Prosecuting the Defenders of our Unborn

If we ever needed a more poignant example of the decay in society, then this would be it.

Secret videographers David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt were both indicted on charges of tampering with a governmental record, a second-degree felony that carries a punishment of up to 20 years in prison. Daleiden received an additional misdemeanor indictment under the law prohibiting the purchase and sale of human organs.

That's right folks. The brave people who reported on the repulsive acts of Planned Parenthood have been indited and could face up to 20 years in prison. Yet our Republican led congress, with Paul Ryan at the helm, continues to provide funding to Planned Parenthood and other abortions clinics who specialize in the murder if our unborn children and the sale of their body parts.  

Read the whole story here.

Hope

As has been reported, the career elites in Washington decided to abandon governing in the face of overwhelming voter apathy. As My Way News reports:

With their House and Senate majorities on the line, Democratic leaders called off votes and even debates on all controversial matters...Staying or going might seem an equally unpleasant prospect for some embattled Democrats, who are facing more than four weeks of defending unpopular votes in favor of Obama's economic stimulus measure, health care law and uncompleted legislation for curbing global warming.

The AP - shockingly - adds:

Battle-weary members of Congress are coming soon to neighborhoods near you to press for re-election, more willing to campaign before angry constituents than to compromise in Washington on tax cuts, child nutrition or a federal budget.

Now its obvious that Democrats don't want to vote on controversial issues before the November 2nd election.  They already have enough voter angst pointed in their direction. If they attempted to force additional legislature down the throats of the public, it would ensure defeat.  Yet this very inaction may have quite possibly sealed their political doom.

As most Conservatives sometimes complain, American's aren't stupid.  Gullible? Yes, but not stupid. There's an old saying that is quite relevant when discussing today's voters: "Fool me once, shame on me.  Fool me twice, shame on you." You see, the collective eyes of America have been opened.  They see the elites in Washington for what they really are.  Even Barney Frank is facing election troubles in ultra-liberal Massachusetts. Although probably not enough to prevent him from being re-elected, the mere fact that the threat exists reveals the determination of an angry public. 

Politicians aren't stupid either. Although there are some exceptions (i.e. VP Biden), the majority understand the power of rhetoric and propaganda. Experts on manipulation, they have realized that lack of action in the remaining four weeks before the elections will be, and has been, recognized by "Joe Public" for what it is. Why then have they chosen this course? The answer is that they are scared.  In fact, they're terrified. They know how angry Americans have become towards those who have no regard for the Constitution or private rights.  It is their hope that they can use this expertise to persuade their constituents to keep them in office.

Do not underestimate the Elites. They will use every technique they know. Blame will be passed on to the former Bush administration; they will work to uncover dirt on their opponents; they will use charm to beguile the unlearned masses - focusing on charisma instead of context. They will even deny supporting the bills which they voted for.  Indeed, Ben Nelson (the Nebraska Democrat who is notorious and infamous amongst conservative circles for selling his state for his vote) has called for extensions of the Bush tax cuts.  How he proposes to continue funding for the massive Government take over of health care while at the same time lessening the fleecing of private citizens is an issue he has not yet addressed.  Yet by appealing to the independents of his state, Nelson is seeking to hide his Progressive agenda.  He hopes that they will forgive him for selling out America. Remember, is was Nelson's vote that ultimately allowed Obamacare to become law.  The House needed it, and he sold it to them.

I find it interesting that when their jobs are on the line, Democrats suddenly become centrists - leaning more towards the Conservative train of thought. Although November will tell, I don't think it will work this time. The assault on America led by the Marxists in the Oval Office have awakened the backbone of this country. The people are angry, and the politicians know this.

In fact, neither side of the political isle is safe. Long serving Republicans in states such as Utah and Alaska have already been voted out of their respective primaries.  And although McCain looks to remain in power, this is only because of his sudden transformation into a "warrior" for Conservatism. I only wish that Arizonians had a longer memory and it is my hope that the rest of America's voters aren't as easily duped.

