Florida Senator Marco Rubio gives defining pro-family, pro-straight and pro-American speech

Florida Senator Marco Rubio has taken on social issues in a major speech given at the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. Senator Rubio is taking the high ground on issues that are important to the majority of Americans.

In “Strong Values for a Strong America” Rubio states, “A strong America is not possible without strong Americans – a people formed by the values necessary for success, the values of education and hard work, strong marriages and empowered parents. These are values that made us the greatest nation ever, and these are the values that will lead us to a future even better than our past.”

Rubio notes, “No one is born with the values crucial to the success sequence. They have to be taught to us and they have to be reinforced. Strong families are the primary and most effective teachers of these values. As the social philosopher Michael Novak once said, the family is the original and best department of health, education and welfare. It is crucial in developing the character of the young. And those efforts can be reinforced in our schools, religious institutions, civic groups and our society.”

Rubio comes out strong as the pro-family, pro-straight and pro-American candidate for President in 2016. Immediately after his speech Rubio was attacked for the following statement:

Now, I know that given the current cultural debates in our country, many expect that a speech on values would necessarily touch upon issues like same sex marriage and abortion. These are important issues and they relate to deeply held beliefs and deeply divisive ideas.

We should acknowledge that our history is marred by discrimination against gays and lesbians. There was once a time when the federal government not only banned the hiring of gay employees, it required private contractors to identify and fire them. Some laws prohibited gays from being served in bars and restaurants. And many cities carried out law enforcement efforts targeting gay Americans.

Fortunately, we have come a long way since then. But many committed gay and lesbian couples feel humiliated by the law’s failure to recognize their relationship as a marriage. And supporters of same sex marriage argue that laws banning same sex marriage are discrimination.

I respect their arguments. And I would concede that they pose a legitimate question for lawmakers and for society.

But there is another side of debate. Thousands of years of human history have shown that the ideal setting for children to grow up is with a mother and a father committed to one another, living together, and sharing the responsibility of raising their children. And since traditional marriage has such an extraordinary record of success at raising children into strong and successful adults, states in our country have long elevated this institution and set it apart in our laws.

That is the definition of marriage that I personally support – not because I seek to discriminate against people who love someone of the same sex, but because I believe that the union of one man and one woman is a special relationship that has proven to be of great benefit to our society, our nation and our people, and therefore deserves to be elevated in our laws.

Watch the YouTube video of Rubio’s speech:

Read the full text of Rubio’s speech here.

In Florida 1 million Christians either did not register or did not vote in the 2010 general election. Obama won Florida by less than 80,000 votes. Perhaps Rubio is on to something?

When tolerance becomes a one-way street it leads to at best religious intolerance and at its worst social suicide. Rubio has taken the moral high ground.

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Straight White Guy’ Festival Outrages Same-Sex Marriage Supporters

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is courtesy of  M.Scott Mahaskey/POLITICO.

Throw the Bums Out and the Quality of the American Electorate

In a recent broadcast of Fox News’ newly-launched panel show, Outnumbered, the five panelists discussed recent opinion polls measuring congressional job approval.  And although the four female panelists… Sandra Smith, Harris Faulkner, Kirsten Powers, and Kimberly Guilfoyle… are not only much easier to look at than the dowdy and tiresome Obama cheerleaders on ABC’s The View, they are, individually and collectively, light-years brighter.

It is even fair to say that the token liberal on the panel, Kirsten Powers, is a rarity among liberals and Democrats… she is thoughtful and almost always fair-minded.  Unlike the ladies of The View, she is not an ideological lapdog for Democrats and the far left.  However, having tossed out that paean to the ladies of Outnumbered, it is also fair to say that they did no better at dealing with the subject of congressional job approval than any other group of talking heads.

In the course of their discussion they cited several recent polls.  Among the congressional job approval polls cited were CNS News at 12%, Fox News at 16%, The Economist at 10%, and Gallup at 15%.  They also cited a Field Poll which showed that some 44% of voters approve of the job their own congressman is doing, while 33% disapprove.  But in the unkindest cut of all, demonstrating how poorly congressional Republicans advocate for Republican principles, one poll showed that 46% said it made no difference which party controlled Congress.

But these results take on real meaning only when we look inside the numbers.  Taking a closer look at voter attitudes toward their own congressman, 57% of registered Democrats said they were likely to vote to reelect their current member of Congress, while only 33% of Republicans would vote to reelect their current member.  What this seems to indicate is that Republicans, in general, are far more thoughtful, far more discriminating, and far less likely to be influenced by “cult of personality” than Democrats.

These numbers also tell us is that people generally have a low opinion of Congress as a whole… always willing to speak ill of those who represent others… but a generally favorable attitude toward their own member, whoever he or she might be and regardless of his or her ideological stance.  Why?  Apparently because they are anxious to reconfirm what they consider to be their own perceptiveness in their voting booth decisions, while those who elected all those other dolts are dumber than bricks.  The only fair way to rate the Congress would be to add up the winning margins of every member and divide the total by 435 for House members and 100 for Senators.

Yes, it is fair to say that Congress does a very poor job of writing the laws and looking after the interests of the people, but that’s not due to any serious flaw in the way Congress is constituted. The principle shortcoming of the Congress is to be found in the quality of its leadership.  To prove the point, I might mention just four names:  Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, and Nancy Pelosi.  Need I say more?

In Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi we have leaders who are truly evil and who care about nothing beyond what is good for the Democratic Party and its candidates.  Their only real concern is that, if the ship of state is to sink beneath the waves, they insist on being at the helm when it happens.  In John Boehner and Mitch McConnell we have two well intentioned men, neither of whom have the foggiest notion of how to deal with the truly evil people on the Democrat side of the aisle.  Taken together, these mutually incompatible characterizations spell nothing but total gridlock.

Can it be fixed?  Yes, Congress can be fixed, but only in the event of a politically astute and well-informed electorate.  So long as 57% of Democrats believe that their own representatives are acting in the best interests of the country and deserve to be reelected, the problems of governance that we now experience can never be fixed.  If Democrats continue to believe that a man the caliber of Hank Johnson (D-GA) deserves to be in Congress, then there is little hope for us.  (It was Johnson who worried openly in a public hearing that the Pacific island of Guam might capsize if the U.S. Navy stationed an additional 8,000 Marines on one side of the island.)

But time is of the essence because reform is possible only so long as we still have a majority of voters who are property owners and/or wage earners, but it won’t be easy because a major portion of the Democrat Party base is comprised of uninformed non-producers, under-achievers, and the disinterested… those who are not property owners or who live off the labors of others.

Three significant reforms are sorely needed: First, we must amend our criminal laws to require mandatory prison time for those who engage in vote fraud.  Second, the right to vote should be limited only to those who are property owners and taxpayers.  And finally, before they are handed a ballot, voters should be required to score at least 60% on a simple ten-question exam, with topics chosen at random from current affairs and from the list of 100 questions used in examining immigrants who apply for American citizenship.

But can we expect Democrats to ever agree to stricter penalties for vote fraud?  Not likely.  Vote fraud is, and always has been, the “bread and butter” of Democratic politics.  In fact, Democrats are so wedded to the notion of vote fraud, so opposed to requiring photo IDs at polling places, so addicted to double and triple voting, that they would be unwilling to adopt a system in which voters would be required to dip a “pinkie” into a vial of indelible ink after voting, much like the  proud first-time voters in emerging democracies of the Third World.  So what does that tell us?

