Portage County TEA Party
4682 State Route 43 • Kent, Ohio • 44240 • 330-474-3878 • 330-673-4672 (Fax)
November 7, 2013
Ravenna Record Courier
126 North Chestnut Street
Ravenna, OH 44266
I would like to make your readers aware of a change in our national media narrative. The lies, and the liars, are now being exposed, and the public is learning that the TEA Party speaks the truth.
With this letter, I am submitting to this newspaper a letter from State Auditor Dave Yost to the Field School Board. It shows dozens of cases of accounting mistakes and policy violations. While they kept insisting for years that we must pass a new levy, our members asked Treasurer Vokac and the Board honest, pointed, financial questions. We were called liars and worse and our personal integrity was attacked – many times in letters to this newspaper. Now we know the truth, the TEA Party was right to question their financial projections, and Mr. Vokac and the Board members who hired him are gone.
Two years ago, as President of the the Ohio Liberty Coalition, I publicly told the IRS that we would not comply with their outrageous demands and their attempts to restrict our first amendment rights. We were dismissed as conspiracy theorists. The media narrative was that the TEA Party was just a bunch of bigots, racists, homophobes, islamophobes, and Nazi’s, who could not be believed. That was the lie that was intended to discredit their critics and hide the truth. But we did prove that the Obama administration, by its own admission, used the IRS and other government agencies for political targeting. Our efforts helped disclose to Americans that their government was reading our emails, tracking our webpage visits, listening to our phone calls and sharing our private information with political groups. The TEA Party took incredible abuse for years, simply because we told the truth, that you did not want to hear.
Finally, over the past six weeks, the President, Senator Reid, and Speaker Pelosi defined the media narrative that the “TEA Party Republicans” and the TEA Party were a bunch of “terrorists”, holding the government “hostage”, “holding a gun to the head of the President”, and we were “extortionist.” They said that we were crazy to shut the government down in an effort to stop Obamcare, when in truth the President and his staff had orchestrated the shutdown months ahead of time for purely political purposes. We were trying to stop this disaster. They repeated the President’s lies about Obamacare, that you could keep your doctor, and your plan, and that your costs would go down. We said that Obamacare would raise the cost and reduce the quality of healthcare, that it was not ready, that it should be defunded or at least delayed. Now we all know that Obamacare is a disaster, and all of our concerns are true.
It is clear that the media, and many of your readers, have been wrong about the TEA Party from the start. They demonize us because many do not want to face the truth about themselves or our nation. The truth is that government is not the answer, it is the problem. The truth is that capitalism works and socialism doesn’t. The truth is that good paying jobs are what people want, not handouts. The truth is that individual freedom and liberty, and the opportunity to work hard and get ahead, is what made America great. America is finally beginning to see the Truth and it’s name is the TEA Party – join us.
Portage County TEA Party
October 22, 2013
Thank you for contacting me about marriage equality. I appreciate your reaching out to me on this important issue.
Marriage equality is a complex issue with strong feelings on both sides, and I have a great deal of respect for varying opinions on the issue. After much thought and prayer, I have come to my own personal conclusion that we shouldn’t tell people who they can love or who they can marry.
This was not a decision I came to overnight. The fabric of North Carolina and what makes our state so special is our families and our common desire for a brighter future for our children. No matter what your family looks like, we all want the same thing for our families – happiness, health, prosperity, a bright future for our children and grandchildren.
Religious institutions should have religious freedom on this issue. No church or minister should ever have to conduct a marriage that is inconsistent with their religious beliefs. But I think as a civil institution, this issue’s time has come and we need to move forward. Jobs and the economy are the number one issue for me and for North Carolinians right now, and I’m not going to take my eye off that ball at a time when so many are still struggling.
Again, thank you for contacting my office. It is truly an honor to represent North Carolina in the United States Senate, and I hope you will not hesitate to contact me in the future should you have any further questions or concerns. If you would like to stay informed on my work in the Senate, you can sign up for my e-newsletter, follow me on Twitter at @SenatorHagan, or visit my Facebook page.
Confused about Common Core?
Don’t know what Common Core is?
Or maybe you just have questions about the, the bad and the ugly about
Common Core and your child’s education?
Then come meet the experts.
Join us at an open forum on
November 12th at First Freewill Baptist Church
919 Gum Branch Road in Jacksonville.
The time is 7:00pm
This is NOT a script put out by the North Carolina or
Onslow County Boards of Education.
These are the FACTS about Common Core presented by
Lindalyn Kakadelis, Director of the North Carolina Education Alliance
with the John Locke Foundation; and
Jane Robbins, Senior Fellow with the American Principles Project
and renowned Common Core expert
This event is sponsored by concerned parents and grandparents of Onslow County
Public Service Announcement
October 28, 2013
Kim Fink, Common Core Committee Chairman for Coastal Carolina Taxpayers Association (CCTA), recently made a 5 minute speech to the Craven County Board of Education on behalf of CCTA. Kim packed an enormous amount of information into 5 minutes, and says she was able to do it by “talking fast and not breathing.” Kim’s talk is reprinted here…
My name is Kim Fink, and I am representing Coastal Carolina Taxpayers Association and I am the committee chair investigating Common Core.
We are fundamentally opposed to Common Core Standards.
Our reasons include:
It’s not legal; Congress has passed three separate statutes that prohibit the Department of education from supervising, directing or controlling curriculum. By using the CC standards and the associated national testing to define the curriculum, they are violating all 3 statutes.
Inception of Common Core: In 2009, the Secy. Of Education, Arnie Duncan gave the Dept. of Education 435 billion dollars of stimulus money that was used to fund the Race to the Top competition. Another incentive to the states was a waiver from the No Child Left Behind program. To compete for this grant money, states had to agree to adopt Common Core, sight unseen. How did this happen? The application for the grants was released in November of 2009. Completed applications were due in 2 months, January of 2010. I remind you that at this time our state was desperate for money for education. Our legislators were not in session during November and December so the decision to apply for the grant was made by the Governor and state board of education. The standards were released in March of 2010, 2 months AFTER applying for the grant. Kind of reminds me of Obamacare, you had to pass it in order to see what was in it. In June of 2010 the final draft of the Common Core Standards was released and the school board had until August for their final vote, NC state board of education voted unanimously on June 2, 2010 to adopt Common Core. This decision was made during summer vacation with little involvement from local districts, principals, teachers or parents. According to the John Locke Foundation, there was only one NC participant in developing Common Core, Professor Jere Confrey of the NC State University College of education. These standards were adopted statewide without being field tested. There is no evidence to suggested that Common Core Standards are successful
Standards versus curriculum argument: Proponents say the CC standards are not the curriculum; the states are free to change the curriculum. This is misleading as the standards drive the curriculum. The curriculum is merely the details of teaching the standards. The National tests will align with the standards, which will dictate the curriculum so students will be able to pass the tests. When states sign on to CC they have agreed to the standards plus assessments, those tests will be the enforcement mechanism. David Coleman is the primary author of the English Language Arts portion of the Common Core, and is also the new President of the College board. He wants to align the SATs with CC; again this will assure the implementation of the CC curriculum.
Data Collection: When the NC agreed to Common Core, they agreed to aggressive online data collection of the students as well as the teachers. The Common Education Data Analysis and Reporting System(CEDARS) is the states longitudinal data system that incorporates the financial systems, teacher licensure, federally required data reporting, and student information from Power School, testing data and student transcripts. Included is personal information like test scores, disciplinary records, health history, medications, immunizations, student vehicle descriptions, family income range, religious affiliation, attitudes persistence, political affiliation etc. Allot of non-academic things that parents are not comfortable with, and have not given permission to share with anyone else, thanks to a presidential executive order allowing the data to be shared with any entity, public or private as long as it describes the sharing as necessary to an audit or evaluation of a federal program. This is from the amended regulations of “Family education rights in privacy act”
Why was CC adopted without being field tested, why weren’t other testing standards looked at? I think the answer is the money. We all want what is best for our children. North Carolina is a Local Control State, which means the local school board is the FINAL authority on decisions of our County. We can’t choose the state tests, but we can choose to adopt whatever standards we want, and directly per Ms Alexis Schauss of the NC Board of Education, we will not lose access to State or Federal Funding should we choose a curriculum and standards other than Common Core, but may lose the Race to the Top grants. I strongly urge you to consider other non-nationalized options.
Why ccta cares: A major concern is how we are going to pay for the continued implementation of CC, the required infrastructure, the computers, the testing, textbooks and materials, the training/retraining of teachers and administration. The tax payer cost has been estimated to be between $300 million and $525 million over the next 7 years.
We care about the loss of parental rights, loss of input from teachers, principals, local and state school boards. CCTA is more comfortable with Craven county school officials than we are with the state and federal bureaucrats and their associated agendas. The Common Core curriculum is a copyrighted program that doesn’t allow for deviation, although you can add up to 15% of content, you cannot delete any part of the standards. We oppose Social indoctrination of our children where they will be taught what to think instead of how to think.
I have collected allot of data on Common Core, my sources include The John Birch Society, The Heritage Foundation, Americans for Prosperity, Civitas, The John Locke Foundation, The North Carolina Education Alliance, The American Principals Project , the North Carolina Institute for Constitutional Law , Michelle Malkin, and even Wikipedia. I have forwarded information to all of the craven country school board members on more than one occasion. I am disappointed that only one of you has seen fit to reply to any of my correspondence. Since I can prove I have reasons to be concerned, Can you give us any reasons not to be?
Info provided by:
Raynor James, PR Chair, Coastal Carolina Taxpayers Association (CCTA)
305 Calico Drive, New Bern, North Carolina, 28560
Congressman Jones wants you to know the cost of the Afghan and Iraq wars. You can go to this link to see the real time cost of war, as well as the costs of other government programs:
Today there was an article in the Sun Journal by an individual who accuses all those who refuse to lockstep with the President and the Senate of the United States as traitors to their country. This letter fundamentally displays why this country has reached an all time high of division and disagreement. I don’t know where the individual attended school, but he was ill served as the letter showed a poor understanding of the English language, and a complete failure to grasp the fundamental ideas of the Constitution and the role of government. He would, however, have been a perfect citizen of Hitler’s Germany.
Unfortunately, the writer is not alone in his thinking. Thanks to an education system which has ignored teaching our founding documents and history, we have a citizenry that is ill-equipped to make rational judgments. A corrupt, biased media further aids the cause of the left by either under-reporting, selective reporting, or spinning the news to fit their agenda. Add an apathetic public who prefers cake and circuses over engaging in the workings of government, and you have a recipe for complete disaster. And that doesn’t even count those who depend on the government for the basic necessities of life.
I would remind the writer of the aforementioned letter, that the government was responsible for numerous ills of our Nation’s history, including but not limited to slavery, eugenics, interment of the Japanese, the Fugitive Slave Act, and Jim Crow laws. It was the courage of individual citizens who forced government to change their policies, not the other way around. So when he attacks those who disagree with the government, he is putting Martin Luther King in that same esteemed company.
Because of my allegiance to the First Amendment, I may disagree with every word the writer espouses, but I will defend to the death his right to say it. I doubt, however, that he would allow me the same freedom.
by Dave Carter
Whatever the perceived shortcomings of Ted Cruz and his hardy band of stalwarts, they’ve performed a remarkable public service by highlighting the fate that awaits all who rub wrongly the translucently thin skin of King Barack the Petulant. The Spartans may have had their shields, Native Americans their tomahawks and arrows, the Samurai may have wielded his sword with all the deadly grace of a tiger in mid-attack, but pound for pound, nothing comes close to the audacious stupidity of “Barrycades” and people in pointy little Smokey the Bear hats, poised to protect America’s monuments from law-abiding citizens.
Welcome to liberal utopia, where barriers are not erected against terrorists or illegal aliens on our nation’s borders, but rather against citizens, and where wheelchair-bound veterans enroute to honor their comrades face tighter security than terrorists enroute to murder a US Ambassador.
Read More -> The Bleeding Heart becomes The Iron Fist
As August winds down, it’s time for the next wave in Ted Cruz’s grassroots TSUNAMI.
-You’ve asked representatives for town halls and set up your own when the rep didn’t want to hear from you. Great job!
-You’ve asked your members of Congress to represent America and to stop Obamacare in September by signing the Mark Meadows letter (US House) and the Mike Lee letter (US Senate). We’ve added two more signers from NC – Great job!
-Your Republican National Committee passed unanimously NC’s resolution instructing Congress to defund Obamacare on the Continuing Resolution (CR). Great job!
Yet, US House leadership, which has the power to stop Obamacare before it starts, is still not willing to do it.
Ted Cruz has again asked the grassroots to bring a “tsunami” (FF to 6:08). Here we go.
4 phone calls from each 1 of us = The Cruz Tsunami:
1. Flood the offices of Speaker of the House John Boehner. Ask him to honor the Meadows letter, the RNC Resolution, the wishes of his caucus, and the American people:
Call Speaker Boehner at 877.976.7521 or fax his office at 202.225.5117.
Tell him you expect him to defund Obamacare through the CR and to NOT raise the debt ceiling. Not raising the debt ceiling means there will be no additional funds for Obamacare. Boehner is using the debt ceiling debate as a “shiny object” to deflect from the defund issue.
2. Flood Senator Burr’s office and insist that he represent us and sign Mike Lee’s letter committing to defund: 202-224-3154 or 800.685.8916
Tell him you expect him to back up his co-sponsorship of the Cruz Act to Defund Obamacare by signing Senator Lee’s letter. Co-sponsoring the bill is meaningless without the procedural context outlined in the Lee letter. Burr is using political cover by signing the bill and not the letter. Tell him funding Obamacare is “dumb”.
3. If your rep is listed below, call and insist that they sign the Meadows letter. Tell them you expect them to back up their previous votes against Obamacare by signing on to the Meadows letter. A vote to defund doesn’t mean a vote to shut down government. Signing the letter gives procedural context to the Graves Defund Obamacare Act. Simply co-sponsoring the Act is only political cover.
Virginia Foxx, District 5: (336) 778-0211 or 202-225-2071
Patrick McHenry, District 10: 800.477.2576 or 202-225-2576
Robert Pittenger, District 9: (704) 365-6234 or 202-225-1976
Renee Ellmers, District 2: 1-877-645-8764 or 202-225-4531
OR If your rep is listed below, thank him for signing the Meadows letter and ask him to stand firm:
Mark Meadows, District 11: 202-225-6401
Richard Hudson, District 8: 202-225-3715
Walter Jones, District 3: 202-225-3415
Howard Coble, District 6: 202-225-3065
George Holding, District 13: 202-225-3032
OR If your rep is listed below, ask them to represent you and to sign the Meadows letter to defund Obamacare. Democrats know the ACA is a train wreck, and we are asking them to be brave enough to stop it:
GK Butterfield, District 1: 202-225-3101
David Price, District 4: 202-225-1784
Mike McIntyre, District 7: 202-225-2731
Mel Watt, District 12: 202-225-1510
4. Call Sen. Kay Hagan (D-NC) 202-224-6342 or 877.852.9462
Tell her you expect her to listen to the majority of North Carolinians who don’t want Obamacare imposed on them. Point out that she and her staff are receiving 75% subsidies for Ocare provided by the taxpayers because Congress found out it was so expensive. Don’t let staffers tell you otherwise!
Thank you and Good luck!
Additional numbers for reference
US Capitol Switchboard (202) 224-3121
Rep. G. K. Butterfield, Jr. (D-01) (252) 237-9816
Rep. Renee L. Ellmers (R-02) 1-877-645-8764
Rep. Walter B. Jones, Jr. (R-03) 800-351-1697
Rep. David Price (D-04) 919.859.5999
Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-05) (336) 778-0211
Rep. Howard Coble (R-06) (336) 333-5005
Rep. Mike McIntyre (D-07) (910) 815-4959
Rep. Richard Hudson (R-08) 704-786-1612
Rep. Robert Pittenger (R-09) (704) 365-6234
Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-10) 800.477.2576
Rep. Mark Meadows (R-11) 828-693-5660
Rep. Mel Watt (D-12) (704) 344-9950
Rep. George Holding (R-13) 919-856-9778
Senator Burr: 800.685.8916
Senator Hagan: 877.852.9462
READ IT…OVER AND OVER AND OVER!!!
The Quote of the Decade: “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America ‘s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America ‘s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that, “the buck stops here.’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.” ~ Senator
Barack H. Obama, March 2006
Pass it on and on and on
Morning Bell: The Next Threat to Your Privacy
Who has access to your Social Security number, your bank information, and your tax records?
When Obamacare’s health insurance exchanges open, your data could be exposed to shysters and hackers, thanks to serious vulnerabilities in the system.
The exchanges are scheduled to open on October 1 (just 53 days away). But the list of implementation failures keeps growing, and the security of Americans’ data is threatened.
THREAT #1: Obamacare “Navigators”
Navigators are a group of people and organizations that are going to be facilitating signups for Obamacare’s insurance exchanges.
- Example: Planned Parenthood has applied for navigator grants to work with consumers.
- Danger: HHS will not require navigators to undergo “minimum eligibility criteria and background checks.” The Administration’s training program does not require navigators to participate in anti-fraud classes. And many states do not have plans for investigating unscrupulous navigators who may attempt to prey on vulnerable and unsuspecting Americans. Even California’s Democratic insurance commissioner—a strong supporter of Obamacare—admitted “we can have a real disaster on our hands” if scam artists posing as navigators get access to applicants’ Social Security numbers, bank accounts, and other personal information.
THREAT #2: Obamacare’s Data Hub
The data hub is a massive compilation of tax filings, Social Security reports, and other government data that will be used to determine eligibility for subsidized insurance.
- Insecure? The hub isn’t scheduled to be certified as secure until September 30—only one day before the exchanges open for business.
- Cutting Corners: The HHS inspector general recently released a report highlighting major delays in implementation of Obamacare’s data hub. The report amplifies what former HHS officials have been saying for months: The Administration has been cutting corners on data privacy for the exchanges, raising major questions about whether the data on the hub can be certified as secure—or whether Obamacare will place Americans’ tax and other personal information at risk.
The Obama Administration’s shoddy, slapdash approach to Obamacare implementation is placing the sensitive personal data of millions of Americans at risk. It’s one more reason why Congress should refuse to spend a single dime implementing this unfair, unworkable, and unpopular law.
Read the Morning Bell and more en español every day at Heritage Libertad.
- Debunking some myths in the fight to defund Obamacare.
- It’s the president who is threatening to shut down the government, though the media won’t cover it that way.
- You may not believe that the majority of parents want this at their kids’ schools.
- How does President Obama’s economic recovery compare to those of other Presidents?
- Liberals are marshalling their forces to push Obamacare against growing opposition.
- The heartwarming story of two people who left Cuba to make a life in America.
- Obamacare even includes the food police.
In 2008, Obama promised to “stem the rise of the oceans and heal the planet.” On June 25, 2013, he finally delivered his plan. The piece below is from John Droz. Check out the links provided for more information.
Given the many scandals of this Administration like the IRS and recent National Security Agency and FBI data mining of Verizon and other carriers, and the internet spying, this should give anyone of any political persuasion pause.
FreedomWorks has created a web site with information on Common Core called Common Core Fails (click here). Get facts and more information on Common Core.
The Muslim World Hates the U.S. More Than Ever
If there was one thing the left was certain about in 2008 it was this: George W. Bush had catastrophically undermined America’s world reputation with his unprovoked aggression and use of torture. The advent of Obama would reverse the damage. As Andrew Sullivan wrote in 2007, among best assets Obama brought to the “rebranding” of America was “his face.” The election of Obama and his friendly approach to the Muslim world would make the United States safer as well as more just.
No one believed this tale more fervently than Obama himself. His first official act was to direct the closing of Guantanamo Bay within one year and the elimination of harsh interrogation techniques. The “message we are sending around the world,” he intoned, “is that the United States intends to prosecute the ongoing struggle … in a manner that is consistent with our values and our ideals.” In Cairo a few months later, he declared, “a new beginning” of relations between America and the Muslim world.
Obama participated in erecting a Bush straw man — a Bush who disdained and caricatured Muslims in general and committed war crimes in the name of national security. In fact, Bush had gone to great pains, within hours of the 9/11 attacks, to appear with imams and to stress that Islam was a “religion of peace.”
Because Iraq had been Bush’s war, as Obama saw it, he squandered the hard-won victory by failing to obtain an agreement that would have kept a stabilizing American force on the ground, electing instead to withdraw completely. And because Afghanistan was the war that Bush allegedly neglected, Obama sent 33,000 more troops (fewer than the generals requested) — a surge that, unlike Bush’s in Iraq — failed, but not before causing 70 percent of the American deaths in that conflict.
Most of all, the Obama administration fled from the concept of a struggle against Islamic terrorism as if fighting jihadis (the small subset of Muslims who’ve declared war on us) were equivalent to warring against all Muslims. Orwellian language flowed. The war on terror became “overseas contingency operations.” When Major Nidal Hassan gunned down his fellow soldiers shouting “Allahu Akbar!” the president warned against jumping to conclusions (a caution he failed to show himself in the Trayvon Martin and Henry Louis Gates cases). His administration later dubbed Hassan’s attack “workplace violence” rather than jihadism or terrorism.
When Faisal Shahzad attempted to explode a car bomb in Times Square, the administration at first declared it to be a lone wolf attack, only later reluctantly conceding that the Pakistani Taliban had been culpable. When the consulate in Benghazi was attacked (undermining the administration narrative that al-Qaida had died with bin Laden), the administration conducted a prolonged disinformation campaign designed to deny the obvious.
Tiptoeing through language after the Boston bombings, the administration at first declined to use the word “terror,” perhaps fearing that to use the word would imply a Muslim connection. “You use those words and it means something very specific in people’s minds,” explained David Axelrod. Besides, he continued, the president suspected “tax day” protesters.
What has this excruciating torture of the language and elaborate “rebranding” achieved? The U.S. is not safer. Terror attacks have been attempted at the same rate as during the Bush years (and have been thwarted slightly less successfully). As for U.S. standing in the Muslim world, the Guardian reports that a 2011 poll found favorability ratings for the U.S. have plummeted. “In most countries they are lower than at the end of the Bush administration, and lower than Iran’s favorable ratings.” A 2012 Pew poll of six predominantly Muslim nations — Turkey, Lebanon, Tunisia, Egypt, Jordan and Pakistan — found U.S. approval ratings below those during the Bush Administration and well under the popularity of China.
It’s one thing to create a bogeyman for political purposes. Obama did it to Bush in 2008 (for use against McCain), and he did it to Romney in 2012. It’s quite another to believe your own propaganda and make policy in response. Bush was no anti-Muslim bigot. If he erred, it was in believing too credulously in the readiness for western-style democracy in the Arab world.
As for Obama, his doubletalk about the nature of our enemies — jihadis — has achieved neither greater safety for Americans nor improved popularity in the Muslim world. He’s 0 for 2.
April 15, 2013
by Bill Frezza
Poverty Professionals And The Crony Capitalists Who Love Them
Yes, it looks like a wedding announcement out of The Onion, but when it comes to making a killing off the never-ending “War on Poverty,” the marriage of convenience between the financial services industry and federal bureaucrats is no laughing matter.
The idea that government welfare programs could eliminate poverty, rather than temporarily alleviate its worst impacts during hard times, took root during Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society initiative. From modest beginnings, a panoply of federal welfare programs expanded and multiplied to the point where they now consume one-sixth of the federal budget—some $588 billion last year, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
This is a lot of spending—even by contemporary standards—and this figure doesn’t even include the current explosion in unemployment benefits, as these are considered social “insurance” payouts rather than welfare. Nor does it include Social Security or Medicare, our largest and most rapidly growing federal expenditures. To make matters worse, these programs, which were designed to keep the elderly out of poverty, are entitlements not yet subject to means testing, so payments go to rich, middle class, and poor alike.
With anti-poverty programs enjoying meteoric growth thanks to the economic policies of the current and previous administrations, we may someday look back fondly on the days when we “only” had to fork over half a trillion a year to support the longest and least successful “war” in American history, with no sign of stopping. Continue reading
Two independents no Republicans, the rest Democrats.
Over the weekend, we were four votes away from the United States senate giving our constitutional rights over to the United Nations. In a 53-46 vote, the senate narrowly passed a measure that will stop the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.
The Statement of Purpose from the billread:
To uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.
The U.N. Small Arms Treaty, which has beenchampioned by the Obama Administration , would have effectively placed a global ban on the import and export of small firearms. The ban would have affected all private gun owners in the U.S., and had language that would have implemented an international gun registry on all private guns and ammo.
Astonishingly, 46 of our senators were willing to give away our constitutional rights to a foreign power.
Here are the senators that voted to give your rights to the U.N.:
Please note: None are Republicans!
People, this needs to go viral. These senators voted to let the UN take our guns. They need to lose their next elections. We have been betrayed.
Security: In addition to stockpiling over a billion bullets and thousands of semiautomatic weapons the feds would deny U.S. citizens, the vehicle of choice for fighting the counterinsurgency war in Iraq is appearing on U.S. streets.
The sequestration question du jour is why the Department of Homeland Security, busy releasing hundreds, if not thousands, of deportable and detained illegal aliens due to budget constraints, is buying several thousand Mine Resistant Armored Protection (MRAP) vehicles?
And just who are they intended to be used against?
This acquisition comes on top of the recent news of the stockpiling by DHS of more than 1.6 billion (with a ‘b’) bullets of various calibers, enough by one calculation to fight the equivalent of a 24-year Iraq War, and the ordering of some 7,000 5.56x45mm NATO “personal defense weapons” (PDW) — also known as “assault weapons” when owned by civilians.
Additionally, DHS is asking for 30 round magazines that “have a capacity to hold thirty (30) 5.56x45mm NATO rounds.”
The Department of Homeland Security (through the U.S. Army Forces Command) recently retrofitted 2,717 of these MRAP vehicles for service on the streets of the U.S. They were formerly used for counterinsurgency in Iraq.
These vehicles are specifically designed to resist mines and ambush attacks. They use bulletproof windows and are designed to withstand small-arms fire, including smaller-caliber rifles such as a .223 Remington. Does DHS expect a counterinsurgency here?
After IEDs began to take a toll on U.S. military forces in Iraq, the Pentagon ordered a large supply of MRAPs.
“They’ve taken hits, many, many hits that would have killed soldiers and marines in uparmored Humvees,” Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in a recent interview.
A DHS officer, Robert Whitaker, stationed in El Paso, Texas, recently proudly described the agency’s new armored toy as “Mine-resistant … we use to deliver our team to high-risk warrant services … (with) gun ports so we can actually shoot from within the vehicle; you may think it’s pretty loud but actually it’s not too bad … we have gun ports there in the back and two on the sides as well. They are designed for .50-caliber weapons.”
This is needed to serve warrants? Perhaps it might have been useful at Waco.
So the question is what does DHS need 1.6 billion bullets, 7,000 Ar-15s and 2,700 armored vehicles for?
What are they anticipating or planning for, and why are few in the media and Congress asking about it, particularly in the light of daily apocalyptic bleats from the administration about sequestration cuts?
Read More At Investor’s Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/030513-646857-dhs-buys-special-armored-fighting-vehicles.htm#ixzz2MogSqnOi
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook
Keystone pipeline is the key to the future
By Bill Wilson — Everything we will ever need to know about the Obama Administration may come down to a single decision. And that is whether Obama, along with newly sworn in Secretary of State John Kerry, approve the Keystone XL pipeline from the Alberta tar sands to the U.S.
For, contained in that decision is not just the future energy independence of North America — the U.S. currently depends on foreign sources for 45 percent of our fuel — but perhaps the future prosperity of the American economy.
If completed, the expanded pipeline — there actually is another Keystone pipeline from Alberta operated by TransCanada that already delivers about 590,000 barrels of oil a day — will add another 500,000 barrels a day to the mix.
The fact the Chinese are waiting in the wings to claim this energy for themselves would be reason enough to approve it. Beijing has offered to pay for building an alternative pipeline to the Pacific coast to have the oil shipped there.
For now, global production keeps up with global demand, but developing economies like China and India — oil importers both — invariably are leading to higher demand.
Which means every drop we fail to develop here, whether in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, or fail to gain access to, as in Canada, is driving up prices at the pump. Continue reading
February 22, 2013
The Feds Want Your Retirement Accounts
By John White
Quietly, behind the scenes, the groundwork is being laid for federal government confiscation of tax-deferred retirement accounts such as IRAs. Slowly, the cat is being let out of the bag.
Last January 18th, in a little noticed interview of Richard Cordray, acting head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Bloomberg reported “[t]he U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau [CFPB] is weighing whether it should take on a role in helping Americans manage the $19.4 trillion they have put into retirement savings, a move that would be the agency’s first foray into consumer investments.” That thought generates some skepticism, as aptly expressed by the Richard Terrell cartoon published by American Thinker.
This doesn’t seem plausible, but it is real. There is some very good information about UN Agenda 21 on this site, and it is from a self-admitted very socially liberal Democrat. But she really nails the insidiousness of Agenda 21.
Here’s President Obama on the Sequester THEN: November 2011
Here’s President Obama on the Sequester NOW: February 2013
(view 1st three to five minutes at minimum)
Now this is a true HYPOCRITE
The So-Called Gun Show Loophole: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics
February 8, 2013 at 10:12 am
J. Emilio Flores/La Opinion/Newscom
There is a lot of misinformation circulating about background checks for gun ownership.
Under the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act—which created the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS)—all federal firearms licensees are required to conduct a background check for all firearms transactions, even if they sell the firearm at a gun show. This is to make sure that the gun isn’t being sold to a person who is prohibited from purchasing a gun under Section 922(g) or (n) of Title 18 of the United States Code, which would include convicted felons, people who have been adjudicated to be severely mentally ill, and people who have been convicted of a domestic violence offense.
President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I), and scores of others have repeated the mantra that approximately 40 percent of all gun purchases are conducted through private sales at gun shows and are not subject to a criminal background check. This has become known as the “gun show loophole.”
At a recent Senate hearing, Baltimore County Police Chief James Johnson went so far as to say, “Allowing 40 percent of those acquiring guns to bypass background checks is like allowing 40 percent of airline passengers to board a plane without going through airport security.”
What gun control proponents never say, though, is that this oft-repeated statistic is based on stale data that was grossly exaggerated even when it was fresh.
As The Washington Post has pointed out, this 40 percent figure comes from a 1997 report by the National Institute of Justice, a research agency within the Department of Justice, and was based on a telephone survey sample of just 251 people who acquired firearms in 1993 and 1994. This was years before the NICS system went into effect. Of the 251 participants, 35.7 percent said that they didn’t or “probably” didn’t obtain their gun from a licensed firearms dealer. Because the margin of error was +/– 6 percentage points, it was rounded up to 40 percent, although it could just as easily and legitimately have been rounded down below 30 percent.
In addition, if you subtract people who said they got their gun as a gift, inheritance, or prize, the number dropped from 35.7 percent to 26.4 percent. And, in terms of how many people actually buy firearms at gun shows, the data from this same survey indicated that in 1994, only 3.9 percent of firearms purchases were made at gun shows.
Citing this data as evidence of how many firearms are currently purchased through private sales not subject to background checks is akin to citing data about current seat belt usage that is derived from a limited sample taken years before a mandatory seat belt law went into effect or before cars were even required to have seat belts. We all know that, according to a phrase popularized by Mark Twain, there are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics. Citing such limited and outdated data over and over again on a matter of this magnitude, however, is going too far.
VITTER: Endangered Species Act’s hidden costs
Respect for private property at risk
By Sen. David Vitter
Friday, February 8, 2013
At least you have to give President Obama high marks for creativity in his latest attempt to curtail freedom and individual rights. Specifically, I’m talking about Mr. Obama’s assault on private property rights through the abuse of the Endangered Species Act.
I strongly support protecting endangered species. No one I know wants to see a species go anywhere near extinction. The far-left environmentalists in the Obama administration, however, have gone way beyond this by settling litigation with their allies in environmental groups behind closed doors. Through these secret settlements, they are advancing a much more radical, aggressive agenda than anything that is actually mandated by law.
This is a tactic called “sue-and-settle,” and it has become a central tool used to advance the radical environmental agenda. This is how it works: Far-left environmental groups sue the federal government — in this case, under the Endangered Species Act — claiming that the government is not satisfying its regulatory obligations. Then the groups and their friends in the administration draft a settlement agreement completely behind closed doors. No other stakeholder or representative of the public is provided the opportunity to shed light on how they might be impacted. The parties then get the judge to bless their agreement. That’s usually easy, since he doesn’t get to hear any opposing arguments and is often eager to get rid of what would otherwise be a complicated, time-consuming case. Continue reading