Southern Baptists held their annual meeting in Houston this week and among the items discussed was what to do about the recent decision by the Boy Scouts of America to allow openly gay boys to participate. After some deliberation, the SBC issued a resolution condemning the BSA decision but fell short of calling for Baptist churches and its members to stop sponsorship of the Boy Scouts.
The Southern Baptists made a terrible mistake. They ignored the word of God which calls homosexuality a sin and refused to take a stand against the LGBT community’s push for acceptance and indoctrination.
So much for Honoring Timeless Values.
The reasoning the SBC gave for the recommendation to continue sponsoring the scouting organization was to allow the opportunity to share their faith. While this may seem like a noble endeavor, one must consider that these are children who are not trained to proselytize for the church. Nor should they be expected to have enough experience to deal with any sexual advances, much less from a member of the same gender. If a boy is self-identifying as homosexual, then he is already acting out in a sexual way and should not be admitted into the same area with other boys much like any young female would be excluded from the troop. The Boy Scouts are a wholly inappropriate setting for any type of sexualized behavior. Members of the Southern Baptist Convention know this and should condemn it in no uncertain terms.
Boy Scout programs bring many newcomers to churches and allow those churches a chance to share their faith with those outside the church, said David Uth, senior pastor of First Baptist Church in Orlando.
That’s one reason to remain in Boy Scouts, said Uth, whose Florida church with about 14,000 members announced recently that it will continue to sponsor a Boy Scout troop.
Baptists who stay in Scouting should try to reverse the new policy, the resolution states. “We encourage churches and families that choose to remain in relationship with the Boy Scouts … to advocate against any future change in leadership and membership policy that normalizes sexual conduct opposed to the biblical standard,” the resolution also says.
Baptists have no hostility toward gay Scouts, the resolution says: “We declare our love in Christ for all young people regardless of their perceived sexual orientation, praying that God will bring all youth into a saving knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
While the SBC has chosen to do nothing more than issue a resolution, I would urge any true Christian Church to remove all sponsorships of the BSA or its activities until they get right with God and refuse to condone or promote the gay agenda.
The Eyes of Texas – by John Sinclair (Sung to the tune of I’ve been working on the railroad)
The Eyes of Texas are upon you,
All the live long day.
The Eyes of Texas are upon you,
You can not get away.
Do not think you can escape them
At night or early in the morn-
The Eyes of Texas are upon you
‘Till Gabriel blows his horn.
Since I was a boy I’ve thought the lyrics to the song ‘The Eyes of Texas’ were a bit creepy, even if they were meant to inspire folks to be on their best behavior. Attributing God-like spying capabilities to the State of Texas or the University of Texas was, to me, just a little Orwellian. Should I, in my most intimate moments, be looking over my shoulder for Texas’ prying eyes? What kind of rebuke might I expect if Texas didn’t approve of my midnight snack? I wondered.
Recently, the lyrics reached a whole new level of scary, given the developments that Texas does indeed have “eyes” and they are ever present: in the air, on street corners, on highways and who knows where else. Mounted secretly on cell towers, perhaps? The trend has advanced so much as to attract the attention of State Representative Lance Gooden (R-Terrill) who has sponsored a bill limiting drone use by both individuals and law enforcement:
1200 WOAI’s Michael Board reports that Gooden has introduced a measure which would outlaw the use of drones by individuals, or state or federal law enforcement.
Gooden tells 1200 WOAI news that his bill would have limited exceptions, including allowing drones within 25 miles of the Rio Grande for drug and illegal immigrant interdiction programs, or for use by law enforcement with a valid search or arrest warrant, with ‘probable cause to believe that a person has committed a felony.’
“Do we want out local police departments laying off officers and simply parking drones over our homes to keep an eye on all of us?” Gooden asked.
Gooden’s measure would make it illegal for any image which was taken by a drone-based camera from being used in any civil or criminal court proceeding.
Looking past the obvious Fourth Amendment privacy concerns is the fact that the drones’ payload capabilities are ever increasing and those capabilities certainly haven’t gone unnoticed by our friends in law enforcement. At least one Texas sheriff has stated desires to equip his department’s drones with non-lethal projectiles such as rubber bullets or install tear gas capabilities. How long until those projectiles become lethal?
