Healing Doesn't Begin With Putting God Back In The White House....

.... It begins with bringing Him back to the CHURCH HOUSE.

M.A.S.H. Comes To Life….

The president has declared that the Orlando shooting had nothing to do with islam, despite the shooter calling 9-11 to pledge his allegiance to ISIS.  The USAG has said they are still trying to determine the shooter's "true motivation" for his actions, but reiterates that it had nothing to do with islam despite the shooter's own words.

We are watching an episode of M.A.S.H. come to life before our eyes.  This is from the episode, The Novocaine Mutiny, in which Frank Burns tries to get Hawkeye courtmartialed:

Frank -  It has come to my attention that Sergeant Zale lost $300.

Hawkeye - Yeah.  So?

Frank - So that means that there's a thief around here.  Maybe more than one.

Hawkeye - Frank, Zale lost it gambling.

Frank - I beg your pardon?

BJ - Gambling, Frank.  He was playing poker with us.

Frank - Impossible. Gambling's prohibited.  There is no gambling in this unit.  Therefore the money was stolen.

BJ - Can't argue with that logic.

Hawkeye - I certainly wouldn't try.  My mother always said, "Never argue with crazy people and wear clean underwear in case you get run over by a tank and go to the hospital.

BJ - Wise woman.

Frank - Okay, you two clever Dicks.  I'm gonna conduct a search as only I can, and the culprit or culprits will be punished.

BJ - Frank, your sanity's sprung a leak.

Frank - We'll see.  When I find that money, you'll be laughing out the other side of your sleeve.

So here's how this plays out in today's news:

President - It has come to my attention that there was a shooting at a gay nightclub in Orlando.

Public - Yeah, that's what the news said.

President - Well, that means there's a shooter around there.  Certainly not part of a larger conspiracy.

Public - Mr. President, the shooter was a self-proclaimed muslim and pledged allegiance to ISIS.

President - I beg your pardon?

Public - Muslim, Mr. President.  The shooter said he was Muslim.

President - Impossible.  I have declared that there are no such things as muslim terrorists.  Muslim terrorists do not exist,  therefore, the shooter must have had some other motivation.

Public - Can't argue with that logic, won't even try.  My mother always quoted Proverbs 29:9, "If a wise man contendeth with a foolish man, whether he rage or laugh, there is no rest."  She was a wise woman.

President - Okay, you racist, intolerant right wingers.  I and my administration are gonna conduct a search as only we can, and the scapegoats we "discover" will be punished.

Public - Mr. President, your agenda is showing.

President - We'll see.  When I find my scapegoat, you'll be laughing out the other side of your sleeve.

Active Shooters In San Bernardino - And The President Wastes No Time Politicizing The Event….

Active shooter incident in California, and the White House wastes no time politicizing the event. Here is the statement from the WH, broken down with my observations:

"Well, we don't know that much yet." 

Keep that in mind.

"It's still an active situation. FBI is on the ground offering assistance to local officials as they need it. It does appear that there are going to be some casualties. And you know, obviously our hearts go out to the victims and the families."

"The one thing we do know is that we have a pattern now of mass shootings in this country that has no parallel anywhere else in the world, and there's some steps we could take, not to eliminate every one of these mass shootings, but to improve the odds that they don't happen as frequently, common sense gun safety laws, stronger background checks and you know, for those who are concerned about terrorism of, you know, some may be aware of the fact that we have a no fly list where people can't get on planes but those same people who we don't allow to fly could go into a store right now in the united states and buy a firearm and there's nothing that we can do to stop them."

1, We know NOTHING about these people. Who are they? From where did they come? Are they sadists with a beef against the developmentally disabled? Are they terrorists? They attacked a facility that serves the developmentally disabled.

2, We know NOTHING about how they obtained their weapons. Were they purchased locally, in another state, stolen, smuggled in? Since we know nothing about them, how can the president presume that changing our law is going to have ANY impact? A criminal who desires weapons will find illegal ways to obtain them, and no law is going to change that.

