In pursuit of Constitutionally grounded governance, free markets and individual liberty
"There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily." --George Washington
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Assault on the
Second Amendment
"I Will Not Comply"
"A
well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the
right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
--Second Amendment to the United States Constitution
Though tens of millions of American Patriots
have already said it, the time has
come for one of us to go to the mountaintop and shout it so the whole world can
hear it. I hereby make this declaration: I will NOT comply with any executive
decree, law or judicial diktat that violates our innate right to self defense,
or the defense of Liberty enshrined in our Constitution and authorized by its
Second Amendment. What does that mean? It means I will neither
register with, nor surrender to the government, any weapon in my possession. I further declare that I am not in
possession of any weapon, weapon component or ammunition that has not been
lawfully acquired for lawful purposes, including defense of self and family,
home and property, and most importantly, defense of Liberty in accordance with
the Second Amendment.
~~~~~~
American Women Murdered Over 330,000 Children Last Year
by John
DeMayo
Outrage
has grown into activism following the murder of 20 babies in the Connecticut
school shootings last month. Liberal’s all over our nation are brandishing
their moral superiority in the fight to keep our defenseless safe from gunfire. But what of the hundreds of thousands of innocent lives
taken each year by mothers more concerned with convenience than a child’s life.
“There’s just too many incidents that are happening that you think could be
avoided if there were stronger regulations about it.” This quote, from a New York mother in a CBS News piece is not about the
obscene number of U.S. abortions but the necessity of gun control regulations.
“How many more children must die before Washington does something to end our
gun violence problem? “………a mother in a newly released “Mayors against Gun
Violence” Ad. Too
bad the same outrage isn’t felt every 94 seconds for the child ripped from an
expectant mother’s womb in a selfish display of modern female moral
superiority. That’s right liberals every 94 seconds a baby is
aborted in America and that number is expected to rise not fall. Where are the ads from “Mayors against
Infanticide?” Oh no, that would be political suicide, I suppose. I’m not a very emotional man, but I have to admit I cried
hard for the families of the Newtown shootings. I still can’t get past the
faces I have never known and the lives that I have never shared that were
exterminated by a madman. No more good morning kisses for 20 Connecticut
Daddy’s or a shared snuggle on the couch with a favorite blankee. I can’t even
begin to explain how it breaks my heart as a man and a father. Yet each and every year, feminists twist a
Supreme Court right to privacy ruling into a constitutionally protected right
to commit mass murder. All to proclaim victory for gender equality? The
330,000 child murders mentioned in the title of my article is not the sum total
of legal abortions performed in the U.S. this year. It is an accurate count of those performed by the cauldron of
reproductive health provided by Planned Parenthood. A taxpayer subsidized
entity providing discount homicide services for our emancipated modern women.
Services fervently supported by the very same politicians and special interests
seeking to destroy a true Constitutional right, gun ownership, in the name of
children’s safety.
~~~~~~
Getting Things Done Through Regulation
By
Craig Metcalf
Americans constantly complain that their government in Washington is gridlocked and "can't get anything done." Those same Americans have nothing to worry about. America's 2.65+ million civilian government workers are laboring intensely every day "getting things done." It's just that things "get done" in a different way from what most people would expect and that the things that get done are often not what we may like.
As we know, Congress passes laws. The President then signs them into law. Then what happens? Let's say Congress decides that it is time to clean up the environment, clean up the financial system, or reorganize our national health care system. They pass a law and the President signs it. If there is a requirement that the government accomplish some objective, like clean up the environment or the financial system, there must be a mechanism to make that happen. Congress does not have the staff, expertise, or money to take action, neither does the President. As a result, government administrative agencies are created and funded to implement the objectives of the legislation. These agencies are mostly housed within the federal executive branch under the ultimate control of the President.
We are all familiar with these agencies and we may encounter them on an all too regular basis. Some of these agencies include the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and many others. It is estimated that there are about 1300 individual federal government agencies, all working daily to "get things done." The Obamacare law alone creates dozens of new agencies. A brief sampling of these include such agencies as the Elder Justice Coordinating Council, Office of Women's Health and Gender Based Research, Office of Minority Health, and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, just to name a few.
Occasionally, the government ends up with so many agencies all "getting things done" that there are conflicts between those agencies. Alternatively, there are times when there is actually some facet of life that is unregulated because of some unintentional gap in agency authority. In these situations Congress may pass laws which create some sort of "super agency" to coordinate all of the agencies and/or fill the gaps.
One example of a government "super agency" is the "Financial Stability Oversight Council" created in the Dodd-Frank Act. Someone noticed/decided that there were gaps in financial regulation, even though we have numerous financial regulatory agencies. As a result, the Council was created to coordinate efforts and fill gaps. It is chaired by the Secretary of Treasury and voting members include heads of Treasury, Federal Reserve, OCC, SEC, CFTC, FDIC, FHFA, NCUA, and Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, as well as several others, and a whole list of non-voting members. By this complex mechanism the financial systems are to receive complete oversight.
Americans constantly complain that their government in Washington is gridlocked and "can't get anything done." Those same Americans have nothing to worry about. America's 2.65+ million civilian government workers are laboring intensely every day "getting things done." It's just that things "get done" in a different way from what most people would expect and that the things that get done are often not what we may like.
As we know, Congress passes laws. The President then signs them into law. Then what happens? Let's say Congress decides that it is time to clean up the environment, clean up the financial system, or reorganize our national health care system. They pass a law and the President signs it. If there is a requirement that the government accomplish some objective, like clean up the environment or the financial system, there must be a mechanism to make that happen. Congress does not have the staff, expertise, or money to take action, neither does the President. As a result, government administrative agencies are created and funded to implement the objectives of the legislation. These agencies are mostly housed within the federal executive branch under the ultimate control of the President.
