Archive for the ‘War on Liberty’ Category

Thoughts on Donald Sterling: In America, Jerks Have Rights Too

Freedom of speech and thought means protecting the right of people to say and think ignorant offensive things. 

If you want to tattoo a swastika on your forehead, you’re free to do that.

This leads to the case of one Donald Sterling, who made racist remarks in private while in an argument with his ex-mistress Vanessa Stiviano — more than 50 years his younger.

Before launching into my main points, it’s worth noting that Sterling is a loyal Democrat. The real racism in America resides in the Democrat Party.

The Ku Klux Klanis a Democrat organization. Opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 came not from Republicans, but from Democrats — led by Senator Robert Byrd (a leader of the KKK, recruiter for the KKK). Byrd led a filibuster against the Civil Rights Act, personally speaking against the Act for 14 hours and 13 minutes on the Senate floor. He went on from there to become Senate Majority Leader for the Democrats. Byrd was President Pro Tempore of the U.S. Senate and continued to be a leading voice of the Democrat Party in the Senate (affectionately referred to as the “Lion of the Senate” by Democrats and the Media) until his death in 2010.

Byrd really was a racist. He really did hate blacks, Jews, Hispanics, Catholics, and the rest of the KKK’s enemies list. The KKK really was lynching blacks. Yet Byrd was revered by Democrats.

Whatever Sterling is guilty of, at least he’s never been a member of the KKK, like Senator Robert Byrd.

So why was Byrd revered by Democrats and the media up until 2010, but Sterling’s offense is considered unforgivable?

There’s some selective outrage here — something out of proportion, out of whack.

Is Sterling a racist? I don’t know. What he said certainly sounded racist. I won’t print his comments here because they are offensive.

In summary, what he told his ex-mistress over the phone was to stop bringing her black friends to LA Clippers games.

She secretly recorded the conversation, which is a crime in California and in most states.

California’s wiretapping law makes it a crime to record or eavesdrop on any confidential communication, including a private conversation or telephone call, without the consent of all parties to the conversation.

By “confidential,” this means the people talking have a “reasonable expectation” of privacy.

So you can record a public lecture. You cannot record a private conversation without all parties agreeing to be recorded.

Arguing with one’s mistress would certainly fall under the category of private conversation.

It’s also clear from the context of the conversation that what he was upset about is his mistress flaunting in public the fact that she’s sleeping with these basketball players, bringing them to LA Clippers games – the team he owns.

If the people she was sleeping with happened to be Jewish instead of black, he might have made anti-Semitic comments in anger.

He was angry, and used very offensive language — which might or might not reflect his true views during what he thought was a private fight with his mistress.

He has been found guilty of a thought crime. He has now been apprehended in Orwellian fashion by the Thought Police.

Is this the society in which we want to live – where every private utterance might be recorded, shared with the world, and then used to deprive you of your livelihood?

Not that Sterling will be deprived of his livelihood. He’s a billionaire.

He’ll be fine.

But something like this can happen to you – could happen to anyone.

Everyone says things in anger they don’t really mean and would like to take back.

Everyone says things in private they would prefer not go out to the public.

That’s why we have laws against the secret recording of conversations.

Otherwise, there’s no end to where this can lead.

Would it also have been fine if the mistress had stolen Sterling’s private diary to have the more salacious entries published on the front pages of the tabloids?

After listening to this recording, it’s obvious to me the ex-mistress set him up – probably as a way to show the world what a bad guy Sterling is, or perhaps as part of a blackmail scheme Sterling refused to cooperate with. Or maybe she just wanted to make a few bucks by selling the recording to TMZ.

Who knows?

So the NBA has now stepped in to ban Sterling from attending NBA basketball games for the rest of his life.

What? Huh?

He can never again attend another NBA basketball game, for life!?

But wait, many of these arenas are funded and owned (at least in part) by taxpayers. They’re public places — which means open to the public. These arenas are not the property of the NBA.

Can he also be banned from public parks, from riding the subway, from lying on the beach, from viewing the Grand Canyon, from driving on the roads?

Can he be stopped from eating at restaurants, buying groceries, going to the movies?

Will the utility companies now turn off his power and water for his racist remarks?

You see where this can lead.

He can also never enter the offices of the LA Clippers. He can never again have any connection or association with the NBA again.

But he’s the owner of the team!

He actually built the LA Clippers into the playoff team it is today.

No doubt convicted felons attend NBA games all the time. Sterling has not committed any crimes.

What also struck me is the glee the media expressed after NBA Commissioner Adam Silver “dropped the hammer” on Donald Sterling.

Silver stood in front of microphones to announce what “I” (meaning Adam Silver) am doing to Sterling.

No trial. No hearing. No due process. Apparently, just Adam Silver decides — based on one day of news reports.

It’s strange how authoritarianism and dictatorship are all the rage on the liberal side these days.

Obama regularly boasts that he’s going around Congress, going it alone. Paul Krugman of The New York Times praises China’s authoritarian political model . . . because they get things done.

I have not read the NBA bylaws.  Apparently, a three-fourths vote by the owners can force Sterling to sell his team.

It’s hard to believe the owners would set this kind of a precedent — forcing a fellow owner to sell his team for saying something offensive in a private conversation that was illegally recorded.

A precedent like this would put all the owners in jeopardy of losing their teams.

Have we reached a point in America where you can’t even speak in your own house anymore?

Liberals used to defend the “right to privacy.”

Wasn’t the “right to privacy” the entire basis of the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion? — not that abortion has anything to do with the “right to privacy.”

But the “right to privacy” used to be a big deal to liberals.

Sterling’s ex-mistress certainly appears to be in a heap of trouble. Not only has she apparently violated California’s wiretapping laws (a crime), but she’ll be liable for triple civil damages if Sterling sues her – which he probably will.  Damages might be Sterling’s loss of his NBA team.

Don’t get me wrong. I am in no way defending Sterling’s abhorrent remarks. He appears to be a scoundrel.

He had to settle a racial discrimination suit with the U.S. Justice Department. He was sued for racial discrimination by NBA great Elgin Baylor, though Baylor’s suit was dismissed.  So this isn’t the first time the race issue has come up with Sterling.  

But in a free society, jerks have rights too.

The free market has a way of dealing with situations like this.

Advertisers will boycott the Clippers. People will stop showing up at the games. Players won’t play for the team. The team’s value will plummet. He might then want to sell the team.

I doubt the NBA will be able to force him to sell his team under these circumstances. Sterling says he’s not selling the team. And it’s almost impossible to believe the NBA has the legal right to prevent Sterling from attending NBA basketball games for the rest of his life.

Sterling looks like he has a strong lawsuit in the making against the NBA. I can see a judge ruling that the jury can’t hear the recorded conversation because it was obtained illegally and that Sterling is the victim of a crime.

PUTIN & OBAMA ARE WRONG: Here’s what we mean by “American Exceptionalism”

Russia’s often-shirtless authoritarian strongman Vladimir Putin tells America that it’s “extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional.”

Obviously, that’s a gross distortion of what we mean when we say “America is exceptional” in world history.

We are not saying the American people are inherently better than people anywhere else. We are saying the American system — of government bound by law — is exceptional, and allowed liberty and the spirit of enterprise to flourish, thus allowing America to quickly become the richest nation in world history.

Of course, Obama has also often mocked the idea of “American Exceptionalism” — for example, famously saying this shocker at a NATO Summit in Strasbourg, France, in 2009:

I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.

No doubt, America is rapidly losing the distinction of being exceptional in today’s world – thanks to Obama and the Left in Congress not understanding what made America so exceptional.

So other countries are passing us by.  The United States has fallen from #1 to #10 on the Heritage Foundation’s world index of Economic Freedom — now behind even Socialistic Canada and Denmark.

But America is exceptional in world history because America was the first nation to be “conceived in liberty.”

America is exceptional because of its Constitution.

America is exceptional because it’s the first country in world history to establish a government,  the sole purpose of which is to “secure the blessings of liberty.”

America is exceptional because it was the first nation in human history to put such strict limits on the power of the central government.

America is exceptional because it is the first (and is still the only) nation in human history to be founded on this proposition:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Our rights to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” are “unalienable” because they are granted by God Himself. And it’s the responsibility of government to protect and secure these rights.