The slippery slope of Statism is constantly receiving a fresh coat of grease. I pray our representatives can reign in the desire to infringe on our privacy and stop the militarization of these drones over American soil.
Drones are not just a Texas issue.
Still not concerned?
The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) took it to a new level this week, though, with the introduction of “the most advanced surveillance system in the sky.” Codenamed ARGUS — Autonomous Real-Time Ground Ubiquitous Surveillance Imaging System — the new camera system comes equipped with 1.8 gigapixels worth of sensors. It’s made up of an array of 368 sensors not unlike the one in your smartphone, each capable of 5-megapixel resolution. (Adding them all up gives us that 1.8 gigapixel number.) It doesn’t miss a thing either since it’s capable of streaming a million terabytes, or 5,000 hours, of HD video every day.
Those are some insane specifications. At that resolution, ARGUS can spot a six-inch object from 10 miles away while flying at an altitude of 20,000 feet. The imaging system is so powerful it can see what you’re wearing from the nearly same altitude as commercial airlines fly, while your puny eyeballs can barely spot small cities from that high.
Read more: Drones Can Now See Inside Your Bedroom
I hate to say I told you so, but well, I told you so. Not YOU, personally, probably, unless you happen to be the person-in-denial I told, but well, you get my drift. The point is, I DID say it was coming and several deniers protested the thought that *gasp* Obama was going to even attempt a gun grab.
Damn. I hate it when I’m right. And not even a heartfelt apology from said deniers will make that sorrow dissipate. It’s almost too late, you see.
Joe Biden (Viceroy of Ogling) was quoted earlier today stating Obama is weighing Executive Order gun control options. via The Weekly Standard:
“The president is going to act,” said Biden, giving some comments to the press before a meeting with victims of gun violence. “There are executives orders, there’s executive action that can be taken. We haven’t decided what that is yet. But we’re compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and the rest of the cabinet members as well as legislative action that we believe is required.”
Biden said that this is a moral issue and that “it’s critically important that we act.”
Biden talked also about taking responsible action. “As the president said, if you’re actions result in only saving one life, they’re worth taking. But I’m convinced we can affect the well-being of millions of americans and take thousands of people out of harm’s way if we act responsibly.”
More interpolation at Townhall: Obama to Use Executive Order on Gun Control
Obama is coming for your guns. Incrementally of course, but don’t be like my friend living in Egypt on the river with his head buried in the desert. It’s time to realize Obama is taking aim at the Second Amendment, along with Eric (We must brainwash people against guns) Holder, Senator Feinstien, the ATF and Janet (I-shoulda-been-a-man with a gun-ban) Napolitano.
Did conservatives fail to make a compelling, convincing argument? Did the number of takers finally overcome the makers? Was Romney too Mormon? Too moderate? Too rich? Not forceful enough? Did Democrat voter fraud make a difference?
The answer is yes to all the above in varying degrees. The unfortunate truth is, the candidate forced upon us by the Republican Party wasn’t up to the task. What America desperately needed was a Reagan: someone able to convey the underlying values of conservatism, someone who would turn the media bias on its head and take a blow torch to Obama’s class envy straw men. Sadly, the candidate offered in Mitt Romney failed to convince enough independents and conservatives to go to the polls. He failed to adequately define his policies and contrast them with Obama’s dismal record.
In the end, I believe America was the ultimate loser because enough people didn’t trust Romney would go far enough to protect the Constitution and begin a restoration of our Founding Principles. Unfortunately, there were enough who stayed home and by default backed the faster erosion of rights, all the while knowing there will never be a perfect candidate.
This is not a complaint so much as attempting to point out the facts. I believe a true conservative would have won. However, judging from the response and excuse making from the Republican establishment, I don’t hold out much hope that they got the message.
Alright. Enough navel gazing.
One question, moving forward is, who will rise to the 2016 challenge? I’ve already seen names run up the proverbial flag poles testing the political winds but it is much too soon for publicly declared presidential candidacies. Two years from now, the results of 8 years of a hyper-progressive agenda will be laid out for all to see and it should be the easiest argument to make that free markets and less government are the answer, but my cynical mind tells me it will not be so. With this election, the roots of entitlement burrowed deeper into the American psyche. Unacceptable, to me is, they may have burrowed too deep to be eradicated, for those roots feed a fruitless orchard of dependency.