We are all familiar with these agencies and we may encounter them on an all too regular basis. Some of these agencies include the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and many others. It is estimated that there are about 1300 individual federal government agencies, all working daily to "get things done." The Obamacare law alone creates dozens of new agencies. A brief sampling of these include such agencies as the Elder Justice Coordinating Council, Office of Women's Health and Gender Based Research, Office of Minority Health, and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, just to name a few.
Occasionally, the government ends up with so many agencies all "getting things done" that there are conflicts between those agencies. Alternatively, there are times when there is actually some facet of life that is unregulated because of some unintentional gap in agency authority. In these situations Congress may pass laws which create some sort of "super agency" to coordinate all of the agencies and/or fill the gaps.
One example of a government "super agency" is the "Financial Stability Oversight Council" created in the Dodd-Frank Act. Someone noticed/decided that there were gaps in financial regulation, even though we have numerous financial regulatory agencies. As a result, the Council was created to coordinate efforts and fill gaps. It is chaired by the Secretary of Treasury and voting members include heads of Treasury, Federal Reserve, OCC, SEC, CFTC, FDIC, FHFA, NCUA, and Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, as well as several others, and a whole list of non-voting members. By this complex mechanism the financial systems are to receive complete oversight.
~~~~~~
2013 Shaping Up to be the 5th Straight Year with a
Trillion Dollar Deficit by
Greg Campbell
It appears that President Obama is right on track for having the dubious distinction of being the only president to oversee 5 straight consecutive years of deficits that exceed $1 trillion. 2013, though in its infancy, appears to be heading towards the $1 trillion mark rapidly. According to The Hill, “The federal government ran up a $293 billion deficit in the first quarter of fiscal 2013, which ended Dec. 31, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated Tuesday. The government’s fiscal year starts on Oct. 1st. At this pace, the deficit would be on pace to top $1 trillion for the fifth-straight year in 2013. All the trillion-dollar deficits have taken place under President Obama. By the White House’s own estimate, the New Year’s Eve tax deal with Congress will only reduce the deficit by $4 billion this year, once increased spending such as on unemployment benefits is taken into account.” While Americans struggle to make ends meet and food stamp participation is at an all-time high, the federal government labors under no such hard times as it continues to spend more money than it brings in. Though government spending continues to run unchecked and America is heading towards the day of reckoning for the debt ceiling crisis, Speaker of the House John Boehner recently noted that President Obama claimed that, “We don’t have a spending problem.” While the government continues to live beyond its means, Obama and other leading Democrats have all but refused to trim anything meaningful from government spending while demanding tax hikes. “The first-quarter shortfall was $29 billion less than in the first three months of fiscal 2012, CBO said. The improvement is due to increased tax revenue of $60 billion, an 11-percent increase. Payroll taxes were up $44 billion and corporate income taxes were up $7 billion. The $909 billion in spending was basically unchanged from 2012 to 2013. As more and more Americans retire, Social Security spending was up $12 billion and Medicare was up $6 billion.” Although it is possible that 2013 could see a deficit less than a trillion dollars, it is impossible without serious cuts to government spending.
It appears that President Obama is right on track for having the dubious distinction of being the only president to oversee 5 straight consecutive years of deficits that exceed $1 trillion. 2013, though in its infancy, appears to be heading towards the $1 trillion mark rapidly. According to The Hill, “The federal government ran up a $293 billion deficit in the first quarter of fiscal 2013, which ended Dec. 31, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated Tuesday. The government’s fiscal year starts on Oct. 1st. At this pace, the deficit would be on pace to top $1 trillion for the fifth-straight year in 2013. All the trillion-dollar deficits have taken place under President Obama. By the White House’s own estimate, the New Year’s Eve tax deal with Congress will only reduce the deficit by $4 billion this year, once increased spending such as on unemployment benefits is taken into account.” While Americans struggle to make ends meet and food stamp participation is at an all-time high, the federal government labors under no such hard times as it continues to spend more money than it brings in. Though government spending continues to run unchecked and America is heading towards the day of reckoning for the debt ceiling crisis, Speaker of the House John Boehner recently noted that President Obama claimed that, “We don’t have a spending problem.” While the government continues to live beyond its means, Obama and other leading Democrats have all but refused to trim anything meaningful from government spending while demanding tax hikes. “The first-quarter shortfall was $29 billion less than in the first three months of fiscal 2012, CBO said. The improvement is due to increased tax revenue of $60 billion, an 11-percent increase. Payroll taxes were up $44 billion and corporate income taxes were up $7 billion. The $909 billion in spending was basically unchanged from 2012 to 2013. As more and more Americans retire, Social Security spending was up $12 billion and Medicare was up $6 billion.” Although it is possible that 2013 could see a deficit less than a trillion dollars, it is impossible without serious cuts to government spending.
~~~~~~
Voters Still Think Economy Fairer to Lower Income
Americans Than to Middle Class -
Rasmussen
~~~~~~
74% Think Americans Have Constitutional Right To Own A
Gun
While most Americans are clear they want tougher rules for gun ownership,
they also feel as strongly as ever that the average citizen has a
constitutional right to own a gun. Only a plurality, however, feels that laws
governing gun ownership should be a federal responsibility. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone
survey finds that 74% of American Adults continue to believe the U.S.
Constitution guarantees the right of an average citizen to own a gun. Only 17%
disagree, while nine percent (9%) are undecided.
No comments:
Post a Comment