Next, we need to take a serious look at who is allowed to vote and who is not.  It makes no sense at all to have those who live off the public dole to participate in the election of the politicians who then vote to create bigger and better free lunches.  And while some may believe that voting is and always has been a universal right, such is not the case.  During the early years of the republic, only white males who owned at least 50 acres of land or had taxable income were allowed to vote.  Un-propertied men and women, slaves, and ex-slaves were prohibited from voting.  However, by the mid-19th century, most white males were allowed to vote, regardless of income or property ownership, and in the ensuing years the right to vote was further expanded.

The 15th Amendment (1870), extended voting rights to all citizens regardless of “race, color, or previous condition of servitude;” the 19th Amendment (1920) extended voting rights to all female citizens; the 23rd Amendment (1961) extended the right to vote in presidential elections to residents of Washington, DC; the 24th Amendment (1964) struck down poll taxes and other taxes as barriers to voting; and the 26th Amendment (1971) extended voting rights to 18-year-olds.

Article VI, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution states that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”  Instead, it leaves the question of voter qualifications to the states to decide.  In short, the right to vote is not an explicit right under the Constitution.  States may deny the right to vote for reasons other than those explicitly addressed in the Constitution and subsequent amendments.  In addition to barring non-taxpayers and non-property owners, the Congress should also deny voting rights forever to those who obtain citizenship after illegally sneaking across our borders or by overstaying a visa.

Finally, it stretches credulity to suggest that the vote of an individual who cannot demonstrate the most rudimentary knowledge of current affairs or of the U.S. Constitution, should be valued as highly as the vote of the best-informed and most knowledgeable citizens.

The “man in the street” interviews popularized by late-night comedian Jay Leno and Fox News producer Jesse Watters tell us everything we need to know about the quality of the American electorate.  If we were fortunate enough to have a better educated and more informed electorate we would have a far more effective Congress and, once again, a president who would merit the respect and the admiration of the American people.

The U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service administers a test to all those who wish to become U.S. citizens.  The test contains 100 questions from which questions are chosen at random and 60% is a passing grade.  A typical multiple choice test might appear as follows:

  1. What was the purpose of the Declaration of Independence?
  2. What are the first three words of the U.S. Constitution that define self-governance?
  3. What do we call the first ten amendments to the Constitution?
  4.  How many justices serve on the United States Supreme Court?
  5.  Who served as President of the U.S. during the Great Depression and World War II?
  6.  What nation is the only functioning democracy in the Middle East?
  7.  The Taliban is a radical Islamist group operating largely in which country?
  8.  Who currently serves as Attorney General of the United States?
  9.  How many time zones cover the U.S. from New York to California?
  10.  Which major river is the longest river in the United States?

Ten questions of this caliber, chosen at random and posed in a multiple choice format on a touch-screen monitor, could be used to screen out those with an insufficient knowledge of current affairs and our system of government to merit the privilege of voting.  Taking such a test would take less than two minutes per voter and would not in any way impede the voting process.

If we’re going to get serious about “throwing the bums out,” maybe we should begin with voters who cannot demonstrate that they deserve to be seen as members of an “informed” electorate.

Obama’s approval numbers in Florida falling

Though Democrats continue to stand behind him, 52 percent of Florida voters disapprove of the way President Obama is handling his job while 44 percent approve, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Thursday.

The numbers are similar to a May 1 poll, which showed 50 percent of the state’s voters disapproving of the president’s performance.

The new poll reinforced a sharp divide among the state’s voters: Only 7 percent of Republican voters approved of the job Obama is doing, while 84 percent of Democrats approved. Meanwhile, 40 percent of independents approved and 54 percent disapproved.

The poll had better numbers for Florida’s U.S. senators, Republican Marco Rubio and Democrat Bill Nelson. Of those polled, 49 percent approved of the way Rubio is handling his job, while 37 percent disapproved. Nelson received approval from 45 percent of voters, with 32 percent disapproving.

The Connecticut-based Quinnipiac frequently conducts polls in Florida and other states. The latest poll of 1,251 registered voters was conducted from July 17 to July 21.

EDITORS NOTE: This column is courtesy of News Service of Florida.

Net worth up for majority of Florida lawmakers by Jim Turner

THE CAPITAL, TALLAHASSEE, July 24, 2014 — For most state lawmakers, 2013 was another good year financially, regardless of party.

Still, those with an “R” affixed to their names are doing better, in general, when it comes to the bottom line thanks mostly to stronger housing and stock markets.

Updated financial-disclosure reports for 2013 were due July 1. And from the reports posted online as of Thursday, the average net worth in the Senate is just under $3.77 million, while the average net-worth figure is a little more than $1.4 million in the House.

The totals run from a high of $26 million for outgoing Senate President Don Gaetz to a negative $127,138 for Rep. Darryl Rouson, a St. Petersburg Democrat who remains underwater on a pair of home loans.

Gaetz, a Niceville Republican with two years remaining in the Senate, was a co-founder of VITAS Healthcare Corp. He actually saw his net worth slip slightly in 2013, by about $140,000, from the prior year.

“The decline in my net worth is forcing me to make economies,” Gaetz quipped in an email response. “I’m afraid I will have to cancel some newspaper subscriptions.”

Of the 156 lawmakers who served during both the 2012 and 2013 sessions and whose reports were available, 119 recorded increases in net worth, 35 went down and two posted no change.

The reports represent an individual’s net worth on Dec. 31, 2013. While the reports were due July 1, lawmakers have until Sept. 2 to file them before facing fines.

As of Dec. 31, 2012, the average for all 40 senators stood at $3.34 million. The average for the 120 House members was $1.27 million.

A little more than $30,000 in income for each legislator comes from their state salaries.

Senate Republicans on average are worth $4.3 million per the latest reports, while their House GOP counterparts chime in at an average of $1.7 million. Democrats in the Senate averaged $2.77 million, while in the House the average stands at $865,224.

The averages are all up from a year earlier.

Dan Krassner, executive director of the watchdog group Integrity Florida, said lawmakers should be praised for major ethics reforms in 2013 that require the financial-disclosure reports to be posted online. However, the information still fails to provide a full picture of individual lawmakers’ wealth, he said.

“Many lawmakers receive significant income from special interests who lobby the Legislature,” Krassner said in an email. “The Legislature has created disclosure loopholes so conflicts of interest are easily hidden or just made legal.”

Among the problems with the reports, according to Integrity Florida, are that the self-reported numbers are never audited, assets can be easily hidden under a spouse’s name and lawmakers don’t have to reveal if firms they own or work for have business before the Legislature or state government. Also, Integrity Florida contends that with the requirement that numbers be based on a single day rather than the full-year lawmakers can “secretly engage in major transactions throughout the year undetected.”

Of the 40 Senators, 18 are millionaires, one more than during the prior year.

Tampa Democrat Arthenia Joyner, a longtime attorney, joined the seven-figure crowd, with her net worth growing from $908,422 to $1,009,588.

In the House, 35 of the 120 members are members of the millionaires club, the same number as the previous year though the list of millionaires does not include all the same representatives.

Not among those seven-figure lawmakers is outgoing House Speaker Will Weatherford, a Wesley Chapel Republican who reported his net worth declined from $288,075 to $285,259.

Weatherford, who reported his leadership post paid $39,585 last year, also drew $16,000 from the Dallas-based Breckenridge Enterprises and $102,785 from Red Eagle Group, a company under the umbrella of Simpson Environmental Services, which is headed by Sen. Wilton Simpson, R-Trilby.