When government trespasses beyond this purpose, its activities become illegitimate.

That proposition, this purpose of government — to secure the blessings of liberty — is what makes America exceptional in world history.

As a result of all the limitations on government power imposed by the Constitution, Americans were free to build businesses and profit from their efforts. This allowed America to become the richest nation in world history in a very short period of time.

To the extent other countries are now enjoying liberty and prosperity, it’s because they followed the American example.

If America is no longer exceptional, it’s because our government has mostly ignored the Constitution for the past 90 years or so — since the Presidency of Calvin Coolidge (the last President who actually cut federal spending in real dollars). He really was a great President.

Calvin Coolidge loved to read through the entire federal budget — line by line . . . so he could cross items out of the budget.  He often said nothing gave him more pleasure than saving taxpayers money.

Mostly what our elected leaders do (Democrats and Republicans) is look for ways to get around the Constitution — if they pay any attention at all to the Constitution.

Our political leaders in Washington, DC (not just Obama) respect few limits on government power.

Our political class today treats the Constitution as a set of guidelines, at best — not as law.

I believe America is still exceptional because we at least still have the Constitution — which is still supposed to be the supreme law of the land. We just need to get back to following the Constitution.

America also has an exceptional history that gave us advantages that other counties have not had.

America was settled by courageous people who had a pioneering spirit.

It takes a certain type of person to leave their family, friends, and familiar lives behind and travel to a new land, a wilderness, in search of freedom and opportunity.

Arriving on the shores of a desolate and freezing Cape Code in November of 1620, half the  passengers on the Mayflower died during the first winter.

The tens of millions of settlers and immigrants who followed them here did not expect anything from the government — certainly were not looking for handouts and free health care.  All they wanted was freedom to build a new life.

That takes courage.  America was built by risk-takers.

By the time of the American Revolution in 1776, Americans had already become the world’s richest people — because of their entrepreneurial spirit.

America’s thriving shipbuilding, tea, tobacco, and rum businesses were out-competing those of the British Empire — which was what led to Britain’s crackdown on American industry (i.e. the heavy tax on tea that triggered the Boston Tea Party, the Stamp Tax, and other taxes).

America is exceptional because we actually fought a war against the British Empire (the largest empire in world history) over excessive taxation.

How many people have done that?  What would have America’s founders thought of ObamaCare?

No doubt, they would have seen ObamaCare as a abomination — an all-out assault on liberty, exponentially worse than the tax on tea that lit the fuse of the American Revolution.

America is exceptional because we used to zealously guard our liberties.  For the Americans of that day, no attack on liberty was too slight to overlook.  ”Give me liberty, or give me death!” declared Patrick Henry.

That was the American mindset in 1776.

If America is losing its distinction as exceptional in the world, it’s because most Americans today don’t seem all that concerned about liberty anymore. Most Americans pay little attention to politics.   Internet page-view data reveals Americans to be 12 times more interested in Miley Cyrus‘ “Twerking” display than war with Syria or what our government is doing to us.

The problem is not so much Putin not thinking America is exceptional. We would not expect the former Soviet KGB thug to value liberty.

The problem is we now have an American President who agrees with Putin — that America is not exceptional.

President Obama has made it clear throughout his political career that he has little  respect for our Constitution — or even the rule of law.

When Bret Baier of FOX News asked President Obama about the subversion of the legislative process President Obama and the Democrats engaged in to pass ObamaCare into law by one vote in the U.S. Senate, President Obama said: “I don’t spend a lot of time worrying about what the procedural rules are.”

Obama doesn’t seem to understand that what makes America so exceptional is that we are a nation governed by laws, not men.  We are a nation of rules, not rulers — and that these laws (rules) are supposed to apply equally to everyone.

No one — not even Obama — is supposed to be above the law.  All Americans — including Obama — are supposed to follow the rules.

Obama is not so keen on this.

When in the state legislature in Illinois, Obama openly expressed his hostility to our Constitution in a radio interview when he called our Constitution “flawed.”

He went on to say:

“I think we can say that the Constitution reflected an enormous blind spot in this culture that carries on until this day, and that the Framers had that same blind spot . . . It also reflected the fundamental flaw of this country that continues to this day.”

In another radio interview, Obama said this:

“As radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution.”

So President Obama has made it clear that he considers the Constitution to be a flawed charter for government. He says he wants to “break free” from the restraints the Constitution places on government power.

To Obama and most on the Left,  the Constitution is an inconvenient obstacle they try to get around.

Obama does not believe in liberty or limited Constitutional government. And he has shown himself to be no fan of the American Dream.

He’s certainly no fan of capitalism — which is the most powerful force in world history to create wealth and lift people out of poverty.

President Obama is the first President in America’s history who does not believe in “American Exceptionalism.”

He promised in 2008 that he would “fundamentally transform” America.

In his mind, America’s heritage of liberty and limited government is not worth conserving.

Instead, Obama wants to “fundamentally transform” America into his vision of a European-Bloomberg-style socialistic Nanny State (or worse) — far removed from the pioneering “spirit of enterprise” that made America so rich, so free, and so successful.

By the way, can you really love something that you want to “fundamentally transform“?

If I told my wife I’m out to “fundamentally transform” her, I doubt she would take that as a compliment. We’d probably be headed for divorce court.

So if our own President Obama doesn’t think America’s heritage of liberty is exceptional and worth protecting, why would we expect better from the shirtless KGB thug Putin?

48 Alarming Facts That Tell Us America Has Become a Gigantic Prison

By Ben Hart

Edward Snowden is important because he added some detail and put a spotlight on a truth this blog has been documenting for some time. That truth is this . . .

The U.S. government today is in possession of technology that tyrants of yesteryear would have salivated over.

This technology is quickly turning America into an electronic prison from which escape to freedom is nearly impossible (because the alternatives to America aren’t so good either).

Here’s what’s happening . . .

The U.S. government now tracks, monitors, records, and stores most of your activities and communications. You have no privacy anymore.   This means you must be very careful what you say, even what to think . . . because whatever you say, write, or even think can (and probably will) be used against you.

In his great book 1984, George Orwell wrote this:

There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live — did live, from habit that became instinct — in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.”

This is the society in which we now live. We are no longer a free people.

Yes, we can live a comfortable life. We can go to work everyday and collect our paychecks. We can watch our TV shows at night and attend sporting events.

The government will even allow a certain amount of criticism of the government.

But that doesn’t mean you are free.

Information is power. Information is the most powerful weapon on the planet.

That’s why blackmail is so effective. Now your government knows everything there is to know about you — or can instantly access this information, as needed to serve its purposes.

The government can use this information to destroy you at any moment, whenever it pleases.

Because there are so many laws and regulations on the books, I have been told by federal prosecutors that the government can convict anyone of a crime if it focuses on someone long enough, searches hard enough through all your records and communications. Now we have computers that can conduct investigations of all of us at lightening speed, with sophisticated algorithms.

Experts say Google is rapidly approaching the point when it will be able to predict whether you are about to commit a crime (just like in the Spielberg movie Minority Report – which had people arrested and convicted before they actually commit the crime).

All this data collection on law-abiding American citizens by the government is, of course, unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment, which states:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled throughout America’s history that police cannot conduct dragnets that sweep up innocent citizens in an effort to find criminals. Nor can police or the government rummage through your garbage or personal correspondence to find evidence of a crime without “probable cause” and without a warrant from a court. Warrants can only be issued if there’s evidence that the specific person in question has committed a specific crime. The argument for a warrant must include specific items and evidence police are searching for.

In other words, the bar is supposed to be high for the government to be able to rummage through our lives and things. Clearly, there’s no bar at all anymore.  The government now treats the Constitution and Supreme Court rulings as advisory, at best.

The government can (and is pretty much is) doing whatever it wants to us.

We once thought the Internet and all this technology would be a force for liberation across the globe. But instead, this technology is quickly turning into a weapon to make our enslavement by government (in cohoots with mega multinational corporations such as Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook, etc)  easier and more efficient than ever.

So Here are 48 facts that tell us America has become a gigantic prison:

FACT #1: Everything Edward Snowden has told us about NSA’s spy program on Americans has proven to be accurate. Actually, the situation is substantially more alarming than what Snowden told us. We now know the NSA is collecting and storing pretty much . . .

