Conservative Political Views



185 Dirksen Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C.  20510

(202) 224-5922


Report No. 4:
The Obama Administration’s Abuse of Power
By U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX)
Ranking Member
Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on The Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights

Of all the troubling aspects of the Obama presidency, none is more dangerous than the President’s persistent pattern of lawlessness, his willingness to disregard the written law and instead enforce his own policies via executive fiat.

The President’s taste for unilateral action to circumvent Congress should concern every citizen, regardless of party or ideology. The great 18th-century political philosopher Montesquieu observed: “There can be no liberty where the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or body of magistrates.” America’s Founding Fathers took this warning to heart, and we should too.

Rule of law doesn’t simply mean that society has laws; dictatorships are often characterized by an abundance of laws. Rather, rule of law means that we are a nation ruled by laws, not men. No one—and especially not the president—is above the law. For that reason, the U.S. Constitution imposes on every president the express duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”

Rather than honor this duty, President Obama has openly defied it by repeatedly suspending, delaying, and waiving portions of the laws that he is charged to enforce. When President Obama disagreed with federal immigration laws, he instructed the Justice Department to cease enforcing the laws. He did the same thing with federal welfare law, drug laws, and the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

In the more than two centuries of our nation’s history, there is simply no precedent for the White House wantonly ignoring federal law and asking others to do the same.

For all those who are silent now: What would they think of a Republican president who announced that he was going to ignore the law, or unilaterally change the law? Imagine a future president setting aside environmental laws, or tax laws, or labor laws, or tort laws with which he or she disagreed.

That would be wrong—and it is the Obama precedent that is opening the door for future lawlessness. As Montesquieu knew, an imperial presidency threatens the liberty of every citizen. Because when a president can pick and choose which laws to follow and which to ignore, he is no longer a president.



Governing by Executive Fiat

1.  Disregarded 1996 welfare reform law in granting broad work waivers for work requirements of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF).1

2.  Implemented portions of the DREAM Act, which Congress rejected, by executive action.2

3.  Ended some terror asylum restrictions, by allowing asylum for people who provided only “insignificant” or “limited” material support of terrorists.3

4.  Allowed immigrants in the U.S. illegally, who are relatives of military troops and veterans, to stay in the country and get legal status.

5.  Extended federal marriage benefits by recognizing, under federal law, same-sex marriages created in a state that allows same-sex marriage even if the couple is living in a state that doesn’t recognize same-sex marriage.

6.  Recognized same-sex marriage in Utah, even though the Supreme Court stayed the court order recognizing same-sex marriage in Utah and Utah said it would not recognize same- sex marriages performed before the stay.

7.  Refused to prosecute violation of drug laws with certain mandatory minimums.

8.  Issued signing statements, refusing to enforce parts of congressional-enacted statutes.

9.  Illegally refused to act on Yucca Mountain’s application to become a nuclear waste repository.


1 Caroline May, Obama administration ‘guts’ welfare reform with new HHS rule, Daily Caller, Jul. 13, 2012.

2 Mark Krikorian, Today is A-Day, National Review Online, Aug. 15, 2012.
3 Reid J. Epstein, Obama administration ends some terror asylum restrictions, Politico, Feb. 5, 2014.
4 Julia Preston, Immigrants Closely Tied to Military Get Reprieve, N.Y. Times, Nov. 15, 2013.

5 Matt Apuzzo, More Federal Privileges to Extend to Same-Sex Couples, N.Y. Times, Feb. 8, 2014.

6 Charlie Savagejan, U.S. to Recognize Utah Gay Marriage Despite State Stance, N.Y. Times, Jan. 10, 2014.
7 Pete Williams & Michael O’Brien, Holder: ‘New Approach’ to reduce mandatory drug sentences, NBC News, Aug. 12, 2013.
8 Charlie Savage, Obama Takes New Route to Opposing Parts of Laws, N.Y. Times, Jan. 8, 2010.
9 Joel B. Pollak, Nuclear fallout: Yucca decision would affect immigration, obamacare, Breitbart, Aug. 14, 2013.


 National Security

  1. Falsely portrayed the Benghazi terrorist attack as a spontaneous protest against an anti- Muslim YouTube video,10 and then lied about the White House’s involvement.11

  2. Illegally revealed the existence of sealed indictments in the Benghazi investigation.12

  3. Failed to enforce the Magnitsky Act as required by law, by not adding Russian human rights abusers to a list of people not permitted to travel to or do business in the U.S.13

  4. Killed four Americans overseas in counterterrorism operations without judicial process.14

  5. Continued to give Egypt aid after the military took over its government, even though federal law prohibits aid to Egypt in the event of a coup.15


10 Bill Flax, Benghazi: Four Americans Died, Obama Lied, and the Press Complied, Forbes, Oct. 18, 2012.

11 Michael D. Shear, Email Suggests White House Strategy on Benghazi, N.Y. Times, Apr. 30, 2014.
12 Mike Levine, President Obama’s Surprise Revelation of Sealed Benghazi Indictment, ABC News, Aug. 9, 2013.

13 Obama’s Magnitsky Walkback, Wall St. J., Jan. 5, 2014.
14 Karen DeYoung & Peter Finn, U.S. acknowledges killing of four U.S. citizens in counterterrorism operations, Wash. Post, May 22, 2013.
15 White House says U.S. has not cut off aid to Egypt, Reuters, Aug. 20, 2013.




  1. Granted a “hardship” exemption from the individual mandate for people whose health plans were canceled because their plans weren’t Obamacare compliant.16

  2. Delayed the individual mandate for two years.17

  3. Allowed individuals to buy health insurance plans in 2014 that did not comply with Obamacare.18 Extended this delay until 2016—past the mid-term elections.19

  4. Extended the deadline to enroll in Obamacare.20

  5. Illegally granted businesses a waiver from Obamacare’s employer mandate.21 Twice.22

  6. Illegally continued the Obamacare employer contribution for congressional staffs.23

  7. Illegally delayed the Obamacare caps on out-of-pocket healthcare payments.24

  8. Illegally delayed Obamacare verification of eligibility for healthcare subsidies.25

  9. Illegally required people to violate their faith via the Obamacare contraception mandate.26

  10. As of May 2011, over 50% of Obamacare waiver beneficiaries were union members (who account for less than 12% of the American work force).27


16 Margaret Talev & Alex Wayne, Obama Lifts Health Mandate for Those With Canceled Plans,, Dec. 20, 2013.

17 ObamaCare’s Secret Mandate Exemption, Wall St. J., Mar. 11, 2014.

18 Stephanie Condon, Obama letting people keep canceled health plans for another year,, Nov. 14, 2013.

19 Louise Radnofsky, Obama Gives Health Plans Added Two-Year Reprieve, Wall St. J., Mar. 5, 2014.

20 David Martosko, Busted! After promising ‘no delay’ in final Obamacare sign-up deadline, Obama administration unveils new ‘honor system’ extension through mid-April, Daily Mail, March 25, 2014.

21 Sarah Kliff, White House delays employer mandate requirement until 2015, Wash. Post, July 2, 2013.

22 Juliet Eilperin & Amy Goldstein, White House delays health insurance mandate for medium-seized employers until 2016, Wash. Post, Feb. 10, 2014.

23 Ezra Klein, In 2014, Congress gets Obamacare. Here’s how they’ll pay for it., Wash. Post, Aug. 1, 2013.

24 Avik Roy, Yet Another White House Obamacare Delay: Out-Of-Pocket Caps Waived Until 2015, Forbes, Aug. 13, 2013.

25 Avik Roy, Not Qualified for Obamacare’s Subsidies? Just lie – Govt. To Use ‘Honor System’ Without Verifying Your Eligibility, Forbes, July 6, 2013.

26 Joel Gehrke, Little Sisters of the Poor sue over Obamacare fines, contraception requirement, Wash. Examiner, Sept. 24, 2013.

27 Milton Wolf, Obamacare waiver corruption must stop, Wash. Times, May 20, 2011.




  1. Ordered Boeing to fire 1,000 employees in South Carolina and shut down a new factory because it was non-union.28

  2. Implemented a moratorium on offshore drilling after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill without statutory authority, and continued to enact new versions after federal courts repeatedly invalidated the moratorium.29

  3. Treated secured creditors worse than unsecured creditors in the Chrysler bankruptcy.30

  4. Terminated the pensions of 20,000 non-union Delphi employees in the GM bankruptcy.31

  5. Had SWAT teams raid a Gibson guitar factory and seize property, on the purported basis that Gibson had broken India’s environmental laws—but no charges were filed.32

  6. Government agencies are engaging in “Operation Choke Point,” where the government asks banks to “choke off” access to financial services for customers engaging in conduct the Administration does not like—such as “ammunition sales.”33


28 Steven Greenhouse, Labor Board Tells Boeing New Factory Breaks Law, N.Y. Times, Apr. 20, 2011.
29 Frederic Frommer, Government takes third attempt at drilling moratorium, Associated Press, Jul. 13, 2010.

30 An offer you can’t refuse, The Economist, May 7, 2009.
31 Emails: Geithner, Treasury drove cutoff of nonunion Delphi workers’ pensions, Daily Caller, Aug. 7, 2012; Report: Obama administration played key role in GM Bankruptcy as pensions cut for salaried workers, not unionized ones, Associated Press, Aug 16, 2013.
32 Deborah Zabarenko, Gibson Guitar CEO slams U.S. raids as “overreach”, Reuters, Oct. 12, 2011.
33 Frank Keating, Justice Puts Banks in a Choke Hold, Wall St. J., Apr. 24, 2014.



Executive Nominees and Personnel

  1. Appointed czars to oversee federal policy specifically because czars do not require Senate confirmation, earning criticism from stalwart Democrats such as West Virginia Sen. Robert Byrd35 and Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold.36
  2. As of January 2012, 36 of the President’s executive office staff owed $833,970 in back taxes.37
  3. Made illegal “recess” appointments to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the National Labor Relations Board when Congress wasn’t in recess.34 Ignored the rulings of three federal courts of appeals that held those nominations unconstitutional.
  4. As of 2011, 311,566 federal employees or retirees owed $3.5 billion in taxes.38

34 Timothy Noah, Cordray’s Recess Appointment Sure Doesn’t Look Constitutional to Me, New Republic, Jan. 4, 2012.
35 John Bresnahan, Byrd: Obama in power grab, Politico, Feb. 25, 2009.
36 Jordan Fabian, Feingold questions Obama ‘czars’, The Hill, Sept. 16, 2009.37 Andrew Malcolm, 36 Obama aides owe $833,000 in back taxes, Investors Business Daily, Jan. 26, 2012.38 Richard Rubin, Number of Tax-Delinquent Government Workers Up 11.5%, Bloomberg, Mar. 8, 2013.