More important than who the next candidate will be is the establishment of a longer term plan. To that end, conservatives must identify and correct the root of the problem if we are to ever grow the base to large enough numbers for future victories and affect real change.
Much like the left devoted decades to turning enough people against the American idea by subtly, incrementally redefining it, and indoctrinating the people to want government to do more than constitutionally allowed, conservatives and libertarians must reclaim the educational high ground. Without proper education clearly contrasting the rewards of liberty versus the deadly results of socialism how can any people be expected to chose properly?
To this observer, education on the Founding Principles is the much needed vaccination against leftism. Natural Law needs more champions in public education, academia, the media, state and local governments and congress. The left has steadily out funded and out flanked the right in that regard. To ignore that fact is to cede that intellectual high ground and ultimately lose before the battle is begun.
However insurmountable the task seems, it must be done. We must find ways to re-institute teaching the roots of our Constitution, the essence of Liberty, else our country will ever be on the dangerous, socialistic path the left has placed US.
The bottom line is, if we don’t educate ourselves and our children as to the rights and liberties we are losing, how will we be able to save them?
To learn more about the Constitution and our Founding Principles, I highly recommend Hillsdale College’s Online Constitution Courses. They are offered free of charge and are invaluable sources of information.
For those in the Beaumont, TX area, the Southeast Texas Tea Party offers an ongoing Constitution Course taught by David Guidry every first Monday of the month in Beaumont, 6pm Trinity Church on the corner of I-10E @ W. Cedar St, across the freeway from Chilli’s on the frontage road.
Every Citizen has a fiduciary duty to preserve, defend and protect the Constitution. How can that be achieved if we do not have knowledge of the Constitution? The solution begins with each individual making a commitment to study and understand the original intent and meaning of its words. The future of our children and all of those yet unborn depend on it. ~ David Guidry
Apologies for a lack of posting the last few days. I must confess a certain amount of distress at Obama’s re-election. To say that the news was disheartening would be too mild. The ramifications of another four years of leftism will certainly try our patience and perseverance but soldier on we must in the name of conservatism. What choice do we have? That said, posting will likely be light in the near future as I recharge and tend to some off-line activities.
In the mean time, I recently received a newsletter from my friend and fellow southeast Texan, Peter Morrison that I would like to share with you. If you haven’t subscribed to his newsletter, I urge you to do so. Keep the faith my friends, after all, God is in charge.
Election Night Analysis: Our Nation’s Future - The Peter Morrison Report
I know a lot of you are in shock today with the results of the election. In the Peter Morrison Report, one of my continuing themes is that the problems America faces demographically are becoming more and more intractable. I kind of expected this to happen, though like a lot of you I was hopeful over the last few weeks. The root of the word patriotism is the Latin word for father, and I would compare the emotional hurt washing over the conservative movement to that of caring for an aging parent with a degenerative disease. You know how the story is going to end, but it is very painful every step of the way as you see it happen. Last night America took one more step towards the abyss.
I cannot blame the Romney campaign for the loss. In the debates, Romney mostly held the line on taxes, immigration and other issues. Some may have felt that he was the lesser of two evils, but he was a lot lesser of an evil than McCain in 2008. It’s a shame, because Romney was probably the smartest person to run for President since the Founders, and if he would have continued his data-driven approach to management in government, he could have done a lot of good. In the America of 2012, being successful and smart can unfortunately be a political liability, not an asset. Many Americans would rather the affirmative action poster boy who’s never worked a real job in his life.
Romney is a numbers guy, and so we now know he was absolutely correct when he stated behind closed doors that 47% of the nation was automatically against him because of government dependency; Obama only needed a few “useful idiots” to deliver the election. I think Romney saw the polls last week and decided on a risky strategy of playing for Pennsylvania as his only way out. Just as it was 149 years ago, the fate of the nation was decided in Pennsylvania. The Romney campaign may be remembered as the Pickett’s charge of the conservative movement, a last desperate effort to stave off the cruel arithmetic of superior numbers overcoming principle and valor.
