It’s Official: The Democrats are the Party of the Devil

/in , , , , /by

Perhaps the first clue, or the ten thousandth, was when many Democrats opposed the reinsertion of God into their party’s platform in 2012 and booed the judgment that the measure to do so had passed. But now it’s official:

The Democrats are the party of the Devil.

Here’s the story, courtesy of CBS Boston:

Ruth Provencal is a devout Catholic whose favorite phrase when saying goodbye has now thrust her into controversy.

“I would say ‘thank you for voting, God Bless you,’” Provencal explains.

After serving as an election volunteer five times, the 67-year-old was told to stay home on November 4th, sacked by Derry [New Hampshire] officials who argued that her reference to God might be an illegal effort to influence voters.

“I just can’t believe that you’re telling me that I can’t say the word God,” she told the elections official. “Then she said ‘no you can’t.’”

My, it didn’t take long for the Democrat mantra to change from “Yes, we can!”

The article actually states that Derry election officials believe saying “God bless you” could be electioneering. Now, let me apply a little white male linear logic here. Since we don’t yet have a Satanist Party on the ballot (give it time) and I don’t believe one of the other minor parties was the concern, I’m going to take a wild guess and say it was thought that the alleged electioneering could be an influence with respect to one of the two major parties. And here’s what this means:

One of our major parties is so closely associated with godlessness, with evil, with everything so antithetical to the divine that even the mere mention of God’s name in a polling place constitutes a message in opposition to that party.

I’m going to take another wild guess and assume this party was not thought — even by the liberal election officials — to be the Republican Party.

What’s funny is that I seem to remember another party officially opposed to God. It was once dominant in places such as the Soviet Union, Hungary and Albania and still masquerades as its old self in China. I don’t think it started with “D,” though, but was one letter back.

So should the Democrats henceforth be known as the Demonrats? Will their new symbol be the Pentagram? Will they trade the donkey for the Tasmanian devil? Will their (relatively few) election winners be sworn in this coming January on a book written by Anton LaVey?

This also explains why the Democrats’ campaign tactics seem to perfectly align with occultist Aleister Crowley’s maxim “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.” It also should shape Republican campaign tactics in future elections. Forget spending millions of dollars on ads, political strategists, data mining and get-out-the-vote efforts. All they really need do is hire an army of exorcists.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

EDITORS NOTE: The featured graphic is courtesy of the Doo Doo Economics blog.

Why the Sarasota Herald-Tribune’s Tom Tryon just doesn’t seem to get it

/in , , , , /by

Opinion Editor for the Sarasota Herald-Tribune Tom Tryon did a column titled “Post-election enmity won’t help schools.” Tryon used the word enmity when referring to Bridget Ziegler, a newly elected member of the Sarasota County School Board.

Enmity is defined as, “the state or feeling of being actively opposed or hostile to someone or something.” You know like being opposed to things that are absurd, and people who are bad or evil.

Tryon is concerned that  in the local community there is “a palpable sense of hostility, enmity and animus.” Tryon wants to be the “can’t we all just get along” Rodney King of Sarasota, Florida. You know, think alike, be alike, don’t stand out from the crowd for your ideas and ideals. Perhaps Tryon should write a letter to President Obama on his enmity toward Republicans, rather than picking on a working mother who is doing her civic duty.

Tryon wants this new school board member to go along to get along. To fully embrace Common Core State Standards (a.k.a. Florida Standards) even though she campaigned against it because teachers and parents are against it. In the name of just getting along Tryon wants this newly elected school board member to abandon those who have enmity toward Common Core.

He wants this school board member to embrace government secrecy and behind closed door “workshop” meetings in the name of being nice.

He wants this new school board member to lovingly embrace the Sarasota Classified/Teachers Association that repeatedly used the district email system, even after Superintendent Lori White sent out a warning that it violates district policy, to defeat her. Perhaps district staff member Gary Ferguson, who used his office and the district email system to support Ziegler’s opponent, didn’t get the memo, which he probably wrote?

What about the district staff and SC/TA enmity toward Ziegler?

Tryon wants this school board member to forget what she stands for and stands against in the name of uniformity of purpose.

Tryon wants this school board member to abandon those parents, teachers, administrators and citizens who voted for her in the name of friendship with those on the School Board who openly and publicly attacked her at a behind closed doors school board “workshop.”

Tryon wants this newly elected school board member to forget how her fellow school board member Democrat Shirley Brown and her fellow Republicans Caroline Zucker and Jane Goodwin did everything in their power to undermine her election. Brown used the school district email system to fund raise for her opponent. Zucker brought her opponent to a North Port Republican Party event as her guest. Goodwin did a robo-call endorsement of her opponent. Isn’t three against one bullying?

But let’s let bygones be bygones. Just slip into bed with the enemy and all will be right as rain.

Abandon your principles, says Tryon, and you will be loved. Tryon has one thing right, the 2014 mid-term election is over. But the bad policies of the school board continue. Policies like:

  1. Embracing Common Core State Standards (Florida Standards) that takes away every teachers ability to teach. A centralized one size fits all education system.
  2. Holding school board workshops off camera, throwing government transparency under the bus.
  3. Holding SC/TA negotiations at their offices rather than in the open, live and on camera at the district so all can see.
  4. Putting the tax referendum on an off year March ballot (thereby suppressing the vote), while costing taxpayers $500,000, rather than during the regular November election cycle.
  5. Teaching to the test as required by No Child Left Behind and Race To The Top federal legislation.
  6. Allowing school board members, the district staff, SC/TA and others to use the taxpayer funded district email system for political purposes.

Tryon seems to want a 5-0 vote on everything district staff brings to the board for action. Heaven forbid that any school board member ever questions any district action or school board policy because it is considered unfair, wrong or just plain bad policy by parents, students and ordinary citizens.

Maybe Tryon needs to tell Brown, Zucker and Goodwin to stop the enmity toward those who don’t think like them such as parents and students?

We do agree with a couple of Tryon’s comments like Brown, Zucker and Goodwin avoiding “creating the appearance that the School Board is their private club.” We also like Tryon’s idea, which he took from us,  to make “Union leaders to help themselves and their members by creating their own email system.”

Maybe Tom Tryon is actually reading what we write? No, that can’t be it.

Enmity is a good thing. Marching in lockstep is a bad thing, just as it is in Washington, D.C. and at Sarasota school board meetings. Different ideas must be heard, discussed in a civil manner and then voted on. That is the Constitutional Republican way.

Tryon is trying to use his editorial pen to pound a round peg into a square hole. Good luck with that Tom.

Voters Reject the Green Political Agenda

/in , , , , , , /by

What the midterm voters wanted was an economy that returned to its average 3.3% annual growth since the end of World War II. For six years of the Obama presidency, growth has all but disappeared. In 2013, as measured by the World Bank, it was barely 1.9% That translated into a lack of jobs, stagnant middle class income, and what Obama correctly called the Great Recession, but could not end.

Instead, in the lead-up to the midterm elections, he was still talking about “climate change” as the greatest threat to the nation and the world. For the voters, however, climate change wasn’t even on its list of priorities and with good reason, there is nothing anyone or any nation can or should do about the great forces of nature that determine what the Earth’s climate will be; starting with the Sun.

The day after the elections two major environmental organizations, the Sierra Club and Friends of the Earth (FOE), wrote to their members. Their message was similar and their conclusions were absurd.

“The election’s over and the planet lost,” wrote Erich Pica, FOE president. “The next Congress will be controlled by politicians elected with millions of dollars of the Koch brothers’ oil money—putting at risk the vital environmental protections we’ve fought so hard to achieve.” FOE has more than 2 million activists in 75 nations including the U.S.

What Pica does not mention in his letter is the estimated $85 million spent on six Senate races by what The Hill described as “the nation’s top environmental groups including the League of Conservation Voters, the Sierra Club, the Environmental Defense Fund, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and billionaire Tom Steyer’s NextGen Climate…”

So the Koch brother’s money is evil, but environmental organizations’ money is okay?

As far as FOE’s Pica is concerned, “The truth is, President Obama hasn’t always done the right thing for the environment. He should have denied the Keystone Pipeline years ago, he should be rolling back unchecked fracking, and he should have taken stronger action on climate both at home and in international negotiations.”

FOE could care less about the thousands of jobs the Keystone pipeline would create, plus the revenue from refining the oil it would transport to the Gulf States. As for fracking, it is not “unchecked.” It has to be done within the context of safety and environmental laws. As for the climate, China and India are just two nations increasing the use of coal to generate the electrical power they need to stimulate industrialization and improve the lives of their citizens by bringing power where he has never been before.

Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club, wrote that “Friends of Big Oil have taken control of the Senate” claiming they have “a 100-day action plan that reads like Big Oil’s wish list. Our opposition is about to have free reign to implement their anti-environment agenda. And approving the Keystone XL pipeline and destroying proposed environmental regulations top their list.”

Oh, really? If the polls and elections are any indicator, a lot of Americans want to see the pipeline construction. As for the “anti-environment agenda”, that too is pure fiction. What Americans oppose is the forced closure of electricity generation plants in the name of a global warming that is not happening. Or a climate change over which no government has any role or control.

To drive home his doom-and-gloom message, Brune added that “Rare species of wildlife already hanging by a threat will not survive this onslaught.” Consider the absurdity of the claim that a Republican controlled Congress will be responsible for species extinction. For good measure, Brune, like the FOE, mentioned the Koch brothers, labeling them “big polluters.” Since when is drilling for oil and providing it to a world that runs on it “pollution”? It’s not. It’s progress that benefits humanity.

Commenting on the elections, Dr. Jay Lehr, the Science Director of The Heartland Institute, a free market think tank, characterized them as “the repudiation of the President’s policies” and the nation’s political pundits all agree. Dr. Lehr called for “a bill to require the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline which has bipartisan support and has passed every environmental test.”

Dr. Lehr called on Congress to “require the government to open up public lands to environmentally safe mineral and energy exploration as well as speed up approval of permits to drill and mine for resources on already approved lands. This will ensure our resource independence in both areas for centuries to come.”

High on my list of priorities was reflected by Dr. Lehr’s call for Congress “to take charge of the funding of the Environmental Protection Agency which has gone rogue in efforts to impede virtually all economic development in our nation, and eventually phase out the EPA, passing on its responsibilities to a committee of the whole of our fifty state environmental protection agencies.”

A November 6 article, “Climate change supporters suffer losses”, published in The Hill, reported that “Despite millions spent to make climate change a wedge issue during the midterms, environmentally friendly candidates didn’t fare well on Election Day.” Even so, the Sierra Club’s Brune was quoted saying, “Public support is solidly behind action to tackle the climate crisis. While we have lost friends in Congress, we are gaining them in the streets, as our movement grows stronger and broader.” NOT!

Frances Beinecke, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, echoed Brune’s empty boasts. “Whatever may have driven individual races, the American people want action on climate change.” NOT!

As far as the environment is concerned, it is way down on the list of the voter’s priorities and the change of leadership and control of Congress reflects that. The voters don’t want a lot of vapid, idiotic talk of climate change and other environmental fantasies. They want jobs. They want an economy that will provide them. They want a better future for themselves and their children. And whether they know it or not, they want a conservative approach to government.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

Congressional Black Caucus: Blacks Own Worst Enemy

/in , , , , , /by

Black Democrats are the most despised people on the face of this earth and they have worked hard to deserve this designation.

They vote upwards of 90 percent for Democratic candidates for president and get very little in exchange for their loyalty. They constantly deliver victory to Democrats, only to see the spoils of victory go to other groups: homosexuals, illegals, and White women.

Jimmy Carter had very few Blacks in his administration. Bill Clinton had more, but threw Lani Guinier, one of his closest personal friends and a top campaign supporter, under the bus because of threats by Republicans not to confirm her as Assistant Attorney General. Obama has even refused to interview a Black female jurist for consideration to the U.S. Supreme Court.

So, I was thoroughly stunned by the comments of the Democratic chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), Marcia Fudge (D-Ohio) during their annual conference two weeks ago here in D.C.

Here is a direct quote from her:

“I hope you will spend this much time with your local elected officials. I guarantee you most people in this room have not done that. With your school board, with your city council, and so then you won’t be calling me talking about somebody didn’t come and pick up your trash. You need to call your city council person for that.

And I say it that way because, I need you to understand we all have a role to play and the Congressional Black Caucus cannot do it all by ourselves. Everybody has to do their part …The black caucus fights for you every day. Even when you won’t fight for yourself. We fight for you. Whether its immigration or education, whether it’s food stamps or housing, we fight for you every day. So my message to you is to contain your complaining.”

Now mind you, the CBC is the same group that criticized Obama for telling them to stop complaining at their annual dinner in September of 2011, “Take off your bedroom slippers. Put on your marching shoes; Shake it off. Stop complainin’. Stop grumblin’. Stop cryin’. We are going to press on. We have work to do.”

Isn’t it amazing that both Fudge and Obama’s tone to this group of Blacks was extremely condescending? They both showed a great deal of disdain for their own people. Now just suppose that a White Democrat had said the same thing. These very same Blacks would have lost their minds screaming bloody racism.

With Fudge and Obama it may not be racism, but it is liberal elitism at its finest.

Fudge claims that the CBC is fighting for Blacks even when they won’t fight for themselves. Really? How is supporting amnesty for illegals helping the Black community? Every analysis done has concluded that amnesty would drastically increase the Black unemployment rate. How is denying poor mothers the power to choose which schools to send their kids to helping better the lives of those forced to attend subpar schools? I find it ironic that most CBC members refuse to send their kids to public schools. There are more Americans on food stamps now than at any point in our country’s history and Blacks are disproportionately represented in this number.

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, in the past five years, the number of households on food stamps has greatly increased. In fiscal year 2009 – Oct. 1, 2008 through Sept. 30, 2009 — the number of households on food stamps was 15,232,115. Five years later, in 2013, that amount had increased by 51.3 percent to reach 23,052,388 households (or 20 percent of all households). Twenty two percent of Blacks receive food stamps during this time period, though Blacks are 13 percent of the U.S. population.

How does the CBC expect Blacks to be able to afford to buy a home, if they are promoting policies that continue to keep the unemployment rate at high levels?

Fudge and the CBC seem to talk about fighting for welfare as though it should be a badge of honor. Would it not make more sense to brag about how their policies are increasing employment opportunities for Blacks, therefore those needing food stamps is going down. That would be worth celebrating.

If Republicans would take this message into the Black community, not only will we take over the Senate; but we will win the White House with double digit support from the Black community. Would this not be a “conservative” approach to dealing with some of the issues affecting the Black community? Would this not be a worthy expenditure of campaign funds?

The Black vote is up for grabs during this congressional election and beyond. The question for Republicans is who will turn a deaf ear to their White consultants who constantly tell them that the Black vote is unattainable? Just food for thought.

Democrats reveal the ‘secret’ of the Republican win

/in , , , , /by

In an email to supporters, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee announced the “secret” behind the Republican win on November 4th, 2014 – a day that will live in infamy for the loyal followers of President Obama.

No, it is not his failed domestic policy that has left tens of millions of Americans without jobs. It is not the illegal alien invasion bringing with it the deadly EV-D68 virus into public school classrooms across America. It is not the mishandling of the Ebola virus pandemic that has for the first time reached America’s shores. It is not Obamacare, the stone walling of the Keystone Pipeline, climate change, the inability to stop the Islamic State and Iranian nuclear program, Russia in the Balkans and Ukraine or the administration throwing Israel under the Palestinian bus. Its not even the unsustainable national debt and failed stimulus program.

It is “obstructionism.”

The email features the below image of Paul Krugman:

krugman obstructionism

The DCCC email states, “In other words, the Republicans broke Washington. Then, they spent millions of dollars of secret money running against a broken Washington.” I appears the voters know who”broke Washington” and voted accordingly on November 4th.

Just who are the Republicans obstructing and sabotaging? Why President Obama and his Collectivist agenda. Paul Krugman got it right, as did the American people. While President Obama was not on the ballot his policies were, as the President so eloquently pointed out.

The “sabotage” of the Obama agenda was and remains priority one for the lame duck 113th Republican House of Representatives and will continue under the new Republican majority in the U.S. Senate and expanded Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives in the 114th Congress. This strategy will continue until the 2016 Presidential elections when it is expected that Republicans will offer a stark alternative to the Collectivism of President Obama.

As Redstate’s Erick Erickson noted the American people got a taste of socialism under Obama. It is now clear they did not like it and spit it out.

The DCCC email concludes that in President Obama’s final two years, “There’s no sugarcoating it. Full Republican control of Congress won’t be easy.”

Who will become the obstructionist when legislation is passed by both houses of the 114th Congress and placed on the Presidents desk for signature?

For Democrats this has always been about Obama. For Republicans it has always been about Obama.

Its the President’s policies, stupid!

RELATED ARTICLES:

BIG REVIEW SET BY DEMOCRATS AFTER ELECTION LOSSES – AP

DNC chief: We have a problem – The Hill

Poll Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein shouldn’t run again, majority of voters say – LA Times

We Won: Must Hold Their Feet to the Fire

/in , , , , /by

My lovely wife and I shared a victory toast and a kiss in front of the fireplace in the lobby of the hotel that we are staying in Colorado, upon the announcement that the GOP won the Senate. Our Conservative Campaign Committee team has been here for weeks working to elect Cory Gardner for U.S. Senate. Gardner won!

Folks, please do not get me wrong: I am elated that the GOP has won control of the Senate. Despite their faults, the GOP is closest to our principles and values. Also, we desperately needed to dethrone evil madmen Harry Reid as Senate Majority Leader.

However, I must confess that it was annoying to watch Karl Rove on TV pounding his chest in victory about how he and his group pushed the Tea Party nut candidates out of the race. Rove had the nerve to say he and his people wanted the best electable conservative candidates. That simply is not true.