Simpson, worth $18.1 million, is the second-wealthiest senator.

Weatherford is slated to be replaced this fall as House speaker by Rep. Steve Crisafulli, R-Merritt Island. Crisafulli, a real estate broker from a prominent citrus family, posted a net worth of $453,989. A year earlier, Crisafulli’s net worth was at $375,127.

Sen. Andy Gardiner, an Orlando Republican who is vice president of external affairs at Orlando Health, is slated to replace Gaetz as Senate president this fall. Gardiner came in with a net worth of $751,353 in 2013, up from $585,023 in 2011 to $681,653 in 2012.

Rep. Michael Bileca, a Miami Republican who co-founded the Towncare Dental Partnership firm now located throughout Central and South Florida, topped the House in terms of net worth, at $14.2 million.

Sen. Darren Soto, an Orlando Democrat and attorney with more than $300,000 in liabilities mostly involving home loans, is the only senator to record himself as financially underwater. Soto listed his net worth at a negative $6,663, an improvement from a negative $32,351 a year earlier.

In the House, 12 members — two fewer than a year earlier — owe more than they’re worth, mostly due to outstanding home, student and auto loans.

EDITORS NOTE: This column is courtesy of News Service Florida. Involved, invested, or interested in Florida politics? Buy your copy of the Political Almanac of Florida 2014 by Dave Royse today!

Is Charlie Crist buying the Democrat Party of Florida?

The August 26th primary nears to pick the Florida Democrat gubernatorial nominee. The race is heating up between Democrats Nan Rich and Charlie Crist.  The question for Democrat primary voters: Who are you going to trust – Nan or Charlie? Perhaps some background and new information will help Democrat primary voters make a decision.

Nan Rich is a life long Democrat. Charlie Crist is not. So how does Charlie become the Democrat favorite? Can you say money? Charlie Crist is inextricably tied to big money. His relationship with the law firm of Morgan & Morgan gave him access to those with deep pockets when he was a Republican and this close relationship continues now that he is a Democrat gubernatorial primary candidate.

According to News Service of Florida:

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Charlie Crist and closely aligned political committee raised about $98,000 from July 5 to July 11, while continuing to funnel large amounts of money to the Florida Democratic Party, according to newly filed campaign finance reports.

The committee, known as “Charlie Crist for Florida,” sent $400,000 to the state party on July 8. That came after similar moves in past months, including $400,000 sent to the party in June. Crist’s campaign raised $61,059 from July 5 to July 11, bringing its overall total to nearly $4.2 million.

The committee raised $37,000 during the seven-day period, bringing its total to $10.16 million. Former state Senate Minority Leader Nan Rich, Crist’s opponent in the Aug. 26 Democratic primary, collected $5,175 for her campaign account from July 5 to July 11, giving her a total of $408,704. A committee backing Rich, known as “Citizens for a Progressive Florida,” collected $25,000 during the seven-day period, bringing its total to $140,315.

[Emphasis mine]

So is Crist buying the Democrat Party of Florida? It appears so given the largess of the Crist for Florida campaign to the FL party in excess of $.8 million.

Crist is known to use money to make his way to the top. While the leader of the Republican Party of Florida he used and misused donations. In 2010 the Orlando Sentinel reported, “State Republicans moved the three-way U.S. Senate race to a new level Saturday, with party leaders pointing to an audit of their books they say implies Gov. Charlie Crist — now an independent candidate for U.S. Senate — ran up potentially ‘hundreds of thousands’ of dollars in inappropriate charges. Party Chairman and state Sen. John Thrasher said the expenses came to light during the just-completed forensic audit by Alston & Bird LLP — which was the examiner in energy giant Enron’s 2002 bankruptcy. He said the party may sue their former standard bearer to get the money back.”

As George Santayana wrote, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Crist uses money to get what he wants. At some point, history tells us, Crist will begin withdrawing his investments in the FL Democrat party. Is that what Florida Democrats want in their nominee? We shall see on August 26th.

UPDATE: CRIST COMMITTEE SHIPS ANOTHER $600K TO PARTY

July 25, 2014

A committee closely tied to Democrat Charlie Crist’s gubernatorial campaign raised $221,600 from July 12 to July 18 and funneled $600,000 to the Florida Democratic Party, according to newly filed finance reports. The committee, known as “Charlie Crist for Florida,” has sent a series of large checks to the party recently. Along with the $600,000 payment July 18, for example, the committee reported sending $400,000 to the party on July 8. Overall, the committee had raised a total of nearly $10.4 million as of July 18 and had spent $2.2 million. Updated totals for Crist’s campaign account had not been posted on the state Division of Elections website Friday morning.

Meanwhile, Gov. Rick Scott’s campaign and the closely aligned “Let’s Get to Work” committee raised $221,695 from July 12 to July 18, according to the reports. And while the committee did not report spending money on TV ads during the week, it shelled out $213,752 to a Ponte Vedra Beach firm for yard signs. Scott’s campaign raised $200,695 during the period, bringing its overall total to $5,840,775. It also had spent a total of $1,051,206. The committee, meanwhile, raised $21,000 during the week, bringing its overall total to $32,980,927. Let’s Get to Work had spent a total of $19,080,722.

AGENDA: Grinding America Down

All American citizens who hold their FREEDOM dear, and support family values should watch the below listed video entitled “AGENDA: Grinding America Down.”   We’ve received thousands of E-mails each week for 5 years; “AGENDA: Grinding America Down” is one of the most significant presentations we’ve viewed over these past 5 years.

Before you watch “AGENDA: Grinding America Down”, please watch this 19 second video:

The video is about the values you want to ensure your children & your extended family members benefit from, it supports the different religious faiths that provide the foundation upon which human values are based, it’s about supporting the members of the US Armed Forces—many of whom gave their last full measure of devotion in order to defend the Republic—it is mainly about the FREEDOMS accorded to all American citizens in the US Constitution by the Founding Fathers.

AGENDA: Grinding America Down

Using Obama’s own words, when he said that he fully intends to “fundamentally transform” our 238 year old Republic; we now have witnessed his true goal to create a Socialist State by any means necessary.  By repealing President Clinton’s requirement that welfare recipients must work for financial aid from the government, over the past 6 years, Obama has managed to enroll a record number of Americans and illegal immigrants in government welfare program with 40 million on food stamps, and millions of new recipients on the disability rolls.

Obama has been framing traditional US work ethics as the foolish belief that President Ronald Reagan once supported, with President Reagan’s thesis that anyone can lift themselves up by their bootstraps being the promise that always has been America and the success that comes about from hard work.  In order to “fundamentally transform America”,  Obama in his speeches and his bloated bureaucracy has been working to replace President Reagan’s well held belief  in American’s work ethic, that contributed to the most successful economy in the history of mankind with something that has never worked in any country in history.  Obama wants to replace American work ethic with the Marxist principal that government must distribute the wealth created by hard working Americans to those who have little interest in working.  Obama wants to more heavily tax the top 10% of successful American earners who already pay 68% of all the taxes in the nation each year (the bottom 50% of earners in America pay 3% of all the taxes).

Obama’s unrelenting attack on the Second Amendment and the right of American citizen’s to bear arms, and the protections accorded all American citizens by provisions of  the Second Amendment that is under relentless assault by the Obama administration.  Obama’s use of the IRS to suppress the rights of conservative Americans who were trying to exercise their right to participate in a national presidential elections should have a special Prosecutor assigned, but Holder refuses to appoint one.   Obama is also using Holder’s Justice Department to prevent states from issuing voter IDs to endure American citizens only vote once, in the last presidential election 7 million voters voted in two states; voter fraud was not controlled; the fear of rampant voter fraud looms large in the November election.