Last night on Fox News, the Bush-Rove wing of the Republican Party was on the air pointing fingers at Romney’s immigration policies as the cause of his loss. This is false because Romney and McCain both did about as well among Hispanics despite McCain being the biggest immigration panderer to the right of Ted Kennedy. It is amazing, however, to see the Cheap Labor Lobby attempt to
squeeze out one last ounce of profit as the Republic burns. The simpler explanation is that many members of minority groups are simply racist against the party most white people happen to vote for. Take Asian Americans, for example. If any group should be Republican, it should be this group, as they earn more money and pay more in taxes than white Americans. They, along with whites, bear the brunt of affirmative action policies; Barack Obama is the living personification of why their kids have to score 200 points higher on the SAT to get into the Ivy League. Yet, exit polls revealed they voted about 70% for Obama. I’m afraid Karl Rove’s bright idea that these groups will vote in their individual self-interest (if we pander to them) instead of on an irrational ethnic basis is delusional. It would be nice for Republicans if the facts were different and we could build a multi-ethnic, colorblind, conservative America, but the evidence is quite to the contrary.
If we can take comfort in anything, it’s that the debt and spending binge of the federal government cannot go on forever. If something cannot go on forever, at some point it must stop. Like the remainder of Lee’s army after Gettysburg, it is our duty to keep fighting to the bitter end, in hopes that Providence might shine upon our cause before it is too late. We must contest every single inch of ground and delay the baby-murdering, tax-raising socialists at every opportunity. But in due time, the maggots will have eaten every morsel of flesh off of the rotting corpse of the Republic, and therein lies our opportunity.
For the liberals are at war not with just the conservative core of this country, but rather with God and Nature. You simply cannot, in perpetuity, take more and more people out of productive work and onto the government dole. Just as the Soviet Union fell, and Rome with its bread and circuses fell, this government will fall, and a remnant of the American people may, with God’s help, redeem some portion of our founding vision.
In probably the most unintentionally Orwellian lyric in country music, Lee Greenwood sang “the flag still stands for freedom, and they can’t take that away.” Lee was right about that, but it’s cold comfort when “they” can take away everything else. “They” re-elected Obama last night. He is their President. And we must admit to ourselves at some point, it is now their country. Just as Scotland is currently contemplating her own independence from Great Britain, it is time for the more conservative constituent parts of this country to consider whether this sacred union is really quite so sacred anymore. Countries all over the world, like the Baltic States and the Czech Republic, have been over the last 20 years securing amicable divorces as the most humane way to settle fundamental cultural differences that lead to the type of governmental paralysis and partisan division we see in America today. The bond between a husband and wife is sacred. National borders, once they have exhausted their historical purpose, are not.
In this respect, Texas can lead the way. Texas was once its own country, and many Texans already think in nationalist terms about their state. We need to do everything possible to encourage a long-term shift in thinking on this issue. Why should Vermont and Texas live under the same government? Let each go her own way in peace, sign a free trade agreement among the states and we can avoid this gut-wrenching spectacle every four years.
In the near term, we have very important battle coming up for the Texas House Speaker. Joe Straus is once again being challenged by a true conservative. Start calling your state representatives now to let them know that we will remember how they vote in 2014. If voting is the best revenge, the low turnout of an off-year Republican primary will offer many opportunities for payback. I’m sure I’ll be in touch as the situation develops.
The Peter Morrison Report
Yes. For some reason, it seems we need to.
The coming 2012 election should not be framed in ideology of Right versus Left, Republican vs. Democrat or Libertarian/Conservative vs. Liberal.
The main issue of this election is whether we the people of this country choose to enslave our neighbors using the machinery of mob rule democracy or reclaim our lost liberties and return to the original intent of our Constitutional Republic. That is the issue.
Either you are an asset to society or you are a burden on it.
The 2012 election should be framed in light of the government’s unbridled over-expansion. Today, the US government in engaged in an unhinged, un-American mission to encourage sloth and preach entitlement theology, enabled and encouraged by the uninformed citizen and the educated elitist alike while funding the assault on the backs of the very people they prostitute but claim to protect: the everyday American.