  • all of our cell phone calls
  • all of our emails
  • all of our Internet searches
  • all of our credit card and financial records
  • even our passwords

FACT #2: Edward Snowden reports that the NSA has the ability to track what we are thinking in real time as we are typing on our computer keyboards.

FACT #3: We now know the NSA has the authority to access any of this information on any individual it chooses without a court order “simply based on an analyst deciding that,” according Rep Jerrold Nadler’s (D-NY) account of an intelligence briefing he received. “I was rather startled” to learn this, Nadler said.

FACT #4: There is no time-limit for how long the NSA can keep all this information on law-abiding American citizens. NSA readily admits it plans to keep all this data on every law-abiding American forever.

FACT #5: The NSA is collecting 2.1 million gigabytes of data on all of us every hour.

FACT #6: Overall, Republicans are worse than Democrats on this issue. In a vote in the U.S. House of Representatives, 134 Republicans and 83 Democrats voted against putting even modest limits on the NSA’s spying activities on law-abiding Americans.

FACT #7: Republican leaders such as Sen John McCain, Gov Chris Christie, and Congressman Peter King are calling other Republicans, such as Sens Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, “crazy” and “dangerous” for raising concerns about the NSA’s comprehensive spying on the daily activities of every American.

FACT #8: According to NSA whistleblower William Binney, the NSA has a “target list” of somewhere between “500,000 to a million people“.

FACT #9: The NSA is just one of 17 U.S. spy agencies, each with similar data collection programs, all operating in a shroud of secrecy with secret budgets that together total about $80 billion annually.

FACT #10: America is supposed to be a government “of the people, by the people, and for the people ” — but there is no way for voters to hold these spy agencies accountable because we have almost no idea what they are really doing.

FACT #11: But even if most of America’s “low information” voters knew what was happening, it’s unlikely anything would change. Surveys show most Americans support the NSA’s comprehensive spying on every aspect of our lives. In other words, most Americans today have no problem with putting themselves in this electronic prison and throwing away the key.

Obamacare is a Surveillance State Horror

If you thought the NSA’s spying was invasive, understand that Obamacare will completely wipe out the last vestiges of privacy in America.

FACT #12: ObamaCare will be collecting the complete medical records of every American, thereby wiping out the last vestige of privacy in America. Until now, medical record privacy was considered sacrosanct in America.

FACT #13: Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told Congress in testimony that the massive ObamaCare “data hub” as it’s called, will interact with the IRS, the Department of Homeland Security, the Veterans Administration, Office of Personnel Management, the Department of Defense, and (for some reason) even the Peace Corps. Plus the Hub will plug into state Medicaid databases.

FACT #14: Sebelius also informs us that the ObamaCare “data hub” will also know your income, Social Security number, size of your family, immigration status, whether or not you’ve even been incarcerated, and your enrollment status in other health plans, among other things. So this will be an identify thief’s dream.

FACT #15: Since the IRS is the enforcer of ObamaCare, the ObamaCare “data hub” will also include all your financial records. Basically, all these government “data hubs” — NSA, Homeland Security, IRS, ObamaCare, FBI, state and local law enforcement (you name it, apparently even including the Peace Corps) — will be linked and talking with each other, constantly sorting and sifting through all your personal data with sophisticated algorithms to keep tabs on you.

FACT #16: Sebelius also notes that ObamaCare’s “data hub” will store data from businesses — to make sure they are complying with ObamaCare mandates.

Your Car is No Longer “The Great American Freedom Machine”

Americans have had a love affair with their cars for more than a century because the automobile has been considered “The Great Freedom Machine.”

Not anymore. The automobile today has become your surefire path to interaction with law enforcement. Your car has become the government’s near foolproof way to know where you are and what you are doing on a daily, if not hourly basis.

FACT #17: Many police today are equipped with computerized scanners that automatically scan every license plate of every car that drives by and stores this information in computerized databases that can be accessed at any time. Soon these license plate scanners will be standard issue for cops.

FACT #18: Toll booths are equipped with similar scanners and video surveillance that is also being stored in vast government databases.

FACT #19: Video monitoring and tracking is quickly being added to nearly every street intersection that has a stop light.

FACT #20: There is hardly a place you can go anymore in public without being video taped. We’ll certainly catch many real criminals this way. Nor is this unconstitutional because you have no expectation of privacy when in public. But this also means your nearly every move when in public is being recorded and stored. So don’t think no one is watching when you pick your nose or scratch an itch.

FACT #21: Soon radar detection will be added to video to automatically catch speeders.It won’t be long before we find video and radar surveillance on every inch of highway.  Most police allow you to exceed the speed limit by 8 MPH, especially on interstate highways. But once speed detection on every vehicle on nearly every inch of road is computerized and automated, you’d better be careful to drive a few MPH’s below the speed limit at all times just to be sure not to be flagged.

FACT #22: The Obama Administration is talking openly about requiring so-called “black boxes” in all cars (similar to the black boxes in aircraft) to track such things as: how fast you are going at all times, how much fuel your are consuming, and what you are talking about. The government wants to know exactly what’s going on in your car at all times and where you are at all times.

Prison USA

Less than 200 years ago, the great French writer Alexis de Tocqueville came to America to discover the reasons for America’s stunning success — unparalleled prosperity combined with a level of individual liberty never before seen world history.

Here was one feature of American life that got his attention:

In no country is criminal justice administered with more mildness than in the United States.”

This is no longer the situation:

FACT #23: The United States today has less than 5 percent of the world’s population. But it has almost a quarter of the world’s prisoners.

FACT #24: One out of every 100 adults in America is in prison today.

FACT #25: No country in the world has more prisoners per capita than the United States — not even Cuba. (Caveat: We don’t know what’s happening in North Korea)

FACT #26: America has 2.3 million citizens behind bars. China, which still calls itself a Communist country, has 1.6 million people in prison, even though China has four times the population of the United States.

FACT #27: America is the only advanced country to lock people up for crimes that other Western countries consider relatively minor, such as writing bad checks, smoking weed, driving with a suspended license,  or other non-violent crimes.

FACT #28: Especially harsh sentences have also become a hallmark of the U.S. criminal justice system. Burglars in the United States serve an average of 16 months in prison, compared with 5 months in Canada and 7 months in England.

FACT #29: The United States is the only advanced Western country that still has the death penalty.

(SIDE NOTE: I have become an opponent of the death penalty because too many mistakes are being made and the death penalty is being used for crimes that don’t merit the death penalty. But that’s a topic for another article).

FACT #30: The death penalty is supposed to be reserved for especially sadistic serial killers, such as a John Wayne Gacy, Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy type of serial killer (who kill just because they enjoy killing). But prosecutors in America are increasingly seeking to use the death penalty for crimes that should have been prosecuted as second or third-degree murder. I.e. prosecutors actually sought the death penalty against Casey Anthony. This reckless mom probably killed her baby by accident and covered up the crime.  Casey Anthony was certainly no gem, but did not merit the death penalty.

FACT #31: Prosecutors in America today routinely engage in the practice of intentionally over-charging suspects in order to terrorize them into pleading guilty to a lesser charge (even if innocent) in order to save the trouble of going through a trial. The usual proposition goes something like this: “If you make us go to trial, you’ll risk spending the rest of your life in jail. But if you plead guilty to this lesser charge, you’ll spend three years in jail.”

FACT #32: Slipped into the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) in 2005 was a little noticed provision that empowers law enforcement to collect and permanently retain DNA samples from anyone arrested or detained for any crime whether or not they are convicted, including if pulled over for routine routine traffic violations. The Supreme Court has ruled this is all okay. So watch soon for police to be collecting fingerprint and DNA samples from you when you are stopped for a broken tail light. It’s just a matter now of the police having the right equipment. But that should not take long. These fingerprint and DNA samples will then be stored forever in a national database.

FACT #33: This DNA database is likely (certain) to be expanded to include all Americans under the ObamaCare law as part of the drive to nationalize health care in America. This will be the ultimate invasion of medical privacy, once thought important in America.

FACT #34: The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878  forbids the use of military force against American citizens. But the police in America today have become increasingly militarized, equipped now with “shock and awe” military-style weapons. For example, modern armored police vehicles are equipped with a sound device that can stop rioters in their tracks. The FBI admits to using drones over America (a military weapon). In a 2010 the Department of Homeland Security announced that it plans to use armed drones inside America’s borders to “immobilize TOIs” (Targets of Interest.

FACT #35: In the 1960′s and 1970′s courts probably tipped too far in giving every advantage to criminals and hampering police. There is an avalanche of evidence that we have moved too far in the other direction, giving near unlimited power to the police. As a consequence, police have become increasingly free with using excessive force on average citizens who are doing little or nothing wrong. I list some examples here:

FACT #36: Videotaping police in action is now illegal in many jurisdictions. But, of course, government is free to videotape us. In Illinois, police and prosecutors charged Michael Allison with five felonies for videotaping police actions from his own front yard. They accused him of violating Illinois’ eavesdropping law — a crime that carries the same penalty as rape in Illinois. Allison faces up to 75 years in prison. The case was dismissed in the first round of court action, by prosecutors have appealed the dismissal.

Politicization of the IRS

FACT #37: The IRS has now admitted that it has been targeting Americans for punishing audits and investigations because of their political views and affiliations. Specifically, the IRS admits it targeted organizations with the words “Tea Party,” “patriot,” “liberty,” “Christian,” and “teach the Constitution” for audits and investigation.

FACT #38: The IRS audited and targeted more than 500 Tea Party, conservative, Christian, and pro-Israel organizations.

FACT #39: Quickly after he endorsed Mitt Romney for President, the IRS audited the ministries of Reverend Billy Graham and his son Reverend Franklin Graham’s. The Graham ministries had never before been audited.

FACT #40: The IRS also targeted many (we don’t yet know how many) conservative churches for punishing audits and investigations. The IRS demanded to read the prayers of conservative churches. The IRS also demanded copies of church membership lists.

FACT #41: The author of The ObamaCare Survival Guide, journalist Wayne Allyn Root, reports that he was audited by the IRS soon after his book became a national bestseller. Mr. Root (a former classmate of Obama’s at Columbia) also reports that he has personally spoken with 15 donors to the Mitt Romney campaign who were audited within 90 days of making their donations.

FACT #42: The IRS audited reporters and news anchors who the Obama campaign did not like.

FACT #43: The IRS targeted conservative and Christian and conservative college-age interns who were taking courses on the Constitution and American history.

FACT #44: Sarah Hall Ingram, the head of the IRS division that was conducting these audits of conservatives and conservative organizations, has been promoted to run the IRS office that charged with enforcing the ObamaCare mandates.

FACT #45: The day after conservative Christian O’Donnell announced she was considering running for U.S. Senate, her federal tax records were accessed by Maryland government officials.

FACT #46: The Obama campaign accused some of the larger donors to Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign of not paying their taxes and accused them of engaging in shady activities — an obvious effort by Team Obama to intimidate Romney’s donors into not donating to Romney, thus illustrating how the government can use the world’s most brutal collection agency as also the world’s most powerful opposition research operation.

America’s Largest Corporations Are Now Partners
with the Government in Setting Up the Surveillance State

FACT #47: Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, Apple, Verizon, ATT, Cisco systems, and America’s largest corporations are getting rich, in part, by helping the U.S. government quickly build the surveillance state. We know already that Yahoo! worked closely with China’s regime to help round up China’s anti-government dissidents. China told Yahoo! it would be banned from China if it didn’t provide the identities and locations of critics of the regime in Beijing. Yahoo! was eager to cooperate.

FACT #48: As technology advances, there will be no escaping government’s prying Big Brother eye. The technologies that are coming into play are frightening. Companies are now able to broadcast talking ads that seem to be coming from inside our own brains — ads that are so customized to what we actually think that it’s difficult to distinguish our own thoughts from the ad itself. Here’s a description of how this new kind of advertising works:

Passengers leaning their head against the window will “hear” adverts “coming from inside the user’s head”, urging them to download the Sky Go app. The proposal involves using bone conduction technology, which is used in hearing aids, headphones and Google’s Glass headset, to pass sound to the inner ear via vibrations through the skull.

A video for the Talking Window campaign released by Sky Deutschland and ad agency BBDO Germany states: “Tired commuters often rest their heads against windows. Suddenly a voice inside their head is talking to them. No one else can hear this message.” Passengers leaning their head against the window will “hear” adverts “coming from inside the user’s head”, urging them to download the Sky Go app.

Now imagine the potential for political ads — if people can’t quite tell the difference between our own thoughts and what our President is telling us. Technology like this would have been a dream come true for Adolf Hitler and his master propagandist Joseph Goebbels.

This is the “Brave New World” we’re heading for. It’s the world we’re already living in.

This is what a soft tyranny looks like. We are being controlled by the most sophisticated mass-control tools ever devised — that become more sophisticated everyday. Of course, a “soft tyranny” can quickly become a hard tyranny . . . and usually does.

Can this Pandora’s Box of horrors ever be shut?

Frankly, I don’t see how.

Why democracy works in America, not in Egypt

The American Revolution succeeded because the American people, at the time of the American Revolution in 1776, had been governing themselves for nearly two centuries.

Even though nominally under British rule, the British government, for the most part, left us alone.

We set up our own local governing councils. The people of the colonies (later states) drafted their own Constitutions, which then became the model for the eventual federal Constitution.

At the time of the American Revolution, the people of the 13 colonies were the wealthiest people in the British Empire. Because of a respect for property rights and the Protestant work ethic that reigned in America, America had thriving businesses. We dominated ship-building, the rum trade, the tobacco trade, and were challenging the British government’s East India Tea Company (a government monopoly) for the world’s tea business.

Hence the British government’s crackdown on the American tea industry with a special tax on tea that led to the Boston Tea Party rebellion that then triggered the American Revolution.

So the American people (then British subjects) had a history of living as free people. We had been governing ourselves since 1620, the year the pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock and adopted the Mayflower Compact.

The American people were also well-read in the literature of liberty. Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations (the classic book on why capitalism works so well to create prosperity) was the most widely read book other than the Bible in the 13 colonies at the time of the American Revolution. The Americans were also heavily influenced by the writings of John Locke and William Blackstone.

America’s Declaration of Independence is really a summary of Locke’s theory of the Social Compact.

According to Locke, every person has a natural right, or God-given right, to life, liberty, and property. It is government’s job to secure these rights. Thomas Jefferson changed “property” to the “pursuit of happiness” in our Declaration of Independence because he was looking for a broader term that would include property.

Under Locke’s theory of the Social Compact, members of society agree to live under a shared system of laws. Government is instituted to make laws that protect these three natural rights — the right to life, liberty, and property. If a government does not properly protect these rights, we have a right and duty to overthrow that government.

Locke’s theory became the American idea. Locke’s theory was popularized by Thomas Paine in his pamphlet Common Sense.

The Mayflower Compact, adopted 156 year prior to the American Revolution, was the classic Lockean idea (though the Mayflower Compact predates Locke).

The point is, the American people had a 156-year tradition of living as free and independent people, governing themselves.

Heavily influenced also by the writings of William Blackstone, they had a deep respect for the “rule of law.”

So America had a tradition of being governed by the “rule of law,” not men, not kings. In America, the law applies equally to all, including to government officials.

This is why the American Revolution succeeded. Really, the American Revolution was not a revolution at all in the minds of Americans at that time.

The Declaration of Independence, in fact, makes the case that the Americans were acting in self-defense. They were defending their own governing councils and their own Constitutions that had been in place for a century or more.

Americans wanted to be free to continue to live as they had been living.

The American Revolution was not about creating a new kind of government. It was about defending a tradition of local government that had been in place in America for 156 years, since the signing of the Mayflower Compact in 1620 — a tradition that included regular elections, the secret ballot, rule of law, and an understanding that the purpose of government is to secure our God-given rights to “life, liberty, and property.”

There is no such tradition in Egypt.

In a place like Egypt, democracy is used as a weapon for one faction or the other to seize power. The losing side is then slaughtered. In a place like Egypt (and other Islamic countries where there is no respect for life, liberty, property, or law) we usually get one election, then tyranny.

The rebels in Egypt say they plan to try President Mohammed Morsi (the guy Obama backed) for the crime of “insulting the Presidency.” Of course, Morsi was no peach either. He jailed newspaper columnists for writing editorials he disagreed with.

To call Egypt a democracy simply because they gave the people a piece of paper to mark their choice for President is a joke. Whichever side wins an election in a place like Egypt just uses their power to kill off and jail the losing side.