AGENDA Grinding America Down graph

For a larger view click on the chart

The Obama administration will eventually meet with serious and widespread “unorganized” opposition from American citizens because of his violation of Federal Laws, Immigration Laws, and provisions of the US Constitution.   The  Obama administration has been preparing for possible citizen’s unrest, by creating heavily arming federal police force swat teams in the Capital Police Force, Park Police, DHS, the Wildlife Service, the Marshal Service, in the IRS, the Postal Police, the Department of Defense Police, the Federal Protective Service, the Secret Service, and Obama ‘s National Police Force authorized & funded by the Obamacare Law, while providing DHS with armored vehicles, and purchasing excessive amounts of ammunition (more than the US Army and the US Marine Corps uses each year in training their personnel).

The most important Congressional election in 238 years will be held in about 3 months, we encourage you to support the endorsed Combat Veterans For Congress listed in the attachment.  They have the courage to stand up to bureaucratic excesses, will work to rein in the out of control spending by irresponsible members of Congress & the Obama administration, and will protect and defend the US Constitution.

Why Are a Few Florida Supervisors of Elections Breaking the Law?

It’s now been 7 months since 29 of Florida’s 67 Supervisors of Elections were notified of their portion of 3,000+ voter registrations potentially illegally listing a UPS store as a legal residence. To their credit 13 of those Supervisors have cleared 100% of their registrations. But, there are 9 other Supervisors who have provided insufficient excuse for failing to do what the law clearly requires.

The counties with well below 50% success in 7 months are: Broward, Duval, Leon, Orange, Palm Beach, Sarasota, Seminole, St. Lucie, and Walton.

The problem here is not one of county size. Two of the largest counties, Miami-Dade and Hillsborough, had some of the fewest ineligible addresses, and are two of the thirteen counties that have cleared 100% of their UPS store registrations.

But because some of the biggest procrastinators are also Florida’s worse offenders, state-wide closure on the issue has embarrassingly stalled at only 26%. And it may get worse before it gets better. Because now, instead of shrinking their existing mess, these rogue counties have allowed 137 additional registrations listing a UPS store as a residence to be added to their voter roll. These 137 new registrations indicate that these Supervisors are also still not obeying the law that requires them to maintain and use a list of valid residential street addresses for their county (F.S. 98.015(12)). Makes you sort of curious what else they’re up to.

In addition at least three Supervisors have identified more than 5,000 additional registrations they consider as having listed an ineligible residence address. But instead of following the law to get these cleaned up, they’re allowing them to stay on the voter roll essentially indefinitely. They do assuringly indicate they’re hoping to not let these registrations vote until they provide a valid residential address, even though that approach failed in 2012.

Glaringly, none of the Supervisors have been able to point out an applicable statute or rule to support ignoring their legally required duty under F.S. 98.075(6) & (7). One Supervisor’s office even claimed that since their staff found the ineligible residence addresses without outside help, that they weren’t required to follow that statute! What’s your definition of the word “is”?

And what’s your Supervisor’s approach to these type registrations?

Florida’s Division of Elections has been aware of these issues, but as yet does not seem to have had a positive impact. Does any of this make anybody else curious enough to help determine state wide how many other registrations list a non-residential address as a residence? Or to in general more closely monitor the performance of our Supervisors of Elections?

To a few Supervisors’ credit (but also another item in the things that make you go “hmmm?” category): Because the voters never responded to their Supervisor’s requests for a current residence address, the 13 counties with 100% success ended up removing 93% of their UPS store registrations.

Further, of the 800+ registrations that were cleared state wide, slightly more were removed from the voter roll than had their addresses corrected.

As reported earlier in an April 2014 article, “Florida: 3,000 Voter Registrations List a UPS Store as a Residence”, definitionally ineligible registration residence addresses should not exist. Accordingly, Florida law provides a prompt and clear process to correct a voter’s residence address. And the law says if a voter does not respond to the Supervisor’s contacts, “the supervisor shall make a final determination of the voter’s eligibility” (F.S. 98.075(7)(a)3).

That’s noteworthy, for at least three reasons.

First, the law says “shall”. It’s not optional. Yet somehow too many of our Supervisors have too many excuses for making the wrong “final determination”.

Second, if the Supervisors were truly doing their jobs, they would have identified and cleared these registrations on their own during their 2013 non-Federal election “list maintenance” cycle. The 38 counties who didn’t have any UPS store registrations this past December did just that. Why didn’t the other 29?

Third, the F.S. 98.075(6) & (7) mandated process triggered by at least December 2013 requires far less than 4 months for an honorable Supervisor to accomplish. Accordingly, at least 13 (and arguably 51) Supervisors have. Yet here we are at 7 months post notice, with an election season looming, and we have 9 Supervisors behaving like we should just sit back and enjoy the ride.

And speaking of folks not doing their job, perhaps it’s time to ask your local media how a Supervisor of Elections intentionally disobeying the law isn’t a newsworthy story?

A Titan Falls: Politicians Befriend Big Business, Undermine Free Market by Doug Bandow

For most people politics looks like a game about who is up or down. Sometimes established favorites win big. Other times long-shots burst forth and upset the established order. The horse race tends to most capture public attention.

The recent Republican primary defeat of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor was one of the bigger shocks to American politics in some time. Two decades ago Democratic House Speaker Tom Foley was ousted in the general election. Fourteen years before that House Majority Whip John Brademas of Indiana went down to defeat. However, congressional leaders usually are handily reelected. Once they are known to for bringing home the bacon for local folks, they become as titans bestriding the world.

But Cantor’s loss will have a much larger impact than simply reshuffling who enjoys the biggest offices on Capitol Hill. He gave lip service to fiscal responsibility but was, argued Nick Gillespie of Reason, “atrocious and hypocritical in all the ways that a Republican can be,” constantly voting to grow government.

Indeed, Cantor’s constituency was as much corporate America as it was Virginia voters. Business was counting on his support to push through reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank, long known as “Boeing’s Bank” for the extensive benefits lavished on one company; extension of terrorism risk insurance, which transfers financial liability for loss from firms to taxpayers; and preservation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which nearly wrecked the economy while subsidizing homeowners, builders, and lenders.

Cantor’s loss, said the Washington Post, was “bad news for big business.” The New York Times observed that Cantor was “a powerful ally of business big and small, from giants like Boeing to the many independently owned manufacturers and wholesalers that rely on the federal government for financial support.” He was also “one of Wall Street’s most reliable benefactors in Congress.” His opponent, an economics professor, targeted Cantor’s crony politics.

In practice Cantor’s loss changes little. His replacement as House Majority Leader, California’s Keven McCarthy, appears no less political than Cantor. McCarthy also has relied on Wall Street for fundraising. However, while previously voting to reauthorize the bank, he recently said he would prefer to let the institution’s charter expire. He once owned a sandwich shop, and therefore understands the problems of small business.

Suffering near political death was Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), who trailed a Tea Party-backed state senator in the initial primary vote and narrowly won the runoff, apparently with Democratic support. Widely viewed as the “king of pork,” Cochran relied on his ability to raid the Treasury to pay off fellow Mississippians. Noted the New York Times, the one-time Appropriations Committee chairman and several predecessors all used “their perches on the powerful Appropriations Committees of their chambers to shower their impoverished state with federal funds.”