So while many Americans are rightfully disgusted with Congress' cowardly retreat, I suggest that it should also be taken as a sign of hope.  True hope, not the kind Obama used to get into power.  The hope is that those who have taken this country town the road of Stalin, Mao and Castro will soon be voted out of office.  The hope is that they will be replaced by those who not only respect America, but fear her citizens - more specifically, their votes. The hope is that even though we have been led down this dark path, America will arise from the ashes of corruption and be all the more stronger for it.

Let's hope.

Town Hall With Chick Heileson

It’s been well over a week since there was an event labeled as a “Town Hall Tea Party” in Pocatello, ID (October 13, 2009). In reality, it was a chance for Chick Heileson to plead his case before the forty or so voters who showed up. A Vietnam veteran, he is running for congress in Idaho’s 2nd district against Mike Simpson. I must confess that I was expecting an actual Tea Party with local representatives instead of a campaign meeting. I have a feeling that others who attended believed the same was as well. Yet be that as it may, I took along a notepad and pen, and jotted down my impressions of the event.

The reason I waited to write this article was that after the event was over, I approached his campaign manager, Ron Baker, and informed him that I wished to interview Mr. Heileson. I left my phone number as well as email address, and was assured that they would get back to me. Since I have not heard back from them, I must write this article based upon my impressions of that night.

Shortly after 7pm, Ron introduced Chick. Mr. Heileson began by lecturing those in attendance on the founding of the United States, its Constitution, and differing governing systems such as Socialism, Communism, Democracy, and Republicanism (what he called, “Americanism”), etc. He spent thirty minutes or so on the lesson and then opened up the floor to questions. Before doing so, he stated that if elected, he would enforce the Constitution in totality, and would not even read a bill that he considers unconstitutional. He proclaimed that he is a supporter of States’ Rights and limited government.

A member of the audience inquired if he would support limited terms, and after much he-hawing, he said no. Another asked him concerning the life time pensions and health care that all members of government receive, even when no longer in office. He was asked what his opinion was concerning this, and if he would refuse such a thing for himself. Mr. Heileson’s answer was, “I don’t know anything about it, so I can’t answer you.”

When asked how he would combat those currently in Congress who vote against the Constitution, Mr. Heileson stated that he would attempt to approach each member individually and invite them to a Constitution class. It is his hope that through communication and education that he can make a difference.

Mr. Heileson also states that he does not feel that power corrupts. He states that those in office who bend on principal had that character defect before elected. He proclaims that he will never compromise on his. When asked how he could guarantee us that he would not, after much rhetoric, his ultimate answer was that he could not prove it to us. We, the voter, would simply have to take him at his word.

I had the opportunity to ask him about his stance concerning support for Israel. He immediately asked me if I was a reporter, and advised him that I was not. I did inform him that I am a blogger. It seemed that his defenses came up. His answer was: “friendly with all nations, in alliance with none.”

When asked how he would enforce States’ rights, he said that he would do so through his votes and that he would compare pending bills to the Constitution to see if they were authorized by it.

Concerning Social Security, he states that it is unconstitutional. Although he states that no opinion is set in stone, he feels that a good way to end Social Security is to put a halt to new “investors” into it. Let it apply to those who already paid in, but not allow any new members. With Social Security’s funding in the dismal condition as it exists today, he did not state where the government would get additional funding to pay off those who were already invested.

Concerning “Global Warming,” Mr. Heilesonstates that he is not a believer in it. As well, he does not support the United Nations.

After these questions, time was soon up. He informed anyone who had further questions that he would stick around and try to answer them.

The following are my impressions of the event:

Mr. Heileson is an extremely charismatic individual. As such, he was able to quickly draw in the audience’s attention. Even I was touched by his personality, and found myself caught up in the emotion of the event. Yet, since time has passed, I have been able to reflect back. For me, Mr. Heileson is not a person I can support for any political office in the House or Senate.

First off, I had the impression that he avoided many important questions. When faced with those (such as the pension plan), his answer was simply that he had no knowledge of it, and thus could not comment. How can one who is running for congress not have knowledge or opinion on these issues? I feel that he does, but that he did not wish to share them.

When I asked him simply on a stance for supporting Israel, he became visibly irritated. I feel that the main reason America has been blessed in the 20’th century is because of her support for Israel. As well, as the only true democracy in the Middle East, Israel is a literal shield to the rest of the world. She is surrounded on all sides by nations that want to see her destroyed, and is constantly under attack. Ever year, numerous resolutions are passed by the United Nations which condemn her, yet support her attackers. For America to stand back and not support her is more then just a sin, it is reckless.