The vote, of course, is only part of why the American system works. It’s really the last piece of the puzzle.

First, there must be a general respect for the rule of law and the God-given rights of individual citizens. The losing side in elections needs to feel secure that they won’t lose their life, liberty, or property if they lose an election.

This is why it was such folly to get rid of Hosni Mubarek, the Shaw of Iran, or even Saddam Hussein.

As brutal as Saddam Hussein was, he was actually a bulwark against terrorism. He hated al Qaeda as much as we do. He was also a counter to the much more dangerous Iran, which is why Ronald Reagan backed Iraq in its war with Iran in the 1980s.

The Shah, too, was very tough. But he brought Iran out of the Middle Ages and into the modern world. Iran had a modern capitalist economy thanks to the Shah. A well-educated strongman like the Shah is about the best we can hope for in countries like Iran, Iraq, and Syria — which have no tradition of liberty or democracy.

This is why it’s also a fool’s errand to intervene in Syria on behalf of the rebels against Bashar al-Assad. Yes, the Assad regime is dreadful by Western standards. But we’ll get something far worse if the rebels prevail. We’ll get Iran, Part Deux.

Read America’s Declaration of Independence Out Loud at Your Barbecue This Evening, Before Fireworks

Make This an Annual Family Tradition

The only way to save America as the “land of the free” is if the voters regain an appreciation of freedom.

The best way to understand what America stands for and why America’s founders thought liberty to be so precious is to make a commitment read America’s founding document every July 4th.

America’s Declaration of Independence (written by Thomas Jefferson on July 2 and adopted by the Continental Congress on July 4, 1776) is perhaps the greatest statement on the proper role of government ever written.  The purpose of government, according to the Declaration, is to secure our unalienable God-given rights to “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

When the central government goes outside that mission, it trends toward tyranny.

Read the Declaration out loud at your barbecue with your family, friends, and loved ones.

When you read the Declaration, you’ll be stunned by how far we have drifted away from the principles of limited government outlined in the Declaration. The complaints we had against King George were minor compared to what our federal government is doing to us today.

America’s Founders would never have stood for ObamaCare, or this massive politicized IRS, or the NSA PRISIM program, or the assault on our Second Amendment rights, or our government’s assault on religious freedom, or the progressive income tax, or the Department of Education, or HHS, DHS, or much of what our federal government is doing today.

If we had a federal government that actually followed the Constitution, it would be about one-third the size it is now.

Make the reading of the Declaration of Independence an annual family tradition. If every patriotic American family would do this, we could educate tens of millions of Americans about the benefits of liberty, and why liberty is the idea that made America the most prosperous nation in human history.

Here’s the text of the Declaration . . .

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Is America’s “War on Terror” Worth the Cost We are Paying in Terms of Lost Freedom, Lost Lives, and Lost Treasure?

Whatever one thinks of Edward Snowden (hero or villain) is irrelevant.

What is relevant is what he’s told us about the information and data the NSA’s PRISIM program is collecting on every American citizen.

Snowden informs us that the NSA is . . .

  • collecting all our cell phone records
  • recording and storing all our cell phone conversations
  • collecting all our credit card transactions and bank records
  • collecting all our emails and social media posts
  • tracking all our online searches via Google the search engines

Snowden also tells us, chillingly, that the NSA has the ability to track what we are thinking in real time as we are typing on our computer keyboards.

In his great book 1984, George Orwell wrote this:

There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live — did live, from habit that became instinct — in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.”

This is the society in which we now live.

We are no longer a free people. Yes, we can live a comfortable life. We can go to work everyday and collect our paychecks. We can watch our TV shows at night and attend sporting events.

The government will even allow a certain amount of criticism of the government.

But information is power. Information is the most powerful weapon on the planet. If you knew for certain what the stock market was going to do over the next hour, you could become an instant millionaire or billionaire.

Now the government knows everything about you.

Now the government has all the information it needs at its fingertips to destroy you — erase you — at the slightest provocation. All it has to do is decide you’re a threat. Then it just has to sift through all the data its collected on you (including all your phone conversations) to find a crime, any crime, any violation of law — and you’re finished.

This is exactly what the Constitution’s FOURTH AMENDMENT was designed to prevent. It states:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

The courts have long interpreted this to mean that the government cannot record or listen to your phone conversations, cannot search through your car, cannot search your house, cannot read your mail, without a search warrant. And the government cannot get a warrant without probable cause.

The big purpose of the FOURTH AMENDMENT was to stop so-called “writs of assistance.”

A “writ of assistance” is a general warrant, allowed under English law.

A “writ of assistance” allows the government to conduct a general search without specifying who it’s searching, what it’s searching for, or even why it’s searching.

The FOURTH AMENDMENT requires “probable cause” to conduct a search. The courts have interpreted this to mean that the government, to get a warrant, must specify what it’s searching for and why. The government must also explain why they need to search through the belongings of this particular person — “probable cause.”

This NSA PRISM program clearly goes way beyond that by collecting and storing every cell phone call (the full conversation, not just the meta tags), email, etc on every American. That’s a general warrant (a “write of assistance”) — exactly the kind of warrant the FOURTH AMENDMENT outlaws.

The NSA’s PRISM program is also a violation of the Patriot Act — even the stronger, updated one that President Obama requested and signed into law.

The Patriot Act permits the NSA to monitor foreign communications (phone conversations, emails, etc) because foreigners are not protected by the U.S. Constitution.

The Patriot Act permits the inadvertent collection of data on Americans, but only if by accident, only if the American is part of the foreign phone or email traffic.

So if you are an American citizen who is taking phone calls from Yemen or Afghanistan, you would likely pop-up on the NSA’s radar screen. That’s how the Patriot Act was supposed to work.

The NSA PRISM program clearly goes light years beyond that.

So the NSA PRISM program violates both the FOURTH AMENDMENT to the Constitution and the the Patriot Act.

Is Edward Snowden a traitor or a hero?

Well, Paul Revere was no doubt a traitor in the eyes of the British authorities.

We don’t know all there is to know about Edward Snowden.  But I’m very happy he let us know what’s really going on.

The Obama Administration will argue that this data collection by the NSA was approved by the so-called Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA), a special court set up to make sure innocent Americans are not being targeted by foreign surveillance operations, including the Patriot Act.

The fact that the FISA court was derelict in its duty and approved the NSA’s tapping of, recording, and storing the phone conversations of every American citizen does not make it legal. It makes the FISA court a party to the criminal conduct.

Even the name of this special FISA court (“Foreign”) tells us what NSA was supposed to be doing — and that’s monitoring the phone and email traffic of foreigners — potential foreign terrorist threats to America.

NSA claims the PRISM program has prevented 50 terrorist attacks on America so far.

Impressive (sort of), but how are they counting?

Are they counting the same way the Obama Administration is counting how many jobs have been created and/or saved by the “stimulus”?

Are they counting the same way Obama under-estimated the cost of ObamaCare by triple (as of this date)?

No way to know, of course.

All this brings me to the question raised by this article: “Is the cost of the war on terror worth it?”

We have clearly lost our freedom. There is no such thing anymore as “privacy.”

The government knows everything about us — or can retrieve all the info if needed, including actual recordings of every phone conversation we’ve made on our cell phones and all our email correspondence.

This means the government (if it chooses to) can convict anyone of a crime because it’s impossible to live life anymore without violating a law or regulation of some kind, even if inadvertently.

This means the government can very easily target its enemies — i.e. those who want smaller government.

Far fetched?

Well, now we also learn that the IRS has been targeting the Tea Party, conservative-leaning organizations, churches, pro-life organizations, and organizations deemed opposed to the Obama agenda. We have learned that . . .

