It’s STILL AMNESTY! … J. D. Longstreet

It’s STILL AMNESTY!
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
****************

It matters not a whit what you call it — it still amounts to amnesty for eleven million illegal aliens in America.

This “new” immigration reform from both the US Senate and the US President is utterly ridiculous.  But in the end, it will be rammed down the throats of the American public simply because the US government has gone rogue and is no longer responsive — nor responsible — to the US citizenry.  (And some people still wonder WHY Americans are arming themselves???)

The Heritage Foundation released the following statement on January 30th, 2013:

“America’s heritage of immigration has fueled our nation’s strength and diversity, yet our immigration system has become so politicized and dysfunctional that it causes untold personal tragedies, strains the fiscal capacity of public services in many states, and prevents many from pursuing the American Dream. Complex, comprehensive legislation based on back-room deals never works, and the Senate immigration proposal announced this week and echoed yesterday by President Obama—to the extent that it repeats the mistakes of the past—will further polarize Americans, fail to solve the real policy problems, and make matters worse.

Immigrants come to our country for freedom and economic opportunity. We are concerned that many aspects of the framework for comprehensive reform will undermine the very foundations that make for America’s exceptional success. Policymakers should refrain from committing to such broad statements before the actual legislative language is available for public review. A proposal that would grant individuals who are in this country illegally a pathway to citizenship violates the rule of law and is unfair to those who have obeyed our immigration laws.

The Heritage Foundation believes that America’s immigration system must be reformed through an open and public step-by-step, problem-solving approach that unites Americans and creates a system that welcomes immigrants, protects our sovereignty, encourages assimilation, and expands opportunities for everyone. Once such common-sense reforms are in place and working, lawmakers can determine how to respond in a fair, compassionate, and constitutional way to those who have come to our country illegally.”SOURCE:  http://blog.heritage.org/2013/01/30/heritage-foundation-statement-on-immigration/?roi=echo3-14403859543-11190034-1b80b2b425f4c1aef7d244951acffbfe&utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell
Let’s just blow away some of the smoke and call it what it is:  What we have here is a HUGE payoff by the Obama Administration to the Hispanic community for their vote in the November election.  That’s one side.  On the other side is the GOP trying like hell to convince the Hispanic vote to shift to their side by offering them citizenship in the country they broke into.

If you, like me, don’t like what the Senate and the President are proposing, well, stuff it!  It doesn’t matter. The decision has been made — and a bill WILL be passed to offer illegals amnesty. 

Look.  The poor, hapless, dumb, republicans cannot, for whatever reason, understand that the GOP has lost (if they ever really had) the Hispanic vote.  Heck, the Hispanic vote is a “natural” for the Democrat/socialists, anyway … always has been.    The republicans cannot get it through their heads that agreeing to and passing this comprehensive immigration reform simply adds eleven million NEW VOTERS to the democratic side of the tally sheet.  It is lose, lose, for the republicans.  And it is lose, lose, for America as that will place the democrat/socialists in a position to rule America in perpetuity… forever!

Oh, and don’t count on the border being secured, either.  Yes, I know it is supposed to be a key part of the Senate bill.  But here’s the thing:  How are you and I going to know the border is secure?  Take their word for it, huh?

Consider this for a moment:  The only way that the American borders are going to be sealed is when a rogue US government decides to seal them  — not to keep illegals out — but TO KEEP US CITIZENS IN!!  Then — and ONLY THEN — will the US borders be sealed.

America’s old hippie government, years ago, bought into the globalist “world without borders” agenda and they will never agree to securing America’s borders. But they WILL lie to America and swear the borders are secure when, in fact, they are not.

That part of the Senate bill means absolutely nothing.  Obama’s “proposed” bill doesn’t even include a provision for securing the border first. 

Those of you who support open borders do not, I repeat, DO NOT try to beat us about the head and shoulders with the old saw that says America is a nation of immigrants.  See, we already know that — because our ancestors were immigrants, too.  Mine came into the country, legally, in 1789 through what was then Charles Town Harbor and were assigned a place in the 96th precinct of the state of South Carolina.  Notice – they came into this country LEGALLY!  That is all we expect of any who want to immigrate to America.  Do it legally and we will welcome you with open arms. Do it illegally and we want you caught and deported forthwith!  Unless, of course, you are a prospective democratic voter. 

America’s biggest problem with illegal immigration is not with those who illegally break into our country and help to bleed it dry, but with our government which refuses to uphold the laws already on the books.  Had those laws been enforced we would not be in the situation we find ourselves today.  Plus, the problem of what to do with these 11 or 12-plus million illegal aliens would not be a problem, at all, if the government would simply follow the laws on the books today.

The bottom line for Americans to ponder is… what do we do with a government that refuses to uphold/enforce the nation’s laws and tramples on the constitution at will? 

Well, let me ask you – suppose you had a business and an employee consistently refused to follow the rules of the workplace.  What would you do to that employee?  See?  The answer used to be simple. You’d toss them out at the next election.  Unfortunately, our elections have become something of a pro forma showcase these days.  Just going through the motions while the results are fore ordained.  Nowadays “the fix” is in before the first ballot is dropped into the box.  The ONLY way we are ever going to get relief from this problem is to clean the house in Washington.  But, how to do that now? Huh? When your vote no longer counts, how, exactly, do you do that?   
My friend and fellow blogger, Alan Caruba, recently said in his piece entitled “A Crisis of Governors:”   “What, in fact, Americans are witnessing is a failure of government at both the state and federal level. The nation has managed to elect too many people to public office that are so clearly inept, incompetent, and untrustworthy, it poses a threat to the republic.”  SOURCE:  http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/2009/07/crisis-of-governors.html  

Alan, as usual, is spot on.  America’s most dangerous enemy, at the moment, is its own government! I would add that, in my opinion, America’s second worst enemy, at the moment, is its own ignorance. It was through the ignorance of the American electorate that these pitifully inept, power hungry, politicians were elected to office to begin with.

Not to worry.  The democrat/socialists are going to get their eleven million new voters.  Count on it.  And it makes absolutely no difference what YOU think!
J. D. Longstreet

******************

VISIT J. D. Longstreet’s “INSIGHT on Freedom” Face Book Page!!:   (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)

******************

<a href=”http://www.hypersmash.com”>Hypersmash.com</a>

<a href=”http://www.pingblognow.com”>Ping Blog</a>

<a href=”http://pingates.com”>Pingates</a&gt;

LEAGUE OF THE SOUTH ‘S Statement on Firearms and Self Defense

LEAGUE OF THE SOUTH NEWS SERVICE
17 January 2013

LINK:  http://dixienet.org/rights/2012/firearms_and_self_defense.php

Re: Firearms and Self Defense

For immediate release

On 16 January 2013, President Barack Obama issued a series of twenty-three “executive actions” designed to control “gun violence” in America.

The League of the South, the premier Southern nationalist organization, issued the following statement from its President, Michael Hill:

“We encourage all Southerners to defend their God-given right to self defense. To defend oneself and one’s family, real property, and rights presupposes having the means to do so, and in our day that means firearms ownership and the right to keep and bear such arms whenever and wherever necessary.

We encourage our Southern State governments–the lesser magistrates–to employ the doctrines of Nullification, Interposition, and Secession to protect their citizens from unlawful encroachments by the government of the United States.”

This is just the latest example of the abandonment of the principles upon which government was established on these shores. The Declaration of Independence clearly established that we as citizens “are endowed by [our] Creator with certain unalienable Rights” And just as importantly: “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

Over the years the primary purpose of government – to guarantee our God-given rights – has been lost upon the corrupt and power-hungry officials in Washington, DC. This Founding principle is now looked upon as “extreme” from both sides of the aisle.

Therefore, should the U.S. government, or our State governments, decide, as did King George III in 1775, to confiscate our weapons and ammunition, then like our ancestors we shall have no choice but to declare it an act of war and meet it with a morally justifiable, righteous, and manly armed resistance.

The only way to stop this madness is for you–the citizens–to let these corrupt government officials understand that you are ready to withdraw your consent. We urge you for the benefit of your children and grandchildren to join with us in the League of The South.

End of Release

LINK:  http://dixienet.org/rights/2012/firearms_and_self_defense.php

Is a Political Balance of Powers “Unconstitutional?” … JB Williams

Is a Political Balance of Powers “Unconstitutional?”

By JB Williams

jb.uspu@gmail.com

*********************

It’s an ironic and not so funny world which can see the extraordinary efforts of our nation’s Founders, to create a system of checks and balances, a balance of political and governmental powers, each to forever keep watch on the other in protection of the people’s inalienable rights as itself, an “unconstitutional” act. But this is the world we live in today…

Last week, the Mississippi State Legislature was the first to introduce The Balance of Powers Act currently sweeping across all state legislatures, in their effort to protect and preserve the rights of the State and the people currently under direct and extreme assault from their federal government.

In HB490, members of the Mississippi legislature grabbed the lead in a nationwide rush to shut down the “unconstitutional” acts of an increasingly tyrannical federal government. Within hours, local leftist news reporters had dragged out a couple “law professors” to quote in opposition, using the same old false claims of unbridled and unchecked federal supremacy to attack any state legislator brave enough to dare challenge the almighty Fed.

A day later, well-known leftist blog Daily KOS was busy regurgitating the blatant hogwash that a constitutional balance of powers is “unconstitutional,” and just in case the people are too smart to fall for that line of nonsense, it’s “racist” too. In the immortal words of Gomer Pyle, “surprise-surprise”… These so-called “experts” were about to prove Thomas Jefferson right…

“The judiciary of the United States is the subtle corps of sappers and miners constantly working underground to undermine our Constitution from a co-ordinate of a general and special government to a general supreme one alone. This will lay all things at their feet. … I will say, that “against this every man should raise his voice,” and, more, should uplift his arm …” — Letter to Thomas Ritchie, Sept. 1820

 193 years later, “expert law professionals” and their leftist blogosphere minions would prove Jefferson dead right, as they worked to convince American citizens that the constitution itself is “unconstitutional.”

Robert McElvaine, professor of history at Millsaps College, said all this bill will accomplish is to put Mississippi up for ridicule. “ ‘The Neutralization of Federal Law’?” he said. “I am astounded to see such a measure introduced in the 21st century. Do the authors of the bill see Mississippi as part of the United States?”

Of course Mississippi legislators see their state as part of the United States, which means they see themselves as a party to the compact which establishes the United States, the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.

The question is — what does the good professor think the Founders meant in the Tenth Amendment? – “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.”

Does Professor Robert McElvaine understand that the Mississippi bill does not seek to neutralize “constitutional acts” of the federal government, but rather the “unconstitutional acts” only? Or does the professor think that all federal acts are “constitutional?” Or does the professor really think that the Charters of Freedom died at some point in history, becoming nothing but a relic?

Be very careful professor, if the Constitution and Bill of Rights no longer exist, then the people and the states have no obligation to the federal government at all, including an obligation to follow any of its laws or pay any taxes. So, which way do you want it professor? It exists, or it doesn’t exist?

The local news report gets this part right – “The proposed Joint Legislative Committee on the Neutralization of Federal Law would review existing federal laws and executive orders and recommend those to be “neutralized.” If the majority of lawmakers back the recommendation, Mississippi “and its citizens shall not recognize or be obligated to live under the statute, mandate or executive order.”

Imagine that… A State could neutralize any “unconstitutional act” of the runaway federal government, based upon the State’s Rights protected by the Tenth Amendment in the Bill of Rights. Is the Tenth Amendment “constitutional?” Let’s ask another “expert…”

George Cochran, professor at the University of the Mississippi School of Law, said – “it’s obvious the bill is unconstitutional.” – “It all boils down to the same completely discredited argument,” he said. “When John C. Calhoun and South Carolina attempted to nullify federal law in the 1830s, President Andrew Jackson forcefully rejected the concept.” – said Cochran.

Is the professor suggesting that states do not have Tenth Amendment Rights? Is he suggesting that the states have rights, but no right to enforce those rights? What are these so-called “experts” saying? Are they saying that the Bill of Rights is no longer in force or in affect? If they are, I’m sure this will come as a surprise to even many of their leftist minions, who have fought for Constitutional and Civil Rights under the Bill of Rights for more than 200 years now…

Oh wait, we have a Civil Rights “expert” weighing in…

Civil rights veteran Leslie Burl McLemore said the bill strikes him as “grandstanding.”

Director of the Fannie Lou Hamer National Institute on Citizenship and Democracy at Jackson State University, McLemore said, “In subtle and not so subtle ways in Mississippi — and a good bit of the South — we fight the Civil War every day. The drum-beating, rabid right-wingers long for those years, but we won’t revisit those years any time soon.”

So, the Balance of Powers established by the US Constitution and Bill of Rights is not only “unconstitutional,” – it’s an act of Civil War era “racism” too? We may revisit those years sooner than you think Director McLemore. What do you think happens in American once you convince the American people that their Constitution and Bill of Rights no longer exist? Why do you think Americans will refuse to be disarmed by your left-wing friends in the White House?

Has anyone noticed that all of these so-called “constitutional experts” are Democrats, fully supportive of the Democratic Party’s current Democratic Socialism and the right of their runaway federal government to run roughshod over the states and the people at will?

Is it the constitutionally grounded text of the Mississippi Balance of Powers Act designed to enforce existing state and individual rights that the “expert” left-wing nuts object to so vigorously? Or is it the Bill of Rights itself?

One need look no further than the current massive assault on all state and individual rights coming from the Democratic Left today, to understand that it is in fact the Constitution and Bill of Rights they object to, going so far as to directly attack the Second Amendment Rights of all law-abiding citizens while arming known terrorists all over the world.