His stance on communication and attempts to “teach” members in congress about the Constitution is, I feel, very flawed. Persons in those positions of power are soon corrupted by it. They receive numerous hand outs by organizations and corporations who wish policy to go in their favor. As well, there is extreme peer pressure from fellow congressmen as well from the President to vote in certain ways. A simple discussion with people who have already shown that they can be bought or made to compromise will not be effective.

As well, his stance of being friendly with all nations but in alliance with none is, in my strong opinion, dangerously isolationist and unwise. That position may have served America well before the 20th century, but in today’s world of faster then sound travel, mass communication and weapons of mass destruction, American cannot afford to “go it alone.” As well, America must actively support the few remaining free nations in the world. To not do so will ultimately bring destruction upon the world and America herself.

I also cannot bring myself to trust a man whose campaign manager promised to get back to me, yet did not do so. It is a minor issue, not built on pride. Yet it does show to me that Mr. Heileson is already willing to go back on a given word. He may state that he did not make that promise, yet his campaign manager did.

Also, a concern for me is someone who refuses to read any bill he considers unconstitutional. Even if one disagrees with such bill, one should keep themselves informed. Then they can use such knowledge to reach out to their colleagues in congress as well as the American public. Tell us why it isn’t constitutional, what you oppose in such a bill, and what you feel should be done instead. It is my opinion that those who remain blissfully uniformed will never make the strong difference that America truly needs.

Here is a list of questions that I was going to ask him. I feel they are issues that any concerned voter would appreciate knowing his stance on. They are as follows:

• What is your stance on border security and illegal immigration?
• The Dollar is quickly becoming obsolete, and the majority of world’s reserve currency no longer uses it. What do you intend to do to resolve this?
• What is your stance concerning religion in schools? Humanism, Atheism, Evolution and Islam are all religions which are routinely preached to students, yet Christianity is not allowed. What should be done?
• What is your stance on the United States becoming energy independent? Do you support drilling in ANWAR as well as the Gulf of Mexico?
• What is your stance on the controversy surrounding Obama’s eligibility to be president? Is the short form of his Hawaiian birth certificate (which has been given to children born outside of the United States) acceptable to you or not? If shown that he is not eligible, will you push for impeachment? Why or why not?
• What is your position on the second amendment, as well as the claims that the Constitution is a “living document?”
• How will you deal with lobbyists?
• Will you fight pork in proposed bills?
• What is your stance on State Militias? In both the Revolutionary War as well as the Civil War, the States sent their militias – their armies to fight. Yet now all military is run by the federal government. Is this constitutional in your opinion?
• What is your stance on abortion? What will you do to enforce that stance?

Mr. Heileson, if you read this article and desire to reply, please know that I would welcome an open discussion with you. I do want those questions answered, and I am also open to discussion concerning any other point I have made here. If there have been any misunderstandings on my part, please let me know.

The Czars - Part 1

Republican Congressman Mike Pence has called for background checks on Obama's Czars while Republican Congressman Patrick McHenry has called for the Czars  “to testify before Congress about their 'authority and responsibilities' in the executive branch.”

While this is something I completely support, I have to ask, what took them so long?  In preparation for this article, I did some in-depth research on Obama's Czars.  The amount of unelected, non-approved, proponents of a socialist government whom are serving at Obama's beck and call is staggering.  The following will be an analysis of these men and women, broken down by those who were confirmed and unconfirmed by congress.


Czars Unconfirmed by Congress


Richard Holbrooke, Afghanistan Czar:

PBS's Newshour has posted an in-depth biography which states among other things:

• He was the Peace Corps Director in Morocco
• In 1976 he coordinated National Security Affairs for the Carter-Mondale presidential campaign
• In 1977, President Carter appointed him Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, a post he held until 1981

Jeffrey Crowley, AIDS Czar:

Mr. Crowley is one of the few Czars carried over from the Bush Administration.  As his title implies, he will direct America's policy concerning AIDS. He has the unanimous support of the homosexual/lesbian community as well as AIDS related organizations.