  • The IRS audited the ministries of the Reverend Billy Graham and his son Reverend Franklin Graham’s ministries in 2012 soon after Billy Graham endorsed Mitt Romney. The Graham ministries had never before been audited.
  • The IRS audited and targeted more than 500 Tea Party, conservative, Christian, and pro-Israel organizations.
  • Journalist Wayne Allyn Root reports that he was audited by the IRS soon after his book The ObamaCare Survival Guide was published and became a national bestseller. Mr. Root also reports that he has personally spoken with 15 donors to the Mitt Romney campaign who were audited within 90 days of making their donations.
  • The IRS demanded to read the prayers of conservative churches.
  • The IRS demanded copies of church membership lists.
  • The IRS audited reporters and news anchors who said critical things about Obama.
  • The IRS targeted Christian and conservative college interns.
  • Sarah Hall Ingram, the head of the IRS division that was conducting these audits of conservatives and conservative organizations has been promoted to run the IRS office that charged with enforcing the ObamaCare mandates.
  • The Obama campaign accused Mitt Romney of not paying his taxes (even though Obama and Romney paid about the same percentage of their incomes to the IRS)
  • The Obama campaign accused Romney’s donors of not paying their taxes and accused them of engaging in shady activities — an obvious effort by Team Obama to intimidate Romney’s donors into not donating to Romney.
  • The Obama Justice Department secretly obtained phone records and emails of more than 100 reporters, journalists, and editors — with a special focus on destroying FOX News. The purpose of this, of course, was to chill media criticism of Obama during 2012.
  • The Obama Justice Department claimed FOX News reporter James Rosen was engaging in criminal activity by asking Obama Administration officials about the North Korean missile threat. Rosen is FOX News’ chief Washington, DC correspondent. The Obama Justice Department secretly seized Rosen’s phone records, emails, and tracked his movements 24/7.

This is how Communist regimes behave. This is not how the United States government is supposed to behave.

We have a government in Washington, DC, that is completely out of control.

The Obama Administration has told us that we should trust it with all of our information — that it’s just trying to keep us safe.

But look at the price we are paying for all of this safety.

Granted, the War on Terror was launched in earnest under the Presidency of George W. Bush.

Former Vice President Dick Cheney is a vigorous defender of the NSA PRISM program, which apparently was launched in 2007. Obama just continued, expanded, and enhanced it.

Fine. That doesn’t make it right.

George W. Bush was arguably one of the worst Presidents in American history.

He actually launched a war by mistake — against Iraq — a war that served no purpose whatsoever, a war that cost us $2-3 TRILLION, depending on whose accounting you use.

Turns out Saddam Hussein had no credible nuclear bomb program, or weapons of mass destruction of any significant nature that could threaten the United States. Turns out he was actually a bulwark against terrorism, hated al Qaeda, and was a key check against the much more dangerous Iran — a fact Ronald Reagan understood very well (which is why he supported Iraq in its war with Iran).

But let’s look further at all this War on Terror has cost us. And then let’s ask the question: Is it worth it?

3,000 Americans died in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack.

This launched America’s War on Terror.

So the cost of the September 11th attack was 3,000 American lives. It also cost $3.8 billion to rebuild the World Trade Center.

So the cost was huge. The loss of 3,000 American lives was tragic.

But what has it cost to right this wrong?

What has it cost to “keep us safe”?

And has this wrong been righted? Are we any safer today than we were the day before September 11, 2001?

Perhaps we’re a bit safer from the terrorists. But what about safer from our own government?

Well, the cost of rebuilding World Trade Center: $3.8 Billion.

6,648 Americans died in the Iraq War — more than double who died in the September 11 attack.

Another 2,238 Americans have died in Afghanistan.

The official number of Americans wounded in the Iraq and Afghanistan now stands at more than 50,000.

But brain injuries from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) are not counted in the official tally of wounded.
PTSD brain injuries are crippling and require lifelong treatment.

If we include PTSD injuries in the cost of these wars, the number of wounded soars to over 100,000.

Many of America’s wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan would have died in earlier wars. But our modern medical care is so good, that we’ve been able to keep many “basket cases” alive.

The combined dollar-cost of the Iraq and Afghan wars was $3 TRILLION TO $5 TRILLION, depending on whose accounting you use.

The cost is really much higher than this because we’ll have to care for these 100,000-plus wounded (including PSTD) for the rest of their lives, along with their families.

Given what we know now, was (is) all this worth it?

I certainly believe we had to do all we could to hunt down Osama bin Laden and his associates, and kill them.

But we could have done this for less than $3-5 TRILLION, plus all the loss of liberty and privacy we are suffering now.

Instead of a $25 million reward for bin Laden, why not offer $1 Billion or $10 Billion — plus $1 BILLION or $10 BILLION for each of his associates.

Surely, this would have gotten the job done.

This is how we caught criminals in the wild west days. We offered rewards. This created an industry of bounty hunters. The criminals were usually caught.

If you make the bounty (reward) big enough, we could have had the entire world looking for bin Laden and his associates.

Doesn’t a system like this make a whole lot more sense than what we are doing now?
Wouldn’t this concept make a lot more sense than setting up a massive National Surveillance State to monitor every activity and every communication of every law-abiding American citizen?

There’s no reason to sacrifice our liberty for this gargantuan Surveillance State.

America’s founding fathers had it right. The Constitution makes even more sense today than it did back then.

The fact that we are spending $1 TRILLION a year on defense and national security is beyond absurd.

We have 12 aircraft carriers. China and Russia each have one.

Right now, 43 percent of the entire world’s military spending is, well, us. We are spending six times more on our military than #2 China. We are spending 14 times more than Russia.

President Eisenhower (no liberal) warned America about the “military industrial complex” and the threat it presents to our liberty and wallets and freedoms. Wow! Are we seeing this truth play out today.

It’s time to scale back this national security state we find ourselves in. It’s time we scale it way back — perhaps to one-third of what it is now.

What we are seeing emerge in America now is a vast unaccountable bureaucratic government apparatus designed to control us — all under the guise of keeping us safe, of course.

Robespierre, you might remember, also had a Committee for Public Safety — enforced by the guillotine — in the aftermath of the French Revolution.

All tyrannies become tyrannies under the rubric of protecting the people. Every government always says what we need is more safety. That’s how governments amass more and more power — to supposedly protect us . . . from ourselves, from our enemies, from whoever and whatever.

We have a government today that mocks the Constitution, laughs at the rule of law. Everything and anything is justified under the rubric of keeping us safe. Republicans are just as much to blame for this as Democrats.

Republican House Speaker John Boehner calls Edward Snowden a traitor for telling the American people what’s really going on.

Never mind that the Constitution has an actual definition of what constitutes treason. Article 3, Section 3 of the Constitution defines treason thusly:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”

Snowden was not “levying war” against the United States.  He was not conspiring with any enemy. He’s not selling this information for profit.  He seems genuinely alarmed with the NSA’s clearly illegal unconstitutional assault on the privacy of law-abiding America.

We’re supposed to be governed with the “consent of the governed.”

How can there be consent if we don’t know what our government is doing, even in general terms?

Snowden wasn’t revealing the identities of CIA agents. He wasn’t jeopardizing America’s national security in any substantial way.

He was just telling us about an unconstitutional and illegal program that Americans (voters) had no idea exists.

He’s a whistleblower, not engaging in espionage. Big difference.

He’s just saying, “Hey, look here.  Did you know your government is doing this to you?”

This is supposed to be a Constitutional Republic where citizens are supposed to know, at least generally, what’s going on.

Switzerland doesn’t seem to have a terrorist problem.  Could it be that the way we are conducting ourselves around the world (like a bull in a china shop) might have something to do with with this hatred in the Muslim world toward America?

It appears that the United States of America is now the most hated country in the world.

Perhaps that’s because we’re the world’s most annoying busybody. We’re like Michael Bloomberg, trying to tell everyone how much soda they can drink.

If we scale back the war on terror, will more Americans die?


If the U.S. government wasn’t cataloguing and recording every cell phone conversation in America and capturing every email and social media post, will more Americans die?


But a lot more Americans have been dying as a result of the War on Terror.

We know statistically that 32,000 Americans will die in car crashes this year.

But we have made a decision that the freedom to drive outweighs the 32,000 lives that would be saved by banning driving.

America needs to conduct a similar cost-benefit analysis on whether this War on Terror is worth the price we’re now paying in terms of lost liberty, lost treasure, and lost lives.

Short of seceding from the union, the states can take strong action to counter an abusive federal government

The Red States should issue a “Declaration of Non-Compliance” with all unconstitutional Federal laws and regulations

Short of seceding from the union, are there steps the states can take to counter an abusive federal government?

For example, suppose a big state, such as Texas, declared itself a tax sanctuary — that no Texan will be required to pay an income tax of, say, more than 15 percent to the federal government.