Cochran also has been a regular supporter of business subsidies. Which is why corporate America returned the favor. Economic elites surprised by Cantor’s loss “are moving quickly to ensure that Mr. Cochran does not meet the same fate,” reported the Times. The incumbent Senate Republican raised $800,000 at just one fund-raiser targeting corporate lobbyists. Big firms like General Atomics and Raytheon have given generously to groups backing Cochran.

It long has been evident that the greatest enemies of capitalism are the capitalists. Even Adam Smith, the famed author of The Wealth of Nations and great proponent of free markets, warned that businessmen oft gathered together to conspire against the public for their own gain. Today it is hard for them to resist doing so. When “everyone” is doing it, who wants to be left out? Especially with boards and shareholders to satisfy.

Of course, business is not alone in shoving its snout into the federal trough. Big Labor and many other influential interests do so as well. However, the disjunction of simultaneously praising and undermining the free market is particularly jarring when coming from businessmen.

Alas, our entire political system has been corrupted. In April Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) gave a thoughtful speech warning of “America’s crisis of crony capitalism, corporate welfare, and political privilege.”  The victims are every day folks, “the poor and middle class” excluded by government “from earning their success on a level playing field.”

No wonder, then, Americans’ ever greater frustration with politics. Blowback is coming as antagonism grows towards those who treat the federal Treasury as a piggy bank for themselves and their supporters. Moreover, as Cantor dramatically discovered, discontent with the politics of privilege may be as strong on the right as on the left. Explained the Times: “Beyond their priorities in Congress, what has unsettled business executives is what they sense as a growing anger over the ‘corporate welfare’ and ‘crony capitalism’ among the many associated with the Tea Party.”

Anger is the appropriate emotion. Who is the better candidate in any particular race is up to the voters in that district or state. But citizens everywhere should be frustrated with a government driven by interest groups where business leaders who actively subvert the market economy.

The problem is not just the money—roughly $100 billion a year for corporate welfare, for instance. Also disturbing is the message government is sending to all Americans. The way to rise and prosper, to expand one’s business and increase one’s income, is to seize control of the State to loot your neighbors. Gaining wealth by working hard is, well, hard work. It is so much better to hire a lobbyist and whisper sweet nothings in legislators’ ears. No heavy lifting there.

Moreover, the illusion of consent cannot hide the dubious moral principles these players rely upon. If government has as purpose, it is to advance particularly important and genuinely collective interests which cannot be achieved privately. Taking people’s earnings for anything less differs little from theft. Sadly, most of today’s vast transfer state looks like a complex of stolen goods.

Eric Cantor’s defeat is a useful reminder to the political class that even they are ultimately accountable to the people. Only by sharing that message widely is there a chance of rolling back the rampant political privilege and cronyism which dominates Washington today.

dougbandow3540ABOUT DOUG BANDOW

Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and the author of a number of books on economics and politics. He writes regularly on military non-interventionism.

Obama Encounters an Apex of Anger

Barack Obama has managed to do something one would hardly imagine a President could achieve by the midpoint of his second term. He has managed to anger most segments of the American populace, including those to the far Left who constitute a significant part of his base. It has taken time for most people to reach this point.

Americans are amazingly patient with their presidents, but Obama has pushed them beyond scandal fatigue. The “final straw” appears to be the illegal alien invasion masterminded by Obama.

What they are seeing and hearing is not what they were sold; a charming man of allegedly extraordinary intelligence. Friday’s press conference regarding the shoot down of the Malaysian commercial aircraft showed us a man utterly lacking any moral outrage and, as always, “leading from behind” by insisting this was Europe’s problem, not one that would be addressed by an America doing anything more than applying a few economic sanctions.

He looked and sounded bored, annoyed that he had to utter a bunch of empty platitudes about Russia; the same Russia with which he and then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had declared a “reset” from previous administrations’ relations. Putin took his measure and saw weakness.

Obama’s response to the Middle East was to pull out all our troops from Iraq and a muddled series of actions in Afghanistan topped by the announcement of when troops there would leave, always a very bad idea when the enemy is still in the field. The “Arab Spring” became another Obama nightmare of bad decisions.

Cartoon  - Lame Duck

For a larger view click on the image.

It took years, but it eventually became clear to most paying any attention that Obama has told so many lies that whatever he says now is deemed worthless. Then, too, his administration is now subject to congressional investigations that include the Internal Revenue Service and the Veterans Administration.

The Attorney General was slapped with contempt of Congress. A key figure in the IRS scandal, Lois Lerner, has pled the Fifth.

The House of Representatives is getting ready to sue Obama for failing to obey the Constitution’s separation of powers. The President’s efforts to ignore the Constitution have been met with an extraordinary number of Supreme Court rebuffs, many of which were unanimous.

How bad is Obama’s situation at present? One indication is the way the news media has been slowly, but steadily falling out of love with him. As Paul Bedard noted recently in the Washington Examiner, “In unprecedented criticism of the White House 38 journalism groups have assailed the president’s team for censoring media coverage, limiting access to top officials, and overall ‘politically-driven suppression of the news.”

David Cuiller, president of the Society of Professional Journalists, said, “It is up to journalists—and citizens—to push back against this force. Hard!” As a member of the SPJ since the 1970s this is a welcome expression of indignation, but it is also been occurring across a full spectrum of Republicans, Democrats, and independent voters as various Obama policies have negatively affected them.

No President has ever much liked the news media. This one, though, took them from adoration to distrust. With the exception of the network news shows and steadfast liberal newspapers, Obama’s news coverage is going to become increasingly harsh. Or should we say “accurate”?

The illegal alien immigration issue has enraged average Americans and Obama is not helped when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid claims that “the borders are secure” or House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi makes some equally absurd and moronic claim.

In the six years since Obama took office in 2009, Americans have encountered a succession of scandals that began with Operation Fast and Furious when a scheme to transfer arms to Mexican cartels was covered up by the assertion of executive privilege. The Obamacare lies were followed by administration efforts to force corporations and religious organizations to forego their faith-based beliefs. Millions of Americans lost their healthcare insurance plans, only to have them replaced for far more expensive ones.

On top of the problems Americans encountered with the implementation of Obamacare, along came revelations that the Department of Veterans Affairs was letting some veterans seeking healthcare die by falsifying treatment records.

While this was occurring the nation’s debt rose to a historic high of $17 trillion, causing its credit rating to be reduced for the first time. There has been no budget during his first and second terms. There are still more than 90 million Americans out of work and the prices of food and gasoline are rising.

Following the Benghazi attack, the scandal was the lies told by Obama and Hillary Clinton, then the Secretary of State, describing it as a random attack despite the fact it occurred on the anniversary of 9/11. When the administration released five high ranking Taliban leaders at the same time we continue to be engaged in a war against them in Afghanistan, the public really began to take notice. It angered veterans and others.

No one in Congress believes a word Obama says and the House of Representatives is getting ready to sue him for his failure to enforce the laws Congress has passed and his usurpation of unconstitutional power to alter laws whenever he wants. This is unprecedented in the history of the nation.

And the scandals noted are only a small number of the actions Obama and his administration have taken that have finally combined to create a body of evidence that he has been acting against the interest and welfare of Americans he took an oath to protect. How does he expect to do that as he reduces the nation’s military strength to pre-WWII levels?

Obama’s response to the growing level of anger has been to concentrate on fund raising for the Democratic Party, but even those benefitting from it do not want to be seen with him.