3, He mentions terrorism, implicitly declaring this to be a terrorist attack, yet he continues to push for unvetted people to be allowed into the country, while treating citizens with Constitutional rights as closet criminals.

4, The list to which he refers, the "no fly" or "terrorist watch list", is unConstitutional. It contains more than ONE MILLION names. Most of those people have been added to it in violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments WITHOUT EVER HAVING BEEN CHARGED WITH OR CONVICTED OF ANY CRIME WHATSOEVER, merely on someone's suspicion, denying them their Constitutional RIGHT to due process. Since these people have been charged with nothing, had no opportunity to confront their accuser in open court as demanded by the Constitution, have been convicted of no crime, there is no legal basis to deny them their Second Amendment RIGHT to purchase a firearm.

"That's a law that needs to be changed, and so you know, my hope is that we're able to contain this particular shooting and, and we don't yet know what the motives of the shooters are, but what we do know is, is that there are steps we can take to make Americans safer and that we should come together in a bipartisan basis at every level of government to make these rare as opposed to normal."

Again, we have already established that we know nothing about these people, so again, the president cannot presume that using the "terrorist watch list" will stop anything. If anything needs to be changed, it is that the "terrorist watch list" needs to be eliminated. If someone truly poses a threat, then investigate them, charge them, convict them, and deal with them AS DEMANDED BY THE CONSTITUTION. As has already been well-established, a criminal who wants to obtain weapons will do so regardless of inclusion on some government list.

"We should never think that this is something that just happens in the ordinary course of events, because it doesn't happen with the same frequency in other countries."

This statement has already been thoroughly de-bunked. There are far more countries, particularly muslim countries, where such mass shootings are DAILY OCCURRENCES. Of course, that doesn't fit with the agenda.

Pray for the families effected by this tragedy. Pray for law enforcement as they work to round these animals up.

And stop politicizing tragedies. These are people - not political pawns or statements.

Incongruous….

Mr. President, Please Explain….

Mr. President, during your prayer breakfast speech, you addressed the issue of atrocities committed in the name of religion.

Please explain how it is that you have no trouble attributing the crusades, the inquisition, slavery and Jim Crow directly to individuals acting in the name of Christianity, yet you continue to insist that atrocities committed by muslim jihadis in the name of Islam and Islam are mutually exclusive.

It was a jihad - for all intents and purposes, a crusade - that lasted for over nine hundred years that left Islam in control of the middle east, northern Africa, and much of the Iberian peninsula.  It was atrocities committed against Jews and Christians - an inquisition, if you will - as well as the capture of the Holy Land in general and Jerusalem in particular that brought about the crusades.

Muslims are responsible for instituting their own version of Jim Crow - dhimmitude - against the unconverted living in their controlled areas, essentially relegating them to second class citizenship status.

It was muslim slavery and pillaging of American personnel and shipping traffic that led to the assault by US Marines on Tripoli on orders of President Thomas Jefferson, yes, the same president to whom you attribute the "celebration" of the first iftar at the White House.  You know it was nothing of the sort.  The dinner in question to which Libyan ambassador Mellimelli was invited was to have taken place at 3:30 pm.  The ambassador, however, was observing the ramadan fast, so the dinner was re-scheduled to after sundown as a diplomatic courtesy to accommodate his religious beliefs.  Jefferson had no reason to love Islam.  It was his earlier meetings, while US ambassador to France, with Ambassador Sidi Adja that taught him (as he reported to Congress), 

"...that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every muslim who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise." 

Some 1.5 million white slaves were taken by the Barbary (muslim) pirates.  To this day, muslims lead the world in the slave trade. 

Mr. President, you argument simply doesn't hold water.  Muslims have done all of these things in the name of their religion for millennia.  If you attribute guilt for similar atrocities directly to those who committed them in the name of Christianity, then you must also acknowledge and attribute the same atrocities to the muslims that commit them in the name of their religion to the present day.

Obama: Radical Islam A "Phenomena," Not A Threat...

Radical islam has taken over countries in the middle east and threatens France, Britain, and other European countries, yet Pres. Obama refers to it as a "phenomena... that has metastasized," but he does 

"...not consider it an existential threat… This is one we will solve. We are stronger, we are representing values that a majority of Muslims believe in — in tolerance and working together to build rather than destroy."

The president cannot just will ISIS or any other radical islamic terrorist threat away. Claiming to have the moral high ground has not stopped radicals from destroying other societies that also claimed to have the moral high ground, and it won't stop them here, either. This is not a problem "… to be solved," it is a clear and present danger to be eradicated.

Thomas Paine made the following observation, and it holds true today: 

"I am thus far a Quaker, that I would gladly agree with all the world to lay aside the use of arms, and settle matters by negotiation; BUT UNLESS THE WHOLE WILL, THE MATTER ENDS, AND I TAKE UP MY MUSKET AND THANK HEAVEN HE HAS PUT IT IN MY POWER," emphasis added.

It is time to take up the musket against these radical islamic terrorists, and thank heaven He has put it in our power.

US/Israel Relationship at a Tipping Point?

"The fault for this breakdown in relations can be assigned in good part to the junior partner in the relationship, Netanyahu… he’s a chickens**t…" who "… lack[s]… political courage."

To those who said Obama would maintain our solid relationship with Israel, think again.

The administration accuses Benjamin Netanyahu of having no courage to attack Iran because of their nuclear program, yet it was the administration that, on multiple occasions, warned Israel that any such attack would result in serious repercussions from the US.

They accuse him of going out of his way to protect his job by building apartments in East Jerusalem and criticizing the Obama regime, yet Obama has gone out of his way to protect his own job by throwing open the borders to anyone who wishes to cross illegally, providing amnesty - even citizenship - to those illegals (including letting some serve in the military), attacking churches and other religious organizations, covering the illegal activities of his underlings (Holder, Clinton, and the IRS), and acting as an apologist for radical islam - all the while shaping public sentiment against Israel.

They accuse Netanyahu of being "disconnected from reality." Really? Hamas is the organization that has been lobbing bombs at Israel, yet it is the administration that tells Israel not to protect itself, but to stand meekly by.

We have a responsibility to protect Israel, to bless Israel - something this administration is rapidly moving away from.  They set up the conditions leading to this breakdown, now they (as has become so familiar) blame Israel for fulfilling their prophecies.

the-crisis-in-us-israel-relations-is-officially-here

Ebola and the (Non-existent) Travel Ban….

Does everyone remember back in April when the administration initiated a travel ban to Israel because of the potential of a terrorist attack?

 Yet this same administration refuses to initiate a travel ban to and from ebola-stricken countries, even though the WHO estimates that ebola will be claiming up to 10,000 victims a week in Africa very soon. 

The administration doesn't need commercial airlines to get resources into and out of the hot zone. Initiate the ban before we truly DO have a crisis on our hands here in the US.

Mr. President: Veto the Upcoming UN Resolution...

Post by American Center for Law and Justice.

Administration Suing Wisconsin Company For Requiring Employees To Be Able To Speak English….

"… the Civil Rights Act protects employees from discrimination based on national origin, which includes the linguistic characteristics of a national origin group," Administration sues Wisconsin company. 

No one is denying an individual the right to speak their own language while at work, but the ability to speak english is essential in most companies in order to facilitate communication between the employee and the employer.  

This action, however, appears to be part of the administration's "job creation" package.  Every company employing non-english speakers will have no choice but to employ interpreters for every language spoken by their employees, as well as print multi-language copies of all employment documents (applications, employee handbooks, etc.), in order to preserve their "civil rights.