This is but one example from The Heritage Foundation 2011 Budget Chart Book
The world the Statists would establish is one of dependency on government as a patriarch who makes even the most mundane decisions for us and therefore, as a child of government, we will have no rights or property except what illusion they would allow.
This election is about American versus un-American.
It’s about Freedom versus Slavery.
I’ve been thinking along these lines for a while. After all, what is governmental redistribution of wealth but slavery? But the possibility that there may be more people in this country who are against America as founded than are for it really hit home when I saw this retweeted from Pat Dollard last week:
Scary, but true. RT @PatDollard If Obama wins the next election, then there aren’t enough Americans left for it to be America anymore.
To which I replied:
Too true. Unfortunate as well is, that knowledge could serve to energize either base.
Have too many Americans forgotten what it means to be uniquely American?
It’s a bit terrifying to me that we’ve come this far down the road to Socialism, Communism or Statism. Call it what you will, but the America we thought we knew is teetering on the precipice of a debt cliff caused by overspending on unearned entitlements. If it is not reversed, America simply can not survive. No country can, or ever has when using the economic model being employed.
It’s as if there is some genetic defect that keeps mutating every generation, eating away at our Self Reliance Gene. Everywhere you look, before acting, (pod) people stop and ask themselves what kind of government subsidy can they get for doing A, B or C or what entity they need approval from to do X, Y or Z, or boast to a co-worker about how much Uncle Sam gave him for his clunker or how much they received from some other such government incentive program. Where do you think that money comes from?
It is through slow, methodical, generational training that you feel these things are normal.
Once upon a glorious free country, you needed only the approval of your heart and a fearless ambition to pursue whatever you set in your mind to. As long as no-one else or their property was harmed, then by all means, go ahead. You were free to succeed and free also to fail. Now, that freedom to act at will has been taken from us. We must get a permit to do just about anything. Someone or some entity must approve of your plans before you can break ground on a homestead, start a business or attempt to market your latest invention, all under the guise of government knowing better than you. Slowly, generation by generation, the evil that is an unrestrained government has eaten away at the American foundation of self reliance.
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
C. S. Lewis
English essayist & juvenile novelist (1898 – 1963)
Make no mistake folks, this election is about the survival of America as she was founded.
It will be the single most important election in which you ever will cast a vote. America lives or dies in 2012. This election is about defining what it means to be an American. The true definition of an American has been gerrymandered and perverted by the media, in legislation and regulation and in the halls of “higher education.”
“Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it.”
The true definition of an American has been diluted by diversity and diffused by political correctness. Our defining characteristic, what makes us Americans, has in some cases been stolen along with our dignity. We must reclaim our pride in our American heritage and reassert our love of liberty by standing up to the detractors, the apologists, the America haters and the would be en-slavers.
This election is about American self reliance versus forced servitude. It is also about framing the question as such.
The good news is that, according to the Obama administration, the rich will pay for everything. The bad news is that, according to the Obama administration, you’re rich.
P. J. O’Rourke
It is un-American to take from your neighbor so that you may have what he doesn’t.
It is also un-American to take from someone who works so that you don’t have to. Right now there are working class people who toil away at their jobs under threat of losing their livelihood if they show up late, fail a drug test, are insubordinate to their employer or any number of prerequisites for employment while at the same time, the people who benefit from those stolen monies are not required to adhere to any such standards. That is un-American to its core. It is also thievery.
In America today one can’t get a decent job without background checks and drug tests and aptitude tests and any number of requirements for employment. It’s a circus of flaming hoops, but we do it because we love our families, we still have our pride and we need to make money to survive. What pride the takers once had, they exchanged for a welfare check or a stack of food stamps and a cell phone at the behest of a ‘benevolent’ government. Without renouncing their selfish attitude, is there any question to what they will vote for? They will vote for more of your money and they will do so because of generational training.