Chris McDaniel, to name one, in Mississippi was an awesome extremely electable Tea Party conservative who was pushed out of the race with GOP dirty tricks which included race-baiting. Yes, you heard me correctly. The GOP establishment machine engaged in the Democrat-gutter, tried and true, despicable tactic of race-baiting to screw McDaniel. I know. I know. You’re saying, C’mon, Lloyd, that’s in the past. We won. Celebrate and get over it. Sorry, folks. I expect better from our side.

Rove and his deep-pocketed homey’s strategy of the GOP keeping a low profile and letting Obama hang himself worked okay. Unfortunately, exit polling revealed that the GOP is still viewed unfavorably by a majority of voters. Given the horrors and scandals of the Obama regime, the Republican wave should have been a tsunami. What if the GOP had offered an agenda inspiring people to vote FOR them rather than AGAINST Obama? What if the GOP boldly articulated why conservatism is the best and most direct path for each and every American to achieve their American dream?

Two remarkable things happen this election that strongly suggest that blacks are open to hearing what Conservatism has to offer over Liberalism. A video of urban blacks in Chicago trashing Obama and the Democrats went viral.  My lifelong Democrat 86 year old black dad called from Maryland to tell me that he did not like any of the candidates, but voted Republican. Folks, that is huge. Dad has always believed that a vote for a Republican is a vote for the KKK. So something is up.

Republicans now control the House and the Senate. Praise God! Now what? Word on the political street is the GOP plans to give the Tea Party the finger.

Patriots, we must be more mobilized and engaged than ever. We must do everything in our power to push the GOP into doing what we worked our butts off for them to do: Stop Obama’s Agenda!

D.C. insiders say that the GOP strategy is not to push back too soon or too hard against Obama’s agenda as not to be called arrogant, aggressive and mean by the MSM. The game plan is to play nice with Obama as not to hinder our chances of winning the White House in 2016.

These D.C. insiders also say repealing Obamacare is impossible and the best that we in the Tea Party can hope for is for the GOP to fix it. Mitt Romney said upon the GOP winning the Senate an immigration bill would be top priority. You see where this is headed folks? The GOP plans to go swishy on us and implement a Democrat-lite agenda.

We can not and will not allow them to get away with it. I am proposing that the united forces of the Tea Party launch “Operation Hold Their Feet to the Fire”. Every individual, group and organization must use their gifts, talents, skills and passion to force the GOP to do the right thing.

Folks, we have brilliant minds on our side. I have met many of you traveling on over a dozen national bus tours, attending over 400 tea party rallies. I challenge you to think of strategic ways to turn the GOP’s agenda to our agenda; repeal Obamacare, secure our borders, fiscal responsibility, restoring our freedom and liberty and turn us back to one nation under God.

Ronald Reagan: “There is no limit to the amount of good you can do if you don’t care who gets the credit.” Patriots, I am calling for an all hands on deck drill to save our country by holding the Republicans’ feet to the fire. Frankly, I do not care which Tea Party group, organization or individual that leads the charge. Let’s just get it done!

Everyone pulling together is how we (Conservatives) won big in 2010, shocking Washington D.C., despite being ignored by the MSM.

As I said, we are in Colorado, too busy campaigning to enjoy the world renowned hot springs. In celebration of the Republican wave, America’s push back against socialism, we can relax a bit. Mary and I plan to enjoy a few relaxing therapeutic soaks in the sulfur smelling hot springs.

Then, we will be ready to pack our bags and hit the road on a “Hold Their Feet to the Fire Tour”. I have even written a soon to be released theme song.

I thank God for our victory. But, there is still much more work to be done; miles to go before we sleep.

Congrats patriots, taking the U.S. Senate is a major step in the right direction.

I don’t know why, but I feel compelled to end with this video of Kate Smith singing “God Bless America”.

No, Ted Cruz is Not Eligible to be President

/in , , , , /by

On October 31, 2014, MinuteManNews.com published an article by Greg Conterio, titled, “Yes, Ted Cruz is Eligible to Serve as President,”  Over the past seven years, since the day Barack Obama crawled out of the political cesspools of South Chicago, I have written numerous articles on the question of his eligibility to serve as president… the longest of which is a comprehensive 13-page analysis of the term “natural born Citizen” titled, “The Obama Eligibility Question .”

Now, as we enter the 2016 campaign season, with Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), Governor Bobby Jindal (R-LA), Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), mentioned as potential presidential candidates, a great many Americans remain confused about the definition of the term “natural born Citizen.”  Although each of these men are eligible to serve as governors, as U.S. Senators, as members of the U.S. House of Representatives, or even justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, none are eligible to serve as president or vice president because they are not “natural born Citizens,” as required by Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution.

Cruz was born in Canada to an American mother and a Cuban father; Jindal was born in the U.S. to a father and mother, both of whom were citizens of India; Rubio was born in the U.S to parents, both of whom were citizens of Cuba; and Santorum was born in the U.S. to an American mother and an Italian father.  Under provisions of the 14th Amendment, all are “citizens at birth,” but none are “natural born” citizens because of their non-citizen parentage.

Aware that Senator Cruz was born in Canada to a Cuban father, Conterio relies on language contained in 8 USC §1401 to support his contention that Cruz is a “natural born” citizen.  That statutory language defines a “citizen at birth” as “a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is… not a citizen of the United States.”  At no point does the statute mention the term “natural born Citizen,” nor does it attempt to show that the terms “natural born Citizen” and “citizen at birth” are synonymous.  To the contrary, when the Founders inserted the words “natural born Citizen” in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, as a principal qualification for those who wished to serve as president of the United States, it was their intention that all those born with any taint of foreign allegiance should be barred from the presidency and the vice presidency.  Hence, the term “natural born Citizen.”

Under the 14th Amendment, all those born in the United States to American citizen parents, as well as those born to foreign nationals or parents of mixed nationality, are “citizens at birth.”  In other words, all “natural born” citizens are “citizens at birth,” but not all “citizens at birth” are “natural born.”  However, Conterio contends that the terms “natural born Citizen” and “Citizen at birth” are synonymous, just as the terms “dog” and “domestic canine” are synonymous.  That simply is not true.  Those terms are no more synonymous than the terms “apple” and “orange.”  But then, Conterio goes on to argue that, “Based on U.S. law, the terms ‘natural born Citizen’ and ‘Citizen at birth’ are synonymous.”  However, in the next breath he reverses course, saying, “The Founders said ‘Natural Born Citizen,’ and the U.S. Code says ‘Citizen at Birth,’ which mean two completely different things.”  So which is it?  Either the terms are “synonymous,” or are they “two completely different things?”  They can’t be both.