Free Speech and Privacy

  1. Circumvented the Freedom of Information Act, by requiring White House Counsel review of all documents to be released under the Freedom of Information Act that the Administration believed pertained to “White House equities”—and then delayed in producing many of these documents by FOIA’s statutory deadline, or didn’t produce them at all.40
  2. Got secret permission from the FISA Court to reverse restrictions on the National Security Agency’s use of intercepted phone calls and emails, permitting the NSA to search American’s communications in its databases.41
  3. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is seeking to monitor about 80% of U.S. credit card transactions.42
  4. Targeted Fox News reporter James Rosen by falsely labeling him a possible “co- conspirator” in a criminal investigation of a new leak.43
  5. Illegally targeted conservative groups for heightened IRS scrutiny.39
  6. Secretly obtained phone records from staff at the Associated Press.44
  7. Had meetings with lobbyists in coffee shops near White House to avoid disclosure requirements.45


39 Greg Sargent, Conservatives have themselves a real scandal on their hands, Wash. Post, May 10, 2013.
40 Mark Tapscott, ‘Most transparent’ White House ever rewrote the FOIA to suppress politically sensitive docs, Wash. Examiner, Mar. 18, 2014.
41 Ellen Nakashima, Obama administration had restrictions on NSA reversed in 2011, Wash. Post, Sept. 7, 2013.

42 Richard Pollock, CFPB’s data-mining on consumer credit cards challenged in heated House hearing, Sept. 13, 2013.
43 Another Chilling Leak Investigation, N.Y. Times, May 21, 2013.
44 Mark Sherman, Gov’t obtains wide AP phone records in probe, Yahoo News, May 13, 2013.
45 Eric Lichtblau, Across From White House, Coffee With Lobbyists, N.Y. Times, June 24, 2010.




Other Lawless Acts

  1. Aided drug cartels instead of enforcing immigration laws—as found by a federal judge. Border Patrol agents, multiple times, knowingly helped smuggle illegal immigrant children into the U.S.; “the DHS is encouraging parents to seriously jeopardize the safety of their children.”46

  2. Illegally sold thousands of guns to criminals, in the operation known as Fast and Furious,47 and then refused to comply with congressional subpoenas about the operation.48

  3. Dismissed charges filed by Bush Administration against New Black Panther Party members who were videotaped intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling station during the 2008 election.49

  4. Argued for expansive federal powers in the Supreme Court, which has rejected the Administration’s arguments unanimously 9 times since January 2012.50

  5. Sued Louisiana to stop school vouchers and keep low-income minorities trapped in failing schools.51

  6. Threatened to arrest military priests for practicing their faith during the partial government shutdown.52

  7. Muzzled the speech of military chaplains.53

  8. Sued fire departments saying their multiple-choice, open-book written employment tests were racially discriminatory.54

  9. Gave 23,994 tax refunds worth more than $46 million to aliens here illegally using the same address in Atlanta, GA.55


46 Stephen Dinan, Border Patrol helps smuggle illegal immigrant children into the United States, Wash. Times, Dec. 19, 2013.
47 DOJ Inspector General, A Review of ATF’s Operation Fast and Furious and Related Matters, Sept. 2012.
48 Jerry Seper & Stephen Dinan, GOP sues to force Obama, Holder compliance on Fast and Furious, Wash. Times, Aug. 13, 2012.

49 Kevin Bohn, Justice Department drops charges in voter intimidation case,, May 28, 2009.
50 Senator Ted Cruz, The Legal Limit: The Obama Administration’s Attempts to Expand Federal Power; Senator Ted Cruz, Addendum – More Cases on Obama DOJ’s Expansive View of Federal Power; Senator Ted Cruz, Addendum 2 – More Cases on Obama DOJ’s Expansive View of Federal Power.
51 Obama, Holder Stand in Louisiana Schoolhouse Door, Investors Business Daily, Aug. 30, 2013.
52 Alex Pappas, Priests threatened with arrest if they minister to military during shutdown, Daily Caller, Oct. 4, 2013.
53 George Neumayr, Muzzling Military Chaplains, The American Spectator, Jan. 9, 2013.
54 Editorial: Firehouse flunkies, Wash. Times, Mar. 7, 2011.



Other Abuses of Power

  1. Released a mentally ill Guantanamo detainee,56 who had been a high-risk al Qaeda fighter in jihad combat since the 1980s.57

  2. Backed release of the Lockerbie bomber, Abdel Baset al-Megrahi.58

  3. President Obama told NASA administrator to “find a way to reach out to the Muslim world.”59

  4. Claimed the Fort Hood shooting was “workplace violence” rather than terrorism.60

  5. Signed a stimulus bill that spent money on bonuses for AIG executives,61 and then acted shocked and outraged at the bonuses.62

  6. Gave $535 million to Solyndra, which went bankrupt; Solyndra shareholders and officials made substantial donations to Obama’s campaign.63

  7. Reneged on a campaign promise to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term in office.64

  8. Increased the national debt more in one term than President Bush did in two terms.65

  9. Extended mortgage assistance to people who bought multiple homes during the housing bubble.66

  10. Proposed rules that would have decimated family farms, by prohibiting children under 18 from doing many forms of farm work.67


55 Terence Jeffrey, IRS Sent $46,378,040 in Refunds to 23,994 ‘Unauthorized’ Aliens at 1 Atlanta Address,, June 21, 2013.
56 U.S. judge orders release of mentally ill Guantanamo prisoner, Yahoo News, Oct. 4, 2013.
57 The Guantanamo Docket: Ibrahim Othman Ibrahim Idris, N.Y. Times.

58 Jason Allardyce & Tony Allen-Mills, White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, The Australian, July 26, 2010.
59 Alex Pepper, White House, NASA, Defend Comments About NASA Outreach to Muslim World Criticized by Conservatives,, July 6, 2010.

60 Aaron Goldstein, Obama Still Doesn’t Get 9/11, American Spectator, Sept. 11, 2012.
61 Dana Bash & Ted Barrett, Bonuses allowed by stimulus bill,, Mar. 18, 2009.
62 Helene Cooper, Obama Orders Treasury Chief to Try to Block A.I.G. Bonuses, N.Y Times, Mar. 16, 2009.
63 Bankrupt solar company with fed backing has cozy ties to Obama admin, Daily Caller, Sept. 1, 2011.
64 Josh Gerstein, 5 unmet promises of President Obama, Politico, Oct. 16, 2012.
65 Mark Knoller, National Debt has increased more under Obama than under Bush,, Mar. 19, 2012.

66 Prashant Gopal, Boom-Era Property Speculators to Get Foreclosure Aid: Mortgages, Bloomberg, Mar. 5, 2012.

67 Washington Elitists Want to Take Over the Family Farm, Investors Business Daily, Apr. 26, 2012; Dave Jamieson, Child Labor Farm Rules Scrapped by White House Under Political Pressure, Huffington Post, Apr. 27, 2012.

 PAGE 10



  1. Former “safe schools czar” has written about his past drug abuse and advocated promoting homosexuality in schools.68

  2. Nominated Timothy Geithner—who had significant tax issues69—to head the Treasury Department, which enforces tax laws.

  3. Reneged on campaign promise to broadcast healthcare reform negotiations on C-SPAN.70

  4. Reneged on a campaign promise to wait five days before signing any non-emergency bill (at least 10 times during first 3 months in office).71

  5. Unilaterally, increased the minimum wage for federal contract workers from $7.25 to $10.10, via executive order.72

  6. Cancelled all White House tours after sequestration—purportedly saving $18,000 per week—even though President Obama had spent more than $1 million in tax money to golf with Tiger Woods one weekend a few weeks before.73

  7. Adopted pro-union “ambush election” rules.74

  8. Pressured Ford to pull an anti-auto-bailout TV ad.75

  9. Actively, aided in George Zimmerman protests.76

  10. Tried to seize a privately owned motel when guests used illegal drugs at the motel.77

  11. Shut down the Amber Alert website, while keeping up Let’s Move website, during the partial government shutdown.78

  12. Gave supervised release to a convicted criminal (an alien here illegally) who later killed a nun in a DUI.79


68 Maxim Lott, Critics Assail Obama’s ‘Safe Schools’ Czar, Say He’s Wrong Man For the Job,, Sept. 23, 2009.
69 Jonathan Weisman, Geithner’s Tax History Muddles Confirmation, Wall St. J., Jan. 14, 2009.
70 Chip Reid, Obama Reneges on Health Care Transparency,, Jan. 7, 2010.

71 Jim Harper, The Promise That Keeps on Breaking, The Cato Institute, Apr. 13, 2009.
72 Ed Henry, Obama to sign executive order raising minimum wage for federal contractors,, Jan. 28, 2014.
73 Tom Blumer, Our Petty, Country-Be-Damned President, PJ Media, Mar. 8, 2013.
74 Senator John Thune, NLRB’s ambush elections would hurt local businesses, The Hill, Apr. 19, 2012.
75 Daniel Howes, WH Pressures Ford to Pull Bailout Ad,, Sept. 27, 2011.
76 Documents Obtained by Judicial Watch Detail Role of Justice Department in Organizing Trayvon Martin Protests, Judicial Watch, July 10, 2013.
77 George Will, When the looter is the government, Wash. Post, May 18, 2012.
78 Update: Let’s Move Website Works Fine – Obama plays Politics with Lost Children, shuts down Amber Alert website, The Right Scoop, Oct. 6, 2013.



  1. Shut down an Amish farm for selling fresh unpasteurized milk across state lines.80

  2. Spent $7 million per household in “stimulus funds” to connect a few Montana households to the Internet.81

  3. Spent $205,075 in “stimulus” funds to relocate a shrub that sells for $16.82

  4. Fired an inspector general after investigating an $850,000 AmeriCorps grant received by a nonprofit run by former NBA star and Obama supporter Kevin Johnson (now mayor of Sacramento).83


79 JW Forces Release of DHS Report on Illegal Alien Charged with Killing Virginia Nun in August 2010 Drunk Driving Incident, Judicial Watch, Mar. 4, 2011.
80 Stephen Dinan, Feds shut down Amish farm for selling fresh milk, Wash. Times, Feb. 13, 2012.
81 Nick Schulz, How Effective Was The 2009 Stimulus Program?, Forbes, July 5, 2011.