To fully grasp the anti-American agenda of the political left today, look no further that Rahm Emanuel’s recent blackmail letter to our nation’s largest banks, in an effort to stop banking relations with gun manufacturers, cutting off the supply line to American citizens as the federal government buys up record stockpiles of weapons.

The people are witnessing with their own eyes, why states like Mississippi are rushing to protect all state and individual rights with the passage of The Balance of Powers Act. They are also witnessing the extreme left-wing “experts” like those quoted here today, who will kill the Constitution and Bill of Rights by simply declaring both “unconstitutional,” in their scholarly “expert” opinions.

Not so fast though…

Numerous other states are working on their own versions of the Model Legislation.

Not so long ago, left-wingers thought Michigan would never become a Right to Work state, as ground zero for corrupt labor unions.

A Federal appeals court just ruled Obama’s “recess appointments” unconstitutional and thereby, illegal, demonstrating that not all members of the law profession have dismissed the constitution.

Times, they are a changing… Necessity is the mother of invention my friends. It wasn’t until the federal government started behaving in tyrannical fashion, shredding the Constitution and Bill of Rights in a thousand assaults on state and individual rights every day, that the states found it necessary to take matters into their own hands with The Balance of Powers Act.

The “experts” seem to have forgotten that the US Constitution and the Federal Government exists at the pleasure of the states which created it and gave it limited authority. They seem to have forgotten that it is the union of the sovereign states that make up The United States and that as Joseph Story reminded everyone in 1833 – “In the next place, the state governments are, by the very theory of the constitution, essential constituent parts of the general government. They can exist without the latter, but the latter cannot exist without them.”

The current federal administration has not only sought to unconstitutionally seize control over every aspect of individual lives and the economy, they have acted to destroy the Charters of Freedom altogether. They have also driven our nation to more than $16 trillion in federal debt.

But that is a drop in the bucket to their financial woes if in fact, the “legal experts” are right. If the Constitution and Bill of Rights no longer exist in force or affect, then the union and the federal government itself no longer exists, or at least, no citizen or state is obligated to abide by any of the laws, regulations and taxes that can only exist under the terms and conditions of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Clearly, it is not possible for the Bill of Rights to be “unconstitutional.” So, the strategy of the left is to discredit and belittle anyone who attempts to uphold and defend the Constitution and Bill of Rights as “not knowing what they are doing.”

Thankfully, our Founders wrote the Charters of Freedom in plain simple English, so that any 3^rd grader could read and comprehend its true meaning without the help of any so-called “experts.” As a result, even if legal beagles don’t know what the Founders meant by “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” — And “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.”— Citizens with above a 3^rd grade reading comprehension level do.

Leftists want to attach the Constitutional Balance of Powers Act to the “nullifiers” they have already successfully labeled “crackpots.” Why not… The Balance of Powers Act covers a thousand “nullification” bills and then some. Of course those who want to leave the Constitution and Bill of Rights in the dust bin of historical relics will use any means to do it.

However, leftists are not the only “constitutional experts” in America.

If the left-wing nuts really want a public debate over the constitutionality of The Balance of Powers Act, I hereby challenge them to just such an event.

Any left-wing legal propagandist willing to publicly assert that the Balance of Powers Act is in any way “unconstitutional” can contact the research team made up of legal professional that drafted it by using the contact button at The North American Law Center. They will be happy to arrange an open debate on these matters, videotaped and published for ALL American citizens to view and draw their own conclusions.

I doubt any of the legal propagandists will dare show for such a debate, but what a wonderful event that would be… Instead, they will attack individuals involved in preserving the Constitutional Republic – make false claims that the Bill of Rights is somehow “unconstitutional” – or no longer in force or affect.

I warn these folks one last time to be careful what they wish for… You are not going to like how a lawless society no longer committed to a compact with the federal government they created, manage those who assault their rights. You will come armed with your precedents and procedures, but the people will be armed with their Second Amendment. This is not a fight you want… Such things are better settled peacefully.

For more information on passing the Balance of Powers Act in your state, contact The North American Law Center.

JB Williams
Co-Founder
www.PatriotsUnion.org
www.VeteranDefenders.org
www.ThePatriotsNews.com

***************************

JB Williams is a writer on matters of history and American politics with more than 3000 pieces published over a twenty-year span. He has a decidedly conservative reverence for the Charters of Freedom, the men and women who have paid the price of freedom and liberty for all, and action oriented real-time solutions for modern challenges. He is a Christian, a husband, a father, a researcher, writer and a business owner. He is co-founder of action organizations The United States Patriots Union, a civilian parent organization for The Veteran Defenders of America. He is also co-founder of The North American Law Center, a citizen run investigative legal research and activism organization preparing to take on American’s greatest legal battles. Williams receives mail at: jb.uspu@gmail.com

Gun Owners Against Christ? … J. D. Longstreet

Gun Owners Against Christ?
Tell It To Jesus!
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
****************

Obama and those leftist democrats have now dealt the religion card in their manic drive to snatch weapons from gun owners in America.
Have they NO SHAME — ANY?  At ALL?

I suppose separation of church and state only applies when  Christians attempt to place a copy of the ten commandments or a Christmas creche on a courthouse lawn.  But it DOES NOT APPLY when the political left, the progressives, democrats, socialists, Marxists, and communists in our government  — and, yes,  in the pulpits of the mainline religious denominations in America — feel it is impeding their Marxist agenda.

Senator Feinstein, herself descended from Polish Jews and grandparents who were of the Russian Orthodox faith and self describes her faith as Jewish, ought to brush up on her New Testament before she allows hauling the “cross,” a distinctly Christian emblem, into her anti-gun extravaganzas.

Look.   I am sick, ad nauseum, of the mainline religious denominations in America and across the globe, sticking their self righteous noses into my political ideology.

Heck, it is my firm belief that Christian churches have no business, whatsoever, involving themselves in politics — at any level.  (Frankly, I an very uncomfortable with churches allowing polling places on their premises.)   In fact, if they were doing the job they were given by Christ, Himself, they would not have time to make fools of themselves belittling others and rolling around in the filth of politics.

I refer, of course, in the paragraph above to “The Great Commission,” that with which the Christian church is directly charged by Jesus, Himself, to make its work on earth.  It is simple and to the point — and — if carried out the church would find itself entirely too busy to become involved in those things that are Caesar’s business.

This is The Great Commission:

Matthew 28:18-20
Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” (NIV)

“As Sen. Dianne Feinstein D-Calif. opened her press conference on gun control today, she invited Dean of the National Cathedral Rev. Canon Gary Hall to offer a prayer.

Hall spoke briefly before the prayer, calling for Washington lawmakers to stop fearing the gun lobby and fulfill their “moral duty” to restrict guns.

“Everyone in this city seems to live in terror of the gun lobby,” Hall said. “But I believe that the gun lobby is no match for the cross lobby.”

Hall said that he could no longer justify a society that allowed ordinary citizens to keep and bear “assault weapons.”

During the prayer, Hall asked God to “bless our elected leaders with the wisdom and the courage needed to bring about the changes that the people demand.”   Source:  http://washingtonexaminer.com/sen.-dianne-feinstein-opens-up-anti-gun-presser-with-a-prayer/article/2519581#.UQPnAvJ0jTg 

This is exactly the kind of leftist political stunt that caused me to walk out of TWO mainline denomination churches a number of years ago —  and I have not allowed my shadow to darken the door of one since.

When a body of believers, gathered together as a church, becomes an apostate church, Christians are commanded to “come out from among them.”  That’s what I did — and I highly recommend it for those in fear of the final resting place of their souls.

The whole thing strikes me as the height of hypocrisy anyway.  I mean,  the democrats/socialists screaming about the separation of church and state.  If you want to see overt, in you face, conjoining of religion and politics simply watch the democrats parading into the pulpits of black churches across the nation during a political campaign season. Somehow, THAT is perfectly fine.

OK, I get it:  It’s not wrong WHEN THEY DO IT, right?

We have known the Obama machine is going to use every tool they can lay their hands on to attempt to shame gun owners into surrendering their weapons. (Make no mistake.  The final goal of this entire gun control campaign is to TAKE YOUR GUNS … to disarm Americans.  They only need to complete two easy steps … registration and then confiscation. Register your weapon and they know what it is, who has it, and where it is.  They next step is to TAKE it from you.)

Gun owners in America are going to be called every dirty name in the book in ad campaigns over the next weeks and months. (Think anti-smoking ad campaign.) Leftist columnists will write stinging tomes concerning our low morals, and our lack of respect for human life. You name it and if it is low-down and dirty enough, American gun owners will be labeled as such.

Right now, though, we are E V I L !   That’s why we are seeing the limp-wristed useful idiots of the leftist clergy paraded out to condemn us.

In the words of the ancient prophet Joel:

“…  Prepare for war!
Rouse the warriors!
Let all the fighting men draw near and attack.

10 Beat your plowshares into swords  and your pruning hooks into spears.
Let the weakling say,
“I am strong!” —  Joel: Chapter 3

And finally, before our leftist “Christians” get too intolerably pious on us and begin preaching that Jesus would want us to turn in our guns,  Allow me to disabuse them of that bit of deceit.

Back in December of 2012 I wrote a piece in which I noted the following:  “And yes, dear reader, Jesus’ boys were packing. Well, they weren’t packing “heat” because “heat” hadn’t been invented yet.  I am satisfied that had guns been available — at least Saint Peter would have had at least one on him.  Concealed carry, of course.

What they had were swords.  Not the broadsword with which Hollywood is so enamored, but a short sword similar in some respects to the Roman Gladius, but more akin to the American Bowie knife. (Named for its inventor, famed American gambler Jim Bowie, who died at the Alamo.)

The “sword” the boys of Jesus’ posse possessed were “up close and personal” weapons. You could easily kill, gut, and skin an animal — or a man — with the same utensil.  It was, to say the least, uh, practical.

Now, you anti-gun types might not want to hear this, but Jesus KNEW they had those swords.  In fact, he directed them to get one, if they did not already own one, even if they had to sell their coats to purchase a sword.

For the record, here is what Jesus instructed his men:  “And he [Jesus] said to them [His disciples], “But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one. For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me, ‘And he was numbered with transgressors’; for that which refers to Me has its fulfillment.” They said, “Lord, look, here are two swords.” And He said to them, “It is enough.”  Luke 22:36-38  — You may read the entire article at: http://insightonfreedom.blogspot.com/2012/12/what-did-jesus-do-j-d-longstreet.html

There you have it.   Makes me sort of wonder if Jesus is, today, ” … numbered with the transgressors.”

It all makes me wonder just how long it will be before the gun grabber’s slanderous campaign against America’s gun owners will backfire in the faces of the masters of knee-jerk hysteria.

© J. D. Longstreet

*********************

VISIT J. D. Longstreet’s “INSIGHT on Freedom” Face Book Page!!:   (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)

*********************

<a href=”http://www.hypersmash.com”>Hypersmash.com</a>

<a href=”http://www.pingblognow.com”>Ping Blog</a>

<a href=”http://pingates.com”>Pingates</a&gt;

The “Chickification” of America … Alan Caruba

The “Chickification” of America

 By Alan Caruba

Rush Limbaugh has predicted the end of the National Football League and sees its demise drawing closer.

Is it really any surprise that Obama is leading the charge to make football “safe”, given that it is a sport where there is a lot of physical contact, often resulting in the occasional injury? Americans do not watch football to see players get injured. They watch because it is a version of war. It is fought in stadiums. The field of battle is well defined. And men outfitted like gladiators engaged in a modified version of combat.

The key word here is “men.” Nobody wants to watch two teams of women play football.

Obama is a girly man. When you think of Reagan, he is astride a horse at his ranch. When you think of Obama, he is riding a bicycle.

The latest manifestation of an effort that pre-dates Obama, the “chickification” of America, is the decision by the Department of Defense to allow women to engage in battle alongside their male counterparts. There are few ideas more idiotic than this. Forget the usual arguments put forth about upper body strength and such, even the Israeli Defense Force, famous for including women in its ranks, uses them auxiliary functions in order to free up the men to do the actual fighting.

No civilized nation wants to send women into combat. No military that depends on unit cohesion and morale wants to put the two sexes together in close proximity because the two sexes tend to do what comes naturally in close proximity.

They’ve been holding hearings in Congress about the problems this has created in our military services. We have, however, compounded this idiocy by opening the ranks to openly gay service members. There have always been gays in the military, but in the pre-Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell days, they kept that to themselves.

In an earlier era, the roles of men and women were well defined. Women, indeed, had fewer choices and, to the degree that they now have more, that is a good thing. To the degree that they are in the workplace it also means that both marriage and children are impacted in ways that the 50% divorce rate and the numbers of single mothers were predictable.

It is troubling to me that women in films and on television have been increasingly portrayed in roles where, rather than being the damsel in distress of former times, they are now gun toting, karate smashing characters on a par with men. This undermines traditional values from chivalry to the instinct of men to come to a woman’s aid, to be protective.

I fully understand that culture is always subject to change, but some aspects of culture are worth retaining and this is particularly true in light of the glaring fact that women are different than men. Even women know that!

What bothers me is the creeping effort to turn men into women in terms of their attitudes. Part of the push to permit gay marriage, an element of the Democratic Party agenda, is the constant pressure on heterosexual men to “accept” homosexuality as “normal”, when it has never been regarded as normal.

Homosexuals are approximately 3.5% of the population. The Obama administration has made it clear it has no intention to uphold the Defense of Marriage Act and now openly advocates gay marriage. It tears at the sinews of a society that knows that marriage is between a man and a woman.

As I was thinking about the changes occurring in our culture, I was reminded of a list of Communist goals that were read into the Congressional Record by Rep. Albert S. Herlong, Jr, (D-Florida) in 1963. There were 45 of them, based on a book by Cleon Skousens, “The Naked Communist.”