"...But we are equally opposed to any discrimination against or for a man because of his creed. We demand that all CITIZENS, Protestant and Catholic, Jew and Gentile, shall have fair treatment in every way; that all alike shall have their rights guaranteed them.
The mighty tide of immigration to our shores has brought in its train much of good and much of evil; and whether the good or the evil shall predominate depends mainly on whether these newcomers do or do not throw themselves heartily into our national life, cease to be Europeans, and become Americans like the rest of us. More than a third of the people of the Northern States are of foreign birth or parentage. An immense number of them have become completely Americanized, and these stand on exactly the same plane as the descendants of any Puritan, Cavalier, or Knickerbocker among us, and do their full and honorable share of the nation’s work. But where immigrants, or the sons of immigrants, do not heartily and in good faith throw in their lot with us, but cling to the speech, the customs, the ways of life, and the habits of thought of the Old World which they have left, they thereby harm both themselves and us. If they remain alien elements, unassimilated, and with interests separate from ours, they are mere obstructions to the current of our national life, and, moreover, can get no good from it themselves. In fact, though we ourselves also suffer from their perversity, it is they who really suffer most. It is an immense benefit to the European immigrant to change him into an American citizen. To bear the name of American is to bear the most honorable titles; and whoever does not so believe has no business to bear the name at all, and, if he comes from europe, the sooner he goes back there the better… From his own standpoint, it is beyond all question the wise thing for the immigrant to become thoroughly Americanized. Moreover, from our standpoint, we have a right to demand it. We freely extend the hand of welcome and of good-fellowship to every man, no matter what his creed or birthplace, who comes here honestly intent on becoming a good United States citizen like the rest of us; but we have a right, and it is our duty, to demand that he shall indeed become so…," Pres. Theodore Roosevelt, True Americanism (emphasis added).

September 11, 2014….

"A militia is everywhere; whereas a standing army may be very distant from any attack which may take place."

Albert Gallatin.

Stay Frosty.

ISIS Is Throwing A War - Are We Attending?

In the aftermath of the Sotloff beheading, Pres. Obama finally said this morning that we would deal with ISIS. That is, we are going to try to make them a "manageable problem." Not destroy them, we are going to work with regional partners to try to contain them in Syria. But we're not going to go to war with them or try to destroy them.

The administration's approach reminds me of a line from Tom Clancy's novel, Executive Orders: "'The UIR is going to throw a war,' J-3 thought, 'and nobody's going to come.'" Executive orders is about a newly formed islamic caliphate, too, that attacks the US. That would be a good read for Pres. Obama.

There is no way to make this a "manageable problem." As long as even a few of these people survive, they will again recruit a following and make war. I am not a war hawk, but we have been operating with this same mindset toward the middle east for decades. We go in, pacify, leave, and then watch as a new crop of extremists rises. A show of force will never work. Pacification will never work. They operate on a "destroy or be destroyed" premise. Containing them in Syria, as the president has suggested, only accomplishes two goals: it gives the president the justification he has wanted for the last year, since the Syrian civil war began, to enter Syria, and it concentrates ISIS on the border of Israel - their REAL target.

As it stands, we are likely going to have to deal with ISIS both OVER THERE AND HERE in the very near future.

URGENT: Administration Secretly Issuing Warning Of Imminent Attacks Originating In Mexico...

Judicial Watch posted today that, in addition to the uptick in chatter relating to possible 9/11 attacks, DHS, Justice, and State have put agencies on high alert to find out anything they can to verify reports that ISIS and Al Qaeda are staging in Juarez for possible car bombing attacks on the US, and a warning bulletin for border security regarding an imminent attack has been issued. The commanding general at Ft. Bliss has been read into the threat.

Imminent Terrorist Attack Warning By Feds on US Border - Judicial Watch

Britain has taken similar measures - publicly, with PM Cameron stating that they are facing the "poisonous ideology of Islamic extremism."  The White House has said it currently has no plans to publicly raise the threat level here.

There is evidence to suggest that drug cartels and ISIS are teaming up to move terrorist resources over the border into the country.

If it can be proven that Obama's decision to unilaterally relax border security to allow illegals into the country had anything to do with terrorist elements making it in as well, then he must be impeached and held criminally liable for throwing open our doors to any resulting attacks. He, and he alone, bears the guilt for any resulting attacks and the accompanying loss of life. He bragged that he acted alone; he can take the blame alone, too.

Rev. Jesse Peterson: "What If White America Just Said 'No'?"