In August he will take a long vacation in the ultra-rich environs of Martha’s Vineyard while thousands of illegal aliens continue to stream in and his only “solution” is to ask Congress for billions to care for them. And to blame Congress—Republicans—for failing to pass an immigration bill that amounts to an amnesty no one wants.

The anger that has been building is likely to be expressed on November 4 when Americans go to the polls to clean house and, by that, I mean ridding Congress of as many Democrats as possible and replacing them with openly avowed conservatives. That’s just over a hundred days from now.

The cliché is that “the fish stinks from the head” and it is clear now that the Obama administration reflects the corruption and incompetence of Barack Obama, a Chicago politician who leapt to power despite not even having served a full term as a U.S. Senator. He was elected to be the first black President of the United States and it is no small irony that even African-Americans know he has done little or nothing to address their needs and concerns.

He will not be impeached as he should be, but he will increasingly lack any power other than executive orders. The constitutional system will work, but it will take decades to repair the damage.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

Cracks in the Democrats’ Foundation

In a WorldNetDaily column of July 16, titled, “Why they won’t let us talk to the illegal kids,” talk radio pioneer Barry Farber suggested that, “the reason we in media are not allowed to talk to the children is that the conversation in every honest interview will get around to, ‘What made you all risk so much to get here?’  The answer will be, ‘Oh! Mama and Papa heard it many times. Your President Obama has found many little ways to say, ‘Come on up!  We won’t send you back!’ ”

Barry’s very ominous prediction was that, “The minute that awareness reaches critical mass, Obama, his works, his team, and the Democratic Party will suffer a rejection that will make the Republican years in political purgatory seem like a quick tour-bus jaunt through hell.”

One of my major regrets is that, barring divine intervention, I will not be around to see how historians will chronicle America’s post-constitutional period: the last half of the 20th century and the first 16 years of the 21st century.  These are the years during which one of our major political parties, the Democrat Party, created an ideological plantation on which they cynically attempted to imprison an entire ethnic minority.

Rarely in human history has any civilized nation so offended basic human decency than did the United States during the era of slavery, between 1619 and the signing of the Emancipation Proclamation in 1861. In fact, many Americans found the institution of slavery to be so morally repugnant that a new political party, the Republican Party, was spawned out of the abolitionist movement.

The Republican Party was founded in a schoolhouse in Ripon, Wisconsin, on March 20, 1854.  Anti-slavery sentiment was so strong in some northern and border states that the party was able to elect its first president, Abraham Lincoln, in 1860, just six years later.  In the ensuing 104 years, Republicans fought what seemed an endless battle against Democrats who longed for the return of slavery and who opposed basic human rights for former slaves and their descendants.

  • A Republican president, Abraham Lincoln, signed the Emancipation Proclamation.
  • It was Republicans who drafted and passed the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, outlawing slavery and giving blacks citizenship and the right to vote.
  • It was Democrat-controlled legislatures across the South who enacted the Black Codes and the Jim Crow laws.
  • In 1866, it was Democrats who created the Ku Klux Klan as a paramilitary arm of their party.  Its purpose was to intimidate, terrorize, and murder black people.  In the years between 1882 and 1951, some 3,437 blacks and 1,293 whites, nearly all Republicans, were lynched by the KKK.
  • It was Republicans who authored the Civil Rights Act of 1866, the Reconstruction Act of 1867, the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, and the Civil Rights Act of 1875.
  • It was Democrats who wrote and passed the Repeal Act of 1894, repealing much of the civil rights legislation passed by Republicans in the years since the close of the Civil War.  In other instances, a Democrat-dominated U.S. Supreme Court declared elements of the Republican civil rights legislation to be unconstitutional.
  • It was a Republican president, Dwight D. Eisenhower, who authored the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and the Civil Rights Act of 1960.  Later, it was the strong support of Republicans that made the Civil Rights Act of 1964 possible… a law that was almost identical, word-for-word, to the Republicans’ Civil Rights Act of 1875, overturned by a Democrat-dominated U.S. Supreme Court.  And finally, it was a Republican president, Richard Nixon, who signed the Equal Employment Act of 1972.

It was not until the Brown vs. Board of Education decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in the mid-1950s that Democrats finally decided that, if they could no longer control blacks through violence and intimidation, they would have to buy their hearts, their minds, and their votes with an endless variety of social welfare programs.  Since that time, and to their great discredit, blacks have turned their backs on the Republicans who worked so tirelessly and so valiantly on their behalf.  Instead, they now cast more than 90% of their votes for white Democrats, those who were their oppressors for more than three centuries.  Never in the history of man has a race of people shown such ingratitude toward those who were their principal benefactors.

But now it appears that a schism is beginning to develop in the black man’s love affair with the Democrat Party. For the past sixty years, Democrats have been laying sloppy, slobbering kisses all over our black population. But what blacks are now learning is that, what they took to be undying love and devotion, was nothing more than a prelude to a cheap one-night stand.

Bernadette Lancelin, a black mother in Houston, apparently a former Obama supporter, recently found herself being interviewed by a Houston TV station. She said she was furious that Barack Obama wants to spend nearly $4 billion on Central American kids who’ve entered the country illegally.  She said, “What about the kids here?  What about the kids here in our neighborhood?  And not just in our neighborhood, but in our country? All these (illegal immigrant) kids, really?  Why can’t they go back?” She said, “I’m sorry that their parents are in poor living conditions or surroundings or whatever’s going on out there. I don’t care. I care about what’s going on right here in my own back yard, my neighborhood.”

Mychal Massie, a black writer and talk show host in Los Angeles, has said, “I condemn in the strongest possible terms the media for refusing to investigate (the Obamas) as they did President Bush and President Clinton, and for refusing to label them for what they truly are.  There is no scenario known to man, whereby a white president and his wife could ignore laws, flaunt their position, and lord over the people, as these two are permitted out of fear for their color… Never in my life, inside or outside of politics, have I witnessed such dishonesty in a political leader.”

She went on to say, “He is the most mendacious political figure I have ever witnessed.  Even by the low standard of his presidential predecessors, his narcissistic, contumacious arrogance is unequaled.  Using Obama as the bar, Nero would have to be elevated to sainthood.”

In a July 14 editorial for Minuteman News, titled “Democrats’ New Trophy Wife,” attorney A.J. Delgado writes, “Democrats have built a brand as the party willing to stand up for black Americans, but the amnesty push (for illegal Hispanic immigrants) shows what a false promise that was.  The message to black voters is: ‘Yes, your ancestors endured unimaginable hardships and helped build this country, and we said we’d help you out.  But now we have a new trophy wife.’  Meanwhile, the harm to African Americans is not limited to reduced wages, greater competition for jobs, and declining household incomes… now even the black history of suffering is being diluted.  Liberal columnist and CNN pundit Sally Kohn penned a column last week arguing that the term ‘illegal immigrant’ is the same as the N-word.”

If there is a silver lining in the current immigration crisis along our southern border, it is that a great many previously disinterested or complacent Americans are being awakened to the evils of Barack Obama and the Democrat Party.  William Gheen, president of the Americans for Legal Immigration PAC predicts that, on the weekend of July 19-20, more than 300 protest rallies will take place in cities all across the country.  He said, “Our goal is to unify Americans of all races, political parties, and walks of life against the Obama-inspired illegal immigrant invasion.”