One was “Present homosexuality, degeneracy, and promiscuity as ‘normal, natural, and healthy.’” Another was “Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.” And “Discredit the American founding fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the ‘common man.’”

The Communist goals included taking over the nation’s educational system and infiltrating the press as well as gaining control of key positions in radio, television and motion pictures.

If these goals, revealed just over fifty years ago, sound familiar it is because they are being accomplished. They represent life in America today.

How football is played may seem insignificant. Encouraging gays in the military and women in combat may seem odd at best and idiotic at worse.

The bigger problem is the way the news and entertainment community, along with the capture of our educational system all conspire to undermine values that worked very well from the days of the U.S. Revolution to around the 1960s when the progressives, the liberals, and—yes—Communists began to gain positions of influence and power.

In 2008 and 2012, Americans even elected one.

© Alan Caruba, 2013
************************

Alan Caruba’s commentaries are posted daily at “Warning Signs” and shared on dozens of news and opinion websites. His blog recently passed more than 2 million page views. If you love to read, visit his monthly report on new books at Bookviews. For information on his professional skills, Caruba Editorial Services is the place to go! You can find Alan Caruba on both Facebook and Twitter as well.

American Amazons? … J. D. Longstreet

American Amazons?
Women in Direct Combat
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet

****************

AMAZON: (From Greek mythology) one of a nation of women warriors of Scythia (who burned off the right breast in order to use a bow and arrow more effectively)

***************

” … the call by men for women to fight in their place is the height of cowardice, and worthy of the strongest possible rebuke.”  Source: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thoughtlife/2013/01/women-should-not-be-in-combat-says-a-female-marine-captain/

***************

Has the Obama administration gone completely nuts? (THAT is a rhetorical question.) One is required to be at least “nominally” sane before one can go INsane.

Now they are going to place the lives of that half of the human species — able to reproduce life — directly in harm’s way.

Why?

Have they grown weary of just killing the babies?  Have they now become intent upon killing those capable of producing the babies in the first place? 

Placing women in direct combat teams is so wrong — on so many levels. 

One thing is for darned sure. I will not recommend my grandson join the US Military.  Not any longer.

With the advent of gay society into the ranks, and now weakening the war fighting ability of the armed forces by placing women in combat roles, the US military is simply not up to the moral standards — nor the warrior standards — to which I would have my son, my grandson, my daughter, or my granddaughter exposed.

The left’s social experiments with the US military over the decades has left us with a military that hasn’t won a war since the Second World War.  (Desert Storm was basically one huge battle which lasted days.)

As  veteran myself, I am proud of having done the tiny bit that I did for my country in the military.  But that was back in the 1950s when we were marched over to the WAC’s barracks at Fort Jackson, South Carolina — which were fenced off with eight-foot tall fencing — and we told by our training sergeant  that that was where the women were and if we even went near the place we’d be shot!

I read recently of concerns by some on the political left that America is creating a “warrior class” with our all volunteer military.  Heck, we’ve had a warrior class since, at least, the War Between the States.  We call ’em Southerners!  When the US decides to go to war, southern males begin lining up and signing up.  Blame our Celtic heritage and ancestry.

President Bush in 1992 created the Presidential Commission on the Deployment of Women in the Military to determine the capability of women severing in direct combat positions. “The Commission showed that women were three times more nondeployable than men, primarily due to pregnancy, during Operations Desert Shield and Storm.” (Hoar 1) The commission used expert medical witnesses and current military policy to show the pitfalls of having potential mothers serving in military units.    SOURCE:  http://www.grossmont.net/musgrave2/Grammar%20Hospital/new%20pages/opponent.example.htm

Look.  Combat is just as mean, just as barbaric, just tough as it has always been. The combat soldier MUST rely on his physical strength, and his mental strength to survive and to aid his fellow soldiers to survive and win the victory.  That is a fact — period. 

Let’s state the obvious here:  Women cannot carry as much as far as fast as men, and they are more susceptible to fatigue.

Women are shorter.  Women have less muscle mass. Women weigh less than men.  This is a great disadvantage when called upon to perform tasks that would require a high level of muscular strength and aerobic capacity, you know, like — ground combat.  Read more about this issue here: http://www.grossmont.net/musgrave2/Grammar%20Hospital/new%20pages/opponent.example.htm

This just WRONG!  A nation intent upon survival does not, I repeat, does not deliberately place the “life-givers,” — their women — in danger. It is a basic rule of survival. 

Frankly, I am not surprised. The left places so little value on human life, so little value on human dignity, so little value on the worth of each individual, that, to them, this is just another victory for their progressive agenda. They simply don’t care about the consequences.

We’ve known for many decades that the political left views humankind as a plague upon their Holy Mother Earth.  So, maybe this is just one more way they feel they can rid earth of it’s payload of humans and cleanse the planet. 

Consider the following:  “In “On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society,”  Lt. Col. Dave Grossman briefly mentions that female soldiers in the Israel Defense Forces have been officially prohibited from serving in close combat military operations since 1948. The reason for removing female soldiers from the front lines was due less to the performance of female soldiers, and more due to the behavior of the male infantrymen after witnessing a woman wounded. The IDF saw a complete loss of control over soldiers who apparently experienced an uncontrollable, protective, instinctual aggression, severely degrading the unit’s combat effectiveness.

However, in 2001, subsequent to the publication of Grossman’s book, women did begin serving in IDF combat units on an experimental basis. There is now an all-female infantry battalion, the Caracal Battalion.”  SOURCE:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_combat 

Read more about the Caracal Battalion at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caracal_Battalion

I came across an article while doing a bit of research recently that I think should be read by everyone — on both sides of the women in combat debate.  It is entitled:  “Women Should Not Be in Combat (Says a Female Marine Captain)

You will find the article here: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thoughtlife/2013/01/women-should-not-be-in-combat-says-a-female-marine-captain/   READ THIS ARTICLE. 

“For those who dictate policy, changing the current restrictions associated with women in the infantry may not seem significant to the way the Marine Corps operates. I vehemently disagree; this potential change will rock the foundation of our Corps for the worse and will weaken what has been since 1775 the world’s most lethal fighting force.” —  Capt Katie Petronio  —  SOURCE: http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/article/get-over-it-we-are-not-all-created-equal

The quote immediately above is from the article entitled:  “Get Over It! We Are Not All Created Equal.”  The article was written by Capt. Katie Petronio, a Marine.  You will find the entire article here:  http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/article/get-over-it-we-are-not-all-created-equal 

Placing women in direct combat war fighting roles within the US military will do nothing to elevate women.  It will, in fact, grind women down even more.

Now that that the ban has been lifted we are left with a fight between facts an leftist ideology.  Women are now caught in the middle of yet another fight in which ideology will trump facts.