This does not appear to be copyrighted, so I am including the entire text of Rev. Peterson's blog entry regarding the violence that has taken place in Ferguson, MO:

“He that spares his rod hates his son: but he that loves him chastens him early.” – Proverbs 13:24

As I watch the racial unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, I can’t help but compare the behavior of blacks in that city to that of spoiled rotten children.

Blacks have been rioting and fighting with police after the shooting death of a thug, Michael Brown. And white political and law enforcement leaders have given in to their tantrum like weak parents.

How did we get to the point of having Al “the Riot King” Sharpton as the White House point person for racial reconciliation – and having a racist attorney general like Eric Holder come to the rescue of Ferguson?

Foolish blacks jumped to false conclusions about the death of “gentle giant” Michael Brown. Protesters looted businesses and even targeting the same convenience store that Brown robbed.

Obama predictably weighed in, warning police about using excessive force. Surrendering to the political pressure, Gov. Jay Nixon, D-Mo., (one of the weakest white men I’ve seen!) pulled the Ferguson Police off the case, and placed Missouri State Highway Patrol Capt. Ron Johnson in charge.

Bad move.

Capt. Johnson’s sympathies are with the black thugs. His idea of policing was to march with protesters and order the police to stand down while black criminals roamed the streets looting.

When Gov. Nixon addressed the situation, blacks publicly berated him. Missouri’s Democrat State Sen. Maria Chappelle-Nadal blasted him for being “disconnected” from the black community. She tweeted: “F— you” to the governor and called him a “coward” on national TV.

Angry protesters also shouted Nixon down during his press conference. A black man mocked Nixon for being soft-spoken, telling him, “Speak with your chest!” Nixon tried to appease the black mob and prematurely called for a “vigorous prosecution” of Officer Darren Wilson.

Obama gladly dispatched Eric Holder to Ferguson, but instead of calming racial tensions, Holder made matters worse.

Holder told the young protesters in Ferguson that he understood their distrust of police:

“I am the attorney general of the United States. But I am also a black man. I can remember being stopped on the New Jersey turnpike on two occasions and accused of speeding. Pulled over … ‘Let me search your car’ … Go through the trunk of my car, look under the seats and all this kind of stuff. I remember how humiliating this was and how angry I was and the impact it had on me.”

Some of Holder’s past “greatest” hits:

• As a new attorney general, he refused to prosecute baton-wielding members of the racist New Black Panther Party who were intimidating white voters in front of Philadelphia polls.
• Holder said America is a “nation of cowards” when it comes to dealing with racism.
• He has said that criticism of him and Obama is rooted in racism.
• Holder blames racism for the high incarceration rate of black males.
• He applied pressure on Florida prosecutors to bring charges against “white Hispanic” George Zimmerman, charges he knew would not stick.
• Holder promotes the lie that voter ID laws are racist.

Parents know children throw tantrums when they don’t get their way. When parents give in to the unreasonable demands of a child, they’re reinforcing bad behavior. If the behavior is not corrected, they learn to intimidate to get what they want – until someone says “No!”

In Ferguson, we witnessed the result of what happens when black parents spoil their children. The children turn out to be welfare-pampered, morally crippled, racist black thugs. Now the white authorities have had to take over the “parenting,” but they too refuse to say, “No!”

Black Missouri State Sen. Jamilah Nasheed has threatened the white St. Louis prosecutor with more riots if he doesn’t indict. She stated, “If you should decide not to indict this police officer, the rioting we witnessed this past week will seem like a picnic. …”

She’s not the only one issuing threats.

Brown family attorney Daryl Parks was asked by Megyn Kelly on Fox News, “If the grand jury doesn’t indict, will you accept that?” Parks replied, “Not necessarily … they need to come down with an indictment.”

Michael Brown’s mother said she wants the white officer to receive the death penalty.

The grand jury was just convened and blacks are complaining that it’s too white. These people don’t want justice. They want racial vengeance!

But what would happen if Gov. Jay Nixon developed a spine and said “No” to black rioters?

If Nixon stood up for law-abiding citizens, he’d have self-respect and their gratitude.

