CONSERVATIVE: IT IS NOT A DIRTY WORD

Kudos to Michelle Malkin. For the first time, as far as I can remember, she has finally said what has to be said.

Too often Conservatives "temper" their words, so as not to offend others. Bull Crap with that. Come on guys, we all feel the same...speak what is on your heart. This Politically Correct speak stuff has only stifled the Conservatives from saying what is on their minds. Heck, just try to listen to Bohner speak: doesn't it nauseate you trying to understand what he is saying? IT's all PC and I for one, am fed up with it, and I suspect so is Michelle Malkin.

She has never had a problem telling it like it is but this last interview seems to just finally rub her the wrong way and caused  her to SPEAK OUT!   "JUST A BLOGGER"  “There are real reporters who won‘t even say the name ’Brett Kimberlin’ out of fear…The kind of harassment that I’ve gone through over the past twenty years pales in comparison to what these individuals bloggers [have gone through]…and we owe them so much for standing up, for telling the truth.  Thank them, get their backs.”
“A lot of progressives…always ask me, ‘Why are you so mad?’  Why the hell shouldn’t I be mad?  You’re trying to flush our country down the toilet!  I‘m not going to tell you that you’re a nice person.  And I think we need more people in Washington…not to concede that these people are ‘nice’ people.”...that's Michelle Malkin at her best, and the rest of us should stop worrying about offending someone.

The Progressives want nothing more than to stifle us, and we acquiesce by "choosing" our words. It is time to tell it like it is.

Scott Walker has stood his ground and won a recall vote that will go down in history, no matter who writes it, as the first governor EVER to survive a recall vote, and he won it with a greater margin than he did in his first election as governor.

Michelle and Scott should be enough for the rest of us to realize that conservative is not a dirty word and conservatives are truly the only ones that can put this country back on track. Oh sure, that also means voting out of office people like McCain, Hatch, and the rest of those dinosaurs that have worked so hard to fill their own pockets with our money.

It used to be patriotic to run for office, serve the nation and return to a citizens life, knowing what you did, was make America a stronger nation......but there are soooooo many of those dinosaurs that need to be shown how to go back home.

Do you realize, those dinosaurs are the one that decided they need a retirement package which include medical coverage, and for "serving" for only 12 years; it is NOT Constitutional for these, long in the tooth "politicians" to live off of our taxes.

Look I had better stop. I'll get more verbal than Michelle, and my choice of words are not "sensitive" enough for print.

Conservatism is a lot like Protestantism: others define it. Let this be the last word on the subject: Conservative means we are proud of this Country; we say M'am, thank you, and sorry, but DO NOT TREAD ON ME. Progessives are NOT patriotic, they border on Socialism/Marism/Communism. Conservatism found this nation and it will take Conservatives to restore her place in this world. We are not a Nation to cower to the enemy, and the words of Progressives make them enemies to us. Fight, I say, fight each and everyone of you for the things you know are right and natural, and put an end to the political speak and the progressive speak that is meant to destroy this great country of ours. STAND! cower no more.

A SCANDAL IS A SCANDAL

Man O man, with all that is going on around President Obama, you would think he would be willing to admit he has a good chance of not getting re-elected. I think Bill Clinton believes that it's possible for Obama to lose in the general election; that would explain why Bill keeps saying opposing things to the Obama administration, like Romney had a sterling career as a business man.

So, is Bill trying to float an idea to the rest of the party and the Democratic voters in America? Is Bill paving the way for a Hillary nomination at the Democratic convention? Wouldn't that be great for Hillary; she wouldn't even have to oppose Obama during a primary, and not have all the negatives to overcome that get bantered about during the primaries, yet have the finances built up in the Democratic party for the Presidential race. It's like a win-win for her. AND Democratic voters LOVE Bill.

Obama has to put up with the "Fast and Furious" thing and now the leaks of secrets that appear to have come from higher-up since one of the leaks contends that Obama himself "picks out" the people he wants the military to assassinate.

The Department of Justice has appointed 2 lawyers to investigate the leaks, although the investigators report back to Holder, the man in charge of a department from which the leaks originated, it can be even more messy since the politicians, both Democrat and Republican, want this investigation to reveal the leaker and neither party will be content with a scape goat. Perhaps Holder is hoping the investigation will last long past the Presidential election, so he won't have to worry about being forced to resign or face any sort of prosecution from the Obama administration, and he can just resign into oblivion sometime in the next Obama administration. But that can be a very fatal gamble. Suppose the Republicans do win the Senate and hold the House of Representatives? Can you imagine how swiftly these investigations will be wrapped up and prosecution be handed out? Let's face it, facts are facts and Republicans hate leaks and embarrassment. Surely they will want to blame someone for the allegations being made. It'll start the new year off good, for them.

The recall election of republican Scott Walker is a spear in the hearts of the Democrats. It is the first time ever, that a governor won an election in a recall vote, and it happened in a state where public unions began, and it is a very Democratic state. The whole thing looks like a real boondoggle for Obama, the Democratic party and unions in general. It will cause the other states to believe they too can put a stop to the gustapo tactics of public unions demanding more and more from tax payers, then support the Democrats. Heck, the Democrat politicians in some California cities already got the idea, and are reducing benefits to its public employees. And I believe this is just the beginning. This illegitimate marriage between the public employee unions and the Democratic party is one of the reasons for the financial troubles most states have and it is one of the reasons for the financial mess in the Nation. Republicans nation wide, will use this as a referendum to put an end to power of public unions, state by state. And there is hope, the next President will put an end to  unions for the federal employees.

But this is only the first step. Someone has to step up and put an end to a retirement and healthcare package to any and all of our representatives. They are supposed to be serving the nation, not their own interests, and their demands are a very large portion of the costs of the federal government. In 2010, the government paid  $69.2 Billion dollars to 2.5 million people, and deposited $2.5 Billion dollars into a deferred retirement pension for those same people. The cost of retirement for 2010 was a whopping $275 Billion dollars to dozens of over-lapping departments and agencies.

Private pensions have $2.3 trillion in stocks, bonds, real estate and other assets. Local and state governments have $3 trillion in retirement funds....THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOES NOT HAVE A SINGLE PENNY IN RETIREMENT FUNDS. Last year, $107 billion dollars were added to the retirement promises of the federal government, but like Social Security, no money has been set aside or invested for the employees this retirement is intended for. Each year, those costs come out of the general budget. Last year the government paid $268 Billion Dollars in pension and health benefits to 10 million former civil servants, military and their dependents and another $7 Billion was deposited in tax deferred accounts for current workers. Last year the federal government committed more money to the 10 million former public servants than the $690 Billion it paid out to the 54 million Social Security recipients. PEOPLE, our country cannot sustain these unfunded promises. These are paid through taxation...an expense not listed in the Constitution as a legitimate expense for the Nation. Do you see those numbers?! It means the federal government HAS to tax the American worker enough money just to pay for over $1 trillion dollars for retirement each year (and each year the number of employees goes up and the cost of living goes up).

I hope the Scott Walker re-election puts these ideas front and center for all Americans. Think of it, tax payers owe $1 trillion dollars even before considering border protection, illegal immigration protection, and the general operation of this bloated government. It has to stop! Everyone is entitled to their own version of pension and they should provide for that version, no one else. Europe is a shadow of what will happen to the USA if we don't put a stop to this cancer and tell people they are responsible for their own lives, not other tax payers, and that includes politicians who have a better retirement package than anyone else. Who ever gave them the idea that they can retire at our expense if they would work just 12 years? Think of it: how long will each politician collect "retirement"? It just makes me so mad.

Obama has his problems, and it is more than the leaks of government secrets. The two of these issues are scandals that HAVE to be addressed. Coverup is no longer an option. Our Nation is imploding and these two issues are just the tip of the iceberg. I don't think Obama has any idea of how to settle these issues. It will take a person of intestinal fortitude, and a working knowledge of how to handle money.

WHY DO WE HAVE POLITICAL PARTY'S?

The 2 party system has done more harm than good to America and the XVII amendment needs to be repealed.

The are 435 people in the House of Representatives, 100 people in the US Senate and then you have the President and the Vice President, which is intended to "manage" the politics of this country amicably through negotiations and "compromise", but that is simply not what our current 2 party system has given us.

All that is needed to run our country for either good or bad, is 60 Senators, especially if they have the Presidency "on their side". If this is the case, none of the Presidents' cabinet appointments or other department appointments would be contested and the 60 Senators would not have to abide by the Constitution of the United States. Sure, their actions could be contested through the courts, but it all takes time, and is a slow process.

The Senate would never have to approve a budget and it wouldn't have to address any bills that come out of the House of Representatives. Ergo, 60 Senators could very well be the ones that decide what our country can and will do, at least in the first 4 years of an agreeable President....OH, that is exactly what IS going on, and the 2 party system has no way to stop it. Heck, the House of Representatives can do little more than have hearings about one thing or another and nothing has to be followed up with those, like the one on Fast and Furious, in which the Department of Justice seems to be able to do as it sees fit, and no one has to answer to the Congress for any allegations or assertions made which in this case includes lying to Congress, and the killing of one of our own border guards by a foreigner.

At our founding, there were no party's, per say, just men with opinions and convictions. Sure, in a very short time this morphed into one persuasion of people opposing another persuasion of people and they eventually took on naming themselves to differentiate themselves. Even terminology changed over time so that those who once were known as Liberals are now known as Republicans or are even some times referred to as conservatives. But the "politics" seem to quickly divide itself into money makers and these people established rules to keep others out of the "game". Now we have an established 2 party system that does not easily allow for a 3rd party or additional party's of people who want a chance at helping and serving this country. Even the states have set up rules that virtually make it impossible for a 3rd party, yet they will allow that an independent can be elected, but that means nothing because the House of Representatives, and the Senate dole out committees and seats of power, none of which will go to an independent, making that person "obligated" to "side" with one party or another in order that he/she might be able to get some legislation he favors, passed, although it would have to be approved by the 2 ruling party's.

Getting a 3rd party into out political system would be a game changer for the foreseeable future, but for now, there are a lot of people trying to get elected as Conservatives, or as is the vernacular, Tea Party. I suppose in time, these people will change the Republican party into a more conservative one, BUT we would still have a 2 party system. The 2 current party's are immensely concerned because committees would have to be given to these Tea Party people in order for the country to function, and that alone could take power away from each of the party's, in effect, looking like there would be 3 party's running the country.

But even if the "Tea Party" prevails, House and Senate rules would have to change, then states rules would have to change. But the repeal of the XVII Amendment has to be made in order to return this country to its intended founding whereby states send representatives to DC to represent states, not ideology or establishment types, and this action alone would "restart" American Politics. You might remember recently that when just a few Senators banded together they had the power to stop legislation; remember? John McCain and Linsday Wagner and a few others; they were called the band of seven. And how about talk of the "nuclear option" by the current people in charge of the Senate? By virtue of their collective ideology, they can ram anything through Congress, as long as it is agreeable with the President. That's why the XVIIth Amendment needs to be repealed.

Someone has to have to courage to present a bill to amend the XVII Amendment so each of our states can decide whom they want to represent them, not continue to give power to 12, or 60 or even 100 Senators that get popularly elected, who do not have any idea what your state representatives want. They are in it for themselves and the power they can amass, and often the "establishment money people" pull the strings.

OBAMA IS STRENGTHENED BY THE ELECTION IN FRANCE

Biden is a "useful idiot" and he belongs to the party that espouses useful idiots.

Pundits want to make apologies for the VP because of his remarks concerning gay marriages. What most "republican" pundits fail to see is that Biden is a balloon floater. He went out the day before the President to say what the President was going to say, and it prepared the American people for Obama's comments as well as let the gay community know he was backing their desires. And voila, $ 1 million dollars into the Obama campaign coffers in less than 24 hours. He needed their money and their backing to run in this election.

What bothers me is the Republican pundits keep thinking we are in a legitimate election cycle, and they posit their best ideas as to how this will affect the President's election. The pundits are so far out of step with what the Democrats are doing they are embarrassing.

LUGAR lost the primary in Indiana and the pundits sneered at the opposition. Career politicians "knew" Lugar "couldn't lose"; What?! I suspect this is not over. The Tea Party is flexing their muscle and getting incumbents out of office. They may not win every election and they might cause Democrats to win where the "Good Ole Boy" republican would otherwise be a shoe-in, however, getting the incumbent Rhino out of office is just as big a win as getting a Tea Party campaigner to win the seat in question.

Take a look at France and Greece: I suggested in the past that my readers pick up a book called "The 4th Turning" and read what the writers say about the human condition and the expected changes our society, and the worlds' society is about to undertake. The writers base their projections on previous societies and what they have done, electorally, and postulated that the future generations are predictable.

As such, we can see their postulations unfolding in Europe with the election of France swinging to the left; wanting more taxes to fund the peoples' wants, and Greece about to make the same mistake with their political fight. And so it is supposed, that America will also "demand" the same. Over the years, Republicans and Democrats alike, have "given" the American people the government teat to suckle on, and it is expected that the voters in this election cycle will want to "make those rich guys" pay for the wants of the "common" man.

Obama, Van Jones, George Soros and others, are engaged in what is expected to be the "changing of America" into what will eventually be a "New world order". Don't forget, this new world order was first posited by George Bush the senior, so this is something it seems, all politicians have longed for, for some time, no matter what party.

HOWEVER, no one imagined anything like what is called the Tea Party; those rascally Americans that want a return to the Constitution and limited government. But that's okay, the Republicans and the Democrats believe they can do their "magic" regardless of the opposition. The two party system has strangled our political process for so long, it can't be budged by a "few dissenters", can it?

Even Paul Ryan, the man tea party people like to raise up as an example, has turned on the tea party recently by supporting LUGAR in his bid for re-election AGAINST a tea party candidate, and LUGAR lost. As a side note, I suggest Paul Ryan be run out of office: he sold his soul to a "Rhino" who would vote for his budget if Ryan would support his re-election; instead of trusting that the Tea Party could get a genuine conservative elected by throwing LUGAR out of office.

So, for Obama to support gay rights and their ability to be legally married, and protected under American law, is just a step in the direction the rest of the world has already taken. It is not an "amazing" event that warrants endless conversation: it was expected, BUT 30 states have already voted against legalizing gay marriages; America does NOT want to walk in lock-step with the rest of the world. As hard as it is to find, Americans still have Godly values and these values keep interfering with what the politicians want to accomplish; Lugar the recent evidence of this country being fed up with what politicians want for us.

Obama invoked an 11 page executive order that has been used in the past when America was at war. There is no reason why this executive order needs to be implemented today; we are not at war! But you have to wonder why the President decided to invoke it; is it a preparation for the things to come? Does he know that Soros and his ilk will cause riots and chaos to the extent that Martial Law will be necessary? Does he know that Van Jones and others are holding training classes for 600,000 people to teach them how to demonstrate and how to protest?

Look, I do not trust either party any more, and Paul Ryan has just given me reason not to trust him. Like any other American, I want smaller government and states rights without federal strings attached, and I don't want them by making a pact with the devil. Paul was wrong; Lugar lost and Paul should find another job, however, there are a bunch more that do not seem to have Americas best interest at heart. I thought Ryan did, and he seemed to, for a while.

Folks, this is not politics as usual. The New world order machine has a good set of teeth and those teeth can be found in liberal supporters, in the American Communist party, in organizations funded by George Soros, in both of our political parties, and it is very hard to stop; but it can be stopped. The Tea party is stronger than the news media wants you to believe. You can see it in some of the elections that are occurring. You can see it in your neighbor who rants on and on about how fed up he or she is with what is going on. We don't get a lot of publicity, but the Tea Party is alive, well and a movement to be reckoned with.

Obama can pander to all of the wacky left-wingers he wants to, but silently, like a stealth fighter, the Tea Party is making a difference (and they know it). Stand strong! We can beat "them" one vote at a time; one election at a time; one life-long politician at a time. Who can beat us, if God is on our side?