It would cite the U.S. Constitution’s Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments for legal justification.

The Fifth Amendment states that “Nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.”

This is known as the “Takings Clause.”

The Fourteenth Amendment states that the government must not “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

This is known as the “Equal Protection of the Laws” clause.

The progressive income taxes violates both these Amendments.

If some Americans are taxed at a higher rate than others, they are being denied equal treatment under the law — a fundamental principal of common law and justice.

I should not pay a bigger fine for running a red light if I’m richer.

If the government is taking my money to give to someone else, clearly my property is being taken without just compensation . . . and not even for public use. So this is a violation of the “Takings Clause.”

So there is plenty of legal justification for Texas to simply declare (by passing a state law) that no Texan will be required to pay an income tax of more than 15 percent to the federal government.

The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution establishes the dual sovereignty doctrine. It states that,

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

According to the Tenth Amendment, most of what the federal government is doing today is unconstitutional.

If the federal government actually followed the Tenth Amendment, it would be about one-third the size it is now.

The Constitution set up a federal government to do certain very specific things –”establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”

Clearly, the federal government has no Constitutional authority to take money from one American to give to someone else.

The Sixteenth Amendment states that,

Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”

But the federal government does not have the authority to tax some people at a 30 percent rate and others at a 10 percent rate (for the purpose of wealth redistribution) because that violates both the Fifth Amendment’s “takings” clause and the Fourteenth Amendment’s “equal protection of the laws” clause.

The Supreme Court of the United States has repeatedly upheld the “dual sovereignty” doctrine of the Constitution’s Tenth Amendment.

Most recently, in the ObamaCare case, the court ruled that the states are under no obligation to comply with the ObamaCare law. That is, the states are under no obligation to use money from the state treasury to set up the ObamaCare “exchanges” or to expand “Medicaid.”

Thus, much of the financing mechanism for ObamaCare is gone if the states simply refuse to provide the funds and refuse to set up the exchanges.

James Madison and Thomas Jefferson both argued that the states have the right simply to refuse to go along with unconstitutional federal laws and decrees. After all, it was the states who created the federal government in the first place.

At North Carolina’s ratifying convention, James Iredell told the delegates that when “Congress passes a law consistent with the Constitution, it is to be binding on the people. If Congress, under pretense of executing one power, should, in fact, usurp another, they will violate the Constitution.”

In other words, the states would have the right to ignore any law Congress might pass that violates the Constitution.

So let’s say Texas declares that no Texan will pay more than a 15 percent rate on income to the federal government and that no Texan will be subject to arrest by federal authorities for refusing to pay more than this. What practically could the federal government do in response?

Well, the federal government could try to come into Texas to arrest the non-compliant Texan.

The state of Texas would then provide legal defense for the Texas taxpayer while the case worked its way through the courts, which could take years.

The state of Texas can just use the courts to tie up the federal government for years in litigation.

This would be taking a page from the ACLU’s playbook.

The ACLU has achieved a lot for the Left by threatening litigation and tying up the government in litigation.

Texas could take this approach with every abusive federal law, such as the Obama Administration’s plans to deny Americans their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, or all the unconstitutional regulations coming from the EPA.

In fact, the state of Texas could declare every federal regulation illegal that was not explicitly passed into law by Congress.

The federal agencies have issued hundreds of thousands of regulations that carry the force of law. You will pay fines and can go to jail for failing to comply with these regulations. But these regulations should carry no weight whatsoever because they were not actually passed into law by Congress.

Congress is the lawmaking body, not the Executive Branch.

And Congress has no Constitutional authority to transfer the lawmaking power to the Executive Branch.

So the state of Texas (or any state) could go through every federal regulation and declare it will no longer comply with these regulations.

What could the federal government do if Texas did that?

And what if this trend caught on in other solidly Red states? — such as Oklahoma, Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, Wyoming, Utah, Kansas, Arkansas, Georgia, South Carolina, Nebraska, Kentucky, the Dakotas, Montana, Idaho.

That’s a pretty sizeable chunk of territory that we might call the “Free United States of America” — in contrast to the “Enslaved United States of America.”

What could the federal government really do if this happened?

We would not actually secede from the union. These states would  just refuse to comply with unconstitutional laws and regulations.  They would continue to comply with Constitutional laws. We would want, for example, to continue to pay for national defense because that’s authorized by the Constitution.

The states can go through the federal budget and determine what they will pay for (the Constitutional items) — and NOT pay for (the unconstitutional items).

We will be happy to pay for all Constitutional federal functions of government.

Another area for the states to put their foot down is to say “no more seizing of private and state lands by the federal government.”

The states are perfectly capable of identifying places of true scenic beauty to protect.

What’s been happening is that the federal government has abused its eminent domain power to simply seize as much American land as it can for itself.

The federal government now owns 84.5 percent of Nevada, 69.1 percent of Alaska, 57.4 percent of Utah, 53.1 percent of Oregon, 50.2 percent of Idaho, 48.1 percent of Arizona, 55.3 percent of California, etc. — in other words, most of the Western United States.

The Obama Administration has mapped out a plan to seize millions more acres of valuable Western lands, putting many ranchers out of business.

The Red States need to say not only no more lands will be seized the federal government, but should begin taking lands back from the federal government.

Who is the federal government to say what Texas or Alaska can and can’t do with their own land — including their oil?

Kick the federal government out of the state.

And it really doesn’t matter what the Supreme Court rules because most of these federal laws and regulations are unconstitutional, no matter what liberals on the Supreme Court say.

The Supreme Court is not the supreme authority of the land.  The Constitution is. If the Supreme Court ruled that it’s okay to kill all red-headed children, that would not make it Constitutional to do so.

There’s no mention of the Supreme Court in the Constitution as the supreme authority in the land. That did not happen until 1958, when in Cooper v. Aaron the Court declared that its rulings have exactly the same weight as the text of the Constitution itself.

But that’s a self-evident absurdity.

The Constitution very clearly states that the courts operate under the laws established by Congress.  And Congress operates under the Constitution.

It’s then clear from the ratification debates on the Constitution that the states are supposed to be the final arbiters on what is Constitutional, or not. In fact, that was the entire promise in the ratification debates, or the Constitution never would have been ratified.  The states were assured over and over again, that they would be the judge of the Constitutionality of laws enacted by Congress.

If the federal law is Constitutional, the states would and should be pleased to abide by the law.  We all agree that sensible laws and rules are needed for the proper functioning of a civil society.

But under the American system, most of the governing is supposed to be handled by state and local governments.

Instead, the federal government that is the big usurper and primary lawbreaker America.  It’s come more to resemble organized crime than a real government.

We have a rogue President, a rogue federal bureaucracy, and a largely rogue Supreme Court — a court that actually found an unalienable right to an abortion in the text of the Constitution — where no such right exists — thus nullifying abortion laws in all 50 states.

So if the Supreme Court can nullify laws in all 50 states, the states can counter by nullifying unconstitutional federal laws.  We then have a stand-off — which is what happens when the government attempts to impose its will on an unwilling people.  We’re supposed to be governed in America by the “consent of the governed.”

Since we do need courts, the “Free United States” can set up its own Supreme Court — a competing court made up of Constitutionalists.

Again, what could the federal government really do about this?

The feds could theoretically take military action.

But that’s not likely to happen unless the states actually secede from the union. But the states would not be doing that.  We are not talking about attacking Fort Sumter here.

The states would just be enforcing their Constitutional rights — vigorously, on every front and in every way.

It would not be a Declaration of Independence, we would be issuing a Declaration of Non-Compliance – non-compliance with unconstitutional laws and regulations.

The Supreme Court has already given the states the roadmap for how to do this with its ObamaCare ruling — declaring that the states are under no obligation to comply with ObamaCare.

Its time for the Red States to reassert their Constitutional authority in every area — to take authority back from the federal government.

And it would good to formalize the Red State complaint against the federal government with a formal Declaration of Non-Compliance — following the same pattern of argument as America’s Declaration of Independence of 1776.

America’s Declaration of Independence made its case by cataloguing a long list of abusive behavior by the British government. It’s well worth reading this list, because so many of these complaints apply to our own federal government today:

The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world . . .

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance . . .

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation . . .

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever . . .

A strong case can be made that much of this is happening now — only more so. The federal government has vastly over-stepped its constitutional authority in many areas — “has erected a multitude of New Offices [not envisoned by the Constitution], and sent hither swarms of Officers [bureacrats] to harass our people, and eat out their substance.”

Isn’t this happening today?

Let’s take ObamaCare as just one example.

ObamaCare sets up a Soviet-style health care bureaucracy that will destroy freedom in America and wreck our health care system if its allowed to take root and spread like a cancer into every area of American life. ObamaCare . . .

  • Requires the hiring of 16,000 brand to IRS agents to enforce the 2,700-page law.
  • Establishes 159 brand new government agencies to administer the program;
  • Includes 21 new taxes and tax increases.

Barack Obama promised in his 2008 campaign for the Presidency that he would “fundamentally transform” the American system (his words) — including our Constitutional structure of government.

The engine that’s driving this fundamental transformation of our society is”ObamaCare.”

Communists and socialists have always known that the fastest and surest way to move a country to socialism is through socializing medicine — that is, by putting a country’s health care system under government control.

Vladimir Lenin, the founder and architect of the Soviet Communist state, said “Socialized medicine is the keystone to the arch of the socialist state.”

Lenin and the Communists knew that once you control people’s access to health care and medical treatment, you control their lives. The Left here in America is well aware of this also.

When radio host Paul W. Smith asked liberal Congressman John Dingell (D-MI) why it will take the government until 2014 to fully set up the ObamaCare system, Dingell said this:

“It takes a long time to do the necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to put the legislation together to control the people.”

Source: News Talk WJR Radio with Paul W. Smith 3/23/2010

Does this sound like the America established by our nation’s Founding Fathers and described in the Constitution of the United States?

Is this really the purpose of our federal government — “to control the people“?

The Constitution says the primary purpose of government is to “secure the blessings of liberty” and to provide for the “common defense”  – not to “control the people.

Under our Constitution, people are supposed to be free to do whatever they want, so long as they are not harming someone else.

That’s called freedom.

America’s Declaration of Independence says the purpose of government is to secure our “unalienable rights” to “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

ObamaCare is about none of this.  ObamaCare is about the opposite of what described by our nation’s founding documents.

No wonder Cuba’s Communist dictator Fidel Castro hailed the passage of ObamaCare as “a miracle.”

In other words, when Barack Obama told us in 2008 that he was out to “fundamentally transform” America, he meant it. And he’s doing it primarily through ObamaCare — but also via the EPA, Executive Orders, and his administrative control of the vast federal bureaucracy.

His bureaucrats and regulators are issuing an avalanche of regulations on their own every week that carry the force of law — complete with criminal penalties and sanctions.  All this is unconstitutional.

It’s time for the Red States to Declare Independence from all this — or rather Declare their Non-Compliance with a long catalogue of federal abuses by the federal government, very similar to America’s original Declaration of Independence of 1776.

This is not a proposal to go to war or to secede.  It’s a proposal  simply to refuse to comply with all federal laws and regulations that are clearly unconstitutional.

What could Obama and the Left do if the Red States actually did that?

Not much.

Rep Jesse Jackson Jr says Congress is in rebellion and that Obama should do what Lincoln did to rebels

Jr. says Obama should declare a national emergency, just like Lincoln did, and exercise dictatorial powers  –presumably including suspending Habeas Corpus and declaring Martial Law.

Would this also mean slaughtering hundreds of thousands of citizens? Not clear.

Here the brilliant and learned Jesse Jackson Jr exlains why the U.S. Constitution should be changed to include right to have a laptop computer and an iPod

And to think: These are the people who are running America.

Cop admits he plants drugs on innocent people to meet arrest quota. Says this is common.

It will be real interesting to see how well he gets along with his fellow inmates.

NY DAILY NEWS: A former NYPD narcotics detective snared in a corruption scandal testified it was common practice to fabricate drug charges against innocent people to meet arrest quotas.

The bombshell testimony from Stephen Anderson is the first public account of the twisted culture behind the false arrests in the Brooklyn South and Queens narc squads, which led to the arrests of eight cops and a massive shakeup.

Anderson, testifying under a cooperation agreement with prosecutors, was busted for planting cocaine, a practice known as “flaking,” on four men in a Queens bar in 2008 to help out fellow cop Henry Tavarez, whose buy-and-bust activity had been low.

“Tavarez was … was worried about getting sent back [to patrol] and, you know, the supervisors getting on his case,” he recounted at the corruption trial of Brooklyn South narcotics Detective Jason Arbeeny.

“I had decided to give him [Tavarez] the drugs to help him out so that he could say he had a buy,” Anderson testified last week in Brooklyn Supreme Court.

Read more here >>>

12 Signs That Americans Who Love Liberty Should Watch Their Backs


#1 A 55-year-old man in Arizona was recently ordered to turn in all his guns because of things that he wrote on his blog.  Fortunately, after WorldNetDaily covered the story there was an outpouring of outrage and the order was overturned, but what would have happened if WorldNetDaily had not covered the story?

#2 According to Mike Adams of Natural News, the CDC is starting to call parents all over the nation to question them about the vaccination status of their children….

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control, which has been comprehensively exposed as a vaccine propaganda organization promoting the interests of drug companies, is now engaged in a household surveillance program that involves calling U.S. households and intimidating parents into producing child immunization records. As part of what it deems a National Immunization Survey(NIS), the CDC is sending letters to U.S. households, alerting them that they will be called by “NORC at the University of Chicago” and that households should “have your child’s immunization records handy when answering our questions.”

You can see a copy of the letter that the CDC is sending out to selected parentsright here.

#3 According to blogger Alexander Higgins, students in kindergarten and the 1st grade in the state of New Jersey are now required by law to participate “in monthly anti-terrorism drills”.  The following is an excerpt from a letter that he recently received from the school where his child attends….

Each month a school must conduct one fire drill and one security drill which may be a lockdown, bomb threat, evacuation, active shooter, or shelter-in place drill. All schools are now required by law to implement this procedure.

So who in the world ever decided that it would be a good idea for 1st grade students to endure “lockdown” and “active shooter” drills?

To get an idea of what these kinds of drills are like, just check out this video.

#4 According to licensed private investigator Angela V. Woodhull, hospitals are increasingly using “guardianship” to strip elderly Americans of their liberty and to rapidly drain their bank accounts.  The following is one story that Woodhull included in a recent article….

Ginger Franklin, Hendersonville, Tennessee, fell down the stairs in her condo and suffered a bump on her head.  She was declared “temporarily mentally incapacitated” and a guardian was appointed through the courts.  Within six weeks, the guardian had sold Franklin’s home, car, furniture, and drained her bank account.  Today, Franklin has her freedom back, but she is having to start all over.

#5 In a sign of just how far individual liberty in the United States has declined, a judge in Wisconsin has actually ruled that citizens do not have a right to grow and eat whatever foods they want to.  The following is a short excerpt from his recent decision….

1) no, Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to own and use a dairy cow or a dairy herd;

2) no, Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to consume the milk from their own cow;

3) no, Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to board their cow at the farm of a farmer;

4) no, the Zinniker Plaintiffs’ private contract does not fall outside the scope of the State’s police power;

5) no, Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to produce and consume foods of their choice;

#6 The freedom to raise our pets as we want to is also being greatly curtailed in many areas of the country.  For example, a new law in St. Louis would require nearly all dogs and cats to be sterilized and microchipped….

Board Bill 107 would require all pet owners to spay or neuter their dogs and cats and microchip them for identification. Those who don’t want to sterilize their pets would be assessed a fee of $200 per year.

Will the control freaks that run things want to start sterilizing and microchipping humans someday?

#7 Whenever any politician suggests that we should “suspend elections”, that should be a major red flag.  North Carolina Governor Bev Perdue recently made national headlines when she made the following statement….

“I think we ought to suspend, perhaps, elections for Congress for two years and just tell them we won’t hold it against them, whatever decisions they make, to just let them help this country recover

#8 As I wrote about recently, many NFL teams are now performing “enhanced pat-downs” of fans before they enter the stadiums.  In Green Bay, the Packers are using hand-held metal detectors on fans before they are allowed to enter Lambeau field.

What is next?  Will they soon insist that we all undergo full body cavity searches before we are permitted to attend the games?

Read more here >>>


Login to Join Discussion!