly with their money, they think the only way to “spread the wealth” around is through forced taxation.” (The Patriot Post).

Indeed, Obama has a monopoly on hypocrisy. It oozes from his lips every time he speaks. But the majority of Americans are too brainwashed or ignorant to know this to be true. Near the end of his State of the Union address, he said: “No one built this country on their own. This nation is great because we built it together. We’re great because we have each other’s backs.” What he really was too cowardly to say was this: “The rich must do more to have the backs of the poor.” (Wow, that rhymes).

Not one time in any of his speeches has he addressed how the “lifestyle freeloaders” help benefit anyone other than themselves? What should they be required to be disposed of in order to serve the nation? The taxpayers are disposed of their earnings (property) and their precious time (working 3-4 months to pay Uncle Sam). The conversations coming from our President and his party have to stop being one way. Cutting entitlement and other government programs will cut the need for increasing tax revenue and perhaps even do something magical, like force people to take education seriously (have you spent any time in the public school system lately and seen which students aren’t putting any effort in because they already know where their paychecks will be coming from?), force people to develop skills and become ambitious, curb teen pregnancy, prevent so many women from having babies when they aren’t married, and lower the out-of-control birthrate of those who can’t raise their children properly and make sure they go to school and excel. People will finally start doing the responsible thing, such as applying themselves in school, taking care of their health, taking care of their communities (because they have to work to pay for upkeep and repair, to protect their investments), and having only as many children as they can reasonably support and raise. But these common-sense ideas are never discussed by a Democrat. Why not? Imagine the great benefit to society if these things could happen. So many problems would be solved. In fact, their knee-jerk response to such talk is to cry “racism” – even though color has nothing to do with this discussion. But they will find a way to make it about color… they always do. And even if they claim that that such a solution would “disenfranchise” people of color, the next question should be “why?” Then they should do some further objective analysis. Because, as Obama said in his State of the Union address… we all must make this country together – not just one group or another.

Newt Gingrich recently said: “What allows one group of people to believe they have the right to determine what’s best for the lives of others and the right to take what they need for that agenda? We have gone the full spectra in the rights of man with respect to government: We replaced the divine right of Kings with the divine right of the individual to the divine right self-righteous groups.”

Members of society must accept that individual effort determines income, and that all have a right to enjoy the fruits of their effort. Equality is in the opportunity, not the status. Equality of wealth will ultimately make every man poor and sluggish and equality of social condition will ultimately lead to complete social decay.

Background:

Earlier I stated that the government has an obligation to protect the rights of citizens equally. After all, it expressly says so under the 14th Amendment. This amendment, after all, has not only been used to give rights to every group under the sun but it has also been used to give spirit to the Court’s broad powers as judicial activists. Schools were not only desegregated (legislative segregation was ended under Brown), but they were judicially mandated to use bussing and other artificial means to mix the races and reach acceptable “quotas” in school districts, even if it meant using extensive plans to move students around. Surely, the “Equal Protection” clause must extend to the most basic of fundamental rights…. the right to property. After all, men and women convert the fruits of their mind and their creativity (intellectual property), the benefits of their personality, ethics, etc (good will, which is also an intellectual property), and the fruits of their labor into compensation. Salaries and other investments are converted “property.”

The Constitution was written for those in whose name it was cast – “We the People.” Why was it written for the People? As the Preamble explains, it was written so that people and their posterity would know what to expect from their new government. Basically the government would protect citizens from internal strife and from attack from the outside, but most importantly, it would defend individual liberty. In other words, the Founders did not establish the Constitution for the purpose of granting rights but rather for the purpose of protecting rights.

Thomas Jefferson, who drafted our Declaration of Independence, understood that there are certain rights fundamental to the idea of man being free and because it is our Creator who is responsible for life and because those rights flow from our humanity, governments have no power to take them away and instead, must be obligated to protect them. Drawing inspiration from philosopher John Locke, whom he studied intently, Jefferson believed that government is morally obliged to serve people, namely by protecting life, liberty, and property, and our government, as based on limited powers and the principle of checks and balances, was crafted to protect these fundamental rights. The Declaration was initially written to read: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, endowed by the Creator with certain natural rights that among these are the Enjoyment of Life and Liberty, with the Means of acquiring and possessing Property, and pursuing and obtaining Happiness and Safety.” This language was believed, especially according to Virginia’s George Mason, to be a literal improvement of Locke’s phrase “Life, Liberty, and Property.”

John Locke stressed that private property is absolutely essential for liberty. In his Treatise on Government, he explains that the primary reason for men to organize themselves into societies and to institute a common government is for “the Preservation of their Property.” He wrote: “Every Man has a Property in his own Person. This no Body has any right to but himself. The Labour of his Body, and the Work of his Hands, we may say, are properly his.” Certainly, the right to property and the right to the fruits of one’s labor (including compensation) are as fundamental a right as the right to life itself.

Locke believed people legitimately turned common property into private property by mixing their labor with it, improving it. He insisted that people, not rulers, are sovereign, which also happens to be the bedrock principle underlying our Constitution. Government, Locke wrote, “can never have a Power to take to themselves the whole or any part of the Subjects Property, without their own consent. For this would be in effect to leave them no Property at all.” He makes his point even more explicit: rulers “must not raise Taxes on the Property of the People, without the Consent of the People, given by themselves, or their Deputies.” Thus, according to Locke, an individual’s labor, his intellect, his personality, the good will he earns through his honest and ethical conduct, and the fruits of all of these are his PROPERTY and are to be protected with the greatest zeal by any legitimate government.

Locke went further and affirmed an explicit right to revolution: “Whenever the Legislators endeavor to take away, and destroy the Property of the People, or to reduce them to Slavery under Arbitrary Power, they put themselves into a state of War with the People, who are thereupon absolved from any farther Obedience, and are left to the common Refuge, which God hath provided for all Men, against Force and Violence.”

In 1772, John Adams wrote “The Rights of the Colonists,” which he delivered to a Boston Town meeting. He started his historic document with these words: “Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these: First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; Thirdly, to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can. These are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature.” As the colonists were British subjects at the time, Adams further wrote in his essay: “The absolute rights of Englishmen and all freemen, in or out of civil society, are principally personal security, personal liberty, and private property.”

Arthur Lee of Virginia (1775) wrote: “The Right of property is the guardian of every other Right, and to deprive the people of this, is in fact to deprive them of their Liberty.” William Blackstone, the great British legal scholar, wrote: “So great is the regard of the law for private property, that it will not authorize the least violation of it; no, not even for the general good of the whole community.” Ayn Rand, author and philosopher, wrote: “Just as man can’t exist without his body, so no rights can exist without the right to translate one’s rights into reality, to think, to work and keep the results, which means: the right of property.” Thomas Jefferson wrote: “To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father’s has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association – ‘the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.’” He also said, in his 1801 inaugural address: “A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of the laborer the bread he has earned.” And finally, Frederic Bastiat, a French economist, wrote: “Each of us has a natural right – from God – to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of one is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two.”

Prior to 1913, the government operated with revenues raised through tariffs, excise taxes, and property taxes, without ever touching a worker’s paycheck. The Supreme Court has classified income tax as a direct income tax. Apparently, in enacting the 16th Amendment, legislators ignored the pesky little problem of States’ rights and the concept of federalism. After the government attempted to enact a peace-time income tax following the Civil War, the Supreme Court, in Pollock v Farmer’s Loan and Trust, 157 U.S. 429 (1895), declared it unconstitutional. Referring to the explicit prohibition against direct taxation in Article I, the Court argued that the income tax would excessively enhance federal power in relation to state power. But in an effort to “soak the rich” and attempt to strip them of at least some of the power they held, the 16th Amendment was passed despite the important Constitutional principle it violated.

In his book “The Income Tax: Root of all Evil,” Frank Chodorov explains why taxes on income and inheritance are different in principle from all other taxes: “The government says to the citizen: ‘Your earnings are not exclusively your own; we have a claim on them, and our claim precedes yours; we will allow you to keep some of it, because we recognize your need, not your right; but whatever we grant you for yourself is for us to decide.’”

As Larry Arnn and Grover Norquist wrote in their 2003 article in Claremont entitled “Repeal the 16th Amendment”: “Although the first income tax in 1913 was very limited – it applied to just 2% of the labor force, and its highest rate was 7% – it prepared the way for the federal government’s almost unlimited access to revenue. It thus provided an almost unlimited ability to fund programs that are properly state matters–crime fighting, education, welfare–and to pressure the states into conforming to a national standard in matters that should reflect regional differentiation, like speed limits and drinking ages.”

The Problem:

The nation currently faces a crisis not only financially, but also of conscience. It also faces a crisis of Constitutional proportions, under both the very language of Article I and under the Equal Protection Clause which requires that laws must be applied equally to all Americans. In 2009, the Democratic-led Congress enacted a series of tax reforms and generous exemptions and tax credits and then in 2010, it passed the gargantuan economic stimulus bill. The result of these reforms, credits, and stimulus bill is that millions of Americans have been dropped from the federal tax rolls. A huge number of Americans are simply no longer affected by the federal income tax. Before these tax reforms, 47% of Americans were already not paying income tax. Now this number is about 50% and shows every indication of continuing to climb higher. As if that weren’t enough, the bottom 40% of income-earners actually receive a cash payment from the government at tax time – “the Earned Income Credit.” This is a re-distribution of wealth in its most recognizable form and is not covered under the “General Welfare” Clause. Hence it is not a legitimate exercise of Congress’s powers.

To make matters even more unfair, those who are required to pay taxes often have to spend quite a bit of money on tax compliance. A recent study shows that taxpayers spend an astounding $431.1 billion annually on such compliance. How large is $431.1 billion? It’s more than the dollar value of all the goods and services produced in a state such as Virginia or Michigan.

Under the Obama administration, many Americans accustomed to paying their share of federal taxes are being taken off the tax rolls. Recent tax law changes mean that for the first time, in 2009, a family of four making $50,000 can pay no federal income tax at all. A family at this income level has surely suffered in this recession, but should they really pay no federal income tax at all? By the way, can you guess which political party they will now side with?

The fact is that America has become divided between a growing class of people who pay no income taxes and a shrinking class of people who are bearing the lion’s share of the burden. Despite what critics have said about former President Bush that the tax cuts enacted in 2001, 2003 and 2004 favored the “rich,” these cuts actually reduced the tax burden of low- and middle-income taxpayers and shifted the tax burden onto wealthier taxpayers. Everything the government does continues to shift the tax burden onto wealthier taxpayers and at some point it has to stop before the notion of fundamental fairness we so treasure in this country is made a complete mockery of.

The current mindset of the Democrats and progressives is dangerous and alarming. It goes against the fundamental principles of our founding documents. Democrats and progressive politicians have turned John Kennedy’s “Ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country” on its head. And telling so many Americans that they don’t need to make sacrifices for our government, as we are now saying, is dangerous new territory for our nation and for the health of our democracy and economy.

Furthermore, by placing the tax burden so heavily on a certain class of Americans and continuing to do so by excluding so many others, the situation is almost tantamount to institutional slavery, or involuntary servitude (to be free only when he or she retires, loses his job, or takes a job at a very low pay). In other words, a taxpayer can only be freed from this immense burden (over 4 months of the year are spent in financial hock to the federal government) if he or she betrays her own conscience and inalienable right to pursue the career of his/her own choice. The 13th Amendment promises that “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, shall exist within the United States.”

Recognizing that there is an inherent laziness and “degree of depravity in mankind” which will unfortunately flourish greater in a republican form of government (James Madison), we would expect non-taxpayers to behave as they do. Their demand for entitlements and government programs is naturally insatiable because they don’t care at all about the cost. Others are providing the funding who, in their eyes, have “more than enough.” Consequently, they will always support increasing government programs as a long as they get even a small benefit from them because it does not cost them a cent. And so they will support politicians who favor more spending. Representatives who need the support of such persons to be elected will continue to take from the pockets of others to provide to this solid voting bloc.

Therefore, by taking more and more Americans off the federal tax rolls, Democrats and progressives are creating a permanent base of supporters for themselves. In doing so, they have abused the progressive income tax too flagrantly and too unashamedly. Many years ago, when Americans were Christians and God-fearing people, they knew it wasn’t right to take something for nothing. They knew they should not look at what another has and covet it. But Americans are a new breed and ‘honor’ isn’t a word that’s used much anymore.

At the rate Democrats and progressives are going, hard-working Americans can never expect their tax rates to go down. And it has to stop now, in the name of fundamental fairness and with reference to the Constitution and the reason the nation was formed in the first place.

Just as Democrats are catering to the needs of their voter base, Republicans must now begin to look after the interests of their voters.

The Solution:

We’ve talked about disenfranchisement and about class warfare. We’ve looked at the fundamental values underlying our nation’s founding and we’ve looked at the problem created by our broken, unfair tax system. At its core, the problem isn’t about how much one group thinks the government should take from another group to somehow satisfy some subjective notion of ‘fundamental fairness,’ the problem is about the audacious and arrogant “right” of the government to take what it thinks it needs from people in the first place. And if the government is going to take from some without taking from others, then there must be constitutional safeguards put in place to legitimately protect the interests of that former group with respect to the latter group. That is a legitimate “fundamental fairness” issue and one that our Constitution in fact does demand. The question becomes this: What is a fair way to safeguard the interests of taxpayers against those who do not pay?

For all the reasons above, I make the following proposal. I propose that voter rights be subjected to the same arbitrary and progressive rules that property rights are. Just as the tax burden is assigned on the ability to pay, the weight of an individual’s vote should be assigned based on the ‘stake’ that person has in government policies that will potentially diminish his or her property rights. In other words, the weight of a person’s vote should equal the amount of skin that person has in the game. A person with a lot of money might be taxed more but he also should have a greater say in what the government does with his money as opposed to someone who has contributes nothing.

So how would this play out? Well, everyone is entitled to the “equal opportunity” to vote so every citizen of legal age would automatically get one vote. Additional votes would be allotted, progressively, according to the amount of property subject to government regulation and according to the amount of money the citizen would be required to turn over in taxes. For example, every taxpayer who owns a house might get a second vote. Every taxpayer who owns a business would get a third vote. Every taxpayer who experiences a jump in the tax rate gets additional votes.

Notice that I didn’t say that everyone has the constitutional right to vote. While most Americans believe that we possess the “legal” right to vote in this country, the fact is that our Constitution only provides for non-discrimination in voting on the basis of race, sex, and age in the 15th, 19th and 26th Amendments, respectively. The US Constitution contains no affirmative individual right to vote nor is it protected from the forces of government in the Bill of Rights. The 10th Amendment to the Constitution states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the State, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Since the word “vote” appears in the Constitution only with respect to non-discrimination, the so-called right to vote is a “state right.” It could be argued, however, that the right to vote underlies our other fundamental rights because it protects them and therefore it is an affirmative right. In fact, voting rights protect all other rights and privileges in this country. But it was the Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore (2000) which reminded us that there is no explicit or fundamental right to suffrage in the Constitution. Chief Justice William Rehnquist had this to say: “In the eyes of the [Supreme] Court, democracy is rooted not in the right of the American people to vote and govern but in a set of state-based institutional arrangements for selecting leaders.” Even more, the Court stated: “The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States.” [So, for example, if President George Bush lost the case, the Florida legislature could have discarded the 6 million popular votes cast in Florida (either real or by "hanging chads"!) and been within its legal authority to select a panel of electors of their choosing to vote for President. It was Republican at the time, so following this hypothetical, it would have made sure that Bush got the electoral votes].

Only an amendment to the Constitution – a “Voting Rights” amendment – can correct the flaw in our system highlighted by the Bush v. Gore case. Only a constitutional amendment would give every American an individual affirmative citizenship right to vote and not one subject to any limitations by the state, such as a residency requirement. (“You must be a resident in the state for at least one year in order to vote.”)

Consider this proposal for a 28th Amendment:

SECTION 1: All citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, shall have the right to vote in any public election held in the jurisdiction in which the citizen resides. The right to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States, any State, or any other public or private person or entity, except that the United States or any State may establish regulations narrowly tailored to produce efficient and honest elections.

SECTION 2: The weight of each citizen’s vote shall be determined in accordance with the liability to which he or she is subject to the laws and regulations of the federal government because of property ownership and earned income.

SECTION 3: The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall elect Senators and Representatives in the Congress in such number and such manner as it would be entitled if it were a State.

SECTION 4: The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Why is a progressive voting scheme necessary? It is necessary for essentially two reasons: (1) to ensure that interests are fairly and proportionally represented; and (2) to ensure that checks are in place to force Congress to be responsible with people’s money. American taxpayers will soon face a crisis of no longer being fairly represented in government because the percentage of Americans who have no tax liability are reproducing at a faster pace than those paying taxes and welfare is becoming a way of life rather than a short-term necessity. Persons with no tax liability and no “skin in the game” are voting to spend other people’s money. They have no “stake” in the decisions of the government to spend taxpayer money or to raise taxes. It simply doesn’t matter to them. (When their programs get threatened, they can just hate the rich more and claim they aren’t “paying their fair share”). These non-taxpayers lack the proper nexus to the “checks and balances” that keeps government responsibly tied to person’s property. As a result, Congress will continue its out-of-control spending. Oh, it may talk about cutting the rate it is increasing its spending, but it won’t stop the ridiculous enlargement of programs and the irresponsible spending. Congress doesn’t have a taxing problem; it has a spending problem. It sees hardworking Americans as an unlimited source of revenue – but only those that make what the government deems is “enough.” And then that burden is enormous.

As I’ve already discussed, the federal income tax is a direct tax on property and therefore an unconstitutional burden on inalienable personal freedoms. The right to property and the right to the fruits of one’s labor (including a paycheck) are as fundamental a right as the right to life itself. The Declaration of Independence gives each individual the right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness (embodied in all types of property), and under the US Constitution, the federal government MUST protect these rights equally for all Americans. Yet the government has not done so.

Our Founders created a republic form of government to protect the rights of minority groups from mob rule, but they never expected other groups of Americans to be required to support them through forced and regulated charity (spreading the wealth or redistribution of wealth). There is indeed a Constitutional crisis when fundamental rights are treated so shabbily. There is indeed a Constitutional crisis when fundamental rights are treated so differently between and among groups of Americans. We’ve gone through many crises in our country when civil liberties and fundamental rights were not respected equally and we’ve put laws in place to remedy the situation. Yet when it comes to money, our government and courts can’t seem to apply the same notions of fundamental fairness and equality, even though money is intricately tied to more precious fundamental rights.

We have undeniably sunk to a new low in “punishing” productive behavior – such as investing in education, conducting oneself morally and ethically, building a career, and making the necessary sacrifices in family life to move up the corporate or business ladder – through excessive taxation. Such productive behavior used to be the ones that defined Americans. That’s not the case anymore. The character of Americans has changed. The dynamics in this country are changing. There is an old saying which goes something like this – If you punish those who work hard and raise their families right, they will start having less children, and if you reward those for being lazy and being freeloaders, then they will have more children. And that’s what we are seeing. We are seeing a shift in the distribution of those who are contributing and those who are taking and it doesn’t bode well for the country and especially for taxpayer. Our financial bankruptcy is finally catching up with the depth of our moral and ethical bankruptcy.

Congress bears a moral responsibility to provide for and protect individual Liberty, including economic Liberty, and personal property (whether real or intellectual). If the current income tax structure is permitted to exist in its arbitrary and progressive nature, then immediately, there MUST be voter reform to institute a progressive, or weighted, voting system to protect the inherent property interests of taxpayers. While each person is entitled to one vote, additional voter weight will be given to those who pay taxes, own property, own a business, and otherwise engage in activities which are subject to the onerous and burdensome taxation requirements of the federal government. This progressive voting scheme will be necessary to combat the inherent unfairness of the current income tax scheme. It will provide that necessary constitutional safeguard to protect a person’s property from the insatiable jaws of government. It will help exceedingly to protect against the thing that could destroy personal freedom and that is government confiscation of property. Then we’d surely have communism here in America. Right now it’s socialism that is moving closer to fascism. (Note that you don’t need outright confiscation of private property or business to impose socialism. It doesn’t really matter if you hold the title to your property the government regulates it so heavily as to render it useless or unproductive. It doesn’t really matter if you hold the title to your business if the government holds the power over the life or death of it).

In the alternative, of course, we could simply abolish the 16th Amendment and move to a Fair Tax or other fair taxation scheme, or go back to the taxation scheme that served our nation well for the first 126 years of our existence – revenues which were raised through tariffs, excise taxes, and property taxes. It never touched a worker’s paycheck. Of course, that would require the federal government to divest all its unconstitutional powers and functions, return the responsibilities to the states, where they certainly would apply them more fairly and intuitively to their citizens.

My solution just keeps getting better !!

In summary, we need to a return to fairness, and not the kind of fairness that Democrats talk about. Fairness needs to apply to everyone and not just those who have chosen to do the very least to get by and therefore feel they are entitled to what others have earned. We need tax reform (or if not, then voter reform!). With tax reform, we need the government to cut its “cradle-to-grave” nanny-state policies. Then we can finally expect to see tax breaks. We need to get the millions off dependency and into self-sufficiency. We need them to stop waiting around for a government check and instead, getting out each day to work to earn a paycheck or to class for an education to get a bigger paycheck. No one has the right to claim inequality unless he or she is willing to put an honest effort into an education and learning the English language in order to speak and communicate fairly intelligently. We need to stop the mean-spirited accusations and the tired old line that certain Americans can’t achieve because they are victims. Everyone is in charge of their own destiny. As Machiavelli once warned: “It is just as difficult and dangerous to try to free a people that wants to remain servile as it is to enslave a people that wants to remain free.”

Diane Rufino

References:

Larry P. Arnn and Grover Norquist, “Repeal the 16th Amendment,” The Claremont Institute, April 15, 2003.
http://www.claremont.org/publications/pubid.477/pub_detail.asp
Ilana Mercer, Repeal the Abominable 16th Amendment, WorldNetDaily, November 20, 2002.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=29716#ixzz1F6ILra20
“Government and Policies: Class Warfare Dominates Debate,” The Patriot Post, Digest – January 27, 2012. Referenced at: http://patriotpost.us/edition/2012/01/27/digest/
Charles Gasparino, “Adding Up to Nothing,” NY Post, January 26, 2012. Referenced at: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/adding_up_to_nothing_8K1eBN3afYXNELupfK8tRL
Timothy Geithner, Honest Questions. Referenced at: http://www.honestquestions.com/tim-geithner/
Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98, 104 (2000)

http://ncrenegade.com/editorial/votiing-reform-a-progressive-voting-scheme/

America Then and Now – Obama Policies Have Put America at Risk

2012-01-30T19:49:00.000-05:00

In 1980, President Ronald Reagan asked the American people if they were better off after nearly four years of President Jimmy Carter. The answer was an obvious NO! If you listen to President Obama you might think all is well in America. We all know better. The chart below shows just how bad things are. I encourage you to review and share with others.

Thanks,
Walter Jones

America Then and Now – Obama Policies Have Put America at Risk

America Before President Obama Took Office and Now

                                               Before               Now               Change

Number of Unemployed1        12.0 Million      13.1 Million          +9%
Long-Term Unemployed2         2.7 Million        5.6 Million       +107%
Unemployment Rate3                   7.8%               8.5%                +9%
“High Unemployment” States4      22                    43                  +95%
Misery Index5                             7.83               11.46                 +46%
Price of Gas6                            $1.85               $3.39                 +83%
“Typical” Monthly Family
    Food Cost7                          $974                $1,013               +4%
Median Value of Single-Family
    Home8                               $196,600           $169,100            -14%
Rate of Mortgage
       Delinquencies9                  6.62%               10.23%             +55%
U.S. National Debt10          $10.6 Trillion      $15.2 Trillion         +43%

1 Number of unemployed in January 2009 and December 2011. http://www.bls.gov/data/#unemployment.
2 “Long-term unemployed” means for over 26 weeks; data for January 2009 and December 2011. http://www.bls.gov/data/#unemployment.
3 Unemployment rates in January 2009 and December 2011. http://www.bls.gov/data/#unemployment.
4 “High unemployment” means having a 3-month average unemployment rate of 6% or higher. From the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ “Extended Benefits Trigger Notice” for January 18, 2009 and January 22, 2012. http://www.ows.doleta.gov/unemploy/trigger/2009/trig_011809.html  and http://ows.doleta.gov/unemploy/euc_trigger/2012/euc_012212.html.
5 The “Misery Index” equals unemployment plus inflation. For January 2009 and December 2012. http://www.miseryindex.us/indexbymonth.asp.
6 Average retail price per gallon, January 2009 week 3 and January 2012 week 4. http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=EMM_EPMR_PTE_NUS_DPG&f=W.
7 U.S. Department of Agriculture, values represent monthly “moderate” cost per family of four for January 2009 and November 2011. http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/USDAFoodCost-Home.htm.
8 U.S. median sales price of existing single-family homes for metropolitan areas for 2008 and 2011 Q3. http://www.realtor.org/research/research/metroprice.
9 Residential mortgage delinquencies (real estate loans) for 2008 Q4 and 2011 Q3. http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/chargeoff/default.htm.

10 Values for January 21, 2009 and January 23, 2012. http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np.

Michelle Malkin: ‘Santorum for President’

2012-01-30T19:34:00.000-05:00

January 30, 2012
THE BLAZE

In an article titled “Rick Santorum for President,” conservative authoress Michelle Malkin throws her support behind the former Pennsylvania senator.

Malkin argues that, of the remaining GOP candidates, Rick Santorum is the most conservative and she backs up her claim by citing his political record. However, lest she be written off as a shameless Santorum shill, she also points out that — like the other GOP candidates — he has his fair share of shortcomings.

Malkin begins by highlighting Santorum’s conservative credentials: his opposition to TARP, the fact that he didn’t “cave when Chicken Littles in Washington invoked a manufactured crisis in 2008,” that he is not among the GOP nominees (i.e. Romney and Gingrich) who supported the bailouts and he didn’t have to “obfuscate or rationalize his position then or now, like Rick Perry and Herman Cain did.”

Furthermore, Santorum “strongly opposed the auto bailout,” the Freddie and Fannie bailout, the “porkulus” bills, and he “clearly and forcefully” opposed individual health care mandates.

He also voted against cap and trade in 2003, voted “Yes” to drilling in ANWR, and, unlike some GOP candidates, he never “dabbled with eco-radicals like John Holdren, Al Gore and Nancy Pelosi,” as Malkin puts it.

CONTINUED AT:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/michelle-malkin-santorum-for-president/

CAGW: Porker of the Month--Sen. Kent Conrad

2012-01-30T16:23:00.000-05:00

On January 24, in commemoration/lamentation of the 1,000th day since the Senate Budget Committee last performed its most significant task - passing a budget resolution - Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) named Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) Porker of the Month. The last time the Senate approved a budget was on April 29, 2009. The House, by comparison, has voted in favor of two budget resolutions during the past two years. This is “an important milestone in fiscal ineptitude and mindless brinksmanship,” declared CAGW President Tom Schatz, noting that Chairman Conrad and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) have made clear that their decision not to enact a budget resolution is conscious, unified, and partisan. “Since April 2009, the budget deficit has exceeded $1 trillion for three straight years, and the national debt has climbed by more than $4 trillion to $15.2 trillion. Chairman Conrad’s bewildering reputation as a budget hawk makes his legislative catatonia all the more frustrating.” For cashing a hefty paycheck for doing nothing in the last 1,000 days, CAGW names Senate Budget Committee Chairman Conrad the January 2012 Porker of the Month.

Read more about the Porker of the Month.
http://www.cagw.org/newsroom/porker-of-the-month/

Liberal SuperPAC Targets Tea Party Reps and Their ‘Downright Crazy Actions and Beliefs’

2012-01-30T16:05:00.000-05:00

January 30, 2012
THE BLAZE

ActBlue, a non-profit political committee who describes themselves as “the online clearinghouse for Democratic action,“ has waged war on a group of Republican legislators who they label ”the Tea Party Ten” via their own “CREDO” SuperPAC. The “Take Down the Tea Party Ten” campaign is aiming to collect donations to help take down 10 members of Congress, naming the frist six Monday; Reps. Sean Duffy (R-Wis.), Steve King (R-Iowa), Allen West (R-Fla), Joe Walsh (R-Ill.), Frank Guinta (R-N.H.), and Chip Cravaack (R-Minn.) The CREDO fundraising page at ActBlue.com reads:

“These Tea Party extremists in Congress have spent the last year attacking women, science and the very notion of equality under the law.

Their racist, sexist, anti-science, hypocritical, corrupt and downright crazy actions and beliefs make them unfit to serve in Congress.

We need your help to take them down.”

CONTINUED:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/liberal-superpac-targets-tea-party-reps-and-their-downright-crazy-actions-and-beliefs/

‘We Will Not Comply’: Catholic Leaders Distribute Letter Slamming Obama Admin Contraceptive Mandate

2012-01-30T15:40:00.000-05:00

January 30, 2012

THE BLAZE

We’ve covered the Catholic Church’s ongoing battle with the Obama administration over contraception health care mandates for quite some time. Over the weekend, though, the stand-off took an unusual turn, as Catholic churches across America read a letter to congregants that perfectly encapsulated the church’s stance against the impending federal requirements.

The Church’s vocal arguments against the Obama administration are centered upon a Health and Human Services Department requirement that employers must include contraception and abortion-inducing drugs in health-care coverage. While this requirement doesn’t apply to houses of worship, it will force Catholic colleges, hospitals and other Christian groups to provide these drugs despite their faith-based opposition to them.

CONTINUED:http://www.theblaze.com/stories/we-will-not-comply-catholic-leaders-distribute-letter-slamming-obama-admin-contraceptive-mandate/

NC RENEGADE: The Theory is Now a Conspiracy And Facts Don’t Lie

2012-01-29T14:38:00.000-05:00

Posted: 27 Jan 2012

Though we live in an era when all undesirable facts are often blindly labeled “conspiracy theories” by political operatives with an agenda at risk, a very real conspiracy unfolds every now and then.

While it is indeed true that not all theories are actual conspiracies, like when Hillary Clinton developed an imaginary “right-wing conspiracy” out to get her husband, when in fact, the semen stained dress provided all the necessary (but unfriendly) facts and a perfectly logical explanation for all of those nasty rumors – it is also true that some conspiracies are much more than just crackpot theory.

To be a bonafide conspiracy, two or more individuals must knowingly conspire, plot or plan an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious act. In politics or law, an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act, is a “conspiracy.” Not in theory, but in reality.

Such is the case today!

A political national committee, the Chair of the Party convention, the Secretary of the Party, Party offices in each of fifty states, and maybe many – many more, have knowingly and wantonly defrauded the American election system and more than 300 million American citizens.

They plotted and planned an act of evil, unlawful, treacherous fraud in a blind quest for unbridled political power, and they hoped that you would never catch it. They almost got away with it too…

They snuck it past fifty state election commissions, congress, the US Supreme Court and Justice Department, the Federal Elections Commission and countless members of the Electoral College nationwide. Not a single member of the, as Limbaugh says, “drive-by media” caught it either, or if they did, they decided to become complicit for their own political reasons.

But as is always the case with liars, cheats and thieves, they slip up – make a silly mistake – overplay their hand – leave evidence lying around that they had forgotten about. And as with all chronic liars, they eventually get caught in their own web of lies.

Then, one day, someone stumbles into that evidence, and the house of cards comes crashing down around them. It’s almost poetic…

The Mistake

Aware of the fact that Barack Hussein Obama does NOT meet Article II – Section I constitutional requirements for the office of President, what well-seasoned professional politician would be stupid enough to sign their name and stake their personal career upon certifying Obama as eligible?

Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates are nominated at their respective Party Conventions.

Believe it or not, each Party is assigned the duty of vetting and certifying the legal eligibility of their own candidates. I know, like asking the fox to guard the henhouse, right. But hey, we are talking about a country which still thinks there is a separation of powers between the High Court and the Executive branch, which seats that court by way of political appointment, confirmed by congress, which wants a piece of the judge and expects a few political favors too.

PLEASE CONTINUE TO READ:
http://ncrenegade.com/editorial/the-theory-is-now-a-conspiracy-and-facts-dont-lie/

Allen West to Obama, Reid, Pelosi: ‘Get the Hell Out of the United States of America’

2012-01-29T13:47:00.000-05:00

Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.) had a strong message Saturday for President Barack Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz: “Get the hell out.”

West made the comments during a speech at a Palm Beach County GOP event in West Palm Beach.

“This is a battlefield that we must stand upon. And we need to let President Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and my dear friend, chairman of the Democrat National Committee, we need to let them know that Florida ain’t on the table,” West said.

CONTINUED WITH VIDEO:http://www.theblaze.com/stories/allen-west-to-obama-reid-pelosi-get-the-hell-out-of-the-united-states-of-america/

The Daily Rant: It’s Black History Month Again

2012-01-28T11:03:00.000-05:00

Mychal-Massie.Com
January 28, 2012

February marks the beginning of black history month. Even though we have a black man and woman occupying the highest office in the world, lurid complaints of inequality are the norm when it comes to race. Blacks are quick to point out that Obama and wife are down with the struggle, and that the justified criticism of them is unfair and prima facie evidence of the deep seated racism in America today. Of course, omitted in this mantra is the fact that blacks were not singularly responsible for electing Obama. Omitted is the fact that it took a lot of white votes for him to be elected.

Also omitted in the complaint, is the fact that while Obama and wife play to the image of sticking it to the white man, their policies have specifically contributed mightily to the degradation of the black family. Many blacks, may live vicariously through the Obama’s and black celebrities, but at the end of the day, that does not translate into solving what is admittedly a problem.

To that end, in February 2005, I wrote the following syndicated piece – that despite massive amounts of money and blame, remains as true today as it did then. The true contagium for said inequality, such as it exists, is not racism – is the refusal to recognize and address the real problem. That said, the following while directed at black families, is just as imperative for the families of all children.

TEACH SCIENCE, MATH, ENGLISH TO BLACK CHILDREN:

Why should we not question the value of Black History Month as such? Why should we not study the true value of a month dedicated to teaching measured snippets of the past, when the children of the present go uneducated?

I am not opposed to the teaching of black history. I am opposed, however, to the charade Black History Month has become. American black history is not dashikis and pan Africanism – nor is it Arthur Haley’s mythical account known as “Roots.”

Black History Month’s goal – properly taught as originally intended – was to teach factual history with the inclusion of blacks who contributed to same. One could also make the case that we need a Shakespeare month, a Mark Twain month, a Founding Father’s month and a history of war month to compensate for the fraudulent revisionist exclusionary teachings in most public-school classrooms today, but I digress.

Black History was initiated (as Black History Week) as a method of inclusion. Today, it has become a tool to further self-imposed separation and exclusion. But again, I digress.

Black children in disturbingly large numbers are receiving an inferior education. And while it is easy to blame everyone from the president down – ultimately the fault lies with the parents, children and academic culture of the National Education Association.

It is more important children are able to spell the names of Marcus Garvey, W.E.B. Dubois and Malcolm X (albeit I personally consider these least worthy of recognition) than it is for them to simply hear about same. It is important they can recognize those names on the printed page, which means it is more important they can read.

I know I am treading on the holy grail of “blackdom,” but it is time we view things in their proper perspective.

CONTINUE READING!http://mychal-massie.com/premium/its-black-history-month-again/

Liberal Dems say Pentagon spending cuts should be doubled

2012-01-27T15:09:00.000-05:00

The White House should cut nearly twice the $487 billion it has committed to reducing the Pentagon's budget, according to Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and other liberal Democrats.

The liberals say the planned cuts, announced Thursday by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, don't go nearly far enough to reduce the defense budget.

“The Cold War is long over and no remotely comparable adversary has emerged or is likely to emerge,” the Democrats wrote in a letter to Obama. “We believe that savings of around $900 billion over the next 10 ears can be realized. We ask you to take even bolder leadership on this issue as you finalize your budget.”

Besides Frank, Reps. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), Rush Holt (D-N.J.) and Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) signed on to the letter calling for deep spending cuts and the withdrawal of U.S. troops in Afghanistan this year.

CONTINUED:http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/budget-approriations/207047-pentagon-cuts-arent-deep-enough-for-some-democrats

Michael Speciale announces run for House District 3

2012-01-27T11:39:00.000-05:00

As a Republican his entry insures a GOP primary-- Local activist Michael Speciale (pronounced spe sha lee) has announced his candidacy for the North Carolina House of Representatives for District 3. This District includes all of Pamlico County, as well as portions of Craven and Beaufort Counties.

CONTINUED:http://www.beaufortobserver.net/Articles-NEWS-and-COMMENTARY-c-2012-01-26-258361.112112-Michael-Speciale-announces-run-for-House-District-3.html

Americans for Prosperity: American Workers aren't Political Pawns!

2012-01-26T19:47:00.000-05:00

In late 2010 the Obama Administration asked Solyndra to hold off announcing massive worker layoffs until after the November 2010 elections. Those 1,100 workers had no idea that they would be fired. Today 90% of those workers remain unemployed. Taxpayer dollars should never be used to subsidize political ideology, and this is a perfect example of what distorting the market place can do. As details of the green energy scam continue to come to light, we must tell President Obama: American workers aren't pawns in your political games.

Click Here to Learn More about how Obama Sacraficed American Workers for Political Games

Please take action now, and let the President know that American jobs and the economy are critical, and that you stand on the side of prosperity.

Click here to see AFP's new ad and to sign the petition now!

Sincerely,
Tim Phillips
President, Americans for Prosperity

FACTSHEET: Obamacare: Obama Ends Medicare As We Know It

2012-01-26T19:30:00.000-05:00

From the Heritage Foundation
January 25, 2012

We Need Medicare Reform, but Not Obamacare

Obamacare Ends Traditional Medicare, but the Wrong Way: Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi claimed that the health law protects Medicare. The truth: Obamacare makes massive changes to the program. Obamacare contains more than 160 provisions for Medicare that increase government’s control over the delivery of care, hit doctors with unsustainable payment cuts, and leave taxpayers with higher deficits.

Obamacare Continues an Outdated Model for Reform: Obamacare expands central planning and tightens price controls on providers. These recycled mechanisms have yet to show any success in driving down costs without harming patients’ access and quality of care. Even the program’s chief accountant says many Medicare providers cannot survive the cuts.

Obamacare Undermines the Doctor–Patient Relationship: On top of the severe payment cuts facing physicians that will threaten seniors’ access, the law weakens the doctor–patient relationship by linking payment not to patient outcomes but to adherence to government protocol.

MUCH MORE!http://www.heritage.org/research/factsheets/2012/01/obamacare-obama-ends-medicare-as-we-know-it?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Heritage%2BHotsheet

Media Release: Businessman Wayne Langston Announces Candidacy for NC House 3

2012-01-26T19:25:00.000-05:00

Media Release

For Immediate Release
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Bill Tarpenning, 410-919-7572

Washington, NC businessman Wayne Langston announced today he will seek the Republican nomination for the North Carolina State House 3 seat representing southern Beaufort, Pamlico and much of Craven counties. This is the seat currently held by Norm Sanderson (R - Arapahoe) who is expected to run for Senate District 2 seat of retiring Senator Jean Preston (R - Emerald Isle). Langston,43, styles himself a fiscal conservative and believes the state budget crisis continues to be a priority for the GOP controlled state legislature.

"We are in terrible trouble with our budget situation. Among other things we have borrowed over two billion dollars from the federal government to fund unemployment payments with no end in sight. Northeastern North Carolina needs representation within the GOP house majority, and I aim to provide that voice."

Langston, a real estate management director, vows to vote the issues and not the straight party line. "Sometimes our party is wrong. " I was very disappointed to see the General Assembly impose a fee structure on what are now toll-free ferry routes. I do not favor government intervention in the citizen's right of passage on the public transportation grid. When I get to Raleigh I will work to repeal this flawed legislation

Langston will attend the Craven County Republican Women's club luncheon at the Chelsea restaurant in New Bern on Wednesday, January 25, and the Beaufort County Republican Club on Thursday, January 26th at Woogie's Seafood Restaurant in Chocowinity.

Langston makes his home in the Chocowinity precinct where he has been active in community recreation. This is his first run for public office.

A US court finally has heard evidence of Obama's eligibility !!

2012-01-26T19:22:00.000-05:00

YOU WILL WANT TO READ THIS! IT IS HISTORIC!

January 26, 2012

Here is a break-down of today's historic event --

Given the testimony from today’s court case in Georgia, Obama has a lot of explaining to do. His attorney, Jablonski, was a NO SHOW as of course, was Obama.

The following is a nutshell account of the proceedings:

Promptly at 9am EST, all attorneys involved in the Obama Georgia eligibility case were called to the Judge’s chambers. This was indeed a very interesting beginning to this long awaited and important case. The case revolved around the Natural Born clause of the constitution and whether or not Obama qualifies under it to serve. More to the point, if found ineligible, Obama’s name would not appear on the 2012 ballot in Georgia.

With the small courtroom crowded, several in attendance could be seen fanning themselves with pamphlets as they waited for the return of the attorneys and the appearance of the judge. Obama himself, who had been subpoenaed to appear, of course was nowhere near Georgia. Instead, Obama was on a campaign swing appearing in Las Vegas and in Colorado ignoring the court in Georgia.

Over the last several weeks, Obama’s attorney, Michael Jablonski, had attempted several tactics to keep this case from moving forward. He first tried to have it dismissed, then argued that it was irrelevant to Obama. After that, Jablonski argued that a state could not, under the law, determine who would or would not be on a ballot and later, that Obama was simply too busy with the duties of office to appear.

After all these arguments were dispatched by the Georgia court, Jablonski, in desperation, wrote to the Georgia Secretary of State attempting to place Obama above the law and declared that the case was not to he heard and neither he nor his client would participate.

Secretary of State, Brian Kemp, fired back a letter hours later telling Jablonski he was free to abandon the case and not participate but that he would do so at his, and his clients peril.

Game on..........

5 minutes. 10 minutes. 15 minutes with the attorneys in the judge’s chambers. 20 minutes.

It appears Jablonski is not in attendance as the attorneys return, all go to the plantiffs table 24 minutes after meeting in the judge’s chambers. Has Obama’s attorney made good on his stated threat not to participate? Is he directly ignoring the court’s subpoena? Is he placing Obama above the law? It seems so. If Joe Q citizen were subpoened to appear in court, would he or his attorney be allowed such action or, non action? Certainly not.

Court is called to order.

-- Obama’s birth certificate is entered into evidence.
-- Obama’s father’s place of birth, Kenya East Africa is entered into evidence. Pages 214 and 215 from Obama’s book, “Dreams from My Father” entered into evidence. Highlighted. This is where Obama indicates that, in 1966 or 1967 that his father’s history is mentioned. It states that his father’s passport had been revoked and he was unable to leave Kenya.
-- Immigration Services documents entered into evidence regarding Obama Sr. June 27th 1962 is the date on those documents. Obama’s father’s status shown as a non-citizen of the United States. Documents were gotten through the freedom of information act.

Testimony regarding the definition of Natural Born Citizen is given citing the Supreme Court opinion from Minor vs Happersett (1875). The attorney points out the difference between “citizen” and “Natural Born Citizen” using charts and copies of the Minor vs Happersett opinion. It is also pointed out that the 14th Amendment does not alter the definition or supersede the meaning of Natural Born. It is pointed out that lower court rulings do not conflict with the Supreme Court opinion nor do they over rule the Supreme Court's opinion in Minor vs Happersett. The point is, to be a natural born citizen, one must have 2 parents who, at the time of the birth in question, be citizens of the United States. As Obama’s father was not a citizen, the argument is that Obama, constitutionally, is ineligible to serve as President.

Judge notes that as Obama nor his attorney is present, action will be taken accordingly.

Carl Swinson takes the stand. Testimony is presented that the SOS has agreed to hear this case, laws applicable, and that the DNC of Georgia will be on the ballot and the challenge to it by Swinson.

2nd witness, a Mr. Powell, takes the stand and presents testimony regarding documents of challenge to Obama’s appearance on the Georgia ballot and his candidacy.

-- Court records of Obama’s mother and father entered into evidence.
-- Official certificate of nomination of Obama entered into evidence.
-- RNC certificate of nomination entered into evidence. DNC language does NOT include language stating Obama is Qualified while the RNC document DOES. This shows a direct difference trying to establish that the DNC MAY possibly have known that Obama was not qualified.
-- Jablonski letter to Kemp yesterday entered into evidence showing their desire that these proceedings not take place and that they would not participate.

-- Dreams From My Father entered.

Mr. Allen from Tuscon AZ sworn in. Disc received from Immigration and Naturalization Service entered into evidence. This disc contains information regarding the status of Obama’s father received through the Freedom of Information Act. This information states clearly that Obama’s father was NEVER a U.S. Citizen.

At this point, the judge takes a recess.

The judge returns.

David Farrar takes the stand. Evidence showing Obama’s book of records listing his nationality as Indoneasan. Deemed not relevant by the judge.

Orly Taitz calls the 2nd witness - Mr. Strump. Taitz enters into evidence a portion of letter received from attorney showing a renewal form from Obama’s mother for her passport listing Obama’s last name something other than Obama.

State Licensed PI takes the stand. She was hired to look into Obama’s background and found a Social Security number for him from 1979. Professional opinion given that this number was fraudulent. The number used or attached to Obama in 1979, shows that Obama was born in the year 1890. This shows that the number was originally assigned to someone else who was indeed born in 1890 and should never have been used by Obama. The eame SS number came up with addresses in IL. D.C. and MA.

Next witness takes the stand - an expert in information technology and photo shop. He testifies that the birth certificate Obama provided to the public is layered, multiple layered. This, he testifies, indicates that different parts of the certificate have been lifted from more than one original document

Linda Jordan takes the stand. Document entered regarding SS number assigned to Obama. SS number is not verified under E-Verify. It comes back as suspected fraudulent. This is the system by which the Government verifies ones citizenship.

Next witness - Mr. Gogt, who is an expert in document imaging and scanners for 18 years. Mr. Gogt testifies that the birth certificate, posted online by Obama, is suspicious. States white lines around all the type face is caused by “unsharp mask” in photo shop. Testifies that any document showing this, is considered to be a fraud. He states this is a product of layering. Mr. Gogt testifies that a straight scan of an original document would not show such layering. He also testifies that the date stamps shown on Obama documents should not be in exact same place on various documents as they are hand stamped. Obama’s documents are all even, straight and exactly the same indicating they were NOT hand stamped by layered into the document by computer.

Next witness, Mr. Sampson a former police officer and former immigration officer specializing in immigration fraud. He ran Obama’s SS number through database and found that the number was issued to Obama in 1977 in the state of MA. Obama never resided in MA. At the time of issue, Obama was living in Hawaii. Serial number on birth certificate is out of sequence with others issued at that hospital. Also certification is different than others and different than twins born 24 hours ahead of Obama.

Mr. Sampson also states that portion of documents regarding Mr. Soetoro, who adopted Obama have been redacted which is highly unusual with regards to immigration records. Suggests all records from Social Security, Immigration, Hawaii birth records be made available to see if there are criminal charges to be filed or not. Without them, nothing can be ruled out. Mr. Sampson indicates if Obama is shown not to be a citizen, he should be arrested and deported and until all records are released nobody can know for sure if he is or is not a U.S. Citizen.

Taitz shows records for Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama, showing he resides in Hawaii and in Indonesia at the same time.

Taitz takes the stand herself and testifies that records indicate Obama records have been altered and he is hiding his identity and citizenship. She then leaves the stand to make her closing arguments.

Taitz states that Obama should be found, because of the evidence presented, ineligible to serve as President.

And with that, the judge closes the hearing.

What can we take away from this? -- This is a historic event. All of this evidence and testimony has finally been entered OFFICIALLY into court records. One huge question is now more than ever before, unanswered. WHO THE HELL IS THIS GUY?

Without his attorney present, Obama’s identity, his social security number, his citizenship status, and his past are all OFFICIALLY in question.

There is one thing to which there seems no doubt. He does NOT qualify, under the definition of Natural Born Citizen” provided by SCOTUS opinions, to be eligible to serve as President.

What will the judge decide? That is yet to be known, but it seems nearly impossible to believe, without counter testimony or evidence, because Obama and his attorney chose not to participate, that Obama will be allowed on the Georgia ballot.

It also opens the door for such cases pending or to be brought in other states as well.

Obama is in it deep and the DNC has some…a LOT…of explaining to do unless they start looking for a new candidate for 2012.

Update – Georgia's Judge Malihi has stated that he will enter a “DEFAULT JUDGEMENT” against Obama. THE JUDGE HAS STATED HE WILL BE FORMALIZING HIS VERDICT BY FEBRUARY 5TH.The Georgia Secretary of State, Brian Kemp, has already stated that he will follow the Judge's recommendations. That mean that Barack Hussein Obama will NOT APPEAR on the Great State of Georgia Presidential Ballot in 2012! Source: http://silencedogood2010.wordpress.com/2012/01/26/georgia-hearing-blow-by-blow

WASHINGTON POST: North Carolina Gov. Bev Perdue won’t seek second term, sources say

2012-01-26T11:39:00.000-05:00

North Carolina Gov. Bev Perdue (D) is set to announce today that she will not seek reelection in 2012, according to multiple sources familiar with her plans.

Perdue, who turned 65 earlier this month, was set for a rematch of her 2008 race with former Charlotte mayor Pat McCrory (R), but she has been plagued by low approval ratings and faced some tough odds this year.

Perdue’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment, but the North Carolina Democratic Party confirmed that she will make an announcement — though it didn’t specify what kind of announcement — in a statement around noon today.

Perdue has struggled recently with reports about campaign finance violations, and some top aides to her 2008 campaign have been indicted . Perdue has not personally been implicated in any wrongdoing.

Names that are likely to be bandied about as possible Democratic replacements include Lt. Gov. Walter Dalton, Charlotte Mayor Anthony Foxx, former White House chief of staff Erskine Bowles, and former congressman Bob Etheridge.

CONTINUED:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/north-carolina-gov-bev-perdue-wont-seek-second-term-sources-say/2012/01/26/gIQAbwekSQ_blog.html

Michael Speciale Announces Cadidacy for NC House District 3

2012-01-26T11:25:00.000-05:00

FYI, folks!

PRESS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
For further information contact: Michael Speciale at 252-635-5326 or speciale@ec.rr.com

January 24, 2012

NEW BERN – Local activist Michael Speciale (pronounced spe sha lee) has announced his candidacy for the North Carolina House of Representatives for District 3. This District includes all of Pamlico County, as well as portions of Craven and Beaufort Counties.

Speciale has a background of service to his country as well as to his State and community. He is a Retired U.S. Marine, a former Chairman of the Craven County Republican Party, a former Director of The Retired Enlisted Association Chapter 92 Cherry Point, a former American Red Cross CPR and Adult First Aid Instructor, a past volunteer reader for the Radio Reading Service of Eastern North Carolina, and he was the driving force behind re-establishment of the Coastal Carolina Taxpayer’s Association (CCTA). He is a former small business owner and has been active in politics, having run for the NC House previously.

Speciale has been active in the community as well as involved in local and State issues. He petitioned the Craven County Board of Commissioners on several issues, as well as the North Carolina General Assembly and the Havelock Board of Commissioners. He is a graduate Fellow of the North Carolina Institute of Political Leadership, has an AAS in Business Management/Operations Management, graduated from Basic Law Enforcement Training.

Speciale will be married for 38 years in April, 2012, and he and his wife Hazel have two children and seven grandchildren.

Speciale plans on registering for the election at the Craven County Board of Elections office in New Bern.

Contact information:
Home: 252-635-5326

Email: speciale@ec.rr.com
Address: 803 Stately Pines Road
New Bern, NC 28560

It is not the function of the government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the government from falling into error. ---John Strider Coleman

JONES ACTS TO STOP HARMFUL CUTS TO MILITARY AND ENC BASES

2012-01-26T11:21:00.000-05:00

Washington, Jan 25 -

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today Congressman Walter B. Jones (NC-3) joined House Armed Services Chairman Buck McKeon (R-CA) in cosponsoring H.R. 3662, The Down Payment to Protect National Security Act. H.R. 3662 would institute a one year delay in $500 billion in harmful ‘sequestration’ cuts to America’s military which are required by the 2011 Budget Control Act (S. 365). The delay would give Congress time to craft an alternative deficit reduction proposal that would not harm the ability of our armed forces to defend this nation. The delay would be paid for by a 10% reduction in the federal workforce through attrition.

“I have long led the fight to cut federal spending, but devastating our military is not the way to do it,” said Jones. “If these cuts go through, there could be additional, significant cuts to end strength, as well as a reduction in procurement of essential new tools like the F-35. There could also be dramatic cuts in healthcare and other benefits and services for members of our armed forces, and potentially another BRAC round. That’s just not acceptable for Eastern North Carolina, or quite frankly, America.”

READ THE REST OF CONGRESSMAN JONES PRESS RELEASE:
http://jones.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=276550

14 Reasons Socialism Won’t Work in America

2012-01-26T11:16:00.000-05:00

In Part Three of this series I explained the broad philosophical problem with socialism: its fundamental premise that state control is superior to individual liberty and economic freedom. In this installment I explain what adopting a socialist system would mean to Americans in practical terms. After completing this installment, the reader should be able to explain to young Americans why socialism is a flawed concept whether viewed as an economic system, a worldview, or in practical terms. Not only does socialism not work, it cannot work because of the following shortcomings:

•Replaces the family with the state as the central unit in society

•Undermines the family by redistributing its wealth and indoctrinating its children in government schools
•Allows legalized theft in the name of redistributing wealth
•Encourages sloth instead of productivity
•Rewards irresponsibility, laziness, and poor accountability
•Encourages self-indulgence instead of self-reliance
•Encourages finger pointing and shifting of responsibility to others
•Replaces the self-discipline of delayed gratification with the need for instant gratification
•Undermines the values that are the foundation of the traditional work ethic (i.e. thrift, diligence, self-reliance, self-discipline, responsibility, accountability, deferred gratification, and hard work) and replaces them with an entitlement mentality
•Treats those who contribute to the betterment of society the same as those who do not, even when they are capable of doing so
•Promotes a get-something-for-nothing mentality that undermines the moral character of the individual and society
•Robs people of initiative, drive, and ambition
•Undermines the spirit of entrepreneurship, innovation, and competitiveness
•Promotes totalitarianism, thereby undermining freedom and liberty

CONTINUED:http://patriotupdate.com/articles/14-reasons-socialism-wont-work-in-america

I'm Confused

2012-01-25T20:35:00.000-05:00

I'm confused. In order to get on an airplane, open a bank account, withdraw money, cash checks, pick up movie or concert tickets, enter a Federal building, apply for Food Stamps, or buy alcohol or prescription drugs, you often need a photo ID.

Democrats charge that requiring photo IDs (to prevent voter fraud) is racist, and meant to simply disenfranchise voters and suppress minority voting. So, I wonder, how have minorities done the above-mentioned without IDs?

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People has asked the United Nations to intervene to block state voter ID laws. The United Nations? In the United States? Wake up, America!

CONTINUED:http://www.personalliberty.com/conservative-politics/im-confused/?eiid=

Elena Kagan cannot be an unbiased judge of ObamaCare.

2012-01-25T13:19:00.000-05:00

Before Elena Kagan was nominated to the Supreme Court, she served as the nation's Solicitor General. In that capacity, she was the government's lead lawyer in cases before the Court.

Recently released emails show that, even before ObamaCare was passed and signed into law, Kagan directed her staff to become intimately involved in the process of crafting the legal defense for ObamaCare. The emails also showed that it was suggested that Kagan attend closed-door strategy meetings to hash out the administration's arguments in defense of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

And now Justice Kagan thinks it's appropriate to sit in judgement of the arguments she helped craft?

We have created a petition calling on Justice Kagan to recuse herself from the ObamaCare case. Preservation of the very integrity of the Supreme Court hangs in the balance. You can find the petition online at www.TellKagan.com.

Will you sign it today and share it with your friends and family? Every signature is another voice asking Justice Kagan to do what is right and appropriate.

Supreme Court Justices recusing themselves is not an uncommon occurrence. The standard holds that when a justice has participated as counsel in a case, then they cannot rule on it. And federal law requires that judges disqualify themselves from any proceedings when their impartiality might be questioned.

To say that Justice Kagan's impartiality might be questioned is a gross understatement.

And yet, Justice Kagan has not recused herself from ruling on the Constitutional challenges to ObamaCare.

Just this week, the Supreme Court denied a request for debate over whether Justice Kagan should recuse herself from the ObamaCare case. Justice Kagan continues to refuse to do the right thing and step down from sitting in judgement of a case in which she was intimately involved.

If Justice Kagan won't do the right thing of her own accord, then she needs to hear from the American people that we expect her to do the right thing and recuse herself.

Sign the petition to day at www.TellKagan.com.

It's clear that she can't be unbiased and it's clear that she can't be fair. Help us send a message loud and clear to Justice Elena Kagan — It's time to recuse yourself.

Thank you,
Heather R. Higgins
President & CEO
Independent Women's Voice

Americans for Prosperity

2012-01-25T13:11:00.000-05:00

Last night, instead of putting forward viable plans to fix the American economy, the President used his State of the Union address and its large national television audience to kick off his reelection campaign.

Continuing his rhetoric of envy, the President proposed to raise taxes on top income earners, spend more on costly infrastructure projects, and use more taxpayer funds to bail out homeowners – policies that will not only fail to help the economy, but also have zero chance of passing Congress this year. Unless the President puts forth viable solutions, it’s going to be a long year.

The President wants you to forget he’s been at the helm for past three years. The big-government policies he’s already rammed through have done nothing to turn the American economy around. But Americans for Prosperity wants you to remember.

We recently published a series of policy reminders to ensure that the American people remember the failures and broken promises we’ve seen out of this administration. One example: in last year’s State of the Union address the President promised to streamline government regulations to ease the burden on American businesses, but instead he continues to pile on new costly regulations on top of the old.

The full list of reminders can be viewed at ObamaForgets.com. We hope you find these useful as you talk to your friends, family, and neighbors about the future of economic freedom in America.
http://americansforprosperity.org/011812-obama-forgets?tr=y&auid=10190950

Responding to Marriage Critics

2012-01-25T12:56:00.000-05:00

Questions and responses surrounding the Marriage Protection Amendment.
Questions/Responses to Marriage Amendment

http://ncfpc.org/FNC/1201-QandR.pdf

North Carolina: Why Christians Are Called to Defend Marriage

2012-01-25T12:52:00.002-05:00

Dr. Mark Harris discusses the importance of voting in the May 2012 primary, when North Carolinians will finally have the opportunity to vote on amendment to the State Constitution that defines marriage as only between one man and one woman.

http://ncfpc.org/radioshow.html

SUN JOURNAL NEW BERN: Sanderson, Speciale announce bids for election

2012-01-25T11:38:00.000-05:00

January 24, 2012

Filing for the 2012 election opens Feb. 9 but candidates are already lining up and announcing their intention to seek office, including Rep. Norman Sanderson, R-Pamlico.

Sanderson announced he plans to seek the N.C. District 2 Senate seat now held by Sen. Jean Preston, R-Carteret, who last week said that she will not seek reelection.

Preston said she will fill out her present term “with the same zeal….”

Stepping up with an announcement to run for the house seat Sanderson will vacate is Michael Speciale, a retired Marine who is former Craven County Republican Party chairman. A leader in Coastal Carolina Taxpayers Association, Speciale has previously run for the house.

In declaring his intent to file for the seat, Sanderson said: “Senator Preston has set the bar high when it comes to hard work, ethical standards and sound fiscal accountability. I assure the people of the 2nd District that I will uphold that legacy as I strive to be their next State Senator.”

Pamlico resident and Havelock businessman Sanderson has served Craven and Pamlico counties in N.C. House District 3 and said he sees the move as a logical progression.

CONTINUED:

http://www.newbernsj.com/articles/seek-103844-sanderson-senate.html

CALL TO ACTION--1000 Days Without a Budget!

2012-01-25T11:06:00.000-05:00

This Tuesday January 24th the Senate and the President reached 1000 days without passing an annual budget. They have done so against the law and the will of the American people. To be sure the President and the Senate are clearly above the laws they make. If they weren't they would be prosecuted for negligence and possibly some finance laws. If a private Corporation ran 3 years without a budget leaving out accountability to it's shareholders in my opinion someone would probably go to jail.

The President and Senate do not want a budget so they can spend taxpayers money as they wish, not being restrained by a pledge of what their spending will be in the current year. We are their shareholders and they are injuring us by their unwilliness to pass and live by a budget, just like all of us here in Richmond County. It is time for the minority party Senators and Congressmen to stop worrying about political correctness and rise up and demand a budget to be passed. And what we need is a balanced budget. President Obama raised his declared budget by a trillion dollars his first year in office, even if he didn't get a budget on paper passed, that was his declaration. And every bit of that trillion dollars per year had to be barrowed.

You can help, by calling all 100 senators and demand they pass a budget. Their phone numbers are on the senate website and they have staff to answer your call. If we don't raise our voices and demand the Senate and President pass a budget, then they will continue this out of control spending with no one being held accountable.

Rev Russ Fincham
North Carolina State Coordinator
Tea Party Patriots

GBTV: ‘Real News From The Blaze’ Panel Delivers Their Own ‘State of the Union’ Addresses

2012-01-25T10:48:00.000-05:00

The crew of “Real News From The Blaze” each delivered a State of the Union address to rival that from any POTUS.

Below are the speeches from all four panelists — S.E. Cupp, Will Cain, Buck Sexton and Matt McCall — in which they describe the state of the union today.

For her part, Cupp focused on the president’s numerous “failed” promises — from earmark reform to promoting an open and transparent government — from abolishing lobbyists to not increasing taxes on families earning under $250 per year.

WATCH THE CLIPS:http://www.theblaze.com/stories/real-news-from-the-blaze-panel-delivers-their-state-of-the-union-addresses/

THE BLAZE: AP FACT CHECK: Obama Pushes Plans That Flopped Before

2012-01-25T10:41:00.000-05:00

It was a wish list, not a to-do list.

President Barack Obama laid out an array of plans in his State of the Union speech as if his hands weren’t so tied by political realities. There can be little more than wishful thinking behind his call to end oil industry subsidies – something he could not get through a Democratic Congress, much less today’s divided Congress, much less in this election year.

And there was more recycling, in an even more forbidding climate than when the ideas were new: He pushed for an immigration overhaul that he couldn’t get past Democrats, permanent college tuition tax credits that he asked for a year ago, and familiar discouragements for companies that move overseas.

A look at Obama’s rhetoric Tuesday night and how it fits with the facts and political circumstances:

OBAMA: “We have subsidized oil companies for a century. That’s long enough. It‘s time to end the taxpayer giveaways to an industry that’s rarely been more profitable, and double-down on a clean energy industry that’s never been more promising.”

THE FACTS: This is at least Obama’s third run at stripping subsidies from the oil industry. Back when fellow Democrats formed the House and Senate majorities, he sought $36.5 billion in tax increases on oil and gas companies over the next decade, but Congress largely ignored the request. He called again to end such tax breaks in last year’s State of the Union speech. And he’s now doing it again, despite facing a wall of opposition from Republicans who want to spur domestic oil and gas production and oppose tax increases generally.

OBAMA: “Our health care law relies on a reformed private market, not a government program.”

THE FACTS: That’s only half true. About half of the more than 30 million uninsured Americans expected to gain coverage through the health care law will be enrolled in a government program. Medicaid, the federal-state program for low-income people, will be expanded starting in 2014 to cover childless adults living near the poverty line.

The other half will be enrolled in private health plans through new state-based insurance markets. But many of them will be receiving federal subsidies to make their premiums more affordable. And that’s a government program, too.

Starting in 2014 most Americans will be required to carry health coverage, either through an employer, by buying their own plan, or through a government program.

CONTINUED:http://www.theblaze.com/stories/ap-fact-check-obama-pushes-plans-that-flopped-before/