These people are our brothers and sisters. They are our fellow Americans. They don’t desire our pity, nor would we grant them any. They have simply lost their feeling of self worth and may not even be aware of it. I believe some of them deep down, know or suspect the wrong they are doing, the harm they inflict on their own country, but peer pressure and the entitlement culture beckon them to stay in the fold. Sadly, the ultimate irony is, the problem was created by the very bureaucrats they vote to keep in office, urged to do so by demagogue leaders willing to sell them down the road to maintain their own minor pedestals of power. It is a fact that inequity exists in the American system, truly, it exists in all governments to some degree, but one cannot legislate equality of outcome, only equality of opportunity. That is the promise of America’s Constitution.
That some achieve great success, is proof to all that others can achieve it as well.
When the politicians and political hypochondriacs scream that some true libertarian/conservative wants to end Social Security or that the TEA Party wants to kill grandma or end some so-called entitlement, they are selling all Americans into slavery, plain and simple.
We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.
It’s time for Americans to re-claim what it means to be a true American.
Instead of thinking “What is government going to give me?” (What can I take from my neighbor?), we need to think about what we can do for our neighbors.
Like the Founders before us, we can give them freedom. It’s up to all of us to keep it.
That is what it means to be a true American.
A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.
Note: I thought this piece relevant because of the recent debate over Gov. Romney’s remarks about the entitlement mindset.
Originally posted May 1, 2011 – Defining American
A rebuttal and follow up post: College Student Responds to “Defining “American”” – Unwittingly Provides Proof of Generational Training
What does the Democrat Party have against the God of Abraham?
Chris Good of ABC News Reports (h/t Jake Tapper on Twitter)
CHARLOTTE — For Democrats, there is no God in 2012 — at least as far as the party’s platform is concerned.
Nor is there a Jerusalem.
Democrats removed those two words, and the passages surrounding them, from the 2012 party platform as it was released this week.
In Charlotte on Monday, the Democratic National Committee released its 2012 party platform after the DNC Platform Committee approved it under the leadership of Newark, N.J., Mayor Cory Booker. The Platform Drafting Committee, led by Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland, gathered feedback for an initial draft in Minneapolis over the summer.
Gone are three sentences identifying Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, now and forever. There is no mention of Jerusalem in the 2012 document, after the 2008 version included this mention:
Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths.
One possibility is the platform changes were made as directed by the president himself, or members of his administration. Why else would Obama’s name be mentioned 38 times in a 40 page document?
Mike Flynn reports at Breitbart.com
Barack Obama is the most cited term in the Democrat platform. Out of the 40 pages that make up the platform, Obama is cited by name on 38 of them. He is cited over 200 times throughout the document. The Democrat party’s platform is really Obama’s campaign manifesto.
Let me put this in perspective. In 2008, the Democrat party platform mentioned Barack Obama 8 times. This year’s GOP platform mentions Mitt Romney…ONCE. And, the mention is in the introduction, not the body of the platform.
Well, the establishment Republicans pulled off some rule changing shenanigans on the first full day of the convention, effectively thumbing their collective noses at grassroots conservatives and the Tea party. I expect quite a bit of backlash from the libertarian leaning wing of the party, and it is justifiable, however I must caution against a protest vote for a third party this election because the ramifications of that mean another four years of Obama: no possibility for repeal of anything Obama’s administration has done, nothing.
At least with the Romnoid, we stand a chance at repeal.
All that said, the pro-constitution message gains more urgency and relevance given yesterday’s grassroots lawn maintenance program by the RNC which, to this observer, resembled a crop duster spraying Round-Up On the farmer’s newly sprouted seedlings.
Nice job alienating your should-be supporters, guys. You blew it yet again. Joe Six Pack has another reason not to trust you.
Is it any wonder the Constitutionalists don’t trust you either?
In a word, no.
The America that has flourished for more than two centuries is being quietly but steadily dismantled by the Obama administration…
He also noted:
If laws passed by the elected representatives of the people can be simply over-ruled unilaterally by whoever is in the White House, then we are no longer a free people, choosing what laws we want to live under.
When a president can ignore the plain language of duly passed laws, and substitute his own executive orders, then we no longer have “a government of laws, and not of men” but a president ruling by decree, like the dictator in some banana republic.
While these things are demonstrably true, it is equally alarming to note that President Obama is being allowed to dismantle our Constitution by the elected Congress of the United States.
Far too often, the presidents’ use of executive order goes unchallenged by the legislature. Why? My feeling is that when the party in power is accumulating more power in one branch or another, the party out of power may offer a token whimper of disapproval, but secretly waits for the day when they will have control of those same powers to use for their own.
Consideration for the constitution long-ago became a flag to be waived when politically expedient but, sadly, shamefully, is no longer used as intended. Checks and Balances are a thing of the past. Limitations on one branch of government accumulating so much power as to overrule the others have been carelessly cast aside. We are witnessing a free people become slaves to their government before our very eyes and the people are US!
Case in point -
S. 679: Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act of 2011
via Western Journalism:
In 2011, Chuck Schumer (D-NY) introduced a bill into the U.S. Senate that would exempt many presidential appointments from needing Senate approval. To no one’s surprise, the bill easily passed the Senate and was sent to the House where one would have expected it to be readily defeated. However, in one of the rare times the Republicans worked with the Democrats, the House passed the bill last month by a 261-116 vote.
On Friday, President Obama signed the bill into law. Barack Obama and every president that follows him will now be able to make appointments of key staff of departments including Treasury, Education, NOAA and Homeland Security without Senate approval. In other words, it will make it that much easier for a sitting president to stack the deck with his minions without having to worry about whether the Senate will approve them.
Outrageous, shameful and disgraceful are just a few of the words that should be leaping from your collective mouths now. The idea that almost 100 Republicans collaborated with liberal Democrats on such an abdication of Legislative Branch constitutional duties during this critical election year is another clear sign the GOP has lost its way. The fact that 30 Republicans never even bothered to vote on such a Bill is a complete dereliction of their sworn oaths “to protect and preserve the Constitution of the United States.” Imagine: 52% of House Republicans either voted with Democrats or failed to vote against this Bill.
Read the rest here - House Republicans Help Give Obama Even More Power
Are we simply too far down the road to a dictatorship to go back? Have Americans been asleep so long that we’re willing to allow an oligarchy of 537 to rule over 300 Million like the serfs of old? I would like to think we are not willing to be led by the nose into dictatorial third-world status but I’m growing ever frustrated. To say the lack of any resistance is enraging to those of us who still revere Liberty would be a gross understatement of enormous proportions.
Conservatives and Libertarians must stand up and be heard in November. There is much work to be done to save this great nation. We must choose new leadership willing to abide by the Constitution. This law and many others must be repealed by the next congress.
Ayn Rand once said “The question isn’t who is going to let me; it’s who is going to stop me.”
The time is long past for the people to stop their government from running roughshod over US. In the natural state of man, all political power resides in the individual. No government can have control over you that you do not first cede to it. We must exercise that power, and reign in the Leviathan before it’s too late.
Many of us have heard of the book Rules for Radicals, by Saul Alinsky. It’s the work, along with other uber-radical influences, that many have said defined Barack Obama’s formative years. The book is dedicated by Alinsky, to Satan himself, who he calls the very first radical. Interesting that this work is claimed to have had a profound effect on our present Commander in Chief, and a fact that, if true, should be explored to discover just what fruit those influences might bear.
Bruce Bialosky, writing at Gary Polland’s Texas Conservative Review , has done us a favor by taking a dive into the far left end of the pool. He just read Rules for Radicals and submitted a short synopsis of his findings to TCR for our perusal.
A short sample:
Though short, this book can be quite challenging. First, it was written in 1971, an era that evokes images of bad clothing and ill-kempt people (only partially redeemed by some mighty fine music). Second, as are most things leftist, it is relentlessly negative. God, these people are unhappy. Finally, much of the book is written in “leftist-ese,” which means it contains rambling statements filled with the type of hollow thoughts that you get from college professors. They use multi-syllabic words to dress up their ignorance. While it may have been written for people taking LSD, it is, unfortunately, a deadly serious book.
If you are seeking to be offended, it won’t take long. On the third page of the prologue, Alinsky states his belief in “…the realization that all values and factors are relative, fluid, and changing.” Thus, he takes very little time to establish his faith in moral relativism – something you could have no doubt assumed — but which he quickly confirms.
Please do head over and read the whole thing . You’ll also find some interesting facts concerning the city of Houston’s new nearly Two Billion dollar school bond wishes and a commentary on the Romney/Ryan ticket.