82 Thomas Cloud, Shovel Ready in San Fran: $205,075 to ‘Translocate’ One Shrub from Path of Stimulus Project,, Apr. 12, 2012.
83 Susan Crabtree, Allies of official fired by Obama mount defense, The Hill, June 24, 2009.





185 Dirksen Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C.  20510

(202) 224-5922

September 5, 2014 Posted by | Home | , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment


(Reprinted under Fair Use Act)

We gave thousands of guns to Mexican drug cartels. Americans died. Where is the outrage?

Where Is the Outrage?

By Arnold Ahlert  Tuesday, December 3, 2013

On Sunday, the New York Post ran an excerpt from “The Unarmed Truth” by John Dodson. Dodson is the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) agent who blew the whistle on the gun-walking operation known as Fast and Furious.

According to the Mexican government, 211 of their citizens, including police officers and children, have been murdered with weapons from that scandalous operation. So was American Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, whose family, along with every other concerned American, has been stonewalled in their efforts to find out who is accountable for this atrocity. After recounting some truly unbelievable instances of bureaucratic arrogance and ineptitude, Dodson inadvertently poses a question with far larger implications. “We gave thousands of guns to Mexican drug cartels. Americans died. Where is the outrage?” he asks.

Perhaps fittingly, “The Boomer Bust,” a column by P.J O’Rourke published the same day in the Wall Street Journal, inadvertently provides a substantial portion of the answer. “We are the generation that changed everything,” O’Rourke writes. “Of all the eras and epochs of Americans, ours is the one that made the biggest impression—on ourselves. That’s an important accomplishment, because we’re the generation that created the self, made the firmament of the self, divided the light of the self from the darkness of the self, and said, ‘Let there be self.’ If you were born between 1946 and 1964, you may have noticed this yourself.”

Self-Absorbed Nation

With some notable exceptions, including a very large one for veterans of the Vietnam War, no previous generation of Americans was as self-absorbed as my own generation of Boomers. Note the word “previous.” Unfortunately, we have done a rather remarkable job of cultivating that noxious trait among subsequent generations. As a result, an American ethos has emerged, one in which the most truthful answer to Dodson’s question would embarrass those previous generations.

Where is the outrage? For millions of Americans, there is no outrage whatsoever—unless something personally affects them.

For far too many Americans, the numerous scandals engendered by this administration, including Fast and Furious, the targeting of conservatives by the IRS, the monitoring of news reporters by the DOJ, the murder of four Americans in Benghazi, the NSA abuses, and the general trampling of the Constitution by a president who unilaterally re-writes laws whenever he sees fit, have generated little more than a collective yawn. And that’s when those same Americans are even aware of what’s going on in the first place. Perhaps the greatest paradox of the modern age is how well-connected Americans are to information-gathering devices, even as they remain completely uncurious about vast swaths of critically important information.

The filtering mechanism that separates the relevant from the irrelevant is transparently obvious: if it’s not about me, who cares?

Facebook: A Testament to “Me”

Perhaps the most searing example of this phenomenon is Facebook. It is, above all else, a testament to “me” in all my glory. In all of American history, there is no comparable example of a time when so many people dedicated so much energy to chronicling the mundane and the trivial at best, and the truly twisted, at worst. It is almost inconceivable how many people have posted self-indicting accounts of criminal behavior. Apparently boasting about one’s thuggery is viewed as a reasonable tradeoff for the possible incarceration that could occur when a jury sees a video starring you and your homies “knocking out” some unsuspecting grandmother, simply for the thrill of it.

Yet there is a bigger thrill. Several other websites glorify such thuggery including one,, that compiles “excerpts of hundreds of fights, from women being sucker-punched to brutal gang attacks,” writes Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel columnist James E. Causey, who further reveals that those videos “often earn thousands of views and ‘likes’ and ‘recommendations’ on Facebook, which turn the perpetrators into overnight sensations.”

That’s as “all about “me as it gets.

Rush Limbaugh:  “low information voter”

Radio host Rush Limbaugh coined the increasingly popular term “low information voters” (LIVs). I believe the term is somewhat inaccurate. These Americans are not bereft of information. They are not cut off from television, radio, the internet, i-Phones, texting, tweeting or any other source of information exchange. In fact, most Americans, including the LIVs, are inundated by information. What they actually pay attention to is the great separator. We live in an age where the public school system promotes the maintenance of self-esteem over genuine achievement, and trains younger generations of Americans to feel, rather than to think. And now that everyone gets a trophy just for showing up, the distinction between banality and greatness no longer applies. Everyone is “special,” and there is little reason to dwell on anything that occurs outside one’s personal universe.

By accident or design, the Obama administration and their media lapdogs have been masters at exploiting this phenomenon. No sooner does one scandal arise than another takes its place, followed by another and another, seemingly ad infinitum. Keeping track requires genuine effort in an age where effort has given way to the cruise control of self-absorption. Those who remain genuinely outraged are either dismissed as over-wrought, or denigrated with a label such as “misogynist,” “homophobe,” “nativist,” or “teabagger,” with the understanding that, once labeled, no further thought is required.

Yet despite their good fortune, this administration pierced the collective fog of self-absorption with the ultimate over-reach known as ObamaCare. Or as the coordinated attempt to put the genie back in the bottle is rolled out, the scrapping of the name ObamaCare and the return to the term Affordable Care Act, lest our feckless president be permanently associated with his “signature achievement,” yet another appellation undoubtedly headed for the ash heap of history. In one of the more colossal outbursts of hubris, Obama and his fellow Democrats decided that millions of Americans getting their insurance policies cancelled would be as indifferent about that reality as they have been about every other scandal, and/or lie of omission or commission, foisted upon them by our Prevaricator-in-Chief.

No such luck. Few things are more personal than one’s health, and the notion that this administration has put millions of Americans’ access to healthcare in jeopardy—even as they were assured that nothing of the sort would happen—has engendered the kind of outrage that even our hopelessly corrupt media cannot tamp down.

Not that they aren’t trying. The trumpeting of the so-called historical deal with Iran that was nothing of the sort, along with the implementation of the “nuclear option” in the Senate, were the latest attempts to overwhelm Americans. Today the administration will attempt to put more lipstick on the pig known as, in the hopes that Americans will conflate the website with ObamaCare itself.

No doubt many will, until other realities intrude, such as the loss of one’s doctor, as networks tighten up to contain mandated costs, or the realization that “cheaper” insurance comes with hefty coinsurance requirements and deductibles that must be satisfied by the insured themselves. Then there is the ultimate time bomb that will explode next year when millions of additional Americans have their employer-based policies cancelled.

The ultimate nightmare for this administration? A sense of outrage that breaks through the containment barrier of healthcare. The possibility that Americans eventually discover that this scandal is not anomalous, but part of a larger pattern. A pattern where even most self-absorbed Americans may be prodded to ask themselves disquieting questions, leading to evermore disquieting questions. “There is no escape from happiness, attention, affection, freedom, irresponsibility, money, peace, opportunity and finding out that everything you were ever told is wrong,” writes O’Rourke, in reference to the Baby Boom generation.

With any luck, O’Rourke is vastly underestimating the size of his audience.

Copyright 2013 The Patriot PostAuthor

Arnold Ahlert  Bio

Arnold Ahlert Most recent columnsArnold was an op-ed columist with the NY Post for eight years, currently writing for and Arnold can be reached at:

December 3, 2013 Posted by | Home | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

BIZPACK REVIEW by JOE SAUNDERS followed by letter, posted on her Facebook page, by YOLANDA (LANA) VESTAL as told by CHERYL CARPENTER KLIMEK

NBC confronts Pelosi with ‘pass it to see what’s in it’ clip; hot mess follows

Nancy Pelosi still can’t see it.

Confronted by “Meet the Press” host David Gregory on Sunday about her famous Obamacare statement of 2010 — “We have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it.” — the San Francisco congresswoman didn’t give an inch.

pelosi 1“I stand by what I said there: When people see what’s in the bill, they will like it, and they will,” Pelosi said, in utter defiance of reality.

“It took a great deal for us to pass the bill. I said, ‘If we go up to the gate and the gate is locked, we’ll unlock the gate. If we can’t do that, we’ll climb the fence. If the fence is too high, we’ll pole-vault in.’”

Set aside for a second the fact that Pelosi might have thought she was talking about the Democratic approach to immigration. The former House speaker had no visible qualms about defending the handiwork she and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid produced during the disastrous years, from 2008-2010, that Democrats held both houses of Congress.

“It doesn’t matter what we’re saying here,” Pelosi nattered. “What matters is what happens at the kitchen table of the American people.”

Actually, what matters is what’s been happening with congressional Democrats who aren’t lucky enough to be from San Francisco and who abandoned President Obama Friday by voting for the “Keep Your Health Plan Act,” sponsored by Rep. Fred Upton, R-Ill.

What matters is what’s going to happen to Democrats who don’t start listening to their constituents when election time rolls around in November.

What matters is that the American people are seeing what’s in the bill. It’s what conservatives have been saying was in the bill for three years now.

They’re seeing it. And, no matter what Nancy Pelosi says, they don’t like it at all.


Texas single mom’s ‘thanks a lot’ letter to Obama goes viral

Crossroads ObamacareA Texas single mom’s letter “thanking” President Obama for Obamacare, and all that it entails, has gone viral.

Yolanda (Lana) Vestal posted the letter on her Facebook page, and what started out as a way to vent, became a way for others to share frustration over Obamacare. The single mother of two blasted the president for increased taxes and lavish vacations. The post has received over 63,000 “shares,” according to

Here is Vestal’s letter to Obama:

Dear President Obama,

I wanted to take a moment to say thank you for all you have done and are doing. You see I am a single Mom located in the very small town of Palmer, Texas. I live in a small rental house with my two children. I drive an older car that I pray daily runs just a little longer. I work at a mediocre job bringing home a much lower paycheck than you or your wife could even imagine living on. I have a lot of concerns about the new “Obamacare” along with the taxes being forced on us Americans and debts you are adding to our country. I have a few questions for you Mr. President.

Have you ever struggled to pay your bills? I have.

Have you ever sat and watched your children eat and you eat what was left on their plates when they were done, because there wasn’t enough for you to eat to? I have.

Have you ever had to rob Peter to pay Paul, and it still not be enough? I have.

Have you ever been so sick that you needed to see a doctor and get medicine, but had no health insurance because it was too expensive? I have.

Have you ever had to tell your children no, when they asked for something they needed? I have.