If he waited for all the evidence to come out before convicting the white officer, the rule of law would prevail.

And what if whites said “No” and didn’t spare the rod of truth when they’re attacked as “racists”?

If whites said “No,” Sharpton and Holder would be out of business.

If whites said “No,” it would give misguided blacks a chance to examine their hearts and repent of their wicked ways.

If whites said “No,” their children would be inspired by their courage.

This kind of transformation is possible for America, but only “if …”

http://www.bondinfo.org/blog/what-if-white-america-just-said-no

al Qaeda The JV? Tell Us Again, Mr. President….

With al Qaeda troops re-taking cities in Iraq and intending to march on Baghdad (al Qaeda pushing towards Baghdad), tell us again, Mr. President, how they are the JV and can be written off without a second thought (Obama-they're the JV).

And while we're at it, tell us again how the release of five taliban leaders represents no threat to us when the guy spearheading the drive to Baghdad was also caught by American troops, a prisoner for two years, and then ordered released by your administration.  All credible intelligence experts believe he will turn Iraq into the next Afghani safe haven for terrorists - and the US will be at the top of his hit list.

Let's face it, Mr. President, your foreign policy has come apart at the seams, your attempts to prove that islam is our friend has been disproved so many times that only someone with a distinct agenda could still believe it, and you have set up our country to lose more citizen lives at the hands of these madmen and their supporters than any president who preceded you - and that includes Jimmy Carter, who single handedly set the stage for the whole islamic revolution by throwing the Shah of Iran under the bus under the misguided notion that the ayatollah Khomeini was a "holy man" with whom he could work (Islamic revolution a Jimmy Carter legacy).  You have effectively re-energized the islamic revolution, and they are coming back with a ferocity that will be unparalleled in recent history.

By all objective standards, your foreign policy is an abject failure - but then, it's just one of several now, isn't it?

Lindsey Graham Warns Obama - Do This Again, And We'll Impeach….

Sen. Lindsey Graham has warned the president that if he ever releases Gitmo prisoners again without first coming to Congress, he will be impeached (Graham Warns Obama).

Right.

When is it going to sink in that we no longer believe you or most of your colleagues - in EITHER House?  

You have more than enough to go to impeachment right now, but the House has allowed three previous articles of impeachment to die in committee.  Even the most liberal democrats have expressed outrage at this latest act.  

Strike while the iron is hot - NOW!  

Forget this "next time…" garbage.  You're dealing with an intransigent president, not a naughty 2 year old.

Impeach.

Administration Puts The Nation's Schools On Notice...

"Attorney General Eric Holder called upon the nation’s school districts Wednesday to rethink “zero tolerance” disciplinary policies that he said disproportionately punish minorities and push too many students into the justice system.

“Alarming numbers of young people are suspended, expelled or even arrested for relatively minor transgressions like school uniform violations, schoolyard fights or showing 'disrespect' by laughing in class,” Holder said during a speech in Baltimore.

Holder’s remarks accompanied the release Wednesday of new federal guidance from the departments of Justice and Education pressing schools to adopt disciplinary policies that are “fair, nondiscriminatory, and effective.”

The guidance lays out the parameters of punishment as governed by federal civil rights protections, alternatives to exclusionary discipline and a comprehensive list of regulations on the books in every state," http://thehill.com/blogs/regwatch/administration/194790-holder-school-discipline-racially-biased-overly-harsh#ixzz2qPkCWLff 

 Holder's call originates with the executive order issued by the President in July, 2012, called the "White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for African Americans," which demands race-based disciplinary policies in schools, permitting african-american students to engage in behaviors that would result in disciplinary action if committed by non-minority students:

"EXECUTIVE ORDER

- - - - - - -

WHITE HOUSE INITIATIVE ON EDUCATIONAL EXCELLENCE FOR AFRICAN AMERICANS

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, to restore the country to its role as the global leader in education, to strengthen the Nation by improving educational outcomes for African Americans of all ages, and to help ensure that all African Americans receive an education that properly prepares them for college, productive careers, and satisfying lives, it is hereby ordered as follows…

