Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Purely Political Opinion’ Category

This almost feels good – to gripe again!  That says a lot about me, doesn’t it?  I have been fighting through this cancer thing and finally I am able to see my way to at least the end of the tunnel even though I can’t see THROUGH the end of the tunnel.

I do not think I am ready to go back to the research for the elections/primaries from the various states, but I am ready to start hitting back.  I have not watched a television in over three weeks.  What little news I am getting is coming from what I hear on televisions I just happen to be near or what I read the few times I have been online.  I have missed my writing very much – but more importantly, I have missed the fact that the Democrats and other liberal entities are taking a serious beating in the election world – except for the very ones everyone said were sure to go – the incumbents.  What happened to that plan after all, huh?

In a few days, I hope to start reading some of the emails I have been intentionally avoiding in order to maintain a positive attitude.  One of those is the illegal immigration and the criminal entities created by that element of society.  I remain frustrated that American politics seems to see only Mexicans as illegals – no one else.  And just who is it who sees it this way?  The Mexicans, of course.  Just a parting shot for you – give it a break!  Mexicans are NOT the only illegal immigrants who create problems for our healthcare industry and other equally American ideals.

So get ready, friends!  My gripe sessions are getting nearer, and I can hardly wait!

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

I understand from a report by FOX News that I am suing you and your state for trying to protect your citizens.  I have spent about an hour reading the lawsuit I have filed against you, and I have noticed a few things that I would like to point out to you.

First of all, Governor Brewer, you should know that I am NOT involved and I am NOT supportive of this lawsuit.  As has been the case since the result of the November 2008 election took office, he is operating on his own.  He calls himself the Federal Government, but he is not.  The Constitution of the United States grants, by authority of the people, to the Federal Government the powers they are supposed to expend.  I did not grant him unlimited power as he has usurped the office and the meaning of the United States of America.

He has alienated me and millions of other citizens of the United States, and he has now, in my name, brought suit against you and your state.  He is an abomination in my eyes.  He is an embarrassment to me.  He knows he cannot defeat the people of the United States on his merit so he seeks to do so by unlawful means.

In his lawsuit against you and the State of Arizona, he says that if your law, SB1070, is allowed to go into effect, it will “undermine the federal government’s careful balance of immigration enforcement priorities and objectives.”  The only priority he has shown me is not a carefully balanced mix of immigration enforcement priorities and the only objective I have seen is his goal of burying the United States of America in illegal immigrants being provided amnesty.  This is in addition to his seemingly successful attempt to unlawfully secede a portion of the land of the State of Arizona to Mexico.

His lawsuit says that your “attrition through enforcement” approach will conflict with federal law governing the registration, smuggling, and employment of aliens.  According to him, “It will altogether ignore humanitarian concerns, such as the protections available under federal law for an alien who has a well-founded fear of persecution or who has been the victim of a natural disaster.”  I have read your SB1070, and I do not see the conflict he is so afraid of.

He seems to be laboring under a misunderstanding of the definition of a person who is in our country illegally as opposed to a person who has gone through an American embassy in his own nation or in the United States to seek political asylum in the United States.

He also says your law will interfere with “vital foreign policy and national security interests by disrupting the United States’ relationship with Mexico and other countries.”  I fail to see any validity to this charge as the security of our nation is at the very heart of your bill.

As far as our relationship with Mexico and other countries is concerned, did he suddenly make a treaty without Congressional approval that allows any citizen of Mexico or “other countries” to have the same rights as citizens of the United States?  Are they to be allowed to freely come and go between our borders; to live wherever they choose and work wherever they like without having the responsibilities that we United States citizens have?  Has he nullified the requirement for illegal immigrants of paying payroll taxes, income taxes, Social Security taxes, sales taxes, health, automobile, and property insurance, becoming legally qualified and licensed to drive in our states, speaking our language, paying school taxes and other fees and charges of sending our children to school?

Has he now authorized illegal immigrants what is commonly known as “a free ride” through our medical professionals and hospitals providing free care to everyone except American citizens?  Did he issue an executive order to the grocery stores of America that they must provide free food to illegal immigrants in addition to the food stamps the states provide to them?

You should know that “the United States understands the State of Arizona’s legitimate concerns about illegal immigration, and has undertaken significant efforts to secure our nation’s borders.”

Do those significant efforts include opening wide our borders to illegal immigrants so that they are no longer a threat to our country – merely citizens of their own country crossing legally into another jurisdiction of their own country even though it was formerly known as a separate and distinct nation?

He closes his lawsuit by listing what he calls “cause of action” – as though you have brought this on yourself.  How is protecting the citizens of the State of Arizona a “cause of action” on his part?  Then to top it off, he demands that you pay him for his expenses?  What expenses?  If he were maintaining control and the security of our borders, none of this would have been necessary.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION – VIOLATION OF THE SUPREMACY CLAUSE

Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 60 of the Complaint as if fully stated herein.

Sections 1-6 of S.B. 1070, taken in whole and in part, represent an impermissible effort by Arizona to establish its own immigration policy and to directly regulate the immigration status of aliens. In particular, Sections 1-6 conflict with federal law and foreign policy, disregard federal policies, interfere with federal enforcement priorities in areas committed to the discretion of plaintiff United States, and otherwise impede the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of federal law and foreign policy.

Sections 1-6 of S.B. 1070 violate the Supremacy Clause, and are invalid.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION – PREEMPTION UNDER FEDERAL LAW

Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 63 of the Complaint as if fully stated herein.

Sections 1-6 of S.B. 1070 are preempted by federal law, including 8 U.S.C. § 1101, et seq., and by U.S. foreign policy.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION – VIOLATION OF THE COMMERCE CLAUSE

Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 65 of the Complaint as if fully stated herein.

Section 5 of S.B. 1070 (adding Ariz. Rev. Stat. 13-2929) restricts the interstate movement of aliens in a manner that is prohibited by Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution.

Section 5 of S.B. 1070 (adding Ariz. Rev. Stat. 13-2929) violates the Commerce Clause, and is therefore invalid.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, the United States respectfully requests the following relief:

1. A declaratory judgment stating that Sections 1-6 of S.B. 1070 are invalid, null, and void;

2. A preliminary and a permanent injunction against the State of Arizona, and its officers, agents, and employees, prohibiting the enforcement of Sections 1-6 of S.B. 1070;

3. That this Court award the United States its costs in this action; and

4. That this Court award any other relief it deems just and proper.

In 1776, the citizens of the United States became officially “the government of the United States.”  That means that without asking the citizens of the United States if we want to take this action, he has brought his own will to bear in our name.  This is not acceptable.

We the people, that is to say the Federal Government of the United States of America, demand the resignation of the man Barack Hussein Obama immediately.  We demand his immediate exit from the People’s House.  We demand the firing of the entire cabinet and appointments whether or not approved by Congress made by the man Barack Hussein Obama.  We demand the repeal and/or removal of any and all laws and executive orders bearing the signature of the man Barack Hussein Obama.  We demand charges of high treason be brought against the man Barack Hussein Obama, and following his conviction, the appropriate punishment begin immediately.

Governor Brewer, in closing, let me assure you that the REAL Government of the United States, the people, have no intention of suing either you or the State of Arizona.  We support and applaud your efforts to protect your citizens.

Respectfully,

RELATED POST:  Governor Jan Brewer:  Woman of Conviction

RELATED POST:  The United States VS. Arizona

Read Full Post »

Toward the end of May, I introduced you to Kimberly Moore and her “Random Pundits” blog.  I hope you have taken the opportunity to check in – she has her finger on the heartbeat of Kentucky politics with a sometimes humorous view.

Ms. Moore’s post today documents a topic that she, Lisa Graas, A Patriotic Nurse, Messenger of the Truth and others have written extensively about – Rand Paul, the incompetent Republican nominee from Kentucky to replace retiring Senator Jim Bunning.

Rand Paul seems to have trouble in a couple of really important issues; telling the truth and being consistent in his positions.  He has already tried to smear the good reputations of Kentucky Right to Life.  From “Kentucky Votes May 18,”

Rand Paul (RINO) – Relies on Daddy Ron’s big-money out-of-state-donors and political machine while at the same time trying to tell Kentuckians that he isn’t.  His first campaign manager, Chris Hightower, resigned amid allegations of racism and Satanic pictures on his Facebook page.  Christie Gillespie, Paul’s original spokesperson, resigned over the lies Paul has told about his Libertarian leanings and his desire to re-form the Republican Party in his father’s image.  That should trouble many Republican voters in Kentucky.  But that isn’t all.  There is the lie Paul is telling that Kentucky Right to Life (KRLA) is the one lying about Paul’s questionnaire to their organization.  I have seen online copies of all the forms referenced – excepting the one that the Paul campaign mailed fully 2 months after he wants people to believe it was mailed.  He thinks that by smearing a well-respected and successful organization he will win points with Kentucky voters.  WRONG!  When a candidate announces intentions to run for a political office by saying that he is not deserting his Libertarian friends; that he is Libertarian but since he realizes he can’t win as a third-party candidate he is going to run as a Republican provides proof positive that the candidate is a RINO.

He also claims to have the endorsement of the American Board of Ophthalmology, but they say he is not even a certified member of their organization.  From that same link, you can see that he invented his own “board” to endorse himself. Now comes the revelation from Ms. Moore about another “board” Rand Paul has invented.

This morning I came across a blog post found at Page One Kentucky, a Kentucky politics blog.  (I’ve added this blog to my blogroll)  What I found interesting is that this post goes into even more detail about Rand Paul’s group, Kentucky Taxpayers United.  You can read more about what KTU does (or rather doesn’t do) and “awards” that KTU has received from an organization called C.O.A.S.T. that ironically has the same address as Paul’s business office by visiting this website link.

Rand Paul is so proud of this group that does “nothing” that he lists himself as the founding member on his website.  From his website, it is written, “In 1993, Dr. Rand Paul founded the Kentucky Taxpayers United (KTU) in an effort to better inform all Kentuckians on how their elected officials were voting on key spending and taxation issues.”  Wow!  This sounds like information I would love to read and know more about.  Too bad they do “nothing”.

What I find most revealing is that Ms. Moore, Ms. Graas, The Patriotic Nurse, and Messenger of Truth are all Kentucky voters who Rand Paul seems intent on alienating.  That does not seem like the best way for a politician to win friends and influence people, does it?  Of all the things Dr. Paul may be good at, alienating voters is what he does best in life.

If you find it difficult to believe that a few ladies who write blogs are hard to believe, would you believe the Kentucky Senate?

The Republican-led Kentucky Senate approved a sharply worded resolution Friday that was aimed at rebuking Republican U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul’s recent questioning of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Senate Resolution 31, filed by Sen. Gerald Neal, D-Louisville, and co-sponsored by all but one of his Republican and Democratic colleagues, expressed the Senate’s support for the Civil Rights Act and criticized as “outside the mainstream of American values” those who oppose any part of the law.

“Suggestions have appeared recently that we retreat from the core values of the protection of equal rights of the citizens of the United States,” says Senate Resolution 31.

Only an “extreme minority of persons in the United States” would support such a move, it says.

The Senate adopted the resolution, which did not name Paul, on a voice vote. Only one senator, Gary Tapp, R-Shelbyville, did not sign onto the resolution, but he did not attend last week’s special legislative session.

Senate President David Williams, the top Republican in Frankfort, said he agreed with the resolution’s language but did not view it as a jab at Paul or a political statement on the U.S. Senate race. “There’s not very much in this resolution that anyone could disagree with,” Williams said Tuesday.

Personally, I think Rand Paul has gone too far to back down at this point.  He keeps opening his mouth and inserting his own foot.  He then adds his leg by trying to “clarify” what he means.

Give the Republican Party – and in fact, the Kentucky voters – the only truth you have left to tell at this point, Dr. Paul.  Resign the nomination.  Give the people you say you care about (?) the opportunity to elect a Republican candidate who truly wants to serve the people of Kentucky instead of the candidate’s father.

Read Full Post »

Have you read Michelle Malkin today?  No!??  Get over there right now!

We can now add Tennessee State Democrat legislator Janis Baird Son­tany of Nashville to the roster of abusers. Here’s what she said about her GOP opponents at a Democrat Party breakfast over the weekend:

State Republican Chairman Chris Devaney today denounced as “petty and insulting” a Democratic legislator’s statement about her Republican women colleagues.

“You have to lift their skirts to find out if they are women. You sure can’t find out by how they vote,” said Rep. Janis Baird Sontany, D-Nashville.

The remark at a Saturday Democratic breakfast was initially reported by blogger Dru Smith Fuller. Sontany acknowledged the statement when asked and described it as “a glib, off-the-cuff remark” that “was inappropriate on my part.”

Okay, Democrats everywhere.  Let’s get this straight.

Democratic Women

[picapp align=”none” wrap=”false” link=”term=hillary+clinton&iid=9053478″ src=”http://view.picapp.com/pictures.photo/image/9053478/secretary-state-hillary/secretary-state-hillary.jpg?size=500&imageId=9053478″ width=”500″ height=”637″ /]

[picapp align=”none” wrap=”false” link=”term=kagan&iid=8840850″ src=”http://view3.picapp.com/pictures.photo/image/8840850/supreme-court-nominee/supreme-court-nominee.jpg?size=500&imageId=8840850″ width=”500″ height=”354″ /]

[picapp align=”none” wrap=”false” link=”term=nancy+pelosi&iid=8601294″ src=”http://view2.picapp.com/pictures.photo/image/8601294/speaker-pelosi-holds-her/speaker-pelosi-holds-her.jpg?size=500&imageId=8601294″ width=”500″ height=”345″ /]

[picapp align=”none” wrap=”false” link=”term=helen+thomas&iid=9053874″ src=”http://view4.picapp.com/pictures.photo/image/9053874/file-photo-helen-thomas/file-photo-helen-thomas.jpg?size=500&imageId=9053874″ width=”500″ height=”539″ /]

[picapp align=”none” wrap=”false” link=”term=katie+couric&iid=876652″ src=”http://view1.picapp.com/pictures.photo/image/876652/universal-pictures/universal-pictures.jpg?size=500&imageId=876652″ width=”396″ height=”594″ /]

[picapp align=”none” wrap=”false” link=”term=rosa+delauro&iid=8257905″ src=”http://view1.picapp.com/pictures.photo/image/8257905/house-reviews-senate/house-reviews-senate.jpg?size=500&imageId=8257905″ width=”500″ height=”359″ /]

Republican Women

[picapp align=”none” wrap=”false” link=”term=michelle+bachmann&iid=1044732″ src=”http://view3.picapp.com/pictures.photo/image/1044732/2008-republican-national/2008-republican-national.jpg?size=500&imageId=1044732″ width=”500″ height=”327″ /]

[picapp align=”none” wrap=”false” link=”term=laura+bush&iid=8756731″ src=”http://view1.picapp.com/pictures.photo/image/8756731/laura-bush-book-signing/laura-bush-book-signing.jpg?size=500&imageId=8756731″ width=”396″ height=”594″ /]

[picapp align=”none” wrap=”false” link=”term=sarah+palin&iid=8893239″ src=”http://view3.picapp.com/pictures.photo/image/8893239/sarah-palin-addresses-real/sarah-palin-addresses-real.jpg?size=500&imageId=8893239″ width=”500″ height=”352″ /]

And I picked Republican women who are not necessarily that well known.  I would say there is quite a difference.

Ms. Sontany, you want to lift a skirt?  May I suggest Sarah Palin’s skirt?  Ever heard of drawing back a nub?

Go for it, Ms. Sontany.  But call me first.  I want to watch you get punched in the….

Oh.. I forgot one Democrat…

Janis Sontany

Read Full Post »

It must be so neat to be a Democrat.

You don’t have to do anything but take credit for the good Obama is doing.  That means you never have to do anything at all – he hasn’t done any good for anything or anybody since you voted him in.

You don’t have to do anything but vote for a Democrat.  It doesn’t even matter whether or not the candidate is a legitimate candidate.  Just pick a name you think you’ve heard before and click the little button or whatever your voting method is.

You elect the darndest people!  And you don’t have to answer for whom or what that candidate you elected is.

Democrats in South Carolina obviously have a problem with vetting of candidates for federal office.  We know they have a history of not vetting the candidates because they keep giving us examples of it.

Example #1 – Alvin M. Greene

Talking Points Media has a blip complete with a picture of Mr. Greene holding his $10,400 filing fee check – not a personalized check from a bank, by the way, but one of those things you get when you open a new account.  Or when you’re trying to hide the fact that you have money and are supposed to be broke.

The Washington Post calls him a mystery man who never gave one campaign speech.

Newsweek asks the question, “…has a candidate like Greene ever won before?”

Newser says he allegedly showed a pornographic picture to a student and has a pending felony charge.  The South Carolina Democratic Party leader has asked him to “pull out of the race.”

ABC News syndicated a photograph saying he was kicked out of the Army.

The Charlotte Observer has this interesting tidbit buried in its article –

Greene was considered such a long shot that his opponent and media didn’t even bother to check his background. If they had, they would have discovered he faces a felony obscenity charge after an alleged encounter with a college student last fall.

FINALLY, SOMEONE GOT TO THE ROOT OF THE PROBLEM!

Nobody even bothered to check his background.  He wasn’t vetted.  He showed up with a check for the correct amount, signed his name and voila!  He’s a candidate for the U.S. Senate from South Carolina.  Just like another candidate of recent history.  The only difference is there is more negative media coverage about this illegitimate candidate than there has been about the other one.

South Carolina didn’t vet the other candidate either.  The “proper papers” appearing legally and duly signed by none other than the Speaker of the House of Representatives showed up on the doorstep – or the mail slot – of the South Carolina Secretary of State, and his name was automatically added to the ballot no questions asked.  Just as Mr. Greene’s was.

Has anyone learned a lesson from the first candidate that could have prevented the second candidate from putting Americans through the hassle of living with another non-vetted candidate?

An article on April 10, 2010, appearing in Sodahead says that at least one governor has taken a little notice.

Virginia‘s slide toward extreme conservative governance under Gov. Bob McDonnell continues.

McDonnell wants to change the process by which non-violent felons apply to have their voting rights restored, the Washington Post reported over the weekend. Whereas before, applicants had had to fill out a one-page form, making the process almost automatic, they now will have to submit an essay outlining their contributions to society since their release.

If you are like me, you probably thought that a person convicted of a felony loses his right to vote.  I know it used to be that way.  Wikipedia would seem to agree with me; but something seems to have changed.

Admittedly, Mr. Greene has not been tried and found guilty of his alleged felony at this time to the best of my knowledge.

The first candidate in recent history to elude the vetting process was a felon only in that the things he has done and the people he has associated himself with since his early 20’s is a crime.

That hasn’t stopped him yet. He still sits in the Oval Office pretending to be President of the United States.

The American Grand Jury has tried to stop him. Dr. David Manning brought charges against Obama and Columbia University in which a guilty verdict was reached.  Still no effort made has to date been able to override Obama’s evil and smirky smile and Socialistic rule over the United States.

Would somebody please do something right for a change?  How about the Secretaries of State in each of our states doing their job for a change?  VET THE CANDIDATES!  Media bosses, publish both positive and negative press about all candidates – not just the ones who coddle you.

Voters in America – WAKE UP!  LOOK AROUND!  You are selling America to the highest bidder. In 2008, it was Obama.  In 2010 it is Albert M. Greene.  Who will be next?

Read Full Post »

Beware of the RINO’s in your midst.  These are the incumbents and candidates who are Republican in Name Only.  Beware also of Libertarians who clothe themselves in support for States’ Rights and personal liberty.  By the way, states don’t have rights – they have powers.  People have rights and give the power to the states.

As we speak, the Libertarian Party is going bankrupt.  In order to save it, the leadership would need millions of dollars.  That is much too costly and the party and its candidates have not been successful in winning support from the majority of Americans.  Therefore, the next best alternative is to hijack the Republican Party since this is the party that is more closely aligned with the Libertarians.  There are major differences, however, so do not be rocked into a sleep of ignorance by having them tell you otherwise.

One of the methods the Libertarians use to take over the Republican Party is to have candidates seek political office wearing the Republican brand.  Once totally ensconced, they will be able to vote whatever changes they seek to the Republican Party Platform and planks.

Another method used is the “Liberty Republicans.”  Either way, they are wolves in sheep’s clothing, and you must make yourself knowledgeable so as to fight against their take over.

I copied this section from the Liberty Republicans website.

Statement of Principles and Positions

The Republican Liberty Caucus supports individual rights, limited government and free enterprise.

We believe every human being is endowed by nature with inherent rights to life, liberty and property that are properly secured by law. We support a strict construction of the Bill of Rights as a defense against tyranny; the expansion of those rights to all voluntary consensual conduct under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments; and the requirements of equal protection and due process under the Fourteenth Amendment.

We support the Constitutional restrictions on federal government powers enumerated in Article I, Section 8 as an absolute limit on all government functions and programs. We oppose the adoption of broad and vague powers under the guise of general welfare or interstate commerce.

We oppose all restrictions on the voluntary and honest exchange of value in a free market. We favor minimal, equitable, and fair taxation for the essential functions of government. We oppose all legislation that concedes Congressional power to any regulatory agency, executive department, or international body.

We support the Constitution as the supreme law of the land, the republican form of government it requires, and the right of all citizens to fair and equitable representation.

We believe these are also the proper positions of the Republican Party.

They are right.  Republicans believe in all those things too, but this is where the similarity ends.  They have given the rest of their “statements” buttery coating so that they will go down easily and like the scroll from the Book of the Revelation, it is sweet in the mouth but sour to the stomach.

“We support initiatives in defense of medical, racial and banking privacy.”  I find that strange that they would group medical privacy, banking privacy and racial privacy.  In other words, they support segregation.

“We recognize the harm that drug abuse causes, but also that the ‘drug war’ has been ineffective and has led to terrible abuses of personal liberty. We favor flexible alternatives at the state and community level to combat the harmful aspects of drug use.”  What they are saying here is that if the people want drugs legalized, that is fine with them.  I was a teenager in the 60’s, and I remember the “if it feels good, do it” attitude that pervaded our generation and ruined a large part of our society.  This is the same attitude we had then.

“We favor foreign military action only upon a Declaration of War by Congress in the face of an imminent and clear threat to the United States. We favor a clear strategy for entrance into and conclusion of any foreign engagement and a definable goal that constitutes victory.”  They are diametrically opposed to the war on terror because it would be impossible to set a “definable goal that constitutes victory.”

“Peaceful diplomatic relations, free trade and open borders enhance the ability of citizens to travel, engage in international commerce and support the pursuit of liberty everywhere in the world.”  You can translate that into no immigration policy other than “come on in and help yourself.”

“We favor the phasing out of all foreign aid, or payments to other nations or international bodies, as a form of global welfare and commercial intervention.”  Why shouldn’t the people of the African nations suffer and die from disease because they don’t have clean drinking water?  Why shouldn’t they die of aids?  They have it, we don’t want it, and it isn’t any of our business.  Yeah, right!

“Abortion is a critical life and death choice for every pregnant woman. Whether government should intervene to influence that choice is dependent on the legal status of the fetus. We acknowledge that there can be honest and ethical differences of opinion on that status, the rights of the woman, and the proper role of government.”  Let me be certain I have a good grip on this.  The woman’s rights overreach the rights of her unborn child because of the “legal status of the fetus.”  It isn’t just a fetus – it is a human baby!

“Everyone in the RLC joined for their own reasons, but it can be presumed that all RLC members agree that in most political races, the Republican Party provides the best opportunity for libertarian-leaning candidates to attain electoral success.”  This statement comes from the frequently asked questions.  They continue with this statement, “In short, we want to win. We believe that our principles are correct. It would be a shame not to transfer our cherished principles into public policy, or at least work as hard as we can to do so. Thus, the RLC hopes to impact future policy by electing candidates and reshaping the Republican Party leadership to represent our values.” (emphasis theirs)

“We only endorse the most libertarian-leaning candidates… We believe that libertarian solutions will contribute greatly to solving America’s problems. Thus, we want to achieve electoral success, and are excited to work within the Republican Party framework to achieve real results.”

You’ll love this one.  “Thus, most of our members are at odds with neoconservative policies and are not trusting of those who have implemented them.

“Moreover, the neocons have captured the GOP leadership on the Republican National Committee and have control of many state parties. We seek to eliminate any success they have in the future, as our members don’t consider neoconservatives part of a winning equation for the Republican Party. Instead, we believe they are largely responsible for most of the problems the Republican Party currently faces.”

I am a neocon because I believe that abortion is murder; because I support my nation and my state; because I believe in supporting our military in the War on Terror wherever it leads by fighting ON THEIR TERRITORY RATHER THAN ON UNITED STATES TERRITORY; because I receive Social Security Disability.

What does the RLC think of the religious right? “The RLC supports individual rights and believes that all voluntary, consensual conduct should be permissible in a free country. We seek a Republican Party of both tolerance and a strong yearning to protect the rights of individuals.” (emphasis mine)

This take over of the Republican Party must be stopped.  If Chairman Steele, the national leadership and the state leadership will not stop it, WE THE PEOPLE must stop it.  Beware of Republican Liberty candidates and their views of American through their rose-colored glasses.

Since it is common knowledge that the Libertarian Party was the brainchild of Ron Paul, and since you can find Ron Paul in the U.S. House of Representatives today listed as a Republican, it should be clear to anyone that my information is based on facts.  It requires only a few sentences to draw the further connection between the Libertarians, the Liberty Republicans and the Republican Party.

  1. From the Statement of Principles of the Liberty Republicans, “We support the adoption of the Liberty Amendment’ to the Constitution, requiring respect for enumerated powers and repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment.” (emphasis mine.)
  2. From the Liberty Amendment web page, “On April 30, 2009 the Hon. Ron Paul of Texas introduced the Liberty Amendment into the House of Representatives, as House Joint Resolution 48:

Proposing an amendment the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.

(Dr. Paul has previously introduced this amendment in: 2007, 2005, 2003, 1999, and 1998).

I guess he’s going to keep trying until he gets it crammed down our throats much like the Democrats did with Obamacare.

Read Full Post »

I suppose many of you got this same email touting the outrageous event at Montebello High School in California.  It is a true story, and I will document it for you here.  The only problem is that the actual event occurred in 2006, yet the email gives the impression that it happened yesterday.

This fact makes it totally unacceptable to me as a “current event” and whatever we can do to stop this immediately must be done.  Please, do not misunderstand me.  The act perpetrated by the students must not be repeated!  It is of major importance that we not smear the Montebello High School students by taking part in the vilification of their students of today – including the students from the high schools who were involved in this unnecessary and illegal act in 2006.

According to Wikipedia, the school in question is Montebello High School is a four year high school (9th through 12th) located within the Montebello Unified School District, located at 2100 West Cleveland Ave., Montebello, California, 90640. Montebello High School has an enrollment of approximately 3400 students and a staff of 121 teachers. Montebello’s mascot is the Oilers. The school was subject of controversy over an incident where the Flag of Mexico was flown above an upside down American Flag at the facility.

What follows is the body of the email which I received today referring to the 2006 incident.

You will not see this heart-stopping photo on the front page of the NY Times nor on the lead story of the major news networks. The protestors at Montebello High School took the American flag off the school’s flag pole and hung it upside down while putting up the Mexican flag over it.

I predict this stunt will be the nail in the coffin of any guest-worker/amnesty plan on the table in Washington. The image of the American flag subsumed to another and turned upside down on American soil is already spreading on Internet forums and via e-mail.

Pass this along to every American citizen in your address books and to every representative in the state and federal government. If you choose to remain uninvolved, do not be amazed when you no longer have a nation to call your own nor anything you have worked for left since it will be ‘redistributed’ to the activists while you are so peacefully staying out of the ‘fray’. Check history, it is full of nations/empires that disappeared when its citizens no longer held their core beliefs and values. One person CAN make a difference.

One plus one plus one plus one plus one plus one…….. ..

The battle for our secure borders and immigration laws that actually mean something, however, hasn’t even begun.

I do not often check “rumor sites” such as Snopes or Truth or Fiction because I simply do not believe one-half of the things either of them prints.  This time, I think the information from Truth or Fiction has been borne out from other sources; therefore, I will use it as proof of the incident as well as the timing of the incident in question.  I did not edit for grammar and spelling, as you will see.

The pictures are true.  They were taken at Montebello high school on Monday, March 27, 2006. The students were part of a walkout aimed at influencing Congress, which was debating immigration policy and the potential of cracking down on illegal immigrants in the country.  Although the flag-raising took place at Montebello high school, officials of the Montebello Unified School District were quick to point out that the protesters were not students from Montebello high school.  Assistent Superintendent Robert Henke said the high school was under a lockdown and all the students were in their classrooms.  He said that the 800 to 1000 students were from neighboring school districts such as the El Rancho Unified School District and the Whittier Union High School District.  They marched to Montebello high school, lowered the flags, replaced the school flag with a Mexican flag, flew the U.S. flag upside down, and stole the California flag that had been on the pole.

Michelle Malkin even got in on publicizing the incident, once again in 2006.

From the Montebello High School website, I found two documents from the actual period surrounding this horrendous event.  This press release was the first document I noticed.

Press Release:
May 5, 2010

MUSD SCHOOL OFFICIALS CLARIFY MISREPRESENTATION OF MONTEBELLO HIGH SCHOOL

First of all, please be advised that the students depicted in the photograph were not Montebello High School students. On March 27, 2006, the Superintendent’s Office at Montebello Unified School District received a telephone call from a local school district in the city of Whittier, advising that a group of 800 to 1000 students, from both the Whittier and Pico Rivera areas, were heading over to Montebello High School.  These students had walked out of their schools and decided to conduct a demonstration out on the streets, in order to protest proposed federal immigration policies. This group of students stopped by Montebello High School in an attempt to enlist more students to their cause.  Upon arriving at Montebello High School, our students were inside their classrooms. Since we had received notice about these students marching towards Montebello, school officials immediately placed Montebello High School on lock-down.  The front entrance and all gates were locked immediately, and school administrators and campus security personnel were dispersed throughout campus to ensure that no outsider trespassed onto our property.  Once these outside students realized that their efforts to recruit Montebello High School students to join their cause had failed, they decided to congregate around the flagpole, which is located in front of the school, outside of a gated area.

From what we learned after this incident took place, a male student proceeded to pull down both the California and United States Flag.  He placed the Mexican Flag in place of the U.S. Flag and then hung the U.S. flag upside down, below the Mexican flag.  In the meantime, the other outside students (as seen in the picture) cheered him on.  Again, Montebello High School students did not participate in this incident.  They were inside the school buildings.

We realize how hurtful and infuriating these photographs are.  But please know that school officials immediately told this crowd of students to leave our property and then took down the Mexican flag and placed the U.S. flag back to its proper place.  Please note that these outside students stole our California flag.

It is also important to emphasize that the photographer who took these pictures for the Whittier Daily News was fully aware that these students were not Montebello High School students.  The photographer had been following the crowd from the time their protest started in the city of Whittier.  However, he strategically took the photograph making sure that the name of Montebello High School was clearly seen in the background.  The newspaper failed to clarify who these students were when the photographs were published in their newspaper and on their website.  The Whittier Daily News did not print a retraction until 3 days later and it was not published on their front page.  Unfortunately, the damage had already been done in smearing the good name of Montebello High School.  By the way, the flagpole was secured with metal plates after the incident to prevent anyone else from ever desecrating our flag again.

The Montebello High School principal also organized and conducted a student debate during the lunch period on the subject of immigration.  This allowed our students an opportunity to express their feelings in an appropriate manner and to gather opinions and data with which to make informed decisions about the subject. Our school district received an apology from the other school district’s superintendent and an assurance that the specific student involved was significantly disciplined, under the full extent of the California Education Code.

We appreciate this opportunity to clarify the facts behind these disturbing photographs.  Our Montebello Unified School District community was definitely outraged by this incident.

The second document I found on the school website was this memo from the school to school district employees. It is a PDF file so allow time for the download.

As you are aware, our school community is currently dealing with controversial issues involving possible legislation related to immigration. These emotionally charged issues have manifested themselves in the form of student walkouts and protests at some of our intermediate and high schools.

MUSD staff has done a wonderful job in keeping our students safe and secure. However, on Monday, March 27, 2006 at noontime, a group of students from neighboring school districts to the east of our district (i.e. El Rancho Unified School District and Whittier Union High School District) marched to Montebello High School. At this time, MHS was on lockdown and the students remained in their classrooms. The other students, from outside Montebello Unified School District, who were estimated to be 800-1000 strong, gathered outside the MHS campus. For a brief time, the school flag was lowered, replaced with a Mexican flag, and the American flag flown beneath, upside down. The California flag was subsequently stolen.

It is important to emphasize that this was not the act of any Montebello High School student.

Though there have been a few isolated incidences of walkouts on Monday (3/27/06) and Tuesday (3/28/06) of this week, the majority of our students have remained in class, where activities and dialogue have been facilitated by teachers in an effort to teach students positive methods of expressing their viewpoints.

Attached is Board Policy 6144 and Administrative Regulation 6144, regarding the discussion and/or teaching of controversial issues in the classroom, as well as the Guidelines for Providing Safe and Secure Campuses During a Student Walkout. Hopefully these will guide us in helping our students to learn how to work within the system, in order to bring about change and allow one’s voice to be heard.

If you are contacted by the media soliciting questions regarding any of the recent events, please refer those calls to my office at (323) 887-7900 x2271.

Many thanks to all of you for your tireless efforts and for your commitment to our students.

RGH:saa

Attachments

cc: Board of Education

Division Heads

An article about this event was posted on WORLD NET DAILY on April 01, 2006.

A high school in Southern California punished a student for involvement in a protest in which a Mexican flag was flown above an upside-down U.S. flag.

The incident took place Monday at Montebello High School in Montebello, Calif., when students walked out of classes at area schools in protest of a proposed federal immigration bill, the Whittier Daily News reported.

The House has passed a bill to tighten border security, but President Bush broadly supports rival legislation being debated in the Senate that contains a guest-worker proposal.

The unnamed student was from El Rancho High School, about four miles east of Montebello.

El Rancho Unified School District officials gave no details because of legal and privacy issues, except to say the punishment was consistent with the California Education Code.

Montebello Unified School District Assistant Superintendent Robert G. Henke said officials “appreciate the diligence that the district has taken in identifying the student who allegedly committed the infraction with the flagpole incident.”

The image of a flipped American flag beneath the banner of Mexico prompted outrage nationwide.

The protest began when about 1,000 students from the El Rancho and Whittier Union High school districts marched through the town of Pico Rivera to Montebello High.

At the Montebello school, students had boycotted classes in the previous week in protest of the legislation. The campus was on lockdown by the time the protest marchers arrived, the Daily News said.

Henke said that’s when protesters raised the Mexican flag, turned the U.S. flag upside down and stole the California flag.

While police warn of $165 fines for any protesters, El Rancho officials have scheduled an after-school forum today where students will be “encouraged to air their concerns and opinions in a safe, structured, well-supervised environment.”

The district officials said, “For the next several weeks, as the pending legislation works its way through Congress, the situation will be closely monitored by district personnel.”

Faculty in the Montebello Unified and Whittier Union High school districts are being encouraged by officials to teach students positive ways of expressing their opinions.

I will not reprint the incendiary photographs as I had planned to.  It is well past time for this 2006 incident to be put to rest.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »