Diane Rufino: Conservatives Unite!

Diane Rufino is a scholar, an attorney, a mom, a wife and a tireless patriot!  I am proud to say, she is also my friend ~ Lynn
January 31, 2013

A message to the Tea Party, 9/12 groups, the Republican Liberty Caucus, Ron Paul supporters, and other Liberty-minded groups and individuals….

In this article, I hope to convince grassroots conservatives to unite in the coming year to re-assert founding values and strengthen principles of Liberty and to reject the contorted view of the Constitution that President Barack Obama is pushing on the American people. First, let’s view the results of the 2012 election, as much as it pains me to do so –

1). Obama received a majority of the electoral votes - 332 to 206
2). He won the popular vote: 50 – 48%
3). Independents made up 29% of the vote this time, and Romney beat Obama by five points among those voters. This was an increase over 2008 when McCain didn’t capture any of the independent vote.
4). Suprisingly, Mitt Romney received less votes in November than McCain got in 2008. Romney received 2-3 million less votes than McCain. Romney lost the 2012 election not so much because he got fewer votes than Barack Obama but because he got fewer votes than John McCain in 2008.
5). Obama received 60.6 million votes in 2012, almost 9 million less than he received in 2008. Again, if Romney could have had even a slightly better showing than McCain had in 2008, he would have won the presidency.
6). Outside the South, President Obama defeated Romney 55 – 45%. In the South (minus Virginia and Florida), Romney took the lead 60 – 40%. As the Daily Beast put it: “Romney got elected president of the old confederacy.”
7). Romney won North Carolina by 2% of the vote
8). Obama only received 39% of the white vote – the worst showing among whites since Mondale. Yet outside the South, whites didn’t turn out as strongly for Romney either. In fact, the share of votes cast by whites was at its lowest (at 72%) since 1992.
9). Romney won among white voters by 20 percentage points. That was up from John McCain’s edge of 12 percentage points in 2008. Of all those who voted for Romney, 88% were white.
10). Non-whites made up 28% of the electorate, up a bit from 27% in 2008. This group largely backed Obama: 71% of Hispanics (up 4 points from 2008) and 93% of blacks (down 3-4 points from 2008).
11). Romney, on the other hand, received only 2% of the black vote and 29% of the Hispanic vote.
12). Young voters were important to giving Obama his first term. Voters under age 30 showed up again this time: They represented 19% of all voters, one point higher than 2008. But this time, they didn’t back Obama as strongly this time. In 2008, they backed him 66%, but in November their support dropped by 6 points.
13). Seniors backed Romney by 56 to 44%, mostly unchanged from 2008.
14). Married women backed Obama by 11 points (down from 2008) while married women backed Romney by 7 points (a far better showing than McCain got).
15). Men, in general, backed Romney (by 7 percentage points), but married men backed him by an even wider margin (almost 2-1).
16). White Catholics went for Romney by a margin of 59-40%.
17). Romney apparently didn’t fare as well as he could have among Mormon voters. George W. Bush received more support from the Mormon community in 2004 than Romney did in November.
18). While Romney won the presidential debates, the attention that Obama received in the wake of Hurricane Sandy, particularly with bloated NJ Governor Chris Christie, helped him in the polls in the days leading up to the election. (Never mind that the government has yet to provide any assistance to the victims). 42% of voters said Obama’s handling of the hurricane disaster influenced their vote in a positive way. The Benghazi scandal, on the other hand, which far exceeded any wrong-doing that Richard Nixon did in the Watergate affair, seemed to have no negative impact on voters. 4 Americans serving their country in a hostile part of the world notified the State Department that their lives were in danger from radical extremists and requested additional security, but were denied. Hilary Clinton watched in real time as Ambassador Chris Stevens, computer specialist Sean Smith, and former Navy Seals Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were overcome by a terrorist assault on the US Consulate and a safe house. An urgent request from the CIA for military back-up and air support during the attack was denied. US forces were told to stand down and 4 Americans were left to be slaughtered.
19). Republicans lost 6 seats in the US House
20). Republicans lost 3 seats in the US Senate

The fatal mistake that we made was in thinking that voter turn-out would be like that of 2010 when Republicans made historic gains in state government and in Washington DC. The single cause of Romney’s defeat was the failure of Republicans and conservatives to get out the vote. 3 million Republican voters stayed home on Election Day. If those Republicans had voted, Mitt Romney would have won the popular vote by 180,000.

Why did Republicans stay home? The only conclusion is that they weren’t motivated by the Republican party’s election message. They weren’t inspired by the Republican party. They weren’t convinced that Mitt Romney was a better alternative than Barack Obama. They didn’t see a clear-cut difference between the candidates.

On the bright side, however, thirty (30) Republican state governors were elected.

On Saturday, January 5th, Pat McCrory was sworn in as the new Governor of my state of North Carolina. The last time NC had a Republican governor was 24 years ago. And for the first time in 144 years, a Republican Governor will meet a Republican Legislative Majority.

The NC General Assembly picked up an additional nine Republican seats (for a total of 77 out of 120 seats) and an additional two Republican Senate seats (for a record total of 33 out of 50).

But unfortunately the NC GOP could not get an outstanding slate of conservative candidates elected to the NC Council of State. Ed Goodwin, Mike Causey, John Tedesco, Mike Royal, and Debra Goldman all lost their races. How could that be? Many, including the candidates themselves, believe that the failure of the state GOP to provide adequate funding to their campaigns, when it could have done so, was what cost them the victories.

So let’s look at where we are now that the 2012 election is over and what the challenges are ahead.

On Monday, January 20, Obama was sworn in again as President. I could barely summon the fortitude to watch the event. I’ve changed the diapers of my four children with no problem, and endured their episodes of projectile vomiting, but I couldn’t stomach to listen to this man. Just like a mother knows from the sounds her infant makes what vile mess awaits her, that’s how I feel about Barack Obama. The notion of a socialist/Marxist, globalist as the President of the greatest republic in the world, premised on the greatest respect for individual liberty and property rights, offended me to the very core. The lessons of Nazi Germany and Communist Russia are playing out right now here in the United States. An ignorant and uninformed electorate, sufficiently devoid of morals and personal responsibility, more concerned in classifying themselves as a particular ethnic or social group than unifying into one common culture, was swayed by the charisma and promises of “hope” by a demagogue. We’ve given this man great political power and now we wait to see what he will do with it. It struck me how our country, in all its greatness and with its supposed dependence on the Rule of Law, is not insulated from the seeds of tyranny.

In his inauguration speech, Obama laid out his agenda in stark terms: More spending on the same failing big government programs and another push for his global warming agenda to drive up energy prices and take away more of our freedoms in their name of sustainability and wealth redistribution. More centralization of power and more centralized planning over people’s lives and property. We were treated once again to a lecture on Obama’s interpretation of the Constitution and the meaning of our founding principles. And once again he talked about the transformation of America to meet the needs of a new day. It’s clear once again that he is willing to trample on the Constitution anytime it interferes with his ends. We are seeing it right now with his gun control initiative.

We have many challenges ahead and I hope they will serve to make our resolve stronger and unite the many conservative groups on common goals. These challenges include the mounting fiscal showdown, the government’s outright declaration of war on the wealthy and its wealth distribution polices, the administration’s open support of a gay rights agenda, Obamacare and its implementation, the re-interpretation of our Constitution, and the rising storm against Gun Rights.

We already see the start of the same old fight. House Republicans are insisting on spending cuts in exchange for agreeing to a 3-month deal to temporarily raise the debt ceiling. But President Obama has already warned that he will not negotiate. He wants the rich to pay and pay and pay so that he doesn’t have to make any cuts in government programs. Only in America can the rich people – who pay 86% of all income taxes – be accused of not paying their “fair share” by people who don’t pay any income taxes at all.

Welcome to 2013 where the gravest problem threatening the nation is spending, where our Democratic president refuses to make spending cuts, where the Democratic Senate lawlessly refuses to pass a budget, and where Democrats frustrate congressional GOP efforts to enact spending and entitlement reform, yet the public is conned into believing that Republicans are the problem. Almost all polls show that the American people blame Republicans for the fiscal mess (either because they refuse to give in or because they haven’t aren’t standing strong enough).

The question is whether the debt ceiling deal, the “No Budget, No Pay” bill that the US House passed and just recently the Senate, which will delay pay to members of the House or Senate if they don’t approve a budget by mid-April. According to Section 2 of the bill, a payroll administrator would withhold Congress members’ pay after April 15, 2013, if one or both houses of Congress couldn’t agree on a fiscal year 2014 budget. The money will be held in an escrow account and given back to Congress members when a budget is passed or at the end of the current 113th Congress in January 1, 2015. Of course the deal lacks any meat since the 27th Amendment, our most recent constitutional amendment, would most likely prevent the holding of Congress’ pay. The 27th Amendment essentially prohibits a sitting Congress from adjusting its compensation.

Obamacare is moving forward. By November, the exchanges will be open and those without an employer health plan can start enrolling in the government scheme. And next year, the Individual Mandate kicks in. To fund this massive socialist entitlement plan, the government will deep further into our pockets. This will be in addition to the “American Taxpayer Relief Act” which Congress recently passed to allow the expiration of the payroll tax cut to have more money taken out of people’s paychecks. (The mean increase, by the way, is $1,635). Embedded in Obamacare are approximately 6 new taxes which will hit everyone, while 21 new taxes will hit the wealthy (mostly affecting small business owners). Personal and real property will become less and less valuable to us and our children (perhaps even becoming a liability). Because poorer Americans will be exempt from the Individual Mandate and the insurance fee and the wealthy will have no problem paying the “penalty,” Obamacare will be the largest tax increase on the middle class in this country’s history. As Rand Paul said: “Just because a couple of people on the Supreme Court declare something to be “constitutional” does not make it so. The whole bill remains unconstitutional..” The four Justices who dissented wrote: “The values that should have determined our decision today are caution, minimalism, the understanding that the Federal Government is one of limited powers, and federalism. But the Court’s majority undermined those values at every turn. The decision creates overreaching taxing power and undermines state sovereignty. The adherence to those core values is central to liberty, and when we destroy it, we place liberty at peril. Today’s decision should have vindicated, should have taught, this truth; Instead, our judgment today has disregarded it.”

What the Court has done is to clear the way for a very broad use of the tax power, even to the point of coercing people into doing what the government wants them to do and punishing them for their inactivity. We think we have free will, as human beings, but according to the government, we may have to be burdened with taxes to enjoy that luxury. Under the precedent set by the healthcare decision, government can now impose pretty much any mandate of any kind. It could force people to purchase broccoli or cars or other product. It could force people to join a gym and exercise, take contraceptives, limit families to two children, or any other government initiative. We must continue to fight this bill in every way we can.

The Obama administration has succeeded in updating the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which continues to include the offensive provisions which allows the President, and the Defense Department and Homeland Security personnel he surrounds himself with, to target American citizens as belligerents, thereby detaining them indefinitely, interrogating them, and stripping them of their constitutional (Bill of Rights) protections. He have already seen Obama’s willingness to use the NDAA against Americans.

Last August, a 26-year-old former marine and citizen of the state of Virginia, Brandon Raub, wrote the following posts on facebook: “The bill of rights is being systematically dismantled.” ”Your leaders are planning to merge the United States into a one world banking system. They want to put computer chips in you. These men have evil hearts. They have tricked you into supporting corporate fascism. But there is hope. BUT WE MUST TAKE OUR REPUBLIC BACK.” For those words, the government showed up at his home, arrested him, and committed him involuntarily and indefinitely to a mental hospital. The government made the decision to take his rights away. (Luckily, his mother and a sharp lawyer were able to fight the unlawful arrest). But having the mental institution on his record might prevent him from exercising his Second Amendment rights.

Also last year, the FAA, at the behest of Congress, made the decision to allow low-flying, unmanned drones to patrol the US skies to aid local law enforcement. By the end of the decade, there will be as many as 30,000 drones in our skies. Drone manufacturers are currently working on prototypes that would be equipped with fire power. These drones are so sophisticated that they will be able to read license plates, lettering on envelopes, faces, and at night, to detect activity through heat emission. Routine aerial surveillance would profoundly change the character of public life in America. It is said that at any given time, every American is likely breaking between 3-8 laws each day — simply because there are so many laws that we can’t possibly know them all. The only reason we aren’t arrested or stopped or cited is because police themselves can’t keep up with all the laws and plus, resources are limited in most localities. But imagine with the extra tools to spy on citizens?? Remember, you can be denied a license to carry guns if you are convicted of breaking the law.

In 1996, Congress overwhelmingly passed the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) to protect marriage as the union of one man and one woman for the benefit of children and society. But the Obama Administration has disregarded this law and neglected its duty to defend DOMA in court.

In March, the US Supreme Court will hear arguments in two crucial marriage cases: One involves the constitutionality of DOMA and the other involves the constitutionality of Proposition 8, which is California’s voter-approved constitutional amendment protecting marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

The potential impact of these two cases on the future of marriage can be potentially be disastrous. The question is whether we trust the Supreme Court to do the right thing?

Years ago, the government had an interest in the education and morality of its children to ensure the best America possible. I remember the days when every student stood to salute the flag, acknowledged God, and then got a good, solid education, based on the time-honored principles of competition and responsibility. I remember when the family was the most important structure in society. I remember when church bells rang throughout my town and everyone’s lives somehow centered around the church and its activities. Now the government proclaims that it has no business legislating morality. Now the government has an interest in our youth for the primary purpose of indoctrinating them with the mindset that traditional social policies are unfair and discriminatory and should be challenged.

In 2001, Congress passed No Child Left Behind and now we have different standards set for different students and education has never been so bad in the United States. If a child doesn’t get enough sleep, he qualifies for a disability. If he doesn’t want to study hard, he qualifies for another disability. Children learn that in life, they all get to play by different rules. Administrators don’t want to spend their energies disciplining children so they put the responsibility on the teachers so that valuable education time is spend managing problem children, at the expense of those who want to learn. Teachers don’t want to spend time disciplining, so they dumb down their lessons, requirements, assignments, and tests. Teachers and school administrators don’t want these troubled, bad students to keep returning so they move them along, often by setting lower standards so they can pass the classes. They use group assignments, often pairing smart students up with those who struggle. They share one grade. But diversity and tolerance is promoted… which all too often seems to be the aim of the public school agenda. Academic excellence continues to yield in the name of fairness, diversity and social justice.

Currently, the Obama administration is bribing the states with federal dollars to implement his “Common Core” program, which is the administration’s radical make-over of our children’s public school core curriculum. Michele Malkin says the program should be called “Rotten to the Core.” Grammar classes will be deemed irrelevant; literature classes will de-emphasize the classics because too many of the classic authors are white. History lessons covering western civilization and our Founding Fathers will be attacked as being racist. With respect to the math reforms alone, Stanford University has concluded that the Common Core scheme would place American students two years behind their peers in other high-achieving countries.

Remember, America’s downfall began with the entitlement generation and it will continue with the proliferation of the “low-information voter.” And that, of course, starts right in our schools and in our homes….. It starts with the no-knowledge student. The same can also be said about the voter without morals and values.

Probably most offensive to us, as Americans, are the 23 Executive Orders that Obama signed into law on January 16 to regulate gun rights. We knew Obama was coming for our guns. The school shootings just provided him the opportunity. We all know that psychopaths are attracted to schools precisely because they are gun-free zones and because they want to vent their anger in the most audacious way. We know that firearms are merely instruments. They don’t shoot themselves. It’s malevolent souls, like those who shoot helpless children in their classrooms, who are the problem, not the Second Amendment.

We don’t have a God-given right to the Second Amendment, but we do have a God-given to self-protection and self-preservation. And that’s what the Second Amendment is all about. It protects our right to Life, and by extension, Liberty and Property. If we are denied the ability to protect those basic rights, then we are not truly free. The Second Amendment was not written to protect the rights of hunters, it was written to protect the rights of the hunted; whether those that are hunting us or our family are common criminals or a tyrannical government that no longer respects the Constitution, the Rule of Law, or our God-given rights as human beings.

Requiring Americans to register themselves and their firearms, have a photograph taken, have fingerprints on file, and submit to psychiatric evaluations when the government defines what classifications of free speech are considered dangerous is a prerequisite for government monitoring and then confiscation, which then is the prerequisite for subjugation and totalitarianism. In the extreme cases, it is a prerequisite for the extermination of political enemies.

Everyone concerned for their Second Amendment security should contact their state representatives, their County Commissioners, and their local Sheriff’s department (the enforcement agency closest to the individual) and inquire whether each intends to honor their oath to support and defend the US Constitution (and state constitution, which also contains a Bill of Rights). Please urge your representatives and local officials to adopt resolutions which declare the intent to preserve and protect the rights to have and bear a firearm. Resolutions are being adopted all over – from the state of Wyoming to Beaufort County in North Carolina. Model resolutions are available from the NC Tenth Amendment Center. (http://www.northcarolina.tenthamendmentcenter.com)

We need to start treating abuses of the constitution as felonies.

The unconstitutional, fiscal, social, educational, moral, and criminal problems we suffer today are not the problem. They are the symptoms and the consequences of a people who have turned from God and become a society that encourages the “instant gratification” nature in many of us. It’s the American people who need fixing before we can hope to fix the country and our government. A good and moral people require few laws and therefore a small government is possible. And a small government allows for the greatest exercise of freedom. People who can’t control their conduct are one of the reasons we have an out-of-control government and a judiciary that thinks they need to deconstruct the Constitution in order to fashion new social norms for these types of people.

As Tea Partiers, we constantly refer back to the Constitution and our founding principles. It’s our respect for the Constitution and Founding Fathers that gave rise to our movement. Governments are an extension of Natural Law – to address the social nature of man and to keep us in ordered societies and to protect our God-given rights. Constitutions, on the other hand, are not of divine origin. They are man-made instruments that restrain the government and prevent it from oppressing the people it is supposed to serve and protect. Laws restrain people but Constitutions restrain government. Luckily for us, our Constitution was divinely-inspired.

The brilliance of our Constitution is the separation of government powers, each branch jealously guarding its sphere of authority, and the complex system of checks and balances, which includes the states (under the Tenth Amendment) and an engaged and vigilante electorate. Without these effective checks and balances, we would cease to have a constitutional republic. We would, in effect, have a democracy, the one thing our Founders wanted to avoid. The rule of a constitutional majority would simply become the rule of the numerical majority – where the majority would be able to use the full resources of the federal government for its selfish purposes. In times of stress, such as our economic depression and rising unemployment, the rule of the majority can easily become the rule of the mob – with the majority taking what it wants from the minority. Again, this is precisely what our Founders struggled to avoid. Freedom is God-given, but it is up to us, as men and women, to make sure it is secured from the evil tendencies of government.

The attacks on our freedoms and our property rights are a symptom of a deep problem – an unfortunate shift in the political wind and a calculated re-engineering of American society. Those in power get away with it because we let them. And there are several reasons for this:

(a) a fundamental disrespect for the Bible and our Constitution
(b) a failure to stick to our traditional American values
(c) a failure to hold our representatives to their oaths of office.. (we keep electing them); and
(d) a failure to find candidates to represent the party who are not afraid to ask the tough question: “What would Thomas Jefferson do?”

We are facing an unprecedented level of central planning over our lives, our fortunes, and our Pursuit of Happiness. What are our rights worth if the government regulates us so much that we can’t exercise them freely and safely? What President Obama implied in his inaugural speech, as he so heavily relied on the memory of Abraham Lincoln, is that the pursuit of happiness is the pursuit of equality of result. Not the equality of opportunity, but the equality of result. He implied that would do what he could to use the government to make everybody more equal, in terms of their income and their life’s work. He didn’t talk about the rightful reward for effort, sacrifice, and achievement. He didn’t talk about the reward for success, which is the natural incentive and which keeps a civilization moving forward and becoming more successful. It was an income-leveling speech… which signals the death of our John Locke foundation of government and the nation’s view of Natural Rights.

As columnist Keith Koffler wrote: “Jefferson, Adams, Madison and Franklin trusted the people with a Republic. Liberals say the people can no longer be trusted alone with such things….. Jefferson wanted to guarantee the pursuit of happiness. Obama wants to guarantee happiness. The former is the philosophy of capitalism. The latter is Socialism, which uses government to reduce freedom, not create it. This is not what the Founders intended.”

It was unthinkable to hear the leader of the United States, the nation founded on the recognition of man as an inherently free creature, and a former Harvard-educated constitutional lawyer, argue during his speech that America has evolved to the extent “our founding documents” no longer require us to “define liberty in exactly the same way.” The truth is that Obama’s ideology contradicts the Constitution he is sworn to uphold and he is putting his ideology above the one thing that protects the freedom our Creator has endowed us with – the Constitution. Because of this president, we can expect the ideological divide to grow wider over the next four years and time-honored social foundations to be sufficiently eroded. Put on your seat belts folks…. The carnage we can expect as a result of his divide-and-conquer policies and his policies of national transformation will be immense.

As if this all isn’t enough, the rumor that Obama might seek to repeal term limits for the Presidency so he can run again in 2016 is coming true. On January 4, Democratic US House rep, Jose Serrano (NY), introduced a piece of legislation – Joint House Resolution 15 (H.J. Res. 15) – proposing “an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.” It is currently referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

What is it about “tyrant” and “dictator” that is attractive to people? And why is the government trying so hard to make it a reality for this particular president?

But while the pendulum of political ideology swings back and forth, tipping right now at the far left, we have to wonder if the momentum will ever bring it back over to the right. History shows a recurrent movement back and forth in our country, between idealistic big governmental activists and their conservative counterparts who oppose centralized government and believe that government is best when it governs least. These historical cycles have usually lasted for one generation, approximately 20 to 25 years. It’s been 25 years since Ronald Reagan left office. It’s been 25 years since we last enjoyed a president who actively sought to turn back “big government.”

Let’s hope there is a political equivalent of the laws of physics: “For every action there is an equal but opposite reaction.” What goes around comes around.

What will the Republican Party offer in 2016?

I got a call from the GOP sometime before Christmas, asking for money. It was a call from a Washington DC number. Still being in a funk over the results of the presidential election, I wasn’t in a donating mood. But the guy wouldn’t stop asking so I asked him what the GOP plans to do going forward to energize the conservative base? This is what he told me –

1). It will have to support some kind of amnesty – to attract the Hispanic vote (An analysis of the Hispanic community, however, shows that Hispanic voters are not voting for Democrats because the Democratic party is for amnesty or for open borders. The reason they vote for Democrats is the same reason other groups vote for Democrats.. for the hand-outs).
2). The GOP platform can continue to show its support of the Right to Life and the rights of the Unborn but it should not pursue policy to limit or take any abortion rights or funding from those who believe otherwise.
3). The GOP platform can continue to show its moral disapproval of Gay Marriage but it should not pursue policy to deny rights to gays/lesbians.

In other words, the Republican Party intends to sell out its principles and abandon the hope of restoring moral principles to this once moral nation. It is planning to pander to social groups. What party does that remind you of?

The Democratic Party.

If the GOP doesn’t believe in the Rule of Law, if it believes there are special rights for special groups, and if it is willing to concede our founding principles for a more fair outcome, then it has ceased to be Republican party. It is just another liberal party and should waive the white flag of surrender. If you think it is acceptable that our choice in 2016 will be the party of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and the party of unprincipled conservatives, then our country is lost. If you believe that we should resign ourselves to a culture that lacks the moral courage to discourage envy and covetousness, then you have rejected the American ideal of “Equal Opportunity” in favor of the French model of “Equality of Outcome.”

We have to stand the course and fight as best we can issue by issue, at this point. If we still believe in the notion that we have a government of the people, by the people, for the people, then we have to put the power back in the foundation where it came from – us. We the People. That’s what the Declaration of Independence proudly proclaims.

We have 4 more years with a President who fundamentally stands for everything we oppose and who is as ambitious at transforming America as Kim Kardashian is at finding a husband…. or as ambitious as Chris Christie is at finding a donut shop. Obama has made, perhaps, one too many a mistake by going after our Gun Rights. That might be the issue we can hope to build stronger coalitions against this administration. We HAVE to win more seats in the House and Senate in 2014, and we HAVE to figure out, once and for all, the winning strategy for 2016. Or we may never see a Republican in the White House again.

If you believe, as the Republican Liberty Caucus believes and as many Tea Party groups believe, that with hard work and determination we can wrestle the GOP from the grips of those who would sell its soul and restore her, then I beg you to please take to heart what you will hear and learn here today.

Again, we have to get involved to make a difference. The success or failure will rest with us….. working together.

APPENDIX:

I. Obama’s 23 Executive Orders to Regulate Gun Ownership:

1). Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background-check system.
2). Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background-check system.
3). Improve incentives for states to share information with the background- check system.
4). Direct the attorney general to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.
5). Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.
6). Publish a letter from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.
7). Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.
8). Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission).
9). Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.
10). Release a Department of Justice report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement.
11). Nominate an ATF director.
12). Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations.
13). Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime.
14). Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.
15). Direct the attorney general to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun-safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies.
16). Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.
17). Release a letter to healthcare providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.
18). Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.
19). Develop model emergency-response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education.
20). Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.
21). Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within Affordable Care Act exchanges.
22). Commit to finalizing mental-health parity regulations.
23). Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.

Reference: http://www.newsmax.com/headline/obama-guns-executive-orders/2013/01... (“Obama’s Executive Orders to Address Gun Violence Reduction?)

Also see: Scott Coffina, “Gun Control by Executive Order,” National Review Online, January 16, 2013. Referenced at: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/337789/gun-control-executive...

II. Obama’s First Term by the Numbers

At the beginning of January 2013, the RNC Research arm released a list of how much President Obama’s first four years cost in terms of deficits, regulations, stimulus spending, and the underemployed and unemployed individuals. The following are a few of those figures:

 $25.4 Trillion: Projected federal debt in 2022 due to Obama’s binge spending (Office of Management and Budget, 7/27/12).

 $16.4 Trillion: Current national debt (U.S. Treasury Department, Accessed 1/17/13).

 $9.2 trillion: Amount Obama’s FY2013 budget would add to the debt through FY2022 (OMB, 7/27/12).

 $5.8 Trillion: Added to the national debt since Obama took office (U.S. Treasury Department, Accessed 1/17/13).

 $2.6 Trillion: True cost of ObamaCare once fully implemented (Office of the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Report 1/6/11).

 $1.75 Trillion: Annual cost of federal regulations (Small Business Administration, September 2010).

 $1.18 Trillion: Total cost of Obama’s first stimulus with interest (CBO, 1/31/12).

 $1.17 Trillion: American debt held by China (U.S. Treasury Department, Accessed 1/17/13).

 $1.090 Trillion: Federal budget deficit for FY2012–Fourth Highest in U.S. History (CBO, 10/5/12).

 $833 Billion: Price tag of Obama’s first failed stimulus (CBO, 8/23/12).

 $820 Billion: Amount of taxes in ObamaCare (CBO 3/13/12).

 $518 Billion: Amount of regulatory burden since Obama took office (American Action Forum, 1/14/13).

 $447 Billion: Price tag of Obama’s second stimulus (The White House, 9/8/11).

 $236.7 Billion: Amount of regulatory burden in 2012 (American Action Forum 1/14/13).

 $188 Billion: Taxpayer funds for Fannie May and Freddie Mac (ProPublica, Accessed 10/10/12).

 $28.5 Billion: Outstanding government investment bailouts of the auto industry (Treasury Department, 1/10/13).

 $24.3 Billion: Amount government expects to lose on bailouts of auto industry (Treasury Department, 1/10/13).

 $535 Million: Stimulus loan to the failed solar company Solyndra (The Oakland Tribune, 11/4/10).

 46.2 Million: Number of Americans receiving food stamps (Department of Agriculture, 1/4/13).

 22.7 Million: Americans unemployed, underemployed, or have given up looking for work (Bureau of Labor Statistics, Accessed 1/17/13).

 12.2 Million: Unemployed Americans (Bureau of Labor Statistics, Accessed 1/17/13).

 2.6 Million: Unemployed workers that have given up looking for work (Bureau of Labor Statistics, Accessed 1/17/13).

 757,000: Unemployed veterans (Bureau of Labor Statistics, Accessed 1/17/13).

 226,000: Unemployed post-9/11 era veterans (Bureau of Labor Statistics, Accessed 1/17/13).

 89,000: The number of stimulus checks sent to dead or incarcerated people (The Wall Street Journal, 10/7/10).

 $53,224: Your share of the national debt (U.S. Treasury Department, Accessed 1/17/13).

 $18,804: Increase in your share of the national debt since Obama took office (U.S. Treasury Department, Accessed 1/17/13).

 45,696: Pages of new rules added to the federal register during Obama’s first two years in office (Competitive Enterprise Institute, 2011).

 $15,500: Annual cost per household from federal regulations (Small Business Administration, September 2010).

 61%: The amount by which new offshore leases for oil and natural gas drilling has declined under Obama (FactCheck.org, 10/19/12).

 $3,065: Amount of increase of average cost of family health care premiums since Obama took office (The Kaiser Family Foundation, 2012).

 7.8%: The current unemployment rate, which is the same as when Obama took office (Bureau of Labor Statistics, Accessed 1/17/13).

 Since Obama took office, the unemployment rate for women has increased from 6.9% to 7.8% (Bureau of Labor Statistics, Accessed 1/4/13).

 In December 2012, the unemployment rate for women spiked from 7.6% to 7.8% (Bureau of Labor Statistics, Accessed 1/4/13).

 Since Obama took office, the African American unemployment rate has increased from 12.7% to 14.0% (Bureau of Labor Statistics, Accessed 1/4/13).

 In December 2012, the African American unemployment rate increased from 13.2% to 14.0% (Bureau of Labor Statistics, Accessed 1/4/13).

Reference: Figures compiled by the Republican National Committee
http://www.teapartynation.com/profiles/blog/show?id=3355873%3ABlogPost%3A2427180

From Diane Rufino

I got a lot of questions about Obama's "apology" and when Romney went public with his statements.


The US Embassy in Cairo released a statement early on apologizing for the short film ("We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others") as the protests were heating up there, but before the militant attacks in Libya. It re-affirmed that statement up until the time the Egytian embassy was taken and the American flag was taken down and burned and the terrorists were getting organized in Libya. Obama didn't issue a statement. The White House, just as the US embassy in Libya was being attacked, put out a statement saying that the embassy statement was not cleared by the White House and did not represent its policy. But it did not say anything else and did not condemn the attacks. Shortly after that, Romney offered his words.

The following day, after he chose to skip a State Department briefing and before sticking around to learn the fate of Chris Stevens and the others, he headed out to campaign in Vegas.

Obama never actually came out himself to apologize, but the words of those under him represent his official position. Plus he never spoke to the contrary. Only Romney stood up for America's freedom.

I've written up a summary which is attached and which I posted on my website --

http://forloveofgodandcountry.wordpress.com/




It's also posted onTea Party Nation -

http://www.teapartynation.com/profiles/blogs/obama-apologizes-romney-criticizes?xg_source=activity

See How Your State Will Fare Under Four More Years of Obama!

See How Your State Will Fare Under Four More Years of Obama!

Which economic plan will create more jobs in North Carolina?

Mitt Romney vs. Barack Obama

Under President Obama

• 53,500 Jobs Lost in North Carolina
• 7% Increase in Unemployment Rate
• 584,651 New people on Food Stamps in North Carolina
• $3.63 Gas Prices in North Carolina have increased $1.882 per gallon to $3.626 per gallon.

Under the Romney-Ryan Plan

• 355,000 Jobs will be created in North Carolina by 2016
• 12,000,000 Jobs will be created nationally by 2016

GOT IT?

Diane Rufino: The Path to National Redemption

August 27, 2012

This week marks the start of the Republican National Convention in Tampa. Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan will be named the GOP ticket for November's election. We already know that Barack Obama and Joe Biden will be the Democratic ticket.

So now we know who the candidates and personalities will be. The big question is what the election itself will be about. We know the bottom line. The election of 2012 will determine the type of country we wish to be going forward. It's a moral question, and one that must be decided by a country that is steadily and quickly losing its morality. The moral question is whether we should have more spending and bigger government with less liberty or less spending with a smaller government and more liberty. Do we continue with a mindset towards individual liberty or with a mindset that government's role includes taking care of people cradle to grave and stimulating and controlling the economy. Entitlements entitle the government to bargain away human liberty and stimulus money only stimulates one thing - the size, scope, and power of government.

In the movie "The Pride of the Yankees," Lou Gehrig's mother is disappointed when she finds out her son has given up plans to finish college and become an engineer. She tells him: "In America, you can be anything. We didn't come here from Italy for you to play ball." (She didn't understand that professional baseball players make a lot of money). Her point was that the decision of foreigners back in the early-mid 20th century to leave their homes, their countries, and their families was one that was balanced by the enormous opportunity to become personally successful in America. The ambition of our forefathers and our immigrant ancestors has been dulled by the entitlement mentality and the eagerness of our government to put everyone on some kind of government program, making them dependent on the government and on the Democratic party as well.

Mark Levin, author of Ameritopia: The Unmaking of America," puts the election in these terms: "The truth is, ladies and gentlemen — the truth is, if you’re a parent or a grandparent, this election is not about us. It’s not about parents and grandparents. This election is about our children and our grandchildren. Now, we’ve lost perspective. We’re losing our focus. The president of the United States, as I have said before, is the greatest political child abuser in modern American history.” The reason he is so harsh on the president, he explains, is because "government spending and debt, at 100% percent of the gross domestic product (GDP), will put the country in a vulnerable position when my children and grandchildren are older."

On his radio program, he said: “We talk about the debt, which is almost $16 trillion, that’s 100% of the GDP. That's over 100% of all goods and services produced by our economy in any given year. We talk about the unfunded liabilities, which I estimate to be over $70 trillion now, some estimate it to be over $100 trillion. It’s mind-numbing. Now the fact of the matter is, those of us who are in our 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s..... we’re going to be dead and gone when our children and their children are going to have to deal with this. All of these politicians you see on TV today, they’re going to be distant memories, if they’re memories at all. They’re going to be gone. And all of this doublespeak, all this political gamesmanship.” He pleaded with his listeners to remove Obama from office. "We have to save our society - our culture, our economy, and our rule of law. We have to save it for our children and our grandchildren, or they’re going to live in some kind of a tyranny.”

In a sense, we are talking about national redemption. Political redemption. We need to talk about spiritual redemption as well, but that's a topic for another day.

Redemption us defined as "deliverance or rescue." (Free Dictionary) It is "the action of saving or being saved from sin, error, or evil." (Dictionary.com) For example, we can talk about "God's plans for the redemption of his world." Another definition is "the recovery of something mortgaged." (Free Dictionary)

This November, we need the GOP to put forth a plan for the redemption of our country. We need the Romney and Ryan to outline a plan that will recover the country from a mortgaged future that will bind and saddle our children and grandchildren. The government is financing its programs by deficit spending - that is, borrowing now and taxing later. In other words, Congress and the President are forcing future generations to pay for our problems, for problems we generated. We are shifting the costs of this massive spending scheme to our children. We are mortgaging their future. Every dollar the government spends, even if borrowed, has to come out of someone' pocket and therefore preempts the use of that dollar somewhere else in the economy, both now and in the future.

On June 5, Congressman Paul Ryan posted the most recent report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) - "The Long-Term Budget Outlook" - on his US House website. The report outlined a very bleak fiscal and economic future, and underscored the painful consequences for American families should policymakers fail to advance fiscally responsible reforms. Some of the key points from the CBO's "Budget Outlook" include:

• The Federal government’s unsustainable government spending will increase the likelihood of a devastating crisis: The CBO report states that “Growing debt also will increase the probability of a sudden fiscal crisis, during which investors would lose confidence in the government’s ability to manage its budget and the government will thereby lose its ability to borrow at affordable rates.”

• The CBO report affirms that the massive health-care overhaul fails to address the explosion in health care costs. Mandatory federal spending on health care will increase by 93% from 5.4% of GDP today to 10.4% of GDP over the next 25 years.

• The CBO projects that government spending as a share of the economy will increase by nearly 53% between now and 2037, up from its historical average of roughly 20%. Taxes are projected to rise to the historical average in the years ahead, yet the unprecedented growth in government spending is projected to rise much faster, driving an unsustainable explosion in debt.

• The long-term budget outlook continues to worsen with each passing year Congress fails to act. While total debt has already eclipsed the size of the entire US economy, debt held by the public is on pace to eclipse the economy shortly after 2022.

• The crushing burden of debt is driven primarily by the nation’s largest entitlement programs – Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid – along with the compounding growth in interest payments on the debt. Government spending on health care entitlements, Social Security, and interest on the national debt will consume 100% of total revenues by 2025.

• According to the CBO report, the federal government’s interest payments alone are projected to consume 9.5% of our entire economy by 2037, up from about 1.4% today.

• The CBO reports warns of the economic consequences of the President and his administration's insistence on increasing tax rates and raising barriers to job creation and economic growth. With the respect to counterproductive efforts to reduce the deficit by increasing tax rates, CBO states that “the extent that additional tax revenues were generated by boosting marginal tax rates, those higher rates will discourage people from working and saving, further reducing output and income.”

So today, August 27, the Republican National Convention opened in Tampa, Florida. Americans will soon get a sense of what the dynamics will be for the election season. And of course, we will find out who the major players will be. Conservatives want to know if they have a ticket that can beat Obama. They want to know if the message will resonate with conservatives and especially independents. They want to know if their ideas will offer a suitable alternative to those disillusioned with the failed policies of the Democrats. Tea Partiers want to know what the dialogue will be on Constitutional governance, reducing the size of government, restoring fiscal conservatism, cutting back on regulations and promoting free markets, and emphasizing personal responsibility.

But there is a slight problem. Tropical storm Isaac has made an unwelcomed visit to the coast of Florida and it's likely to rain on the RNC's parade (or convention).

So where do we stand at this time? We are headed for a cliff. Since January 2009, Obama's policies have increased our national debt by over 45%. We are headed for a recession if things don't change. That recession could hit as early as beginning of next year. We are heading towards bankruptcy. Social programs make up most of our debt and Obama is increasing dependence on government. Obamacare is looming and in fact, provisions are already being implemented. It will present the largest middle class tax hike in history, they say. 70% of businesses say they cannot hire new employees or expand because of this healthcare bill. Obama is turning the full force of Homeland Security, the Justice Department, the State Department, and the Department of Defense inwards on American citizens.

We know of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which permits the targeting, indefinite detention, torture, and even death of American citizens, and we know the President has used unmanned drones to kill Americans abroad, but most of us don't know that in May of this year, the US House passed a law that would allow American citizens to be targeted with the same government propaganda campaigns that it communicates to our global enemies and friends. Not only did Obama assume power under the Afghanistan Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) as a justification for being able to enter American homes to grab people, detain them indefinitely, and disregard their rights of habeas corpus and other Bill of Rights, but now his can use “U.S. propaganda intended to influence foreign audiences to be used on the domestic population.” In other words, Obama is using war powers against American citizens by unilaterally accusing them of being enemies of the United States and wants to engage in propaganda campaigns to influence and control them. Does this sound like Nazi Germany and other totalitarian regimes? As one commentator wrote: "Nothing speaks more urgently to the creeping fascism of American politics than the assertion by our representatives, who apparently have never read a book on Germany in the 1930s-1940s or on the Soviet Union in the Stalin period, that forbidding the Department of Defense and the State Department from subjecting us to government propaganda “ties the hands of America’s diplomatic officials, military, and others by inhibiting our ability to effectively communicate in a credible way.” And mind you, they want to use our own money to wash our brains!"

Despite the politics of oppression, Obama is still leading in national polls for the presidential election. An average of all the national polls shows Obama leading by 1.2% (as of August 27). Rasmussen, the most consistently reliable national poll, shows Obama ahead by 3%. A breakdown of blue states vs. red states gives an electoral college standing of 221 electoral votes for Obama and 181 electoral votes for Romney.

The battle for the White House, according to Real Clear Politics (which takes an average of all polls) stands as follows, and I've listed the number of electoral votes for each state:

Solid for Obama (142 electoral votes) - CA (55), DC (3), IL (20), MA (21), RI (4), DE (3), HW (4), MD (10), NY (29), VT (3)

Likely for Obama - ME (4), NJ (14), WA (12)

Leaning towards Obama - CT (7), MN (10), NM (5), OR (7), PA (20)

Either Way - CO (9), FL (29), IA (6), MI (16), MO (10), NV (6), NH (4), NC (15), OH (18), VA (13), WI (10).

Leaning towards Romney - AZ (11), GA (16), IN (11), SC (9)

Likely for Romney - MT (3), ND (3), SD (3), TN (11), TX (38)

Solid for Romney (76) - AL (9), AR (6), KS (6), LA (8), NE (5), WV (5), MS (6), OK (7), UT (6), WY (3), AK (3), ID (4), KY (8)

There are 11 states - swing states or battleground states - that will determine this election and determine the course of our country for the next 4 years. Those states are Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Virginia, and Wisconsin. Last week, Real Clear Politics announced that Obama has lost his lead in all of those swing states, except NH. The greatest movement was in Colorado, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Last week Obama was leading in Florida by only 1% and only slightly higher in Ohio. Today's Real Clear Politics shows Romney and Obama in a tie now in both those battleground states. In Missouri, Romney is leading now by 4.3% and in North Carolina, he is leading by 1%. The question is whether Paul Ryan's home state of Wisconsin will vote for the GOP ticket. Currently Obama is still leading by 1.4%.

It is worth noting that in these swing states, the two most important issues are the economy and Obamacare. According to polling data, in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Florida, voters who strongly disapprove of the healthcare bill greatly outnumber those who approve of the bill. So healthcare is a big issue. In Florida, this is countered by the concern for Medicare. Remember the liberal superPAC ad that shows Ryan throwing grandma off the cliff. Romney and Ryan still have to clear the record on the Medicare issue. Once the facts are made known, Florida should go to Romney. What are the facts?

-- Who is the candidate putting Medicare at risk? Obama took $760 billion out of Medicare to help fund Obamacare.

-- Ryan seeks to secure and save Medicare, not destroy it. For those seniors 55 and older, there is no change in the program with his plan. Nothing changes for them. They have nothing to worry about. Those who are 54 and younger, starting in 2023, they will receive a fixed amount of money from the government to pick either private health insurance or a federal plan modeled on Medicare. Ryan says that will keep the program solvent.

As you probably already know, Ryan's plan first and foremost calls for the repeal of Obamacare. Second, it puts more emphasis on managing disease and treating health issues rather than wellness, unlike what Obamacare does.

And that is the status of the race - red vs. blue - going into the Republican National Convention.

The question on everyone's mind is whether Romney and Ryan unveil a winning strategy in Tampa?

We already know that Romney is committed to getting our finances in order. He intends to turn this country around, just as he did for the Olympics in 2002 when he served as president and CEO of the Olympics Organizing Committee. To show that commitment, he selected as his running mate a member of the US House who has served for 14 years, was elected by a traditionally democratic state, serves on the House Budget Committee, has a firm grasp of economics and numbers, and is the only member of Congress to come up with a budget plan to meaningfully address the national debt and put our country back on the path of prosperity. The budget plan he proposed in 2011 was passed by the House but rejected by the Senate. The budget plan he proposed this year - The 2013 Path to Prosperity - was overwhelmingly passed by the House. What a stark contrast Congressman Paul Ryan is to then-Senator Barack Obama. Ryan is a thinker with the discipline and courage to propose bold solutions to real problems. He is not afraid to talk straight with the American people about their shared interest in the economy. Obama can't even articulate what "Hope and Change" means. All he can do is use his ethnic appeal to accuse wealthier Americans of not "doing enough," while telling dependent Americans he will give them more.

The Path to Prosperity is a blueprint for American renewal. It will cut more than $5 trillion in spending from the President's budget over the next 10 years, will put the nation on a path to pay off our national debt, offers pro-growth reforms to our broken and burdensome tax code, saves and strengthens the social safety net, and will balance the budget in 20 years.

Ryan's budget plan sets forth a model of government guided by the timeless principles of our great American experiment: free enterprise and economic liberty; limited government and spending restraint; traditional family and community values; and a strong national defense. While it's true that our government has strayed from these timeless principles, Ryan's plan budget offers a set of fundamental reforms that will restore those principles and put the nation back on the right track.

Specifically, The Path to Prosperity will do the following:

(1). Repeal of Obamacare. Ryan's plan calls for the repeal of Obamacare.

(2). Change Washington's Culture of Spending. Ryan's budget plan offers responsible spending cuts now and structural reforms of government spending programs going forward, to ensure that government spending remains on a sustainable path. Under this budget, government spending will fall from its current elevated level of 24% of the economy to below 20% by 2015. Relative to the President's budget, this budget cuts spending by more than $5 trillion over the next ten years, producing $3 trillion in lower deficits. By restoring discipline to Congressional spending, this budget also tackles the drivers of our debt and averts the fiscal crisis ahead - by cutting debt as a share of the economy by roughly 15% over the next decade.

(3). Strengthening Health and Retirement Security. Ryan's budget puts an end to empty promises from Washington, offering instead real security through reasonable reforms. Medicare is facing an unprecedented fiscal challenge. Its failed reliance on bureaucratic price controls, combined with rising health care costs, is jeopardizing seniors' access to critical care and threatening to bankrupt the system – and ultimately the nation. According to the Medicare trustees, without substantial changes, the Medicare program will collapse in 2024. This budget saves Medicare by fixing flaws in its structure so it will be there for future generations. By putting these solutions in place now, this budget ensures that changes will not affect those in and near retirement in any way. No changes will be made to Medicare for anyone 55 and older.

When younger workers become eligible for Medicare a decade or more from today, they will be able to choose from a list of guaranteed coverage options, including traditional Medicare. This flexibility will allow seniors to enjoy the same kinds of choices in their plans that members of Congress and federal employees enjoy. Starting in 2023, Medicare will provide a payment to subsidize the cost of the plan, which seniors can then use to pick either private health insurance or a federal plan modeled after Medicare. By forcing plans to compete against each other to serve the patient, the government will help ensure the best medical program for the dollar. It will therefore guarantee affordability. In addition, Medicare will provide increased assistance to lower-income beneficiaries and to those with greater health risks. Plans will not be able to "cherry pick" beneficiaries or deny coverage to those with pre-existing conditions. And there will be a strengthened safety net for the poor and sick. This essential reform offers one of the benefits of Obamacare (no denial because of pre-existing conditions) yet empowers individuals to make healthcare decisions based on their own situation. It will guarantee that Medicare can fulfill the promise of health and security for America's seniors.

In contrast, President Obama's health care law takes $500 billion from the Medicare Trust Fund to pay for the costs of his new health care entitlement. With no serious plan to save and preserve Medicare for current and future seniors, the President would allow parts of Medicare to go bankrupt in 2024. The President's law also empowers a board of unelected bureaucrats, known as the Independent Payment Advisory Board, or IPAB, to cut Medicare through formulaic rationing and determine what services your doctor and hospital can and cannot give you, hurting both Medicare recipients and health care providers. Conversely, Ryan's budget plan ends the raid on the Medicare Trust Fund by repealing the President's health care law, including IPAB, and ensures that any potential savings in current law would go to help Medicare, not to pay for new entitlements. In addition to repealing the health care law's new rationing board and its unfunded long-term care entitlement, the budget stabilizes plan choices for current seniors.

This budget also calls for action on Social Security by requiring both the President and the Congress to put forward specific ideas and legislation to ensure the sustainable solvency of this critical program. The risk to Social Security, driven by demographic changes - namely 10,000 baby boomers retiring every day - is nearer at hand than most acknowledge. According to the 2011 Social Security Trustees Report, beneficiaries will face a painful 23% benefit cut in 2036 when the Social Security Trust fund is exhausted. Both parties must work together to chart a path forward on common-sense reforms, and this budget provides the nation's leaders with the tools to get there.

(4). Pro-Growth Tax Reform. The current tax code for individuals is too complicated, with high marginal rates that discourage hard work and entrepreneurship. Ryan's plan embraces the widely acknowledged principles of pro-growth tax reform by proposing to consolidate tax brackets and lower tax rates, to just two rates of 10% and 25%, while clearing out the burdensome tangle of loopholes that distort economic activity and primarily benefit the wealthiest Americans.

American businesses are also overburdened by the highest corporate income tax rates in the developed world. The perverse incentives created by the corporate income tax do a lot of damage to both workers and investors, yet the tax itself raises relatively little revenue. Ryan's budget improves incentives for job creators to work, invest, and innovate in the United States by lowering the corporate rate from 35% (the highest in the industrialized world) to a much more competitive 25% (the international average) and by shifting to a territorial system that will ensure a level playing field for American businesses.

It is also important to remember that most small businesses file their taxes as individuals, and not as corporations. Ryan notes that 9 out of 10 small businesses in Wisconsin file their taxes as individuals. These small businesses, known as "sub-chapter S corporations," limited liability corporations (LLCs), and partnerships, employ more than half of all private sector workers. The President is proposing that the top tax rate for these businesses be raised to 45% in January of 2013. With two thirds of the net new jobs in America being created by small businesses, the President's tax proposal is a plan to kill job creation. Some of our foreign competitors are lowering their tax rates on businesses to as low as 15%. As noted above, our budget lowers the top individual tax rate to a more competitive 25% while broadening the tax base by eliminating loopholes and tax shelters.

(5). Providing for the Common Defense. With American men and women in uniform currently engaged with a fierce enemy and dealing with emerging threats around the world, Ryan's budget takes several steps to ensure that national security remains government's top priority. It rejects proposals to make thoughtless, across-the-board cuts in funding for national defense. Instead, it provides $554 billion for national defense spending, an amount that is consistent with America's military goals and strategies. The budget preserves necessary defense spending to protect vital national interests today and ensures future real growth in defense spending to modernize the armed forces for the challenges of tomorrow.

The defense budget is slated to be cut by $55 billion, or 10%, in January of 2013 through the sequester mechanism enacted as part of the Budget Control Act of 2011. This reduction would be in addition to the $487 billion in cuts over ten years proposed in President Obama's budget. The President's proposal for defense spending represents a budget-driven strategy, not a strategy-driven budget. Ryan's budget eliminates these additional cuts in the defense budget by replacing them with other spending reductions. Spending restraint is critical, and defense spending needs to be executed with effectiveness and accountability. But government should take care to ensure that spending is prioritized according to the nation's needs, not treated indiscriminately when it comes to making cuts. The nation has no higher priority than safeguarding the safety and liberty of its citizens from threats at home and abroad.

The Ryan budget plan also honors the brave soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines who have served our country and made tremendous sacrifices on behalf of this nation. Not only does it match the President's FY2013 request for $61.34 billion to spend on veterans, it calls for more than $16.6 billion in additional spending on veterans and their families over the next ten years. As a country, we must remember the sacrifices of our veterans and their families, who have bravely served our nation, and this budget proves committed to providing the best care possible for them and uniformed service members.

Not exactly a "radical" and "extreme" plan, as President Obama accused it of being.

[After reading what Paul Ryan's plan provides, you will notice that there are several advertisements - "approved by President Obama" - which appear not to be truthful].

The budget that Rep. Paul Ryan wrote came up for a vote before the House on March 29 and was passed by a margin of 228 – 191. Americans were encouraged that the House again voted in favor of a Paul Ryan budget plan instead of continuing down the path of debt, doubt, and decline. Before voting to pass this budget proposal, the House had the opportunity to vote on President Obama's budget proposal for FY2013. The House unanimously rejected the President's proposal, by a vote of 0 – 414, a clear indication that Republicans and Democrats alike did not believe the President put forth a credible plan to address America's challenges.

The economy is the number one issue in this upcoming election. People want jobs. Fathers and mothers want to earn a living for their family. They want the dignity that comes with earned success and not the indignation that comes from accepting a hand-out without producing anything or offering a service in return. Our elderly and disabled want to know that our economy is strong enough to protect the programs on which they depend. Businesses want to trust that the government supports their efforts to invest and grown their operations and create jobs and not punish them for taking risks or for their success. Is it reasonable that small businesses must incur the debt and provide their female employees contraceptives so they can live a sexually-free lifestyle? Is that the role of a business owner?

We all secretly, or openly, are looking for certain promises from the Republicans at their convention this week. For those disillusioned Democrats, they want to know that if they take the chance and vote against their party, they will not be worse off in the next 4 years. Independents, who have been frustrated with both parties, have to hear something from Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan that affirm their faith in American and not add to their distrust of government. And Republicans want to be inspired so they can organize their communities as they've never been able to do before.

To defeat Obama, the Romney-Ryan duo must contrast our great Legacy of Liberty with the oppressive socialist doctrines advocated by the Left. They must energize the largest conservative grassroots movement in history and enlist the support of American Patriots from all walks of life. They must alert fellow countrymen that we are on the downside of the fatal cycle of human liberty and the only way to turn things around is by restoring constitutional integrity and governance.

We see the same themes and issues that Ronald Reagan highlighted when he ran for the presidency in 1980. Under Jimmy Carter, Americans were suffering from out-of-control social programs, a recession, inflation, high unemployment, deficit spending, and runaway taxes. He asked the country if they were better off than they were 4 years earlier. He asked the people if they believe that a small, political elite in Washington can plan their lives for them better than they can. He urged a return to the timeless government principles our Founding Fathers wanted for us. Mitt Romney needs to do the same thing. Unlike Reagan, Romney is not necessarily a great speaker. But that shouldn't stop him from talking about great things and great ideas. Like Reagan did.

The election of 1980, an election poised on the choice to the American people of opposing government ideology, was not unlike the election we face in November. Extreme government control with limited freedom OR limited government with extreme freedom !!

At several events and fundraisers (2011 and 2012), President Obama attempted to compare himself to Reagan. Not to cheapen a good line, but I voted for Ronald Reagan in 1980, and Barack Obama is no Ronald Reagan.

In his acceptance speech of 1980, Reagan proclaimed,

"I want my candidacy to unify our country; to renew the American spirit and sense of purpose. I want to carry our message to every American, regardless of party affiliation, who is a member of this community of shared values. ... Never before in our history have Americans been called upon to face three grave threats to our very existence, any one of which could destroy us. We face a disintegrating economy, a weakened defense and an energy policy based on the sharing of scarcity. The major issue of this campaign is the direct political, personal and moral responsibility of Democratic Party leadership -- in the White House and in Congress -- for this unprecedented calamity, which has befallen us. They expect you to tell your children that America has had her day in the sun and that the future will be one of sacrifice and few opportunities.

We need a rebirth of the American tradition of leadership at every level of government and in private life as well. Back in 1976, Mr. Carter said, 'Trust me.' And a lot of people did. Now, many of those people are out of work. Many have seen their savings eaten away by inflation. Many others on fixed incomes, especially the elderly, have watched helplessly as the cruel tax of inflation wasted away their purchasing power.

'Trust me' government asks that we concentrate our hopes and dreams on one man; that we trust him to do what's best for us. My view of government places trust not in one person or one party, but in those values that transcend persons and parties. The trust is where it belongs--in the people. The responsibility to live up to that trust is where it belongs, in their elected leaders. That kind of relationship, between the people and their elected leaders, is a special kind of compact.

Three hundred and sixty years ago, in 1620, a group of families dared to cross a mighty ocean to build a future for themselves in a new world. When they arrived at Plymouth, Massachusetts, they formed what they called a 'compact'; an agreement among themselves to build a community and abide by its laws. This single act - the voluntary binding together of free people to live under the law - set the pattern for what was to come.

A century and a half later, the descendants of those people pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to found this nation. Some forfeited their fortunes and their lives; none sacrificed honor.

Isn't it once again time to renew our compact of freedom; to pledge to each other all that is best in our lives, for the sake of this, our beloved and blessed land?

We must overcome something the present administration has cooked up: a new and altogether indigestible economic stew, one part inflation, one part high unemployment, one part recession, one part runaway taxes, one party deficit spending and seasoned by an energy crisis. It's an economic stew that has turned the national stomach.

Ours are not problems of abstract economic theory. Those are problems of flesh and blood; problems that cause pain and destroy the moral fiber of real people who should not suffer the further indignity of being told by the government that it is all somehow their fault.

Can anyone look at the record of this administration and say, 'Well done?' Can anyone compare the state of our economy when the Carter Administration took office with where we are today and say, 'Keep up the good work?' Can anyone look at our reduced standing in the world today and say, 'Let's have four more years of this?'

I believe the American people are going to answer these questions the first week of November and their answer will be, 'No! We've had enough.' And, then it will be up to us, beginning next January 20th, to offer an administration and congressional leadership of competence and more than a little courage.

We must have the clarity of vision to see the difference between what is essential and what is merely desirable, and then the courage to bring our government back under control and make it acceptable to the people.

I believe it is clear our federal government is overgrown and overweight. Indeed, it is time for our government to go on a diet. Therefore, my first act as chief executive will be to impose an immediate and thorough freeze on federal hiring. Then, we are going to enlist the very best minds from business, labor and whatever quarter to conduct a detailed review of every department, bureau and agency that lives by federal appropriations. We are also going to enlist the help and ideas of many dedicated and hard working government employees at all levels who want a more efficient government as much as the rest of us do. I know that many are demoralized by the confusion and waste they confront in their work as a result of failed and failing policies.

Our instructions to the groups we enlist will be simple and direct. We will remind them that government programs exist at the sufferance of the American taxpayer and are paid for with money earned by working men and women. Any program that represents a waste of their money -- a theft from their pocketbooks--must have that waste eliminated or the program must go -- by executive order where possible; by congressional action where necessary. Everything that can be run more effectively by state and local government we shall turn over to state and local government, along with the funding sources to pay for it. We are going to put an end to the money merry-go-round where our money becomes Washington's money, to be spent by the states and cities exactly the way the federal bureaucrats tell them to.

I will not accept the excuse that the federal government has grown so big and powerful that it is beyond the control of any president, any administration or Congress. We are going to put an end to the notion that the American taxpayer exists to fund the federal government. The federal government exists to serve the American people. On January 20th, we are going to re-establish that truth.

Also on that date we are going to initiate action to get substantial relief for our taxpaying citizens and action to put people back to work. None of this will be based on any new form of monetary tinkering or fiscal sleight-of-hand. We will simply apply to government the common sense we all use in our daily lives.

Work and family are at the center of our lives; the foundation of our dignity as a free people. When we deprive people of what they have earned, or take away their jobs, we destroy their dignity and undermine their families. We cannot support our families unless there are jobs; and we cannot have jobs unless people have both money to invest and the faith to invest it.

There are concepts that stem from an economic system that for more than 200 years has helped us master a continent, create a previously undreamed of prosperity for our people and has fed millions of others around the globe. That system will continue to serve us in the future if our government will stop ignoring the basic values on which it was built and stop betraying the trust and good will of the American workers who keep it going.

The American people are carrying the heaviest peacetime tax burden in our nation's history -- and it will grow even heavier, under present law, next January. We are taxing ourselves into economic exhaustion and stagnation, crushing our ability and incentive to save, invest and produce.

This must stop. We must halt this fiscal self-destruction and restore sanity to our economic system.

I have long advocated a 30% reduction in income tax rates over a period of three years. This phased tax reduction would begin with a 10% 'down payment' tax cut in 1981, which the Republicans and Congress and I have already proposed. A phased reduction of tax rates would go a long way toward easing the heavy burden on the American people. But, we should not stop here.

Within the context of economic conditions and appropriate budget priorities during each fiscal year of my presidency, I would strive to go further. This would include improvement in business depreciation taxes so we can stimulate investment in order to get plants and equipment replaced, put more Americans back to work and put our nation back on the road to being competitive in world commerce. We will also work to reduce the cost of government as a percentage of our gross national product.

The first task of national leadership is to set honest and realistic priorities in our policies and our budget and I pledge that my administration will do that.

When I talk of tax cuts, I am reminded that every major tax cut in this century has strengthened the economy, generated renewed productivity and ended up yielding new revenues for the government by creating new investment, new jobs and more commerce among our people.

The present administration has been forced by us Republicans to play follow-the-leader with regard to a tax cut. But, in this election year we must take with the proverbial 'grain of salt' any tax cut proposed by those who have given us the greatest tax increase in our history. When those in leadership give us tax increases and tell us we must also do with less, have they thought about those who have always had less -- especially the minorities? This is like telling them that just as they step on the first rung of the ladder of opportunity, the ladder is being pulled out from under them. That may be the Democratic leadership's message to the minorities, but it won't be ours. Our message will be: we have to move ahead, but we're not going to leave anyone behind. Thanks to the economic policies of the Democratic Party, millions of Americans find themselves out of work. Millions more have never even had a fair chance to learn new skills, hold a decent job, or secure for themselves and their families a share in the prosperity of this nation.

It is time to put America back to work; to make our cities and towns resound with the confident voices of men and women of all races, nationalities and faiths bringing home to their families a decent paycheck they can cash for honest money.

For those without skills, we'll find a way to help them get skills. For those without job opportunities, we'll stimulate new opportunities, particularly in the inner cities where they live. For those who have abandoned hope, we'll restore hope and we'll welcome them into a great national crusade to make America great again!

When we cast our eyes abroad, we see an equally sorry chapter on the record of the present administration. We are not a warlike people. Quite the opposite. We always seek to live in peace. We resort to force infrequently and with great reluctance--and only after we have determined that it is absolutely necessary. We are awed--and rightly so--by the forces of destruction at loose in the world in this nuclear era. But neither can we be naive or foolish. Four times in my lifetime America has gone to war, bleeding the lives of its young men into the sands of beachheads, the fields of Europe and the jungles and rice paddies of Asia. We know only too well that war comes not when the forces of freedom are strong, but when they are weak. It is then that tyrants are tempted. We simply cannot learn these lessons the hard way again without risking our destruction.

Of all the objectives we seek, first and foremost is the establishment of lasting world peace. We must always stand ready to negotiate in good faith, ready to pursue any reasonable avenue that holds forth the promise of lessening tensions and furthering the prospects of peace. But let our friends and those who may wish us ill take note: the United States has an obligation to its citizens and to the people of the world never to let those who would destroy freedom dictate the future course of human life on this planet. I would regard my election as proof that we have renewed our resolve to preserve world peace and freedom. This nation will once again be strong enough to do that.

It is impossible to capture in words the splendor of this vast continent which God has granted as our portion of this creation. There are no words to express the extraordinary strength and character of this breed of people we call Americans.

Everywhere we have met thousands of Democrats, Independents, and Republicans from all economic conditions and walks of life bound together in that community of shared values of family, work, neighborhood, peace and freedom. They are concerned, yes, but they are not frightened. They are disturbed, but not dismayed. They are the kind of men and women Tom Paine had in mind when he wrote, during the darkest days of the American Revolution, 'We have it in our power to begin the world over again.'

Nearly 150 years after Tom Paine wrote those words, an American president told the generation of the Great Depression that it had a 'rendezvous with destiny.' I believe that this generation of Americans today has a rendezvous with destiny.

Tonight, let us dedicate ourselves to renewing the American compact. I ask you not simply to 'Trust me,' but to trust your values - our values - and to hold me responsible for living up to them. I ask you to trust that American spirit which knows no ethnic, religious, social, political, regional, or economic boundaries; the spirit that burned with zeal in the hearts of millions of immigrants from every corner of the Earth who came here in search of freedom.

Some say that spirit no longer exists. But I have seen it - I have felt it - all across the land; in the big cities, the small towns and in rural America. The American spirit is still there. The time is now, my fellow Americans, to recapture our destiny, to take it into our own hands. But, to do this will take many of us, working together. I ask you tonight to volunteer your help in this cause so we can carry our message throughout the land."

And then he ended with these words: "I'll confess that I've been a little afraid to suggest what I'm going to suggest -- I'm more afraid not to -- that we begin our crusade joined together in a moment of silent prayer. God bless America."

Isn't this the same message we want to hear again, in 2012? As conservatives? As independents? As disillusioned and demoralized Democrats? As Tea Partiers? As Americans? Isn't this the message we need to hear?

With the economy in shambles as it is and with our national debt mounting as quickly as it is, and with the only response Obama offers is more blame, division, and class warfare, don't we need bold solutions like Reagan offered? We already know that Paul Ryan's budget plan includes a tax restructuring reform like the Gipper implemented. And we know his plan puts us on a path that will rescue the debt from our children and will relieve us from the need to increase taxes. Our social programs will be safe.

The lesson of 1980 is this: Out of severe inflation, economic depression, joblessness, and high taxes came an era of extreme prosperity. It was possible simply by the exchange of policies - the former centered around government and the latter centered around the individual.

Romney and Ryan must make Americans truly see that they are not better off today than they were 4 years ago. And then they must follow it up with a bold free-enterprise plan for economic recovery. Ryan has to explain his Path to Prosperity plan in a way that Americans can understand it. They must boost American morale, and continue to speak forcibly about Obama's failed socialist regime.

They must touch the patriotic core in all of us and ask if we truly want to transform this great land of ours, as Obama is committed in doing, or restore it to its intended glory. They must remind Americans what Obama told a crowd at Georgetown University in April 2009 when he talked about his new 'foundation' and the task he faced of re-building this country, according to the policies that his administration designed. He used such words as "reform" and "transform." He talked about needing "new legal authority" to make the changes necessary. He said that the Reagan model (that is, of limited government) was not a sustainable model for long-term prosperity" and needed to be abandoned.

Romney needs to condemn this idea that a President needs "new constitutional powers." to do so.

Thomas Jefferson is always a good Founder to quote. He's my favorite. I hope Romney finds wisdom in all that he's written. For example, in 1816, Jefferson wrote to a friend: "To preserve the independence of the people, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude."

The election has to be about liberty. It can't be about temporary solutions. It has to be about reapplying our founding principles and restoring a culture of liberty.

Paul Ryan ended his rally speech on Wednesday, August 22 in Raleigh NC with these words: "Vote as if liberty still matters."

With a message like that, I have optimism that the Romney-Ryan ticket will deliver a message as important and bold as the message Ronald Reagan delivered in 1980. The Republican National Convention just might be exciting after all... and perhaps historic as well.


Go to Diane's Blog for References: 

http://forloveofgodandcountry.wordpress.com/ 

 

NC RENEGADE: Urgent!!!!

Only Good Republicans can stop this Disaster
(NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT and more). PLEASE READ PROMPTLY

I received this “urgent” request in an email from a Tea Party leader in North Carolina. My only comment is why it is directed to “Good Republicans”? What happened to “Good Americans”? Romney and the GOP support the NDAA: case closed. How do I know? Romney told us and the GOP voted en masse to pass it. I have to ask why the TSA is providing security at Paul Ryan speeches? Is it because they have not sworn an oath to the Constitution? I do not think we have long to wait to see the disposition of 1.2 billion hollow point rounds.


CONTINUED:  http://ncrenegade.com/editorial/urgent-only-good-republicans-can-stop-this-disaster-please-read-promptly/

Where are the Conservative Presidential Debate Moderators?

We all need to stand up and call each of these TV networks and DEMAND they include conservative moderators!!!! 

THERE IS NO POINT IN A DEBATE WITH ALL LIBERAL OBAMA CONTROLLED MINONS!  ~ Lynn
In just over a month, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney will square off in a series of debates. It's a time-honored tradition, and if they are anything like the GOP primary debates, hopefully people will learn more about the candidates and make an informed decision. However, what is blatantly missing from the debate line-up is any moderator from the center-right. Why is it that the so-called "nonpartisan" Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) can only pick left-wing moderators?

As announced by the CPD, the one vice presidential debate and three presidential debates will be moderated by the following people:

First presidential debate:
Jim Lehrer, Executive Editor of the PBS NewsHour
Wednesday, October 3, University of Denver, Denver, CO

Vice presidential debate:
Martha Raddatz, Senior Foreign Affairs Correspondent, ABC News
Thursday, October 11, Centre College, Danville, KY

Second presidential debate (town meeting):
Candy Crowley, Chief Political Correspondent, CNN and Anchor, CNN's State of the Union
Tuesday, October 16, Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY

Third presidential debate:
Bob Schieffer, Chief Washington Correspondent, CBS News and Moderator, Face the Nation
Monday, October 22, Lynn University, Boca Raton, FL

Frank J. Fahrenkopf, Jr. and Michael D. McCurry, co-chairmen of the "nonpartisan" CPD, had this to say about their selections: "These journalists bring extensive experience to the job of moderating, and understand the importance of using the expanded time periods to maximum benefit. We are grateful for their willingness to moderate, and confident that the public will learn more about the candidates and the issues as a result."  (BULL HOCKEY!)

CONTINUED:  http://www.gopusa.com/theloft/2012/08/15/where-are-the-conservative-presidential-debate-moderators/?subscriber=1