What many who support the eligibility of Cruz, Jindal, Rubio, and Santorum refuse to consider  is that there are only two jobs in all of America that require the incumbents to be “natural born” citizens.  Those jobs are president and vice president of the United States.  Every other job in America, in government or in the private sector, can be filled by natural born citizens, by citizens at birth, by naturalized citizens, or, in some cases, by non-citizens with work visas.  Those who agree that there are several categories of citizenship, but then argue that the Constitution puts no unique requirements on candidates for president and vice president, have an obligation to explain what they see as the difference between a “natural born” citizen and any other kind of citizen.          

In his analysis, Conterio relies heavily on an April 3, 2009 memorandum prepared by attorney Jack Maskell of the Congressional Research Service (CRS).  The Maskell memorandum, which has been widely discredited, was produced for one reason and one reason alone: to give political cover to members of Congress who voted to certify Obama’s Electoral College votes, knowing or strongly suspecting that he was not eligible for that office.

The gist of Maskell’s argument is that “…there is no federal law, regulation, rule, guideline, or requirement that a candidate for federal office produce his or her original birth certificate, or a certified copy of the record of live birth, to any official of the United States government… Furthermore, there is no specific federal agency or office that ‘vets’ candidates for federal office as to qualifications or eligibility… ”

No specific federal agency or office that “vets” candidates for federal office as to qualifications or eligibility?  Upon being sworn into office in early January, following each biennial General Election, all members of Congress are required to swear the following oath: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

The congressional oath of office clearly requires all members of Congress to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”  That includes all those who would seek to gain access to the presidency without the necessary qualifications.

The presidential selection process provides three vetting opportunities for president and vice president.  Unfortunately, all three vetting opportunities failed miserably in 2008-09.  The first occurred at the close of the Democratic national convention, in Denver, when the convention chairman, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, and the convention secretary, Alice Travis Germond, certified Barack Obama and Joe Biden to the 50 state election boards so that ballots could be printed.

Because Hawaii has specific certification requirements under Hawaii Revised Statutes §11-113, Pelosi and Germond certified to the State of Hawaii, as follows: “THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at  the National Convention of the Democrat Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado, on August 25 though (sic) 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively, and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.” 

The certifications sent to the other 49 states read, simply: “THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democrat Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado, on August 25 though (sic) 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States, respectively.”  Affixed were the names and home addresses of Barack Obama and Joe Biden.  The phrase, “… and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution” was purposely omitted.

Other than that, all of the documents were identical… even to the misspelling of the word “through” in the second line of the certifications.  The only reasonable conclusion to be drawn is that Democrats knew when they nominated him that Obama was not a “natural born” citizen and, therefore, ineligible to serve.  Pelosi was aware that certifying falsely to Obama’s eligibility was a criminal offense, so the question arises, what did she know, and when did she know it?

The second vetting opportunity occurred on December 15, 2008, when the Democratic members of the Electoral College met to elect Barack Obama and Joe Biden.  Even though most electors had been warned in advance that Obama did not meet the constitutional requirements to serve as president, all 365 Democratic electors, anxious to have another Democrat in the White House, violated their electoral oaths and cast their ballots for Obama.

The third and final vetting opportunity occurred on January 8, 2009, when the Congress met in joint session to certify the votes of the Electoral College.  Prior to that date, essentially every member of Congress had been advised that Obama’s citizenship status was seriously in doubt.  So, if a member of Congress suspected that the Electoral College had erred, it was his/her solemn obligation to make those suspicions known and to object to the certification of the Electoral College vote. Yet, all 535 members of Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike, purposely violated their oath of office by failing to demand an examination of Obama’s qualifications.

Why did they do so?  Although we can’t read the minds of 535 members of Congress, we can “bet the farm” that most failed to question Obama’s eligibility because they were terrified at what would happen in the streets of America if the first black man ever elected by the Electoral College was turned away at the last moment on a constitutional “technicality.”  Instead, the double-redundant “fail safe” system envisioned by the Founders suffered catastrophic failure.

But now, with the potential candidacies of Ted Cruz, Bobby Jindal, Marco Rubio, or Rick Santorum, Republican principles will soon be put to the test.  We will see whether Republicans, who, unlike Democrats, believe in the strict construction of the Constitution and the rule of law, will have sufficient reverence for the words of the Constitution to deny the nomination to a candidate who does not meet the necessary qualifications.  Knowing Republicans as I do, I feel certain that they will distinguish themselves by refusing to nominate an unqualified candidate.

‘A Lesson in Politics’

/in , , , /by

The mid-term elections in America have gone the way that most pundits predicted: a Republican rout in the mid-terms. The discussion immediately went on to the next question: what does this mean?

In some ways the answer is ‘not very much’. The mid-terms are the only real opportunity American voters get to voice their dissatisfaction with an incumbent party and incumbent President. Almost all of President Obama’s predecessors have been treated in a similar way in their time – both Republican and Democrat. So the voters may want to register their disappointment with President Obama now but perhaps no more than they wished to register their disappointment with President Bush in his day and so on. It is true that disillusionment with Obama may be more serious because of the unbelievable and impossible to live up to expectations which he and those around him promulgated ahead of his arrival in the White House.

The fact that voters get opportunities to register dissatisfaction is of course one of the healthiest aspects of a healthy democracy. But the manner in which they do so is becoming an issue in all our democracies in the West. America’s electoral system allows only for a switch to the other party with the very very occasional independent thrown in.

Until recently British voters had a similar choice – to rotate between the two main parties but with the opportunity to punish both at once by going with the Liberal Democrats. The latter were for years able to appeal to a certain type of voter not least because they had no chance of holding office and therefore could portray their principles as standing aloft from the grubby concerns of other politicians.

Since going into coalition with the Conservatives in 2010 that stance has fallen apart. And the Liberal Democrats are – all polls show – now no longer the party of ‘opposition’ to the two main parties. Indeed they must now fight to be even the fourth party at the next election. There are many lessons to be taken from this but one is the fact that politics ‘taints’. The process of compromise, bargain, meeting in the middle is something everybody in the business of politics becomes aware of. But much depends on whether publics are encouraged to understand this.

One temptation of politicians is to hide the brute bargaining of power while pretending to keep their principles clean. Yet doing so accentuates the divide between voter and representative. In every part of the political divide and each democracy we must be careful not to develop purist publics and ‘tainted’ representatives. All the populist and in some cases demagogic movements of our time come from the message that all ‘them’ in Washington or Westminster are the same.

Ideals are vital in politics. But should we end up in a position where the public hold ideals the politicians cannot live up to, the result will not be not bi-annual expressions of dissatisfaction but a growing generation of political malcontents.

ELECTION 2014 – Crist Retired, Reid Fired, Obama Tired!

/in , , , /by

WOW, the Democrats just took a good ole’ fashion butt-kickin and now the work begins for the Republicans! Join us as we do an election day wrap-up featuring several experts who help make sense out of the chaotic and tsunamic changes that are taking place in the United States Government as the Democrats lose power to the Republicans and President Obama tries to figure out the meaning to life! Also, a live report from Israel on a recent terrorist attack.

Obama’s Revenge

/in , , , , , , , /by

The Democratic Party that supported President Obama’s agenda for the past six years was dramatically rejected in the midterm elections and the message for the new Republican-controlled Senate and House is to aggressively take action on stalled legislation to improve the economy and address other issues that have suffered neglect.

The GOP is going to be up against the revenge Obama will take on America in the remaining two years. The midterms will not generate any humility in Obama; only anger and resentment.

Republicans were not elected to “work with” Obama. They were elected to stop his agenda and actions that have been harmful to the nation. The big question coming out of this electoral mandate is whether the inside-the-beltway Republicans in Washington will do what the voters want.

Obama promised a “transformation” of America, a nation dedicated to individual freedom and liberty, and it has taken this long for many to realize that his definition of transformation was an ever-increasing Big Government to control every aspect of our lives:

  • the education of our youth who lack knowledge of civics, math, and science,
  • the deprivation and reduction of access to vital sources of energy,
  • the refusal to protect U.S. sovereignty by ignoring our immigration laws and border security,
  • the reduction of our military power to levels rivaling pre-World War Two,
  • the failure to resist the growth of Islamic fanaticism,
  • the historic and dangerous increase of our national debt,
  • the failure to take fundamental steps to revive the economy by cutting taxes and reducing regulations,
  • the destruction of our market-based healthcare system.

Obama will take the electoral rejection very personally and, as we have seen in his contempt for working with Congress and his smears of the Republican Party, no one should doubt he will use the remainder of his term in office to wreak as much damage as possible; to prove he is right and the rest of the nation is wrong.

Much of what he will do was put off until after the midterm elections because he knew the level of rejection would be even greater. Now he is free to misuse “executive orders” unless the new Congress takes steps to defund and legislatively stop them. Investigations into the scandals that have become synonymous with his administration must be vigorously pursued.

What can we anticipate?

Obama will do everything he can to leave American vulnerable to increased illegal immigration including a rumored amnesty that would provide work permits and green cards to millions who would compete with jobless natural born and naturalized Americans. He has already refused to spend funds that have been allocated to secure our borders.

When Attorney General Eric Holder exits the Department of Justice expect Obama to nominate someone even more radical and divisive.

In the next two years you can expect the Environmental Protection Agency, already producing more regulations than any other element of the government, to go into overdrive to shut down as many power plants as possible, reducing the production of electricity on which the nation depends.

Obama has done little to respond to the growing global Islamist movement, showing favor to terrorist groups such as Hamas, but his greatest effort has been to provide Iran with the approval to advance its nuclear weapons capability by opening negotiations that, if agreed to, would put it within mere months of being able to put nuclear warheads on missiles and in bombs. It would change the balance of power in the Middle East and threaten the rest of the world.

Expect Obama to try to close Guantanamo despite legislation forbidding this action. In keeping with his tilt toward Islam, he has already released five Taliban leaders in exchange for an alleged U.S. Army deserter. Others who were released rejoined the Islamic holy war.

He will, of course, do everything he can to protect his namesake legislation, the Affordable Patient Care Act otherwise known as ObamaCare. It must be dismantled before it does even more harm to the nation’s healthcare system. He has waited until after the midterms for Americans to learn that their ACA premiums will rise dramatically. Ultimately, it must be repealed.

In these and many other ways, he can continue to harm our national interests. The one prediction that can be made with certainty is that he will spend even more time playing golf and indulging the many perks of the office.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

John Morgan — Wrong on Marijuana, Wrong on Charlie Crist: Can FL Dems trust his judgement?

/in , , , /by

As Florida Republicans bask in the sunshine of victory on November 5th there is one man who is not very happy. His name is John Morgan of the Orlando based firm of Morgan & Morgan. Morgan may be in hiding trying to avoid Florida’s Democrats. Why? Because Morgan sold the Florida Democratic party on putting marijuana and Charlie Crist on the November 4th ballot.

Ana Cruz, former executive director of the Florida Democratic Party, said, “I wish that it didn’t take medical marijuana on the ballot to motivate our young voters. But listen, we’ll take it any way we can get it.” Cruz didn’t get it.

Ben Pollara, a Democratic fundraiser and campaign manager for the United for Care group, stated, “We want to be able to have our stereotypical, lazy pothead voters to be able to vote from their couch.” Ben, it appears the lazy potheads stayed home to smoke a joint or two or three.

Hopes were high, no pun intended, that legalizing marijuana in Florida under Amendment 2 would bring out the millennials. It was Morgan’s long time ally and employee Charlie Crist who had the overwhelming support of the trial lawyers, of which Morgan is one. Both marijuana and Crist when down in smoke.

Can the Florida Democratic Party trust the judgement of John Morgan?

As Florida Democrats are licking their wounds, it is perhaps time for them to rethink the political savvy of John Morgan.

Morgan sold Florida Democrats on Amendment 2. Shame on him. Morgan sold Florida Democrats on Charlie Crist, shame on them.

RELATED VIDEO: John Morgan’s profanity laced interview about the defeat of Amendment 2. His diatribe is filled with hate for law enforcement, those who do not think like him and the older voters of Florida.

Arkansas elects the youngest US Senator to enter the 214th Congress: Rep. Tom Cotton

/in , , , /by

Just prior to last night’s resounding GOP mid-term victories in the US Senate, the House and a host of gubernatorial contests, I had an opportunity to speak with Shoshana Bryen. She is the executive director of the Washington, DC – based Jewish Policy Center. We were preparing for last Sunday’s Lisa Benson Show, which had a midterm election theme of “Vote to Protect America and its Ally Israel”.  We talked about a wide range of issues.  In addition to Shoshana, we had as other guests on the show, Ken Timmerman, veteran Iran watcher and author of Dark Forces: The Truth About What Happened in Benghazi, and Navy Seal veteran, Ben Smith.  Listen here to the discussion on the November 2, 2014 Lisa Benson Show.   

When I asked Bryen about emerging figures in the mid-term elections, she pointed to Rep. Tom Cotton (R-4th CD AK)  running a competitive  campaign against incumbent two-term  US Democrat Senator Mark Pryor. Pryor was the scion of a long serving Arkansas political dynasty.  His father David before him had served as both Governor and US Senator.

Cotton, I knew from reading a profile of him by retired Harvard Professor Ruth Wisse in The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) had a career that resonated. He was a highly educated double Harvard graduate who voluntarily served as an Infantry officer in the US Army during the Iraq-Afghanistan conflict.  Wisse’s WSJ op-ed   was an unabashed endorsement, “Vote for Tom Cotton—and Redeem Harvard”.   So, I asked Bryen on last Sunday’s broadcast to talk about Cotton and another Army veteran Lt. Col.Joni Ernst of Iowa both running for the US Senate in their respective states.

 Cotton and Ernst won their respective Senate races last night. A colleague called last night from a cheering Iowa GOP celebration to give me the news about Ernst’s victory. Cotton trounced Pryor by running against “Obama’s failed policies”. He won by 16 percent. His campaign played up his Army service. Cotton, 37 years old, will enter the 314th Congress in January 2015 as its youngest member.

 Cotton is a sixth generation Arkansan from a cattle raising ranching family in the small community of Dardanelle, Arkansas. A graduate of both Harvard College and Law School, motivated by the events of 9/11, he rejected a JAG Commission. Instead, he volunteered   to go through OCS at Fort Benning and trained at both the Infantry and Ranger Schools.  Cotton served from 2005 to 2009. He had two tours, one in Iraq and a second in Afghanistan with the famed Screaming Eagles, the 101st Airborne, rising to the rank of Captain and received a Bronze Star for his combat actions. At 6’5″, he was selected as Platoon Leader at the Old Guard that provides the honor guard at the Tomb of the Unknowns at Arlington Cemetery.

Watch this mini-documentary on Senator-elect Cotton:

Like Louisiana’s Republican governor, Bobby Jindal, he also is a McKinsey & Co. alumnus. Most importantly as a first term Congressman from the (4thCD- AK) he was assigned to House Foreign Affairs. During his Senate campaign he consistently strove to educate Arkansans about the dangers of isolationism.  He has also proved to be a good friend of Israel in Congress during his initial term in the US House of Representatives. The Emergency Committee for Israel (ECFI head, Bill Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard,  said this about Cotton in a Washington Free Beacon report on their purchase of a spot ad for him, “We’re for a strong Israel and a strong America. So is Tom Cotton. He’ll be a great senator.”

Just before his Senate electoral victory, Cotton weighed in on the West Wing campaign against Israel and PM Netanyahu with a statement released on October 29th:

I’m appalled at recent media reports suggesting the Obama administration is seeking ‘détente’ with Iran, while unnamed administration officials disparage Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with vulgar ad hominem attacks.  I call upon President Obama to renounce these reports and disclose the names of these officials and fire them.  Iran remains our worst enemy and Israel our closest ally.  The Obama administration’s weak behavior will only embolden Iran to continue its headlong rush to nuclear weapons and terror campaigns against America and our allies, while destabilizing the region and further eroding our interests.

Finally, for the record, I must note that Prime Minister Netanyahu in his youth was a member of Israel’s elite special-operations forces, where he displayed great courage.  He and his family have made grave sacrifices in the fight against our common enemies.  On behalf of all Arkansans, I want to thank Mr. Netanyahu for his bravery and service.

I asked Bryen during the preparation for last Sunday’s show where Cotton might be assigned in the newly organized US Senate under the leadership of Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, the presumptive GOP Majority Leader in the 214th Congress in January 2015.  She thought that Cotton might end up on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.  I told her that would be an historic antidote to the legendary Arkansas Democratic Senator William Fulbright who opposed the Viet Nam War during the era of President Johnson after voting for the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution in August 1964.  Cotton’s Arkansas constituents realize the importance of US leadership on national security interests and support for Israel. That will stand him in good stead.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on the New English Review. The featured image of Senator elect Tom Cotton is courtesy of the New English Review.

Republican sweep, Bill and Hillary Documentary resurfaces — first shot fired for 2016!

/in , , , /by

The Republicans will on January 20th, 2015 control both houses of the U.S. Congress. Eric Erickson notes that Americans “had a taste of socialism” and have spit it out. The Republican sweep has reached every state down to the lowest levels. Conservative Republicans have won up and down the ballot in Florida, including the historic re-election of Rick Scott as governor.

Red State’s Erick Erickson writes, “Republicans are going to have the largest House majority they’ve seen since 1946. They have won gubernatorial races, congressional races, and Senate races in blue territory. The GOP not only held Florida, Kansas, and Maine, races they were expected to lose, but they gained Illinois, Maryland, and Massachusetts. They picked up the State House in Minnesota. The GOP did very well in a wave. I was actually kind of wrong. I expected a wave at the state and local level, but did not think there would be one at the national level. There sure was.”

Erickson notes, “[T]he Democrats have a real problem. It is clear now that the Democrats’ coalition is actually Barack Obama’s coalition. As I have said repeatedly, that coalition turns out for Barack Obama, but not for Democrats.”

Time for celebration among Republicans to be sure. But some are calling for the Republican leadership at every  level not to blow it.

The first shot fired for the 2016 race for the White House is making its way across the internet. It is a documentary of Bill and Hillary Clinton’s rise to political power. In many ways their rise is not unlike that of Barack Obama. The results of that rise are eerily similar.  With Hillary 2016 bumper stickers already appearing in Florida, it is time to reflect on the Clinton’s history.

Will Barack Obama’s unpopularity impact the 2016 Democrat primary? Will Obama’s collectivist policies, not unlike those of Hillary’s, haunt Democrats in two years? Clearly, Hillary and Obama are inextricably tied one to another. Will 2016 be a second referendum on Obama’s policies? Time will tell, but in the mean time perhaps it is appropriate to remember what Bill and Hillary did during their time in the White House.

Watch this YouTube documentary titled “Bill Clintons Rise to Power”, the first shot fired for the 2016 Presidential primary:

RELATED ARTICLE: How a Conservative Congress Could Make a Huge Difference in Next Two Years

Why Vote?

/in , , /by

Every election is “the most important” for the simple reason that it has the potential of making our lives better or worse.

What makes elections scary is that votes are cast by people who often have paid little attention to the events, issues, policies or the candidates involved. Casting a vote requires knowing something about the times in which one lives and the persons promising to make them better.

“In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress.” That’s John Adams, our second President, a Founding Father, and though I suspect he was joking, I also suspect he was half serious.

It is our nature to never be satisfied with whomever we elect to high office. A nation is very fortunate to have someone come along to truly demonstrate a vision and leadership. It doesn’t happen that often.

The political pundit, Larry J. Sabato, said, “Every election is determined by the people who show up.” He is about to be proven right again. The reason Barack Obama was reelected was that Republicans stayed home. If you recall, it was a close election.

It has brought us to Tuesday’s midterms and they are likely to demonstrate that it has taken six years of Obama for his incompetence, his far Left ideology, and his lies to have finally penetrated the skulls of those who thought it was a great idea to elect a black President no matter who he was. These idiots will replace that thought with how great it would be to elect the first woman President whether she is qualified or not.

Too many people think there is no real difference between the candidates and the parties they represent. We never seem to learn how wrong that is. Jarod Kintz, writing in “99 Cents for Some Nonsense”, said “Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. Next time, go all out and write in Lucifer on the ballot.” Candidates and the policies they support do matter. Not voting is to concede victory to those who you don’t support.

As Peggy Noonan, a former aide to Ronald Reagan, author of seven books, and columnist for The Wall Street Journal reminds us, “Our political leaders will know our priorities only if we tell them, again and again, and if those priorities show up in the polls.”

The priorities in the midterm elections come down to the economy, national security, healthcare, and a list of others on which “climate change” does not even appear. The cliché is that “people vote their wallets”, but that is exactly what they should do. A President and/or administration that does not govern in a way that generates more economic growth and jobs is doing harm to the nation.

The Democrats have failed to generate a healthy economy, preferring one entirely dependent on the federal government. President Obama’s assertion that “you did not build that” to the nation’s business owners and managers, along with Hillary Clinton’s notion that jobs are not created by corporations and businesses should tell everybody just how absurd and insulting the views of these two Democrat “leaders” are.

That is why the midterm elections will be about which party offers candidates who will take steps to save the nation from the Great Recession that has been around since 2008.

For anyone paying any attention it is clear that the Democratic Party has swung heavily toward a purely socialistic mode of politics. Increasing the role of the federal government has given us Obamacare which is currently destroying what was the finest healthcare system in the world. Earlier administrations—yes, some of them Republican—have extended the federal government’s control over education, energy, housing, and virtually all other aspects of the nation’s economy.

The result has been bureaucracies that do what all bureaucracies do, act arrogantly and with indifference. Examples over the past six years include the Internal Revenue Service, the Veterans Administration, the Justice Department, and, most dangerously, the Environmental Protection Agency whose torrent of regulations, most based on false science, are crippling economic growth and property rights.

Abraham Lincoln said, “Elections belong to the people. It’s their decision. If they decide to turn their back on the fire and burn their behinds, then they will just have to sit on their blisters.”

He was referring, of course, to the Civil War and the voters chose to put him in office and keep him there for a second term. He was a Republican, a party that came into being for its opposition to slavery. The Democratic Party had sought to expand it and, after the war, sought to disenfranchise freed slaves. It is astonishing that the Democratic Party proclaims itself the one with which African Americans should identify and support. The midterms, however, may reveal that its appeal has diminished.

In a similar fashion various groups, demographic by race, ethnicity, age and other factors will be analyzed for the way they voted, but what matters though, is that they showed up to VOTE.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

More than 1,000 Florida Felons Voted in the 2012 General Election

/in , , , /by

According to the Florida Division of Elections’ own records a minimum of 1,000 felons cast a vote in our 2012 General Election.

If the Division wasn’t aware of this, they should have been. Because it was discovered via a simple public records request for voters removed from Florida’s voter roll, their date of removal, and the removal reason.

The data from the that single public records request shows that in the 60 days following our 2012 General Election, more than 3,800 registrations were removed from the voter roll because they were felons.

And more than 1,000 of those 3,800+ removed voter registrations cast a ballot in our 2012 General Election.

Given our government’s self-mandated requirements, the possibility that these individuals were convicted of a felony following the general election and removed from the voter roll in less than 60 days is highly unlikely.

A number, and more likely many, were identified long before the election. And somehow our government has found its way to not doing its job. Again.

Because according to this article from 2010, the Florida Division of Elections has had too much difficulty keeping felons off the voter roll since at least 2008.

And now, a couple years after more than 1,000 felons voted in 2012, how many convictions have you heard of?

So, to those who claim there’s “not even a smidgin” of voter fraud, the most polite response might be:

“Here’s your sign”.