Have you ever patched holes in pants, glued shoes, replaced zippers, because it was cheaper than buying new? I have.

Have you ever had to put an item or two back at the grocery store, because you didn’t have enough money? I have.

Have you ever cried yourself to sleep, because you had no clue how you were going to make ends meet? I have.

My questions could go on and on. I don’t believe you have a clue what Americans are actually going through and honestly, I don’t believe you care. Not everyone lives extravagantly. While your family takes expensive trips that cost more than most of us make in two-four years, there are so many of us that suffer. Yet, you are doing all you can to add to the suffering. I think you are a very selfish and cold hearted man, who does not care what is best for the people he was elected by (not by me) to represent, but more so out for the glory of your name attached to history. So thank you Mr. President, thank you for pushing those of us that are barely staying afloat completely under water and driving America into the ground. You have made your mark in history, as the absolute worst and most hated president of the United States. God have mercy on your soul!


Yolanda Vestal

Average American

November 21, 2013 Posted by | Home, Videos | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

FOXNEWS.COM by DR. KEITH ABLOW (MY TWO SENSE: I believe it is worse than Obama disrespecting others. I believe he is a clinical Narcisist, that he is amoral, and lacks empathy–all of the characteristic facets of a narcissist and a psychopath. No drama, Obama’s lack of character and integrity was certainly shaped in his youth, but once autonomous, he decided which path works best for him and his goals. He is also a megalamaniac, with delusions of power, relevance, and omnipotence. In short, Obama is in love with himself, and if he could, he would make love and procreate all by himself. JUST ME)

Why it is easy for President Obama to lie to the American people

By Dr. Keith Ablow
  • Recently, America has witnessed something we have not seen since Watergate:  The president of the United States openly admitting that he lied to the American people.

There are at least these two differences this time: First, the admission of the lie does not come at a moment when this president is facing impeachment (which would almost certainly have been true for President Nixon had he not resigned).

Second, this president still shows, in my opinion, even after his most recent mea culpa, far less remorse than President Nixon showed in the speech he made upon announcing he would leave office and in his choice to leave office.

I do not believe the president sees most Americans as competent. I believe he sees them as children.

In this case, the president lied to Americans about the Affordable Care Act, promising that passing the legislation meant they could keep their health plans and doctors, when the truth is that tens of millions of people will likely lose their health care plans and be forced to switch doctors.

That’s a really big lie, however you measure it — whether in the tens of millions of people affected, or the hundreds of thousands of doctors, or the dozens of insurance companies, or the thousands and thousands of employers or the rerouting of billions of dollars.

Yet, the president only said he was “sorry that people are finding themselves in this situation based on reassurances they got from me.”

He didn’t say that he had profoundly violated the trust of the American people.

He didn’t say that he would search his soul for the reason he could have been so intent on passing his legislation that he promised very important things he knew he could not deliver.

He didn’t say that the rage people feel toward him is justified.

Why does it seem so easy for the president to tell such a gargantuan lie?

Here’s why:

– In order to feel guilty about deceiving someone, an individual must have respect for that person.

– He must consider the other man or woman his equal.

– He must believe that depriving the other man or woman of the truth would be a sin because it deprives that person of free will. Because without the facts, competent people can’t make informed decisions.

But I do not believe the president sees most Americans as competent.  I believe he sees them as children, who cannot think for themselves, nor support themselves, nor defend themselves.

And because he believes this is a nation of children who are powerless to truly decide anything knowledgably, withholding certain facts from them “for their own good,” is no different than telling the kids a few harmless lies to keep them safe and settle them down and calm their anxieties.

“This doesn’t taste bad,” a father might say to his daughter before giving her medicine, even when he knows it will.  The lie is forgivable. It’s meant to keep his little girl from being too anxious and refusing what she needs.

But tell a competent adult something tastes good when it will make him gag, and you’ll be, rightfully, seen as having deprived the person of information he deserved.

This president was lied to by his father who abandoned him, by his mother who abandoned him and by the grandmother who hugged him, but also revealed that she distrusted men of color.

Now, he wants to be the only adult in town. He needs that much power to feel safe, because he was that disempowered and unsafe in the past. So, to him, we’re incompetents.

To him, we’re just kids who need to take our medicine. And lying is the easy and justifiable way to get the job done.

Dr. Keith Ablow is a psychiatrist and member of the Fox News Medical A-Team. Dr. Ablow can be reached at

November 18, 2013 Posted by | Home | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment


(Why is there no across the board media coverage on this??  JM)


Why Are Truckers Threatening to ‘Shut Down Washington, D.C.’ for Three Days Straight?

A group of truckers is reportedly planning to shut Washington, D.C. down for three days straight starting on Oct. 11 to protest the “corruption against the Constitution.”

The “Truckers To Shut Down America” Facebook page has more than 16,000 likes, though it is unclear how many truckers actually intend on taking part in the disruptive protest.

Truckers Threatening to Shut Down Washington, D.C. for Three Days in Protest


“The American people are sick and tired of the corruption that is destroying America! We therefore declare a GENERAL STRIKE on the weekend of October 11-13, 2013! Truck drivers will not haul freight! Americans can strike in solidarity with truck drivers!” the group’s description reads.

In a YouTube video uploaded by user “Kevin Allan” and linked on the “Truckers To Shut Down America” Facebook page, the event is labeled as a general “strike” by the American people against the federal government and its “bulls**t.”

The narrator in the video says he has received word from others that “truckers are organizing and are going to shut down D.C.” Watch the video below (Warning: Some strong language):

It is too early to tell if the “strike” will be successful, but “shutting down” the nation’s capitol would certainly have a huge impact whether you agree or disagree with the tactic.

The Facebook page provides some additional information on the motive behind the action, which ranges from Obamacare to the IRS scandal to Benghazi:

My fellow patriot this effort is to support the truckers in a major shut down of America ion [sic] a 3 day strike October 11th thru 13th. Obamacare will be in effect and most people will be ready to take action. No commerce on those days stock up on items that you will need. No banking no shopping no money transactions.

It does not matter if a million or 50 roll through DC in this effort. Congress will listen to We the People. Which is remove Obama from office for crimes of treason and misdemeanors. We want Congressional hearing on Benghazi and Seal Team 6. Louis Learner [sic] put in jail. No amnesty, remove all Muslims in our government that do not uphold the Constitution. Remove Eric Holder from office for crimes against the people and the Constitution. Last but not least is Fuel prices.

September 19, 2013 Posted by | Home, Videos | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment




September 5, 2013

It’s unfortunate that many Americans do not know their nation’s history, their Founding Documents, or the extent of their intrinsic rights.  Many, if not most, people believe America is a Democracy and know nothing about our Constitutional Republic form of government.  The differences may be subtle, but the consequences are major. 

The United States Constitution, given to us by the Founders, was intended to be a contract between the Founders and We, the People.  It is NOT, and never has been an agreement between that Document and the ruling elite, the federal government.  Nowhere, within the Constitution, is the word “democracy” used, yet even those who should know better continue to mistakenly refer to our form of government as a Democracy.  Is that purposeful and to some nefarious end?  Who knows, but I suspect that those who should know better, do know better!  The Founders understood that Democracy is a dangerous form of government in that it grants the balance of power to the central government and not to the People.  By design, a Democracy is open to unbridled corruption, oppression of the people, and it is always the stepping-off point to socialism, communism, or any other kind of “ism” there is.  The fact that there is so little outrage over such widespread government corruption reflects that when a people see themselves without options, they accept what they otherwise would not tolerate. 

Our Founders gave us a set of principles, guidelines, and responsibilities by which we are to live if we wish to remain free. Those principles give full authority to We, the People and none to the government to the extent it has become today.  Our US Constitution tells Americans that it is our duty to remove and replace those representatives who do not stand for the principles and guidelines the Founders provided.   Furthermore, We, the People, are held accountable for the well-being of our own freedom, and we are the watchdogs and caretakers of freedom’s future.  Not only are we responsible for the freedom of future generations, we owe a great deal to all those who have given their lives in the fight  for liberty then and now.  President Abraham Lincoln, in his Gettysburg Address, said; “Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. . . (and) to the unfinished work which they who . . . gave the last full measure of devotion .  . . we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”  

Lincoln pointed out a truism that is timeless.  Americans have, and will continue to give, their lives in the name of freedom.  When Americans turn a blind eye to that truth, when they disregard the fact that freedom has a cost, and when they mock respect for US soldiers, past and present, they are, at the same time, spitting on the graves of those who gave their lives for the freedom all enjoy today!

The Founders also gave us a process by which to add, remove, or change Amendments, within the Constitution, when and if the People ever see fit.  That process was not given to the government, and the government is not legally entitled to circumvent the Constitution whenever it pleases.  They gave us three branches of government to act as checks and balances so that one branch does not become more powerful than the others.   Today, the Executive Branch operates, on its own, regardless of the principles and guidelines the Founders gave us and which were and are meant to hold the leaders accountable.  Just remember that it is the People who have the authority, as well as the responsibility to throw off tyranny and oppression.  This Administration will not stop of its own volition until it has complete control and has achieved the “fundamental transformation of America.” 

In essence, the United States Constitution, is being shredded by this Administration’s illegal Executive Orders, the removal of America’s right to due process, and the extermination of American citizens without proof of guilt.  None of these action are about national security.  It is about national control.

September 5, 2013 Posted by | Home | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment


Portraits & autographs of the signers of the D...

Portraits & autographs of the signers of the Declaration of Independence (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

English: Detail of Preamble to Constitution of...

English: Detail of Preamble to Constitution of the United States Polski: Fragment preambuły Konstytucji Stanów Zjednoczonych (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Will Our Military Fire Upon Us? Survey Says….

January 8, 2013 at 5:00 am / by

military woman

Recently a young soldier was upset enough to contact in regards to a survey he was asked to take in his official capacity. This isn’t just any survey and definitely not something you would expect to be filling out when you just signed up to defend and protect the sovereignty of your beloved country and her citizens with your very life if called upon! So just what is this survey?  This military questionnaire is not new and has been quietly lurking around since the Clinton years, waiting for the time when it can be fully played out and reap its usefulness. I believe that time is now. The timing is something of a magnitude in which I now feel deserves the full attention of the American people considering we have a sitting President who rules by executive order and has openly declared gun control as one of his top priorities of the new year. Add in the facts that Obama and his administration is cutting defense spending while giving more power to the UN and building up alternate civilian forces as he is trying to unarm the American people and we can see we are heading for a perfect storm.