No matter how horrible the results of this decision will be for women serving in America’s military,  leftists will NEVER admit to being wrong.  So, this disastrous decision will stand while the broken, twisted, and maimed bodies of America’s young women, those who would bear our young, those who would rear America’s children, will continue to pile up.

© J. D. Longstreet

******************

VISIT J. D. Longstreet’s “INSIGHT on Freedom” Face Book Page!!:   (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)

*******************

Hypersmash.com

Ping Blog

Pingates

One Vote Saved This Nation … J. D. Longstreet

Editor’s note:  I wrote this column in June of 2008 before Obama was elected the first time.  I believe it STILL holds a message for America that is extremely important. 

 Thank you.

***********************
One Vote Saved This Nation
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
**************

The Supreme Court of the US came within one vote of decreeing the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution, a part of the Bill of Rights, unconstitutional.  ONE vote!  And we are celebrating???  It took 9 “learned” people in black robes to tell us the second amendment means what it says.  Do you realize we were one vote away from splitting this nation apart more clearly than the Mason-Dixon line ever did?

An idiot can read the 2nd Amendment and tell you what it says and what it means. But because our liberal friends have muddied the waters of what the word “right” means, over the past few decades, we had to have a pronouncement from the Supreme Court of the land to settle the issue.  Problem is, it didn’t settle anything.  It has only opened up a slew of new platforms for numerous additional challenges to the rights granted US Citizens under the 2nd amendment.

The fact that one of our rights under the bills of rights was saved by one vote ought to scare the hell out of all Americans!  This is how fragile our freedom has become.  This vote reflects just how tenuous our grasp on liberty is in this 21st century.  Those of us who believe in the freedom granted by the original constitution are holding on by the skin of our teeth.  Nobody gives a damn anymore about living free.  If Americans actually BELIEVED in America one tenth as much as the founders of this country did, the issue would never have been considered serious enough to go before the Supreme Court. There would have been no need. The Second Amendment says Americans may keep and bear arms.  It means…. Americans may keep and bear arms!

When America has a supreme court as political as this one, and as unrepresentative of America as this one, we need to take a serious look at ridding the country of this all too powerful institution.

Look, the unspoken driving force behind the presidential election this year is whether we continue to live free, or we elect another socialist who will appoint left wing, liberal/socialist judges to the Supreme Court and finish off the already struggling representative republic known as the United States of America. THAT’S what this election is about!

The problem is… so few Americans take enough interest in their government, enough interest in anything having to do with the politics of this land, that we go about our days in blissful ignorance of the sacrifice made by those who preceded us to insure the freedoms we are rushing, head-long, to give away today. Our public school system, I am now convinced, deliberately does not teach the constitution anymore.  Graduating students who are barely past functional literacy is just another way of creating an underclass dependent upon those who desire, who seek, and who grasp for power over them.  It is happening right in front of our eyes and we are so blinded with all the propaganda coming at us, from all directions, of our imminent doom from a hoax called global warming, that we cannot see, cannot hear, cannot grasp, that we are being flimflammed by a socialist movement bent on the complete destruction of America as a free nation.

Look at the numbers again.  5 to 4. 5 to 4.  One vote. ONE vote! If there was any reason, any reason, at all, to vote against democrats in November…  THIS vote, dear reader, is it!  If we allow the socialists in this country to gain control of the Supreme Court by electing them is such numbers that they control both houses of the Congress and the office of the President, we will assuredly be stacking the Supreme Court with liberals/socialists. Had we not gotten the last two conservative justices on that court, all gun owners in this country would be awaiting orders today to turn in our weapons. We wouldn’t turn them in, of course, thereby bringing about that split in the country I spoke of earlier.

The Supreme Court has taken on powers the constitution does not grant them.  Today they are acting, not so much as a judicial body, as they are a legislative body, making law by fiat.  That is most certainly not constitutional. The Court is circumventing the US House of Representatives and the US Senate by making law from the bench.

The Supreme Court must be reined-in and I’m afraid the only way that will be accomplished is through a constitutional amendment.  No more lifetime appointments to the court for one thing. No more appointment to the court by the President.  “Would be Justices” must stand for election and then serve only six years… one term only.  And that is just for starters.

As a gun owner, you’d think I’d be celebrating the decision of the court that the 2nd amendment means what it says. But I’m not.  I already knew that!  What I didn’t know was how the court would rule… and I was afraid, frankly, that they WOULD rule that the 2nd amendment was unconstitutional even though it is a part of the constitution!

We live in exceedingly dangerous times in America. We have lost our love for freedom. We have lost our love of independence. We have lost pride in who we are because we no longer KNOW who we are. Our young yearn for the ways of Europe from which their ancestors braved an ocean and a lethal wilderness to escape.

Finally, if you are a gun owner, may we suggest that you purchase as much ammunition for your weapons as you possibly can… before the taxes begin. Because, as surely as Obama is elected, and the democrats maintain control of the Congress, they are going to tax ammunition so much that it will be out of reach of most gun owners.  If you do not have the equipment to make your own re-loads you might want to consider getting it. The “gun grabbers” are not going away. If you are going to be allowed to keep your gun, then they will find ways to make that weapon inoperable.

I look at America today and I feel as if I am looking at a replay of German history during the 1930’s.  I see crowds lusting after a candidate who offers “hope” and “change”… again. Germany elected him.  Look what happened to Germany.

All of this from a Supreme Court 5 to 4 vote?  No.  I got all of this from that 5th vote… the 5th vote that could have easily gone the other way…the 5th vote that could have sparked a conflagration in America that would have ended in the destruction of this nation. That’s what I am looking at.  That is why I shudder.

© J. D. Longstreet

****************

VISIT J. D. Longstreet’s “INSIGHT on Freedom” Face Book Page!!:   (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)

*****************

<a href=”http://www.hypersmash.com”>Hypersmash.com</a>

<a href=”http://www.pingblognow.com”>Ping Blog</a>

<a href=”http://pingates.com”>Pingates</a&gt;

BIPARTISANSHIP IS UNAMERICAN … J. D. Longstreet

BIPARTISANSHIP IS UNAMERICAN
A Commentary  by J. D. Longstreet

********************
I hate to tell you this… but BIPARTISANSHIP is “UNAMERICAN”!

Yep!

This is a partisan country. Partisans founded it. It was founded because there was a HUGE difference of opinion between the people of the colonies and the King of England. Democracy is “partisan”. It is the nature of our country and the nature of our government.

Allow me to tell you a short story that might help clear up the misunderstanding about the partisan and bipartisan nature of our country and government:

There was a truly bitter election back in the year 1800 between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. When all the voting was finished Thomas Jefferson had won. But… and here is the big but… as the result of a quirk in the way the Electoral College worked at the time, Jefferson was tied with his own Vice-Presidential candidate, Aaron Burr.

If you are ahead of me here. You know that things just got completely out of hand. See, the election went to the House of Representatives. The Federalists, who had supported John Adams, hated Thomas Jefferson so much they decided to throw all their support to his Vice-Presidential candidate Aaron Burr. Now, at the very moment Burr understood that he just MIGHT become President, well, it was “Katie bar the door!” Burr pulled out all the stops and he began maneuvering for those votes.

Back then the rules required the House of Representatives to vote by state. Well, on the first ballot Jefferson had eight states. That was one state short of what he needed. Six states voted for Burr and two states were tied. Now, over the next few days the House of Representatives had thirty-two more ballots… and guess what? Nothing changed; Jefferson and Burr remained tied as the vote totals remained unchanged!

Things were getting hot in The House… And that’s putting it mildly! Why, Jefferson’s supporters threatened to arm themselves and cause all sorts of bad things, including throwing some hot lead around the Well of the House, if Jefferson was not elected! And… they were not kidding! President John Adams, himself, is on record as having wrote: “a civil war was expected.” Things were so hot and tempers were so inflamed and the fear of violence was so grave that the governor of Virginia, who, by the way, was a Jefferson supporter, placed guards around a supply of 4,000 firearms to prevent them being seized by the Federalist and possibly used in forcing an outcome favoring their candidate.

The sole congressman from Delaware, a fellow by the name of John Bayard, controlled his state’s vote. The Federalists had been, up to this point, supporting Burr. But, after three days of ballot after ballot, Bayard announced that he was going to abstain. That would throw the election to Jefferson. Some really angry Federalist took to the floor of the house and shouted “Traitor, Traitor” at Bayard. But ole John Bayard stood his ground. He later said he did it to save his country.

As a result, the deadlock was broken and Thomas Jefferson became the President. Some four years later Alexander Hamilton was shot and killed in a duel with Aaron Burr. Hamilton had been one of the Federalists who refused to support Burr under any circumstances. Hamilton referred to Burr as “the most unfit man in the U.S. for the office of President.”

I share this wee bit of US history in an attempt to demonstrate that partisanship in the government of the US is in no way new. No. Absolutely not! It is the way the government works, it is the way the government was planned to work. Those loud calls for bipartisanship are deceptive as can be. They are used often as a tool to divert your attention away from the conniving behind the scenes by the very congresspersons calling loudest for bipartisanship. Understand that in a bipartisan House of Representatives, for example, it would insure that every piece of legislation coming before that body would be passed. That includes the rotten pieces of legislation as well as the good. At least with a partisan House the legislation will be debated and examined before it is passed or defeated.

The fact that Obama is polarizing the country is no surprise to those of us who have been around the block a few times. That was a given from the “git go.” The country is split, almost exactly in half, over Obama and his henchman’s plans for the country. I count myself, proudly, amongst that half who wants to see Obama’s presidency fail, utterly, and his plans and machinations all come to naught. If I am right, and I believe that I am, things are going to get a lot worse in the Polarization Department as the months and years go by, and all the trials and tribulations the American people are going to have to bear under an Obama regime unfold.

Many of those Americans who voted for Obama will rue the day!  Had they listened to the warnings from us “Old Bulls” they could have saved themselves, and the country, a lot of grief.

© J. D. Longstreet

****************

VISIT J. D. Longstreet’s “INSIGHT on Freedom” Face Book Page!!:   (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)

*****************

<a href=”http://www.hypersmash.com”>Hypersmash.com</a>

<a href=”http://www.pingblognow.com”>Ping Blog</a>

<a href=”http://pingates.com”>Pingates</a&gt;

His Royal Majesty … J. D. Longstreet

His Royal Majesty
No Explicit Constitutional Provision Or Statute Permitting Presidential Executive Orders 
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
****************

Richard M. Nixon was a shrinking violet compared to His Royal Majesty Barack Hussein Obama.  Talk about an Imperial presidency — an imperial President?  One need look no farther than the current occupant of the Oval Office.

America is about to see “Obama unleashed.”

Everything we conservative commentators warned America would happen in an Obama second term is about to transpire.  Four years from this month, America will be difficult to recognize.  There is even the possibility that America will not exist four years hence.   We hear reports fairly often that a few states are actively investigating leaving the union.

Look up Imperial Presidency in a dictionary and you will probably find Mr. Obama’s photo embedded within the definition.

For those of you not familiar with the term imperial presidency, allow me to offer some background:

Imperial Presidency is a term that became popular in the 1960s and that served as the title of a 1973 volume by historian Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. to describe the modern presidency of the United States. The author wrote The Imperial Presidency out of two concerns; first that the US Presidency was out of control and second that the Presidency had exceeded the constitutional limits.[1]  
Source:  Wikipedia

Please note the last line of the paragraph above: “The author wrote The Imperial Presidency out of two concerns; first that the US Presidency was out of control and second that the Presidency had exceeded the constitutional limits.”  Does that describe any current President of the US that, you know,  might spring to mind?

“One definition of “imperial” on dictionary.com is “of the nature or rank of an emperor or supreme ruler.”

“At his news conference Monday, a petulant, threatening and confrontational President Obama spoke like an emperor or supreme ruler. All that was missing was a scepter, a crown and a robe trimmed in ermine.”  Thus wrote Cal Thomas at in a column at The Washington Examiner which you will find here:  http://washingtonexaminer.com/obamas-imperial-presidency/article/2518775#.UPiWy_J0jTg

Thomas goes on to say:  “President Obama will not negotiate about raising the debt ceiling? Not surprising. Imperial leaders don’t negotiate.”   SOURCE:   http://washingtonexaminer.com/obamas-imperial-presidency/article/2518775#.UPiWy_J0jTg 

“In so many situations, Mr. Obama’s stated rationale for action has been the same: We tried working with Congress but it didn’t pan out—so we did what we had to do. This is not only admission that the president has subverted the legislative branch, but a revealing insight into Mr. Obama’s view of his own importance and authority.

… Mr. Obama came to office promising to deliver a new kind of politics. He did—his own, unilateral governance.” — Kim Strassel — The Wall Street Journal Online —   http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304141204577506881495497626.html

Matthew Spalding, Vice President for American Studies and Director of the B. Kenneth Simon Center for Principles and Politics at The Heritage Foundation, wrote about the imperial presidency in June:

“ We can now see before us a persistent pattern of disregard for the powers of the legislative branch in favor of administrative decision-making without—and often in spite of—congressional action. This violates the spirit—and potentially the letter—of the Constitution’s separation of the legislative and executive powers of Congress and the President.”  SOURCE:  http://blog.heritage.org/2012/10/24/morning-bell-obamas-imperial-presidency-part-ii/

“It is critical that Americans understand the Obama Administration’s mode of operation. The law has not stood in its way. Congress has not stood in its way. It seems to recognize no authority but its own.”  SOURCE:  http://blog.heritage.org/2012/10/24/morning-bell-obamas-imperial-presidency-part-ii/

On a recent Fox News Channel report Mark Levin said the following:   “He was elected   president. Congratulations. This guy makes Richard Nixon look like a man who followed the law all the time. I think we have an imperial president. He sounds imperial, he’s arrogant as hell and I’m furious about this.”  SOURCE:  http://www.mediaite.com/tv/mark-levin-goes-off-on-tyranny-under-obamas-imperial-presidency-to-foxs-megyn-kelly/

Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, speaking on Laura Ingraham’s radio talk show recently said of Obama: “He is feeling right now high on his own power, and he is pushing on every front, on guns … .”  Cruz continued:  “I think he’s going to pay a serious political price, and I think the price that’s going to be paid on this is going to manifest in Senate races in 2014 … .”

America, we have a problem!  A really BIG problem!  If Mr. Obama doesn’t slack-off his monumental power grab we are in for a constitutional crisis.

Look.  The Founders of this nation understood that every time a law is passed by the government, the people lose more freedom.  They deliberately made passing laws very difficult.  We often have gridlock.  Gridlock simply proves the system is working as designed.   It’s not sexy. It’s not pretty, but it IS the way our government is supposed to work.

When a president, any president, takes matters into his own hands, no matter the motive, and orders laws into existence, it is unconstitutional.  It removes the people’s voice.  There is no representation of the people in the making of that law.  THAT’S NOT the way constitutional government in America is supposed to work.

Executive orders were intended to assist officers and agencies of the executive branch manage their operations within the federal government itself.  They were never intended to be laws, or decrees, handed down from the Office of the President.

Executive orders, as perceived today, have the full force of law.  But do they, really?  And where, exactly does the President get the authority to issue such orders?

You may be surprised to learn that there is no constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits executive orders.

There is a vague grant of “executive power” given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, and furthered by the declaration “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” made in Article II, Section 3, Clause 5. Most executive orders use these Constitutional reasonings as the authorization allowing for their issuance to be justified as part of the President’s sworn duties,[2] the intent being to help direct officers of the U.S. Executive carry out their delegated duties as well as the normal operations of the federal government: the consequence of failing to comply possibly being the removal from office.[3] — SOURCE:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order

Please note,  as I mentioned above:  “there is no constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits executive orders.”
No need to check the text of the constitution … it simply is NOT there!

It seems to this ole country boy, that any executive order issued by ANY president that affects any American — not in the direct employ of the executive branch and supervised directly by the President of the United States — is, therefore, unconstitutional.

It would also seem to me that executive orders should be limited to supervising the tasks of executive departments and even then, only after the law triggering the EO has been passed by both houses of Congress an signed by the President. 

Even more important, I believe, is the need to settle the dispute over the constitutional status of executive orders once and for all.  If Americans decide that we wish to have Presidential executive orders the I would propose that an amendment to the constitution is called for.   The amendment should spell out– clearly– what an executive order is and what, exactly, and who, exactly, it affects.   There should be nothing vague about an amendment to the constitution.

There may, very well, be court challenges to one or more of the 23 executive orders Obama signed recently aimed at gun control. The timing is spot on to determine if the President actually has constitutional power to issue such orders, or not.

This is far too important an issue to allow a “vague” notion of power — a “vague” interpretation of the constitution — to affect the freedom of the people of America.

© J. D. Longstreet

********************

VISIT J. D. Longstreet’s “INSIGHT on Freedom” Face Book Page!!:   (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)

********************

<a href=”http://www.hypersmash.com”>Hypersmash.com</a>

<a href=”http://www.pingblognow.com”>Ping Blog</a>

<a href=”http://pingates.com”>Pingates</a&gt;

Overcoming Southern Culture … J. D. Longstreet

Overcoming Southern Culture

More Intolerance From The Left

A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet

********************

I had intended to let this go as the ramblings of an old, tired, man, but, heck, I’M an OLD TIRED MAN myself, and I have more respect for my fellow Americans than to blurt out such offensive remarks on cable television — or anywhere for that matter.

Want to see what has my Southern dander up? Then go here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=DBE5P-ewkm8

Just so we are clear: I am flat-out against the gun control agenda of the left. To be even clearer … I’d be against it if I were a northerner, a westerner, or where ever. Geography makes no difference. The Second Amendment is what it is, says what it says, and means what it says. There is no doubt in my mind that the gun grabbers are “infringing” upon the rights of gun owners in America and their efforts are unconstitutional … period.

Then, along comes Congressman Charlie Rangel of New York and twists the knife with his intolerant remark: “Some Southern States Have Cultures That We Have To Overcome.”

Just a cotton-picking minute, here, Congressman! Where the heck do YOU get off telling ME that MY culture is one to be overcome? Hell, we Southerners have been trying to tell you since 1861 that our culture is different and NOT COMPATIBLE with yours!

A hundred and fifty years ago you sent your army down here and raped our women and our land and tried to “Reconstruct” us into an acceptable image of YOUR culture. You have held us in bondage — at the point of a federal bayonet — for a century and a half and still you find it necessary to offend and insult us by somehow demeaning our Southern culture as one you must overcome.

It is at times such as these that I fervently wish dueling was still legal.

Apparently it is not enough that my ancestors had to endure a cruel, vindictive, Reconstruction. It would seem that period has never ended for the Congressman.

Obviously, Rep. Rangel feels the South remains in a period of some sort of Reconstruction. I can assure the Congressman from New York that he is mistaken and his demonstration of intolerance of Southern culture was immensely unwelcome, deeply offensive, and acutely insulting to ALL Southerners.

Do what you will Congressman in your home state of New York and your city of New York, but do not — I repeat, sir — DO NOT presume to dictate to me and my fellow Southerners a culture YOU and your ilk find acceptable. I may forget that I am a Southern Gentleman for a moment and let slip that many Southerners find YOUR culture, sir, to be detestable.

There remains a chasm between your culture, sir, and mine. It is a divide we haven’t the slightest interest in filling. In fact, we consider it a protective moat.

Congressman, you have overstepped. Whether by accident or by design makes no difference. It is a fait accompli and it will not be forgotten. Even the acceptance of an apology from you, sir, is, indeed, in question.

Many seem not to understand the depth of the Congressman’s transgression. Simply put it is this: You do not insult The South with impunity! When you attack her culture you are attacking her people.

Culture defines a people. It tells the world who, you as a people, are.

Culture reflects a people’s tastes in art and manners and all the knowledge and values shared by those people.

The history, heritage and culture of the Southern people is sacrosanct, Congressman. And you, sir, have violated that sanctity with a callous remark that betrays your lack of respect for millions of Americans residing in the southern portion of the North American continent. That, sir, is no mean feat!

Congressman Rangel, you owe the people of the South an apology. That SHOULD be self evident. Do not perceive this as a plea, a request, or a boon. It is simply a statement of fact.

Be mindful, sir. The manner in which you respond to the ire of the Southern people will reflect mightily on your own culture. Sincerity is advised — and expected.

J. D. Longstreet

***************

VISIT J. D. Longstreet’s “INSIGHT on Freedom” Face Book Page!!: (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)

****************

Hypersmash.com

Ping Blog

Pingates