“I think he’s a phenomenal choice,” said Housing Works Vice President of National Advocacy and Organizing Christine Campbell.

The Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) civil rights organization, today issued a statement on the selection of Jeffrey S. Crowley....“The announcement of Jeffrey Crowley signals that HIV/AIDS issues will be an integral part of health care reform in the Obama Administration,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese.

The “LGBT” organizations have been instrumental in advocating the redefinition of “family,” have pushed homosexual indoctrination upon our children, and in some cases, have supported horrendous events around the country where homosexuals and lesbians publicly parade nude and perform sexual acts upon each other. Their support for Mr. Crowley cannot be a good thing.


Ron Bloom, Manufacturing and Car Czar:

Mr. Bloom was instrumental in Obama's take over of General Motors.  ABC News reported:

A key part of the team that advised the White House on the struggling U.S. auto industry, Bloom and team pushed U.S. automakers General Motors and Chrysler to come up with viable plans for the future,  pushed the CEO of GM to resign, and pushed the U.S. government agreed to become a major shareholder in GM, ponying up $50 billion.

ABC News also reports that he is associated with the “U.S. Steelworkers” union.
 

Ed Montgomery, Car Czar:

As a replacement for Steve Rattner, who stepped down from his post amid controversy over his former firm’s role in a possible kickback scandal, Ed Montgomery is now part of the:

Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry. In this capacity, Montgomery will be responsible for coordinating a government-wide effort to help support the workers, communities and regions that rely on the American auto industry...

...Earlier this year, Montgomery was named by Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and National Economic Council (NEC) Director Larry Summers an official designee to the auto task force to discuss recently submitted restructuring plans from Chrysler LLC and General Motors Corporation.

The Center For Automotive Research reports:

In 1997, Dr. Montgomery joined the Clinton administration as the Labor Department’s chief economist before becoming the assistant secretary for Policy. He helped Secretary Alexis Herman negotiate and end the Teamsters-UPS strike and the first international treaty against child labor. He subsequently served as deputy secretary and chief operating officer for this department with 17,000 employees and a budget of over $32 billion.

Indeed, Mr. Montgomery was much more then a simple professor at the University of Maryland and then “Dean of the College of Behavioral and Social Sciences at the University of Maryland.”


Todd D. Stern, Climate Czar:

From the Environmental Leader, a proponent for “climate control:”

From 1997 to 1999, Stern coordinated climate change policy for the Clinton administration, acting as the senior White House negotiator in the Kyoto talks.
Stern promises “vigorous, dramatic diplomacy” and signals a break from the Bush administration’s conservative climate policies.

In a video that has been posted to YouTube, Mr Stern describes his and the Obama administration's views concerning the climate, stating:

“(The administration) will not question the science on Climate change.”

I guess it doesn't mater that thousands of scientists have come forward and declared it a hoax.


Kennith Feinberg, Pay Czar:

A member of the board of directors for Human Rights First which has numerous connections with socialist proponents.


Lynn Rosenthal, Violence Against Women Czar:

In this newly created position, her duties will consist of:

... Rosenthal will be a liaison to the domestic violence and sexual assault advocacy community. She will also coordinate with the Department of Justice's Office of Violence Against Women on the implementation of Violence Against Women Act programs. Further, she will coordinate with the State Department and USAID on global domestic violence initiatives. Finally, Rosenthal will drive the development of new initiatives and policy aimed at combating domestic violence and sexual assault with advocacy groups and members of Congress.

However, as with all of Obama's Czars, all is not as it seems. Trudy Scheutt of the of the Domestic Violence Examiner does an excellent job dissecting Rosenthal's feminist views and her “impact” on the administration.


Paul A. Volcker, Economic Czar:

Another czar carried over from the Bush administration, he has close ties with socialists and was an adviser to the Obama presidential campaign.  He is also a supporter of a National Sales Tax (VAT).


Carol Browner, Energy & Environment Czar:

From propagandamatrix.com,

Barack Obama's "climate czar" Carol Browner has been exposed as being a member of Socialist International, a highly influential group headed by a Bilderberg Group luminary that calls for the implementation of global government, despite Socialist International's attempts to seemingly "memory-hole" information about Browner on their website.