This particular survey was first given in 1995 right after the “Clinton Weapons Ban” and was passed out to a few hundred Marines in 29 Palms, California. This was not done by the Pentagon but according to an article in New American Magazine in October of 1995 written by John F. McManus, this survey was supposedly part of an academic project by Navy Lt. Ernest Guy Cunningham. Not surprisingly the survey alarmed many of the marines and copies soon were circulated among gun rights supporters. Cunningham quickly told McManus that he himself is a member of the NRA and didn’t agree with the tone of the questions that the survey was only intended to confirm and then pass on to the higher authorities his fears about “the lack of knowledge among the soldiers regarding the U.S. Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and their heritage as Americans.” I wonder what type of grade he earned for such a useful and overused questionnaire. Sounds like the way they cover their tracks even today! Always make the wrong sound right.

Here are two of the questions in the survey; please consider the importance:

Strongly agree/Disagree/Agree Strongly/Agree/No Opinion

45: I would swear to the following code: “I am a United Nations fighting person. I serve in the forces which maintain world peace and every nation’s way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.”

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

46: The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, transportation, and transfer of all non‑sporting firearms. A thirty (30) day amnesty period is permitted for these firearms to be turned over to the local authorities. At the end of this period, a number of citizen groups refuse to turn over their firearms. Consider the following statement: I would fire on U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Do you wonder how most of our military answered these questions? Does this chill you to your core? It should! You can read the full survey here:

Next time you hear people say it is okay to give up our guns to make a safer America, or that it is ok that the TSA treats us as lesser beings than cattle, or even that it is a good thing for the DHS to train our police forces on how to control urban situations against “home grown terrorists”, remind them that they are the reason our freedoms are dissipating before our very eyes. Thank God in Heaven we still have our Vets and brave military men and women who want us to open our eyes and see what is going on in the ranks of our “protectors”.


U.S. Armed Forces Survey: This is the questionnaire that was given in 1994 to select groups of U.S. armed forces personnel. Notice the references to the U.N., the firing on American civilians and the correlations of the two aforementioned. Note questions 8‑17 deal with the use of U.S. federal armed forces intervening in the civilian affairs of the U.S. public under the pretense of policemen. According to the U.S. Constitution (posse comitatus law) No federal forces are to be used in the civil control of the populace. Also note question 46 for a stunning question concerning the use of federal forces.

Note questions 18‑45 deals entirely with the United Nations, which is really the heart of this survey. Questions 1‑7 are only lead in questions for the rest of the survey.

Results to the article (paper file) is “Incredible” – The following is all taken in order: Combat Arms Survey: This questionnaire is to gather data concerning the attitudes of combat trained personnel with regards to non‑traditional missions. All of your responses are confidential. Write your answers directly on the questionnaire form. In part II, place an “X” in the space provided for your response.

Part I. Demographics:

1: What service are you in?

2: What is your pay grade? (e.g. E‑7, O‑7)

3: What is your MOS code and description?

4: What is your highest level of education in years?

5: How many months did you serve in Operation Desert Storm/Desert Shield?

6: How many months did you serve in Somalia?

7: What state or country did you primarily reside in during childhood?

Part II. Attitudes: Do you feel that U.S. combat troops should be used within the United States for any of the following missions?

8: Drug enforcement?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

9: Disaster relief? (e.g. hurricanes, floods, fires, earthquakes)

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

10: Security at national events? (e.g. Olympic Games, Super Bowl)

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

11: Environmental disaster clean‑up?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

12: Substitute teachers in public schools?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

13: Community assistance programs? (e.g. landscaping, environmental cleanup, road repair, animal control)

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

14: Federal and State prison guards?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

15: National emergency police force?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

16: Advisors to S.W.A.T. units, the F.B.I., or the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (B.A.T.F.)?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

17: Border patrol? (e.g. prevention of illegal aliens into U.S. territory)

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

Do you fell that U.S. combat troops under U.S. command should be used in other countries for any of the following United Nations missions?

18: Drug enforcement?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

19: Disaster relief? (e.g. hurricanes, floods, fires, earthquakes)

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

20: Environmental disaster clean‑up?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

21: Peace keeping?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

22: Nation building? (Reconstruct civil government, develop public school systems, develops or improve public transportation system..etc.)

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

23: Humanitarian relief? (e.g. food, and medical supplies, temporary housing, and clothing)

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

Do you feel that U.S. combat troops should be used in other countries, under the command of non‑U.S. officers appointed by the United Nations for any of the following missions?

24: Drug enforcement?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

25: Disaster relief? (e.g. hurricanes, floods, fires, earthquakes)

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

26: Environmental disaster clean‑up?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

27: Peace keeping?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

28: Nation building? (Reconstruct civil government, develop public school systems, develops or improve public transportation system..etc.)

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

29: Humanitarian relief? (e.g. food, and medical supplies, temporary housing, and clothing)

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

30: Police Action? (e.g. Korea, Vietnam, but serving under non‑U.S. officers)

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

Consider the following statements:

31: The U.S. runs a field training exercise. U.N. combat troops should be allowed to serve in U.S. combat units during these exercises, under U.S. command and control?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

32: The United Nations runs a field training exercise. U.S. combat troops under U.S./U.N. command and control should serve in U.N. combat units during these exercises?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

33: The United Nations runs a field training exercise. U.S. combat troops should serve under U.N. command and control during these exercises?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

34: U.S. combat troops should participate in U.N. missions as long as the U.S. has full command and control?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

35: U.S. combat troops should participate in U.N. missions under United Nations command and control?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

36: U.S. combat troops should be commanded by U.N. officers and non‑commissioned officers (NCO’s) at battalion and company levels while performing U.N. missions?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

37: It would make no difference to me to have U.N. soldiers as members of my team? (e.g. fire team, squad, platoon)

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

38: It would make no difference to me to take orders from a U.N. company


(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

39: I feel the President of the United States has the authority to pass his responsibilities as Commander‑in‑Chief to the U.N. Secretary General?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

40: I feel there is no conflict between my oath of office and serving as a U.N. soldier?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

41: I feel my unit’s combat effectiveness would not be affected by performing humanitarian missions for the United Nations?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

42: I feel a designated unit of U.S. combat soldiers should be permanently assigned to the command and control of the United Nations?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

43: I would be willing to volunteer for assignment to a U.S. combat unit under a U.N. command?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

44: I would like U.N. member countries, including the U.S., to give the U.N. all the soldiers necessary to maintain world peace?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

45: I would swear to the following code: “I am a United Nations fighting person. I serve in the forces which maintain world peace and every nation’s way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.”

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

46: The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, transportation, and transfer of all non‑sporting firearms. A thirty (30) day amnesty period is permitted for these firearms to be turned over to the local authorities. At the end of this period, a number of citizen groups refuse to turn over their firearms. Consider the following statement: I would fire on U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government?

(___) (___) (___)

(___) (___)

Strongly agree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree No Opinion

End of questionnaire

Now ask yourself these questions:

1: Are we to turn over our armed forces to the U.N.?

2: Can we be the U.N.’s world policeman?

3: Or the world’s policeman on our own?

4: Should we give oath of allegiance to a foreign power?

5: Should we compromise our U.S. Constitution in the name of world government?

6: Who is first, the United States or the rest of the world, specifically the United Nations?

7: Would you rather answer to a world court (United Nations court) or to the courts of the United States?

8: Do you believe you will have any say in a world government or world court (United Nations)?

9: Are you willing to sacrifice national sovereignty for world laws and courts?

10: Is the United Nations better able to dictate our lives to us than we as a country are?


Think about it, that is what this survey was meant to convey, A New World Order Run By the United Nations!

Here are the results of the survey:

Shoot Americans (New World Order Survey of Last Year) Survey Results One In Four Marines would fire! Results are in from the U.S. military “shoot Americans” survey ‑ and they are disquieting By Mike Blair. About one in four U.S. Marines would be willing to fire upon American citizens in a government gun confiscation program, according to the results of a survey undertaken nearly a year ago at a Marine Corps Base in Southern California. In addition, more than four out of five of the Marines surveyed indicated they would be willing to “participate in missions under a U.S. National Emergency Police Force.”

The SPOTLIGHT has been provided the results of the survey contained in a master degree thesis, reportedly undertaken by a student at the Naval Postgraduate School at Monterey California, to determine “unit cohesion” when soldiers are assigned to “non‑traditional missions.” Few stories published in the SPOTLIGHT have created such a stir when it was revealed in this newspaper’s July 25,1994 issue that the survey had been taken at the Marine base. On May 10,1994, the survey was undertaken by Navy Lt. Cmdr. Ernest G. Cunningham, purportedly as research for his thesis: “Peacekeeping and U.N. Operational control; A Study of their effect on Unit Cohesion,” at the Marine base, located on the South‑east corner of the Mojave Desert, about 70 miles due east of San Bernadino, California, just east of Los Angeles

Received Degree: Cunningham turned in the thesis for printing on March 20 and was graduated from the post Graduate school on March 23, receiving his Master of Science in Manpower, Personnel and Training Analysis degree. According to U.S. Navy and Marine Corps officials, Cunningham administrated the survey to 300 Marine veterans of the Persian Gulf War and the earlier invasion of Panama in the base auditorium.

He had the cooperation and permission of the base’s public affairs officer, but Cunningham did not have consent of the base commander, Brig. Gen. Russell H. Sutton. In fact, Sutton did not know about the survey until afterwards. The results of the survey have until now been “classified,” according to a Marine Corps spokesman. The survey contained 46 questions dealing with the Marines’ willingness to perform “non‑traditional” missions. Question 46, dealing with a gun confiscation scenario, jolted both the Marines and Navy, as well as The Department of Defense, numerous members of the House and Senate and virtually every American concerned with the second amendment to the U.S. constitution, which grantees the people’s right to “keep and bear arms.”

Very Disturbing: This is how the question was posed to the Marines: “The U.S. Government declares a ban on the possession, sale, transportation, and transfer of all non‑sporting firearms. A thirty (30) day amnesty period is permitted for these firearms to be turned over to the local authorities. At the end of this period, a number of citizen groups refuse to turn over their firearms. “Consider the following statement:’I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government’.” The question was then posed as to what degree the individual Marine agreed with the statement. According to results given in Cunningham’s thesis, a total of 88 percent, or 264 Marines, responded to the question. Of the 264 who responded, 26.34 percent, or 79 Marines indicated they would be willing to fire upon U.S. citizens.”