…. African Americans lack equal access to highly effective teachers and principals, safe schools, and challenging college-preparatory classes, and THEY DISPROPORTIONATELY EXPERIENCE SCHOOL DISCIPLINE AND REFERRALS TO SPECIAL EDUCATION. African American student achievement not only lags behind that of their domestic peers by an average of two grade levels, but also behind students in almost every other developed nation. Over a third of African American students do not graduate from high school on time with a regular high school diploma, and only four percent of African American high school graduates interested in college are college-ready across a range of subjects. An even greater number of African American males do not graduate with a regular high school diploma, AND AFRICAN AMERICAN MALES ALSO EXPERIENCE DISPARATE RATES OF INCARCERATION.

(iii) decreasing the disproportionate number of referrals of African American children from general education to special education by addressing the root causes of the referrals AND ERADICATING DISCRIMINATORY REFERRALS;

(iv) implementing successful and innovative education reform strategies and practices in America's public schools to ensure that African American students receive a rigorous and well-rounded education in safe and healthy environments, and have access to high-level, rigorous course work and support services that will prepare them for college, a career, and civic participation;

(v) ensuring that all African American students have comparable access to the resources necessary to obtain a high-quality education, including effective teachers and school leaders, in part by supporting efforts to improve the recruitment, preparation, development, and retention of successful African American teachers and school leaders and other effective teachers and school leaders responsible for the education of African American students;

(vi) reducing the dropout rate of African American students and helping African American students graduate from high school prepared for college and a career, IN PART BY PROMOTING A POSITIVE SCHOOL CLIMATE THAT DOES NOT RELY ON METHODS THAT RESULT IN DISPARATE USE OF DISCIPLINARY TOOLS, and by supporting successful and innovative dropout prevention and recovery strategies that better engage African American youths in their learning, help them catch up academically, and provide those who have left the educational system with pathways to reentry…," all caps added for emphasis.

The full text of this executive order that mandates racially-based disciplinary policies that favor african-american students and requires schools to accept levels of unacceptable behaviors from african-american students that would be disciplined if committed by students of other races/ethnicities can be found here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/.../...

In short, the Obama EO and Holder's remarks are an effort to enshrine Paul Butler's principles of race-based jury nullification (in which he states that black jurors have a moral obligation to acquit black offenders whom they know, based on the evidence, to be guilty of a given crime, in an effort to keep more black males in their home communities) in the public schools. The problem with this line of thinking is that it forces the affected community to resign themselves to a reality that accepts a level of lawlessness, violence, or other socially unacceptable behaviors as a normal part of the daily experience if that is what it takes to keep more blacks in the particular community.

Open Letter To Congress:- End The BrinksmanshipGuarantee - Debt Payments

October 17, 2013

Legislators:  

United States Constitution, Fourteenth Amendment, SECTION 4:

"The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.  But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void."

That the President would use the threat of defaulting on our debt payments as a loaded gun to the head of congress is reprehensible in the extreme, and it must never be allowed to happen again.  His threat to default on our debt payment in violation of the Constitution, placing not only our own economy, but the world economy as well, into a state of panic is an impeachable offense.

Legislation MUST be passed FORTHWITH to insure that no entity - presidential or congressional - can ever use this threat again by GUARANTEEING that debt payments will be made.  Such a guarantee will not only calm our own citizens, but will also reassure foreign creditors as well.

In addition, while the Constitution bans default on LEGITIMATE debt, it also bans payment of any obligation to enemies of this country.  We have no business supporting the Muslim Brotherhood or any other terrorist organization that has threatened or waged war against the United States, or has worked to recruit citizens of this country with the goal of insurrection and rebellion.  Such payments are not legitimate obligations and must be banned.

The brinksmanship ends now.

An Angry Constituent

Pres. Obama: Law Enforcement OVERWHELMINGLY OPPOSES Gun Control Legislation...

The following letter was faxed to Pres. Obama and my legislators from Michigan:

June 11, 2013

President Barak H. Obama
The White House

Mr. President,

Some time back, you stood in front of the cameras with a few police chiefs and told us that law enforcement overwhelmingly backs gun control.  A recent poll of more than 15,000 law enforcement officers, over 70% of which were officers, not elected police chiefs, however, tells a far different story.

Among the results:

* 95% of respondents said that limiting magazines to 10 rounds would not reduce violent crime.

* 90% oppose banning certain semi-automatic firearms.

* 85% said that proposed federal gun control legislation would have no effect on reducing crime, or would even INCREASE crime.

* NEARLY 90% SAID THAT THE PRESENCE OF LEGALLY-ARMED CITIZENS AT OUR RECENT MASS SHOOTING INCIDENTS WOULD HAVE EITHER REDUCED OR COMPLETELY PREVENTED CASUALTIES.  This result, by the way, mirrors a statement issued last year by the border patrol officer's union:

"06-20-12 In another nauseating series of "Virtual Learning Center" brainwashing courses that Border Patrol agents are forced to sit behind a computer for hours and endure, we are now taught in an "Active Shooter" course that if we encounter a shooter in a public place we are to "run away" and "hide". If we are cornered by such a shooter we are to (only as a last resort) become "aggressive" and "throw things" at him or her. We are then advised to "call law enforcement" and wait for their arrival (presumably, while more innocent victims are slaughtered). Shooting incidents cited in the course are Columbine, the Giffords shooting and the Virginia Tech shooting. 

These types of mandatory brainwashing courses and the idiocy that accompanies them are simply stunning when they are force-fed to law enforcement officers. Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that any three of the above shootings would have been stopped cold by an off-duty law enforcement officer or a law abiding citizen with a gun. The Fort Hood shooting would have been stopped cold by someone with a gun as well. The shooters in these situations depend on unarmed and scared victims. It gives them the power they seek. We could go on and on with examples of shootings that could have been stopped by someone with a firearm…"

* More than 80% favor arming school employees.

The overall conclusion of the survey?  

"Quite clearly, the majority of officers polled oppose the theories brought forth by gun-control advocates who claim that proposed restrictions on weapon capabilities and production would reduce crime.

In fact, many officers responding to this survey seem to feel that those controls will negatively affect their ability to fight violent criminals.

Contrary to what the mainstream media and certain politicians would have us believe, police overwhelmingly favor an armed citizenry, would like to see more guns in the hands of responsible people, and are skeptical of any greater restrictions placed on gun purchase, ownership, or accessibility.

The officers patrolling America’s streets have a deeply-vested interest — and perhaps the most relevant interest — in making sure that decisions related to controlling, monitoring, restricting, as well as supporting and/or prohibiting an armed populace are wise and effective. With this survey, their voice has been heard."

The full results of the poll can be found here:  Gun Control Survey-11 key findings on officers' thoughts

So contrary to your public statement, Mr. President, law enforcement does not back your proposals.  And the latest polls reveal that the majority of Americans don't, either.  In fact, in terms of national priorities, only 4% list gun control as a top priority.

It is time to cease your attacks on our Second Amendment rights.  The role of government in this and other issues was clearly delineated in the 1875 Supreme Court Case, United States v. Cruikshank:

"With regard to those acknowledged rights and privileges of the citizen, which form a part of his political inheritance derived from the mother country, and which were challenged and vindicated by centuries of stubborn resistance to arbitrary power, they belong to him as his birthright, and it is the duty of the particular state of which he is a citizen to protect and enforce them, and to do naught to deprive him of their full enjoyment. When any of these rights and privileges are secured in the constitution of the United States only by a declaration that the state or the United States shall not violate or abridge them, IT IS AT ONCE UNDERSTOOD THAT THEY ARE NOT CREATED OR CONFERRED BY THE CONSTITUTION, BUT THAT THE CONSTITUTION ONLY GUARANTIES THAT [I]THEY SHALL NOT BE IMPAIRED BY THE STATE, OR THE UNITED STATES, AS THE CASE MAY BE.

Respectfully submitted,