Joshua DuBois, Faith-based Czar:

As reported by Glenn Beck:

Title: Director of the Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships
Salary: $98,000
Reports to: President Obama
Appointed: February 2009
Department that might have handled similar issues: Health and Human Services

• Acts as a liaison between faith and secular community groups and the White House, often partnering with them to tackle social issues. Helps these groups apply for federal grants available to them.
  Is 26 years old
  Has master’s in public affairs from Princeton University; served as associate pastor
  Worked for Rep. Rush Holt (D-N.J.) as an intern and then as a fellow for Rep. Charles B. Rangel (DN. Y.).
  Hired as a legislative correspondent in Obama’s Senate office in May 2005
  In 2008, at the age of 25, was appointed director of religious affairs for the Obama campaign.

How many of you know of any experienced pastors at the age of 25? Yet Mr. DuBois will “liaison between faith and secular community groups and the White House?”  How did he get his start?

An article from The Boston Globe reports:

He was just 17 years old, a freshman at Boston University, and he didn't know what else to do. A jury in New York had just acquitted the four police officers whose 41 bullets had killed an unarmed Guinean immigrant named Amadou Diallo.

So Joshua DuBois wrote "NO MORE" on a placard, planted himself on an expanse of pavement along Commonwealth Avenue, in front of a memorial to Martin Luther King Jr., and stood there - 41 hours for 41 shots.

However, there is more to this story.  Ann Coulter reported:

As everyone in the universe now knows, the four cops patrolling the 43rd Precinct tried to stop a couple of black men acting suspiciously and whom they believed might be the rapist. The first man they stopped without incident. But the second man they tried to stop, Amadou Diallo, ended up dead.

According to the policemen's testimony -- believed by a jury that included four black women -- Diallo didn't stop after the cops identified themselves and asked him to stop. He turned away from them and then pulled out what they thought was a gun. One of the cops shouted "Gun!" and began to shoot. The policeman closest to Diallo fell backward off a step, leading his partners to believe he had been shot by Diallo.

This was, of course, a tragic mistake and my heart felt condolences go out to the family of this man.  Yet it was one that was blown out of proportion by the liberal media as well as those who push the idea that cops are racist killers. New York is well known as a dangerous city, and though crime rates have dropped, Police Officers daily take their lives into their hands when on patrol.  In addition, they were seeking a a rapist who was considered armed.  When they gave Amadou Diallo a lawful order to stop, he turned away from them and pulled out what appeared to be a gun from his pocket.  The response by the police was understandable, though again, very tragic.  As well, and as Ann pointed out, there were four black women on the jury who acquitted the officers.  One is forced to ask, why didn't Mr. Diallo comply when the order was first given?

Unfortunately, Mr. DuBois fell victim to the propaganda that was spread, and protested against the police.  Do you feel comfortable with someone who falls prey to the propaganda of the left as well as racist organizations?


Cameron Davis, Great Lakes Czar:

Amazing!  Even lakes have a Czar!  This is a testimony given by Mr. Davis in 2002 while he was executive director of the Lake Michigan Foundation.  Although I applaud his efforts to protect wildlife, he promotes placing more restrictions on people who use it's resources (including vacationers).  Yet why was there a need to create a special “czar” office concerning this?  Wouldn't this be within the jurisdiction of the EPA? Well, not needing authorization from congress, the president has promoted a man into a position to enforce a “green” economic policy.  Perhaps it helps that Mr. Davis is from Chicago and also spent time in Kenya?

Again from Glenn Becks Czar list:

Title: Special advisor to the U.S. EPA overseeing its Great Lakes restoration plan
Salary: unknown
Reports to: Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson
Appointed: June 2009
Agency that might have handled similar issues: Environmental Protection Agency

• Oversees the administration's initiative to restore the Great Lakes' environment. 
• President of the Chicago-based environmentalist group Alliance for the Great Lakes
• Was a litigating attorney and served as an adjunct clinical assistant professor of law at the University of Michigan Law School.
• Served with the United Nations Environment Program in Nairobi, Kenya, where he worked on the Montreal Protocol to protect the Earth’s ozone layer, and U.S. EPA’s Office of Regional Counsel in Chicago.

Tomorrow I'll finish examining Obama's czars and add in some closing comments.