Of that total, 18.67 percent or 56 Marines, indicated they “agree” with the statement, and 7.67 percent or 23 Marines, indicated that “strongly agree.” A total of 61.66 percent, or 185, indicated that they were opposed to firing on citizens.

Of that total, 42.33 percent, or 127 indicated they “strongly disagree” and 19.33 percent or 58, indicated they “disagree.” In is thesis, Cunningham noted: “This particular question, unlike the others, elicited from 15.97 percent of the respondents with an opinion, either heavier pen or pencil marks on the response or written comments in the margin space. The responses to this scenario suggest that a complete unit breakdown could occur in a unit tasked to execute this mission.”

In other words, if a commander asked the men of his unit to raise their hands in a simple poll, he could determine the position of such servicemen and those who responded in the affirmative could be tasked for such a mission. This is just one of the reasons the question, not to mention the fact that it was allowed to be asked, is obviously potentially dangerous. In fact, several months before the survey was taken at Twenty‑Nine Palms, the SPOTLIGHT, MODERN GUN and other publications revealed the question posed by Cunningham in his survey had ben asked of members of a U.S. Seal (Sea‑Air‑land) team. In addition, despite Navy and Marine Corps denials, there have been dozens of reports, unconfirmed, that the survey has been given to other servicemen, as well as various law enforcement agents.

Further Surveys? In fact, Cunningham notes: “If the results of this survey elicit concerns in the areas queried, then further studies are warranted. Perhaps a random sample survey should be conducted to determine whether the results of this survey is valid for the entire Marine Corps and/or Army. Also, a survey could provide an indication of the volunteer pool that would seek service in units dedicated to, and specialized in, peacekeeping operations…Also of concern is the fact, as reported by Cunningham in his thesis that 97.67 percent of the Marines responded to a question‑‑an overwhelming 85.33 percent in the affirmative‑‑that they would be willing to participate in missions under a U.S. National Emergency Police Force…” “Furthermore,” Cunningham notes “43.0 percent of the soldiers strongly agreed…”Federal Troops have been restricted from participation with local police authorities to quell domestic violence since the passage of the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. That being the case, it was surprising that these soldiers seemed not to know the legal restrictions placed on them by this act.” He also noted, however, that “In May 1992, 4,000 U.S. Army and Marine Soldiers were ordered by President George Bush to augment city and county law enforcement and state National Guard during the riot in Los Angeles, California following the Rodney King trial. “Since, 1981,” Cunningham states, “the majority of today’s All Volunteer Force has been exposed to and participated in an environment of expanding non‑traditional missions when Congress passed the Military

Cooperation with Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies Act of 1981. This act enabled the Military to participate in the drug war. This cooperative alliance of military and civilian police efforts in the name of national security may have eroded the demarcation between civilian law enforcement and our military institution first established by the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878.”

The results of another question, No. 45, posed by the survey indicates American soldiers are not eager to swear allegiance to the United Nations, although nearly one in four would do so. Question 45 states: “I would swear to the following code:’I am a United Nations fighting person. I serve in the forces which maintain world peace and every nation’s way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense’.” A total of 69.33 percent, or 208 Marines surveyed, indicated they disagreed, with 117, or 39 percent, indicating they strongly disagreed.

On the other hand, 71 Marines, or 23.66 percent, indicated they would be willing to swear such allegiance to the UN, with 19, or 6.33 percent, indicating they were strongly in favor of doing so. “For thousands of years.” Cunningham notes in his thesis, “military organizations have required their soldiers to swear to some kind of code or allegiance. A code provides a standard for the soldiers to live up to and, in many cases, to die for. A code can be a powerful tool for establishing and sustaining unit cohesion. But what if the mission a solider is assigned to perform counters or confuses the code he has sworn to uphold? Question 45 was presented to determine if the solders would swear to such a code.” No one knows if the American personnel traveling in the helicopter shot down over Iraq [by “friendly fire”] in April 1994 would have sworn allegiance to such a code.

Yet, Vice President Albert Gore stated that these Americans “died in the service of The United Nations.” “It is patently clear,” a retired high ranking Army Officer told The SPOTLIGHT,”that this survey raises some very serious issues, not the least of which is that U.S. servicemen are not being properly educated as to the limits of their service in the civilian sector. This is most dangerous, and, I should think the Congress has an obligation to the people to take a careful look at this, not to mention the people at the Pentagon.”

January 8, 2013 Posted by | Home | , , , , , , , | 1 Comment


John Lott

John Lott (Photo credit: Wikipedia)


MY TWO SENSE 12-16-12


The recent tragedy, in Connecticut, has us all saddened by the actions of a killer.  We are stunned and shocked, and we are wondering why this kind of thing continues to happen.  It seems that instances of mass murder, within this year, has increased in both number of victims, as well as in the number of times.  In my sixty-four years, I have lived through several events of mass murder and serial killings, but never, and not until this current year have I seen so many killers slaughtering more innocent people, in a very short period of time, in between one event and the next.  In fact, according to Mother Jones, “The horrific mass murder at a movie theater in Colorado on July 20, another at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin on August 5, another at a manufacturer in Minneapolis on September 27—and now the unthinkable nightmare at a Connecticut elementary school on December 14—are the latest in an epidemic of such gun violence over the last three decades.  (Actually, the “epidemic” was not an epidemic until the last four years.  Make of that what you will.)

What is seen here repeatedly is that the relationship between murders and gun ownership, or gun control, is not cut-and-dried. Not only are statistics collected differently, but also some numbers are greatly affected by suicide, which most everyone agrees is not related to gun ownership (neither globally nor regionally) though obviously an issue for individuals with susceptible people in their homes.


The truth is that neither gun ownership NOR gun control shows a statistically meaningful correlation.  Murder rates aren’t about guns.  They are about poverty, immigration, racial conflict, mental illness, etc.  The US has high crimes rates in the poorest areas, and we have a constant inflow of poor immigrants who are often more likely to be embroiled in conflict.  Some immigration cultures do not put the same value on human life as Americans do.


Within the US, though, you can find some correlations and meaningful numbers, but not in the way you might think.   Violent crime goes down the most in areas after “right-to-carry” laws are enacted.  John Lott, gun-control advocate, began to research correlations between gun control and deaths by guns.  He wanted to prove one thing, but his research showed that gun control did not lower the rate of crime with guns!  In other words, Lott found that gun control does not work.  Even those critics, who disagree, admit that his studies do show that arming law-abiding citizens does NOT increase violent gun crime!  Arming citizens is a deterrent to this kind of murder.

Mass shooters perpetrate their massacres in places where guns are not permitted in general—in schools, malls, and other “gun-free” zones.  Bans on specific guns don’t work either.  The killer, who is planning to shoot others, has no respect for gun-free zones as the rest of us do.  He seeks out such places where people gather in numbers.  (Lott advocates teachers carry and conceal weapons.)  Why not just control the number of humans under one roof?  That would bring down the the number of those murdered, obviously, but the idea is just as ludicrous as taking our self-defense protections away from us.


Illegal guns are not that difficult to buy, borrow, or steal.  We cannot free ourselves of guns.  They are easy to make for anyone set on that goal.  Disarming citizens does not disarm the bad guys or the crazy people.  And let us not forget the most important reason that we need to fight tooth and nail to keep our Second Amendment rights to bear arms.  That right was written into our Constitution for the very reason that “We, the People,” are allowed, if not required to throw off a dictatorial government that oppresses the people and the futures of our children.  This nation was born under, and because of the human right, and need, to be FREE.  We cannot allow this government to remove our birthright.  History explains quite adequately that prior to a tyrannical government usurping and fully oppressing the people, ALL privately owned guns are removed from private ownership, allowing unregulated power of government authority of the masses!  The fact that these events–these massacres–are happening in unnatural order, and in unnatural time frames, is telling and important and must be examined!  This is a dangerous time for all of us!



December 17, 2012 Posted by | Home, The United States of America Constitution | , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment



Now’s the time to fight pallbearers of liberty

Exclusive: Alan Keyes calls on Americans to disenthrall themselves from both parties

Published: 22 hours ago

author-image by Alan Keyes Email | Archive

Once a high-level Reagan-era diplomat, Alan Keyes is a long-time leader in the conservative movement. He is well-known as a staunch pro-life champion and an eloquent advocate of the constitutional republic, including respect for the moral basis of liberty and self-government. He has worked to promote an approach to politics based on the initiative of citizens of goodwill consonant with the with the principles of God-endowed natural right.More ↓I just read a timely meditation on the “fiscal cliff” shenanigans currently going on in Washington. In an article aptly entitled “Cause to Rejoice or Mourn,” a friend and true soul brother, Dave Jeffers, laments the fact that the Washington pols on both sides of the (phony) partisan divide are “wishy-washy squishy leaders” prone to posturing but devoid of true conviction. He accurately observes that this tempts people to mournful political passivity, especially given Obama’s re-election.

“The typical response to all of this mess,” he observes, “is to disengage, especially with Christmas and New Year’s approaching.” But, after correctly pointing out that this is just what the bad guys are counting on, Dave calls on Americans of conscientious goodwill to “engage like never before. Let us get on our faces before Almighty God and cry out to Him to heal our land and save our nation. …” But praying not with their lips only, I think people must seek God’s strength to enact their prayers, by insisting that Congress (and especially the representatives in the GOP’s collapsible “House of cards”) vote to end government’s gluttonous dissipation of the income and good credit of the American people.

In my most recent post at Loyal to Liberty, I discuss the sleight of hand involved in the whole “fiscal cliff” scenario”:

“… [T]he notion that we’re only now headed over the cliff is the biggest lie of all. They lying pols pushed us over the cliff several years ago, and we’ve been falling through the void ever since.

“The ‘fiscal cliff’ is just the lie they’re using now to justify what they’ve been planning all along: steps that institutionalize America’s abysmal fall. The pillaging of America isn’t an emergency response to crisis. It’s the institutionalized crisis, intended permanently to subject Americans to the oppressive form of government our constitutional republic was intended to replace. Instead of forming a government that serves the people, we’ll be a people coerced by government into providing the labor and other resources that contribute to the aggrandizement of the elitist clique that has thus far managed to secure permanent control of our politics.”

If you were among those who followed the “Platform Republican” approach to the late election, you resisted the temptation to let the choice-less choice the GOP/Democrats offered for president keep you from going to the polls. You voted to put the burden of proof on the backs of the GOP majority in the House. However, you were and are expecting John Boehner and his counterparts in the GOP’s elitist faction leadership to betray the convictions generally upheld in the GOP Platform.