IS MARTIAL LAW COMING BEFORE ELECTION

The actions of this President and how he inserts himself into local disputes and agitates others, bothers me. Too often he makes a national case out of a local problem the states can and will end up being the arbiters of, but by speaking out on some of these issues, he tends to stir up the pot when it doesn't need stirring, and you have to ask yourself why he does that.

You remember Vann Jones, the avowed communist that was one of Obama's Czars? Well, he just proclaimed, it was reported in the Examiner, he and others will bring the Egypt style Arab Spring to America this Spring. This doesn't surprise most of us who realize this is how the Obama Administration works: create a situation or take advantage of a situation, incite the Liberal side of Americans to demonstrate and demand change, using the media as wonks who distort truth and further agitate people to believe a lie, and pay most of the demonstrators 20 to 50 dollars a day to demonstrate to make it look like it's a real grass roots concern. Vann Jones' group will accomplish this through 900 "protest training sessions" through out the USA, and when ready, labor unions and Moveon.org will launch the protests; and no one in the media is outraged at the idea organized interruption, and no doubt destruction of private property and the day to day lives of all Americans, is being overtly planned. And where is the Department of Justice? Don't they follow up on these sorts of "rumors"? Where is the President on these issues, a place FOR him to speak out.

Cities and states have experience and have been able to reasonably handle permitted demonstrations and protests, but this is not going to be permitted nor usual. The intention of this movement is to overturn our way of life.....it is some of the change Obama told you he would bring to America.


On March 16, 2010 President Obama authorized an 11 page  "Executive Order" called  National Defense Resources Preparedness. This authority was first used during the Korean War and was explained as follows:


The Defense Production Act (DPA) was created at the outset of the Korean War to ensure the
availability of the nation’s industrial resources to meet the national security needs of the United
States by granting the President powers to ensure the supply and timely delivery of products,
materials, and services to military and civilian agencies.
The DPA codifies a robust legal authority given the President to force industry to give priority to
national security production and is the statutory underpinning of governmental review of foreign
investment in U.S. companies.

DPA Provisions and Jurisdiction
Much of what President Truman initially proposed affected national economic policies. As
enacted on September 8, 1950 (H.R. 9176, P.L. 81-774), the DPA contained seven titles:
• Title I: Priorities and Allocations (authority to demand priority for defense related
products)
• Title II: Authority to Requisition (authority to requisition materials, property,
and facilities for national defense, terminated in 1953)
• Title III: Expansion of Productive Capacity and Supply (authority to provide
incentives to develop, modernize, and expand defense productive capacity)
• Title IV: Price and Wage Stabilization (authority to ration consumer goods, to
solicit voluntary labor/industry cooperation on wage and price stability, and to fix
wage and price ceilings, terminated in 1953)

When there is a dispute between agencies and the heads of those agencies, this executive order confers on the President the authority to make the final decision.

But remember this President issued and ELEVEN PAGE executive order and it details much more than I have in this blog.

I have to admit, I am suspicious of the intentions of the President and the need for such an executive order. We are not at war nor are we ending a war whereby industry and life need to be adjusted, as was the case during World War II and the Korean War. Sacrifices were required and made by every American, but this order, at this time causes me concern. To me, it is more like planning ahead: It is more like "knowing" something is about to occur and you want to get ahead of it. To me it's like the President knows of the Arab Spring movement of Vann Jones, Moveon.org and others and is making ready to do his part when the chaos hits our neighborhoods and disrupts our country. If he does initiate any part of this executive order, it will be akin to Martial Law:    

 " Temporary rule by military authorities, imposed on a civilian population especially in time of war or when civil authority has broken down. It may also be used during outbreaks of deadly illnesses".

"Among aspects of martial law are censorship of radio and newspapers, prohibition of the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages, prohibition of gatherings of more than five persons in the street, and requirement of a permit from the local military authorities before any public meeting can be held. Religious meetings inside buildings may be tolerated by the authorities, held at hours not conflicting with the curfew.
In rare cases, martial law has been in effect with armed soldiers barring citizens from being out-of-doors after sunset".

Is this where we are headed? I hope not, but I do have my doubts.