What is finally beginning to dawn on African Americans is that Barack Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and other Democrats have long taken them for granted… assuming that, once a black man is bought, he will stay bought.  It is apparent that what Democrats are hoping is that Hispanics will become the most sought-after minority voting bloc.  Add those votes to the black vote, the labor vote, and the public employee vote, along with the votes of trial lawyers, radical feminists, radical environmentalists, gays, lesbians, and transvestites, and they expect to have a winning coalition that will maintain them in power until the end of time.

Delgado likens the Democrats’ current attitude toward blacks to the husband who leaves his wife after 30 years of marriage, saying, “We’ve had a good run, honey, but I’ve found someone new.”  He says, “Yes, black America… it’s closing time and there’s a younger, hotter version of you out there on the dance floor, and the Democrats are laying on the charm, slick one-liners, and cash to buy her affections… and votes.”

But now, in a stroke of irony that not even Hollywood screen writers could have visualized, we find that it is a black president and a black attorney general who are most responsible for the fissures that are beginning to appear in the once-solid Democrat base. Yes, cracks are beginning to appear in the Democrats’ foundation. For the good of mankind, let’s all hope that Barry Farber’s prediction comes true and that Obama and his criminal conspirators will be soon be accorded the ignominy they so richly deserve.

Ambassador John Bolton’s Super PAC Announces First Independent Expenditure Critiquing Baffled NH Congresswoman Ann Kuster

WASHINGTON, July 17, 2014 /PRNewswire/ — Ambassador John Bolton’s Super PAC today released its first advertisement featuring troubling video of New Hampshire Representative Ann Kuster (NH-2) avoiding questions about the Benghazi tragedy and stating that Benghazi is not part of the Middle East.

The digital ad buy is for an initial $30,000 and will run for at least two weeks throughout New Hampshire. To date, the Super PAC has raised a record $3 million and has over $2.5 millioncash on hand.

The ad features Congresswoman Kuster at a town hall meeting in Manchester, New Hampshire, responding to a constituent’s question about House Resolution 36, which at the time would establish a select committee to investigate and report on the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi with, “I don’t have it … It’s a Senate … We’re certainly not here to talk about it. We’re here to talk about the Middle East.” House Resolution 36 was indeed in the House of Representatives, subsequently the House set up a Select Committee on Benghazi.

“That she unable to address her constituents’ questions about the Benghazi tragedy is shocking at best,” said Ambassador John Bolton. “Having a basic understanding of the Middle East and America’s security concerns in Benghazi should be a fundamental qualification to be in Congress and Ann Kuster should know better. New Hampshire deserves an informed representative who isn’t afraid to take a lead on both domestic and foreign affairs.”

The online ad is expected to be viewed by tens of thousands of New Hampshire residents and found across online news sources in NH including the Union Leader and WMUR websites. This is the first of what will be many independent expenditures by the John Bolton Super PAC to ensure that American security is a central factor in the 2014 midterm elections. The Ambassador has not yet endorsed a Republican candidate running in the primary election that is scheduled for September 9, 2014.

In addition to the John Bolton Super PAC, Ambassador Bolton’s PAC has already contributed to U.S. Senate candidates Tom Cotton (AR), Joni Ernst (IA), Terri Lynn Land (MI), and Mitch McConnell (KY), along with U.S. House of Representatives candidates Martha McSally (AZ-2), Barbara Comstock (VA-10), Adam Kinzinger (IL-16), Robert Dold (Il-10), and Mike Pompeo (KA-4). The combined money raised for the two PACs is $4 million to date with nearly $3 million cash on hand.

About John Bolton Super PAC: 

The John Bolton Super PAC will aim to make America’s defense and national security significant factors in federal elections through independent expenditures, campaigns, and issue-oriented education. The Super PAC will not make contributions to candidates, parties, or PACs.

Voter Advocate Challenges Media: Inform Voters of Gridlock Cures — Not Just Causes

OMAHA, Neb., July 17, 2014 /PRNewswire/ — American voters are frustrated and they don’t know what to do about it. A recent Gallup survey pegged congressional disapproval at 80% for 2014.

Voters are fearful that the 2014 election will only lead to two more years of the same politics they’ve suffered for the last two years. This spirals downward to even more voter fatigue and apathy, and ever lower voter turnout.

Voter Advocate Larry Bradley

Larry R. Bradley

Voter Advocate and Author Larry R. Bradley offers Editors a new message for those frustrated voters.

“American voters need to recognize the true cause of their frustration. They have the behavior they have from elected officials because of the system being used to elect those officials,” says Bradley. “Voters will have the behavior and frustration so long as they continue to use the existing system. If voters want better behavior and results from elected officials, then the cure they need is to first change the electoral system.”

Bradley, who speaks to groups on this topic, has three specific commitments he says voters should be demanding of the current 2014 candidates in order to earn the voters’ support. They are:

  • Give voters more competitive choices and candidates with Ranked Choice Voting.
  • Neutralize Gerrymandering by instituting Proportional Representation.
  • Authorize true proportional allocation of Electors based solely on the statewide popular vote within each state without being tied to Congressional Districts.

Voter Advocate NLNCB CoverBradley notes that, “Einstein once said, ‘Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.’ Yet Americans fail to recognize their frustration with politics and government is due to using the same defective political system and not fixing its flaws. Even worse is that American media is failing to inform voters of the changes they could and should be demanding.”

“All of these changes,” continues Bradley, “are within the existing authority of state governments to approve. The approval of the changes will completely transform the productivity of our Federal Government for the better.”

Bradley is already scheduled for several appearances in conjunction with his DVD, Why the Two Party System Isn’t Working Anymore: And What to do About it, in the Fall of 2014.

Check out these satirical (but on-point) U.S. Senate Campaign Political Ads

Hat tip to Tom Tillison from BizPac Review for putting us on to these fake (but are they reality?) campaign videos by Represent.US. According to their YouTube site:

What would an honest politician actually sound like? Old Gil is running for Senate against Mitch McConnell and Alison Lundergan Grimes. Follow his campaign at: http://igg.me/at/HonestGil

Honest Political Ads – Gil Fulbright for U.S. Senate

 Honest Political Ads – Healthcare Costs

Refreshing aren’t they?

Are conservatives serious about blacks?

“Conservative” means “‘Strom Thurmond,’ ‘Jesse Helms,’ ‘racist,'” to blacks. Above: late GOP senators Helms (N.C.) and Thurmond (S.C.) at left and right, with Elizabeth and Robert Dole. (AP Photo/Dennis Cook)

Not long ago I had dinner with a very prominent white conservative activist who wanted to talk with me about how to get more blacks involved in the Republican Party and the conservative movement. He and I have known each other for decades, but I still felt compelled to ask him if he truly wanted to have an honest conversation or just the typical D.C. conversation where a black person tells someone like him what they “thought” he wanted to hear just to curry favor with him.

Not long ago I had dinner with a very prominent white conservative activist who wanted to talk with me about how to get more blacks involved in the Republican Party and the conservative movement. He and I have known each other for decades, but I still felt compelled to ask him if he truly wanted to have an honest conversation or just the typical D.C. conversation where a black person tells someone like him what they “thought” he wanted to hear just to curry favor with him.

The first thing white conservatives need to understand is that “meanings are in people, not in words.” When you use the word “conservative,” blacks hear “Strom Thurmond,” “Jesse Helms,” and “racist”; therefore one should define their terminology and not assume your audience knows what your definition of conservative is.

The first thing white conservatives need to understand is that “meanings are in people, not in words.” When you use the word “conservative,” blacks hear “Strom Thurmond,” “Jesse Helms,” and “racist”; therefore one should define their terminology and not assume your audience knows what your definition of conservative is.

What does “conservative” mean, and what is the relevance of it for my life in 2014? Better yet, maybe you should get rid of the word “conservative” altogether when it comes to the black community and use the word “traditionalist.”

In the black community, we have a tradition of pulling ourselves up by the bootstraps because our parents and grandparents had no choice. We have a tradition of valuing education — that’s why we have over 100 historical black colleges and universities. Our parents and grandparents knew that education was the key to the success of future generations of blacks. We have a tradition of living a moral, God-fearing life. Our parents and grandparents were not pro-choice when Sunday morning came around; the question was not, “Boy are you going to church?” but rather, “Are you ready for church?” Children need direction, not choices.

We don’t need anyone to lecture us about values and conservatism; it’s part of our DNA. Getting blacks involved in the party and the conservative movement is easy; the issue is can you make us feel comfortable if we join?

We don’t need anyone to lecture us about values and conservatism; it’s part of our DNA. Getting blacks involved in the party and the conservative movement is easy; the issue is can you make us feel comfortable if we join?

Most conservative organizations are controlled and operated by white males. There are very few, if any, blacks in decision-making positions within these organizations. There are few, if any, blacks in executive-level positions. And there are definitely very few black staffers. This is the 21st century, yet the optics of most conservative organizations still reflect the 1950s or the Flintstones — no blacks.

Speaking of optics, let me mention a few “don’ts.” Never, I repeat never, refer to a black as “articulate” or “attractive;” and never say, “One of my best friends is black” or “I have a friend, who happens to be black.” These are very offensive phrases to blacks.

Just because you have “a” black on staff or are married to a black does not mean you can’t be a racist; just like me owning a pair of Air Jordans doesn’t make me a NBA basketball player.

Blacks constantly vote against their own self-interest — supporting amnesty for illegals, for example, or increasing the minimum wage — because conservatives have not provided a viable alternative.

This cognitive dissonance shows you the power of the value blacks place on relationships.

I operate mostly in a white environment, but spend just as much time within the black community because I have made a conscious choice that it is imperative for me to do so. It’s not an either/or proposition; it’s both/and.

Many conservatives are not comfortable with blacks who refuse to renounce their blackness in order to fit in. Blacks are the most conservative group in the U.S., yet the “conservative” brand is severely damaged in our community — and part of the reason why is because of some of the blacks you have promoted. It’s not enough to simply have a black involved with you; it is just as important to have the right blacks on your staffs.

If you conservatives are happy with your level of engagement within the black community, then keep doing what you have been doing. If you want to tap into the disillusionment created by President Obama, then you really need to rethink the blacks you have promoted as the face of your movement.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in American Current See magazine.

How Intelligent are Americans?

The segments when Jay Leno would take to the street to ask Americans questions about things that one would expect them to know and those when Jesse Watters of the O’Reilly Factor on Fox News does the same thing invariably suggest that those interviewed are appallingly stupid. But how representative are they of the population?

The voters who reelected President Obama despite a first term that included all his policies that put the nation at jeopardy apparently made no connection between those facts and his competence. Voters who stayed home demonstrated indifference.

On July 3, following the latest U.S. Department of Labor June unemployment report, the Job Creators Network responded by noting that “We have more than 3.5 million young adults between 20-24 who don’t have a job, don’t attend school, and don’t have any degree better than a high school diploma—and astonishingly low literacy rates.” The official rate of unemployment was cited at 6.1%, but the Network calculated the real unemployment rate for June at 12.1%. Suffice to say that government data is so politically skewed that it is useless.

In contrast to the view that Americans don’t understand what is actually occurring Rasmussen Reports on July 3rd released the results of its latest poll. “Optimism in the future job market in America is down this month, as fewer Americans believe the unemployment rate will go down over the next year.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 23% of American Adults think, a year from today, unemployment will be lower than it is today. That’s the lowest level of optimism since December 2011. Thirty-two percent (32%) think unemployment will be higher in a year, a new high for the 2014. Just as many (35%) think it will stay about the same. Ten percent (10%) are not sure.” The reality has not escaped just under a quarter of the likely voters polled and two-thirds have a dim view of the year ahead.

cartoon - liberals-brain

For a larger view click on the image. Info-graphic courtesy of The Peoples Cube.

A new Reason-Rupe study and survey of 2,000 Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 finds 66 percent of millennials believe government is inefficient and wasteful – a substantial increase since 2009, when just 42 percent of millennials said government was inefficient and wasteful.

This suggests that there is a difference between the kind of intelligence measured in IQ tests and the kind Americans apply to the world around them and to their own lives. I was the director of publications for the New Jersey Institute of Technology in the 1970s and it was evident to me that having a PhD degree was no guarantee of the latter kind of intelligence, often called common sense.

We have seen this in the way so many “experts” with degrees continue to assert that the Earth is warming (now called climate change) when it has been in a cooling cycle of some seventeen years. Recent polls indicate the public no longer assigns any credit to global warming/climate change. Then why do we continue to read about this in the nation’s media? Perhaps because so many who decide what we read and see are the product of the nation’s schools that continue to indoctrinate students to believe the warming lies and the way “climate change” is now being blamed for everything.

There is evidence, too, that our schools have been short-changing Americans for decades. America is now ranked below many other nations with IQ scores are compared. This is documented in Charlotte Thompson Iserbyt’s book, “The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America.” In March 2013 Joshua Holland noted that “In 2011, Newsweek asked one thousand Americans to take the standard U.S. Citizenship test and thirty-eight percent of them failed. One in three couldn’t name the Vice President.”

Those of my generation that attended school in the 1940s and 50s have little doubt that we received a far better education than those entering in the 1960s and since. Global intelligence quotients (IQs) ratings based on universal tests routinely rank the U.S. as just barely in the top twenty, outranked by nations that include Japan, South Korea, Germany, the United Kingdom and Mongolia! U.S. competence in mathematics and science lags too often and too much.

What is at stake is how prepared and how competent Americans are in order to select the political leadership the nation requires in order to be competitive and to respond to its domestic and foreign relations problems. At this writing, the low esteem in which Americans hold the President and Congress suggests they “have gotten the government they deserve” because that’s how democracy works.

Is that stupidity or indifference? I suspect it speaks more to a variety of factors that include education, the news and entertainment media culture, and the way modern communication technologies may be causing Americans to focus only on their personal circle of family, friends and coworkers to the exclusion of the larger issues and trends around them.

It might also reflect the incredible patience Americans show their elected leadership, often taking years before demanding and getting the changes needed to improve the economy and tend to other national priorities. As illegal immigration demonstrates, nothing has been done to address it since the last amnesty in the 1980s and, clearly, Americans do not want to repeat that mistake again.

Are Americans stupid? Some are. To my mind they number among the 30% of the extreme left that can always be depended upon to support Obama and liberal legislation such as Obamacare and other measures to expand the federal government. Add to them those who have currently grant him 47% approval. That number is beginning to decline.

Overall, however, I believe that most Americans are intelligent enough to know that something has been terribly wrong in a nation that permitted the 2008 financial crisis to occur (the government played a major role) and in the present White House that has failed for six and a half years to take the right steps to put the economy back on the road to recovery.

To that extent, I wait impatiently for the results of the forthcoming November midterm elections. Stupid Americans will vote for more of the same. Intelligent ones will vote for change.

© Alan Caruba, 2014