You expected Boehner’s pathetically prompt eagerness to jettison the fiscal discipline the GOP Platform promised. You expected elitist faction Republicans like John McCain to use Obama’s stolen victory as en excuse to call for the GOP to abandon its principled stands on moral issues like the right to life and the defense of the God-endowed nature of marriage. You watch with a sense of confirmed expectation as the call to abandon principled conservatism pours like a billowing cloud of politically poisoned gas from the mouths of these pallbearers of liberty and their dutiful media apparatchiks.

Instead of discouragement, you feel as America’s founder patriots must have felt when events unfolded that confirmed the British Monarch’s intent to overthrow the liberty of the American people: Now is no time for mourning; but for action! The resonance of truth may at times be tragically sad and disappointing. But for the heart attuned, it is also liberating.

As the GOP’s elitist faction leaders reveal their true colors, now is the time to convict them of their treachery by demanding that they stand on the convictions by which they falsely postured their way to re-election. Now is the time to demand that they put up or shut up with regard to their Platform’s claim to respect the purposes and constraints of the U.S. Constitution. Now is the time to heat up every available means of communication with the demand that they resist surrender. Now is the time to make it clear that you see through the bipartisan charade that masks their arrogant imposition of elitist one-faction dictatorship.

For the GOP members of Congress, the lame-duck session ought to have only one purpose: to say NO to the elitists’ socialist push; their threatening use of a crisis they devised and caused as a WMD for political terrorism, aimed at the extinction of America’s liberty. By whatever name, any other purpose is tantamount to treason. However, it’s very near to a certainty that the GOP’s elitist faction leaders will instead behave (indeed, are already behaving) as, in mid-August, I predicted they would:

“Should Romney be defeated, the loss will be exploited to defame the very people the Romney/Ryan ticket does not represent – the authentically God-fearing, limited government, small ‘r’ republicans. … [T]he GOP leadership … will pretend to be reading the tea leaves (pun intended) left after the electoral repudiation. … On the excuse of that repudiation the GOP’s elitist faction leaders will be ‘dragged’ with mock sullen demeanor, in precisely the socialist direction they really want to go.”

This prediction was not entirely accurate. Far from sullen, the demeanor of the GOP (Boehner/Romney/McCain) wing of the elitist faction is barely suppressed self-satisfaction. They feel sure that their strategy for extinguishing principled conservatism is moving ahead as planned. They have already begun the process of determining which proven elitist faction avatar shall be the GOP’s next “presumptive” (i.e., elitist faction dictated) nominee for president in 2016.

Because the principles of representative, constitutional, republican government are its heart, the extinction of principled conservatism portends the extinction of the American republic. People who embrace the rabid notion that politics has no substance but victory will pretend (in the face of Obama’s “victory”) that there is no course but left, toward the republic’s demise; no choice for its mourners but to follow in the wake of the party, falsely labeled as Republican, that now exists mainly to ease its final passing. But there are Americans worthy of the name, still loyal to America’s founding truths. Except for their strength there would be no GOP majority in Congress. Such people should take the GOP’s impending obeisance to Obama for what it is – the clarion signal that now is the time for Americans of good faith to disenthrall(sic) themselves from the GOP/Democrat delusion. Now is the time to secede from the GOP/Democrat parties of dissipation. Now is the time to save the country from the elitist would-be tyrants who control them both.

“What better first step than to raise up a party avowedly, openly aimed at rallying the faithful? What better standard to raise than the disused but faithful banner of the Federalists, round which our founders rallied those who ratified the U.S. Constitution?”

November 30, 2012 Posted by | Home | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment


English: Photograph of Barack Obama (center), ...

THREE BLIND MICE  Barack Obama (center), Joe Biden (left) and Hilary Clinton (right) during Office of the President speech. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Presidential coverup of an act of war in Benghazi

Sunday, October 14, 2012

Despite the lies and blame-game of the Obama administration, we finally have an accurate account of what really happened during the jihadist attack on our consulate in Benghazi, from two two senior State Department officials.

It was, without question,  a full-out military attack on the US.

The Obama administration knew from the start that this was a very well-organized jihadist attack. Blaming our freedoms, our first amendment rights for the jihadist attack, was a second attack on the American people (perhaps even more frightening) perpetuated by the Obama administration.

The transcript is frightening and deeply disturbing. The Obama administration is at war with the American people, and Americans are dying because of it. This is surely impeachable. Romney ought to be shouting this from the mountain tops.

What Happened In Benghazi Powerline, October 13, 2012

Embassy_finger_prints2Photo: Bloody fingerprints indicate at least some Americans were still alive when dragged from the embassy building.

The State Department has released a transcript of a briefing that two high-ranking department officials gave to a number of reporters via conference call on October 9 (Tuesday). I am not certain about this, but I believe the transcript was only made public today. You should read it in its entirety; it is the most detailed description I have seen of the events in Benghazi on September 11.

While this is by no means clear, it appears that the State Department may have released the transcript as part of the escalating conflict between Barack Obama and Joe Biden and the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. In their desperation to avoid responsibility for the Benghazi debacle, Obama and Biden have pointed fingers in two directions: at the intelligence community for reporting incorrectly that the incident was a protest over a YouTube video clip, and at the State Department for not providing adequate security for the Ambassador.

Here are some excerpts from the narrative:

A few minutes later – we’re talking about 9 o’clock at night – the Ambassador retires to his room, the others are still at Building C, and the one agent in the [Tactical Operations Center]. At 9:40 p.m., the agent in the TOC and the agents in Building C hear loud noises coming from the front gate. They also hear gunfire and an explosion. The agent in the TOC looks at his cameras – these are cameras that have pictures of the perimeter – and the camera on the main gate reveals a large number of people – a large number of men, armed men, flowing into the compound. One special agent immediately goes to get the Ambassador in his bedroom and gets Sean, and the three of them enter the safe haven inside the building. …

They turn around immediately and head back – or the two of them, from Building B, turn around immediately with their kit and head back to Villa C, where the Ambassador and his colleagues are. They encounter a large group of armed men between them and Building C. I should say that the agent in Building C with the Ambassador has radioed that they are all in the safe haven and are fine. The agents that encounter the armed group make a tactical decision to turn around and go back to their Building B and barricade themselves in there. So we have people in three locations right now.

And I neglected to mention – I should have mentioned from the top that the attackers, when they came through the gate, immediately torched the barracks. It is aflame, the barracks that was occupied by the 17th February Brigade armed host country security team. I should also have mentioned that at the very first moment when the agent in the TOC seized [sic — apparently should read “sees”] the people flowing through the gate, he immediately hits an alarm, and so there is a loud alarm. He gets on the public address system as well, yelling, “Attack, attack.” Having said that, the agents – the other agents had heard the noise and were already reacting.

Okay. So we have agents in Building C – or an agent in Building C with the Ambassador and Sean, we have two agents in Building B, and we have two agents in the TOC. All – Building C is – attackers penetrate in Building C. They walk around inside the building into a living area, not the safe haven area. The building is dark. They look through the grill, they see nothing. They try the grill, the locks on the grill; they can’t get through. The agent is, in fact, watching them from the darkness. He has his long gun trained on them and he is ready to shoot if they come any further. They do not go any further.

They have jerry cans. They have jerry cans full of diesel fuel that they’ve picked up at the entrance when they torched the barracks. They have sprinkled the diesel fuel around. They light the furniture in the living room – this big, puffy, Middle Eastern furniture. They light it all on fire, and they have also lit part of the exterior of the building on fire. At the same time, there are other attackers that have penetrated Building B. The two agents in Building B are barricaded in an inner room there. The attackers circulate in Building B but do not get to the agents and eventually leave.

A third group of attackers tried to break into the TOC. They pound away at the door, they throw themselves at the door, they kick the door, they really treat it pretty rough; they are unable to get in, and they withdraw. Back in Building C, where the Ambassador is, the building is rapidly filling with smoke. The attackers have exited. The smoke is extremely thick. It’s diesel smoke, and also, obviously, smoke from – fumes from the furniture that’s burning. And the building inside is getting more and more black. The Ambassador and the two others make a decision that it’s getting – it’s starting to get tough to breathe in there, and so they move to another part of the safe haven, a bathroom that has a window. They open the window. The window is, of course, grilled. They open the window trying to get some air in. That doesn’t help. The building is still very thick in smoke. …

Okay. We’ve got the agent. He’s opening the – he is suffering severely from smoke inhalation at this point. He can barely breathe. He can barely see. He’s got the grill open and he flops out of the window onto a little patio that’s been enclosed by sandbags. He determines that he’s under fire, but he also looks back and sees he doesn’t have his two companions. He goes back in to get them. He can’t find them. He goes in and out several times before smoke overcomes him completely, and he has to stagger up a small ladder to the roof of the building and collapse. He collapses. …

The agent in the TOC, who is in full gear, opens the door, throws a smoke grenade, which lands between the two buildings, to obscure what he is doing, and he moves to Building B, enters Building B. He un-barricades the two agents that are in there, and the three of them emerge and head for Building C. There are, however, plenty of bad guys and plenty of firing still on the compound, and they decide that the safest way for them to move is to go into an armored vehicle, which is parked right there. They get into the armored vehicle and they drive to Building C.

They drive to the part of the building where the agent had emerged. He’s on the roof. They make contact with the agent. Two of them set up as best a perimeter as they can, and the third one, third agent, goes into the building. This goes on for many minutes. Goes into the building, into the choking smoke. When that agent can’t proceed, another agent goes in, and so on. And they take turns going into the building on their hands and knees, feeling their way through the building to try to find their two colleagues. They find Sean. They pull him out of the building. He is deceased. They are unable to find the Ambassador. …

At this point, the quick reaction security team and the Libyans, especially the Libyan forces, are saying, “We cannot stay here. It’s time to leave. We’ve got to leave. We can’t hold the perimeter.” So at that point, they make the decision to evacuate the compound and to head for the annex. The annex is about two kilometers away. My agents pile into an armored vehicle with the body of Sean, and they exit the main gate. …

[T]hey take fire almost as soon as they emerge from the compound. They go a couple of – they go in one direction toward the annex. They don’t like what they’re seeing ahead of them. There are crowds. There are groups of men. They turn around and go the other direction. They don’t like what they’re seeing in that direction either. They make another u-turn. They’re going at a steady pace. There is traffic in the roads around there. This is in Benghazi, after all. Now, they’re going at a steady pace and they’re trying not to attract too much attention, so they’re going maybe 15 miles an hour down the street.

They come up to a knot of men in an adjacent compound, and one of the men signals them to turn into that compound. They agents [sic] at that point smell a rat, and they step on it. They have taken some fire already. At this point, they take very heavy fire as they go by this group of men. They take direct fire from AK-47s from about two feet away. The men also throw hand grenades or gelignite bombs under – at the vehicle and under it. At this point, the armored vehicle is extremely heavily impacted, but it’s still holding. There are two flat tires, but they’re still rolling. …

As the night goes on, a team of reinforcements from Embassy Tripoli arrives by chartered aircraft at Benghazi airport and makes its way to the compound – to the annex, I should say. And I should have mentioned that the quick reaction – the quick reaction security team that was at the compound has also, in addition to my five agents, has also returned to the annex safely. The reinforcements from Tripoli are at the compound – at the annex. They take up their positions. And somewhere around 5:45 in the morning – sorry, somewhere around 4 o’clock in the morning – I have my timeline wrong – somewhere around 4 o’clock in the morning the annex takes mortar fire. It is precise and some of the mortar fire lands on the roof of the annex. It immediately killed two security personnel that are there, severely wounds one of the agents that’s come from the compound.

At that point, a decision is made at the annex that they are going to have to evacuate the whole enterprise. And the next hours are spent, one, securing the annex, and then two, moving in a significant and large convoy of vehicles everybody to the airport, where they are evacuated on two flights.

Barack Obama, meanwhile, was jetting off to Las Vegas for a fundraiser.

It was obvious to the reporters on the call that this narrative blows Obama’s evasions sky high:

First question is from the line of Anne Gearan with the Washington Post. Please go ahead.

QUESTION: Hi. You said a moment ago that there was nothing unusual outside, on the street, or outside the gates of the main compound. When did the agents inside – what – excuse me, what did the agents inside think was happening when the first group of men gathered there and they first heard those explosions? Did they think it was a protest, or did they think it was something else?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: The agent in the TOC heard the noise, heard the firing. Firing is not unusual in Benghazi at 9:40 at night, but he immediately reacted and looked at his cameras and saw people coming in, hit the alarm. And the rest is as I described it. Does that help?

This exchange is priceless:

OPERATOR: The next question is from the line of Brad Klapper with AP. Please, go ahead.

QUESTION: Hi, yes. You described several incidents you had with groups of men, armed men. What in all of these events that you’ve described led officials to believe for the first several days that this was prompted by protests against the video?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: That is a question that you would have to ask others. That was not our conclusion. I’m not saying that we had a conclusion, but we outlined what happened. The Ambassador walked guests out around 8:30 or so, there was no one on the street at approximately 9:40, then there was the noise and then we saw on the cameras the – a large number of armed men assaulting the compound.

So Hillary Clinton and the State Department unequivocally reject the account that Barack Obama and Joe Biden have given. It is hard to imagine what “intelligence” reports Obama could have received that blamed the YouTube video. He is lying, evidently.

Libya act of war



Posted by on Sunday, October 14, 2012 at 01:45 PM | Permalink

Reblog (0)


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Obama’s #savage cover-up of an act of war against America: What really happened in Benghazi:

October 15, 2012 Posted by | Home, Must See, Political Corruption | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment


State-run media‘s fake poll numbers

Published: 2 days ago

Who Is Bradlee Dean

author-image by Bradlee DeanEmail | Archive

Bradlee Dean is an ordained preacher, heavy metal drummer, talk-show host of the Sons of Liberty Radio, and speaks on college and high school campuses with his ministry, You Can Run But You Cannot Hide International. He also is the producer of the 5-DVD documentary “My War.” Bradlee is currently involved with a lawsuit against MSNBC and Rachel Maddow and could use all the prayers and financial support possible. Tax-deductible donations to help restore this generation back to America‘s biblical foundation can be made online.More ↓
rss feed Subscribe to author feed

Obama’s predecessor, Franklin Roosevelt, stated, “In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.”

It was headlined this week by the state-run media propagandists that, “Obama’s lead poises test for Romney.” The report began, “A presidential race that has been neck and neck for months suddenly isn’t.”


The report continued, “President Obama has opened the most significant lead in the daily Gallup poll since Mitt Romney emerged as the Republican nominee last spring.”

Hmmm, where are they getting these poll numbers?

Ever since the skewed CNN poll a few weeks ago (CNN’s president recently resigned due to lack of ratings), voters have looked at the methodology of polling companies with much skepticism, and rightfully so. Evidence recently came out that confirms voters’ suspicions. NumbersCrunchers, an anonymous poll analyst, tweeted a graph that shows the degree of oversampling of Democrats employed by the recent presidential polls, all of which show Obama in the lead. Polls were conducted by CBS/NYT, ABC/Washington Post, Tipps, Reuters … and even Fox News.

Yes, friends, these polls are bought and paid for. Just ask those corporations that attempt to rule the roost through deception. These are the same state-run media outlets, though they are separate companies, that are pushing the same propaganda on the American people on a daily basis.

Like Italian Dictator Benito Mussolini, the New York Times recently admitted that the media had to have their reports vetted by the Obama administration before releasing their articles to the American people.

I just returned from touring California, Florida, Chicago and Michigan over the last three weeks, and I have only seen one bumper sticker in support of Obama.

Did the state-run media forget about the landslide that took place in 2010, when the American people’s votes proved they had enough with Obama and his criminal administration?

Did the state-run media forget that the American people just exposed the fact that 70 percent of Obama’s Twitter followers were found out to be fake or inactive?

Did the state-run media forget that just two weeks ago, the American people watched as Obama’s speech at the DNC had to be moved from a 74,000-seat arena to a 20,000-seat arena due to lack of attendees?

Did the state-run media forget that America knows about those in Obama’s own party and support base who are forsaking him in droves, as he is being taken in his own craftiness?

And even to the credit of young voters, they are seeing through the deception as well. Obama’s Youth Brigade is dissolving right before his own eyes. Michael Federici, chairman of the political science department at Mercyhurst University, commented, “Four years ago he said he could change everything – that he could change the world … but now people don’t like the compromises he’s made and he really hasn’t made everything better.”

The propagandists would have you forget your neighbors’ complaints about Obama and, according to the pollsters, just believe what you are told. You are getting your polling information from the state-run media, who have an astronomically low 21 percent approval rating from the American people. Those are accurate polls, maybe even a little on the high end.

Friends, Obama and his administration have not the numbers nor the support of the American people. End of story. He has the fabricated numbers of the state-run media who fall in line with his ideology. It is time to shut the TV off, put the papers down and get involved.

“Take heed that no man deceive you” (Matthew 24:4). Knowing what you stand for limits what you fall for.

What of voter fraud?

When you mix false polling with voter fraud during election season, you have a recipe for disaster.

Communist dictator and mass murderer Josef Stalin said, “Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything.”

Exposing the media:

Who is Bradlee Dean?

September 22, 2012 Posted by | Here And Now | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment




Congressman Slams Regulations By Government – Gets Standing Ovation


Rep-Mike-KellyRep. Mike Kelly (R-PA) took to the House Floor in anti-big government rant that brought a standing applause from the members of the House. The speech is well worth listening too as he blasts the “re-commitment” of the House to “change the way business is done in this town,” calling it a “joke.”

Rep. Kelly took several examples from the real world to demonstrate how much government has gotten in our lives.

The first was an appeal to a business that he run that was started by his father back in 1953. He owns a auto body shop. When he called up to find out the prices of the tape they use in the business, he found out that the green water proof tape costs $4/roll, while the regular yellow tape case $2/roll. He then asked how much red tape costs and when the person didn’t know, he exclaimed it costs $1.75 trillion!

His second example was when he called up his banker, the one that provides loans for him and his business. His banker informed him that things were tough since the federal government has issued an 1,100 page definition of what a qualified buyer is. He joked in asking, “Are you serious?” while waving the 1,100 page definition in the air.

Finally he pointed to a hometown ballpark, which had spent millions of dollars to renovate. Here’s how Rep. Kelly tells it:

We renovated a ballpark in my hometown. A guy named Tom Bernadowski — veteran — [spent a] couple million dollars to renovate our ballpark. The day we were gonna open up, I got a call at the dealership. It said, “Mike, would you come down?” I said, “Why? What’s going on?” He said, “We’re having trouble with the occupancy permit.” So I went down to see it. I said, “What’s the problem?” He said, “Well, here. Come in the men’s room. Let me show you what the problem is.” I said, “We have 1,500 people want to come see the opening ball game tonight.” “Yep, but we’ve got a major problem. You see the mirrors in the restroom are a quarter of an inch too low.”

“So you can’t possibly open that ballpark!”

So you want to know the price of regulation? You want to talk about the thousands and thousands of pages that we put on the back of the job creators? You want to talk about creating jobs in America? When you want to see a nation that doesn’t want to participate but wants to dominate in the world market, then let them rise! Take the heavy boot off the throat of America’s job creators and let them breathe!

There was thunderous applause and cheers, but Mike Kelly wasn’t done. Oh no, he still had a minute and a half to go!

The jobs we are talking about are not red jobs or blue jobs. They are red, white, and blue jobs. They are not Democrat jobs or Republican jobs or independent jobs or Libertarian jobs. They are American jobs!

We are so out of touch with the American people. And you know what all this does? It adds layer after layer after layer of cost. And that cost is ultimately paid for by the American consumer. You want to have more revenues, then let the tide rise for all boats! Let us be able to not only survive, but to thrive. I urge all my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle. This is not a left or right issue. This is an American issue. I urge you to rise today and vote for HR-4078, and let’s let America get back to work! With that, I yield back.

The place broke out in a standing ovation as chants of “USA! USA!” echoed in the chamber.

Apparently this is such a rare thing to speak like this that it actually gets an applause. I know I was applauding watching it on YouTube. However, this doesn’t need to just be a one time deal. This needs to be repeated over and over with various examples of how big government does nothing but get in the way of the American people and by the way, it isn’t just jobs they are holding back. They are holding back freedom itself. Kudos to Rep. Mike Kelly!

Read more:


July 28, 2012 Posted by | Here And Now | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment


Political Vel Craft

Veil Of Politics

Political Film Blog

money, power, injustice, sex, violence, propaganda, anti-fascism...


Fighting Against Government Harassment

Constitutional Clayton

Politics surrounding the Constitution


Smile! You’re at the best site ever

John Groves Art Stuff

Art from johngrovesart


Swiss Defence League

the seaton post

A little bit of this and a little bit of that

Jericho777's Blog

Correcting Misinformation!

%d bloggers like this: