Tired of getting junk mail from the worthless Republican party begging for money? Print this out and send them 17 TRILLION RINO bux in their postage paid return envelope. Be sure to also include the rest of your junk mail in the envelope so it will be nice and heavy!
Hubby created the image. Click the image above to enlarge, copy, print, share, mail to the RNC.
The news coverage of the Bundy Ranch in Bunkerville, Nevada has died down now, but I still have questions for the feds. What is interesting to me is not some politically incorrect words spoken by an elderly rancher, but what the federal government has done and is doing, and why. The federal government has made rather a fuss about the desert turtle (technically a tortoise) and how it cannot live with all those terrible cattle. Yet is seems to me that the desert turtle has somehow survived for an extremely long time despite the presence of cattle, horses and other creatures. How did that happen exactly? And how did it survive despite the non-existence of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM, created in 1946), a division of the Department of the Interior (created 1849) neither of which is mentioned in the Constitution of the United States and are therefore unconstitutional (see the 10th Amendment).
Many have said that Cliven Bundy’s failure to pay grazing fees to the Feds (he believes the land belongs to the state of Nevada) is the reason the BLM has come after Bundy. However, the real reason may be that he is not a donor to Harry Reid. It seems that U.S. Senator Harry Reid has some interesting connections to the story.
Reid’s former Senior Policy Advisor, Neil Kornze is the new head of the BLM – is he Reid’s puppet? It is fairly certain that Neil Kornze at the BLM is a puppet of the mining industry. But I digress. It seems that the BLM and Senator Reid changed the tortoise’s habitat boundaries to comply with the needs of Reid’s top donor, Harvey Whittemore. Whittemore has leased land to BrightSource Energy, a company scheduled to create a 960-megawatt solar farm complex – a gift to the gods of environmental correctness.
So saving the tortoise is being used as an excuse to grab land, land that may be used for a solar farm complex. It turns out though that the nearly 400 megawatt Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System (owned incidentally by Brightsource Energy) near the California/Nevada border has been in the news (that is if you live there, or if you really care about this sort of thing). It seems that birds (all kinds of birds) tend to see the gigantic mirrors and think they are seeing a lake. The birds then fly closer and the 1000 degree Fahrenheit temperatures either fry or singe the birds. This is what is happing at Ivanpah and it can be expected to be even worse at a larger facility.
If solar power is a problem because of its impact on birds, why not go with wind power? Well it seems that wind power is even worse – first you need wind, and it can be even less reliable than the sun. And then a lot of birds are being killed because they get stuck in the windmills – I assume this is also not good for the windmills. Yet this administration loves solar power and wind power, and they seem to hate coal, oil, gas, and nuclear power – all of which are far less detrimental to man and beast.
Hence, in this tangled little tale we see that a rancher is being harassed by an unconstitutional bureaucracy, to protect a turtle they claim is endangered (yet the BLM has plans to euthanize a large number of these turtles). This same bureaucracy, the BLM, has had no problem with allowing a ‘green company,’ to build, and if that ‘green company’ is also tied to a top donor to a U.S. Senator it hardly seems to matter. And if that ‘green company’ has a proven track record of injuring and killing birds, what are we to make of that? Who do they think they are fooling? Not the average American.
In 2010 the BLM created some ‘Proposed Solar Energy Zones,’ that covered 70% of Nevada. The BLM was hoping to lease much of the 9.6 million acres of land they own in that state, and leasing it to solar power companies would suit their agenda. Enter the Red Chinese. Senator Reid has a son name Roy, a lawyer, who is a real chip off the old block. Roy Reid is a former Clark County (where the Bundy ranch is located) Commission Chairman who urged the county to sell land to ENN Energy Group (the Red Chinese) at well below market value claiming it would provide more local jobs (how many? I couldn’t determine). Well guess who represents ENN, the company that wants to build an energy plant on the Bundy land?
But why are they doing it? It seems that for many people, especially government employees and politicians, wielding power is what is really important. And if a powerful senator wants it done - well so much the better. There is also the powerful community of do-gooders, environmentalist, etc. who feel good about themselves by promoting solar energy. Despite the record of solar energy killing birds and despite the fact that America has more oil in the ground than Saudi Arabia, supporting solar energy is important for a reason to those who are lacking in knowledge and awareness of the environment. They use the environment as a convenient way to gain power and wealth. Clearly as John Hinderaker argues, the Obama administration (and it’s backers) place greater priority on ‘green energy projects’ than they do on ranchers and public land. Or animals.
The dogmas of modern liberalism rely on socialist ideals that use taxes and borrowed money in order to "pay" for social programs. (I put the word pay in quotes, since nearly every social program invented by the US costs more than it produces.) The results of such spending are liberal structures that cannot stand on their own unless propped up with more and more taxes. These structures, in turn, create dependency on government as more and more services that used to be provided by the private sector are taken over by government. The end result is a statist government that has the power to enslave its people, neatly wrapped up in the bonds of "social welfare."
To see how the dogma of spending works, here's an analogy:
Let's say we want to build a house. To start that project, a modern conservative would look for proven technologies to construct it, relying on past experience to guide the design based on proven principles. The conservative would get cost estimates and begin construction only when the project could be fully funded.
On the other hand, a modern liberal would start with the most innovative and forward looking architectural plans he could find, with no regard to the architect's past abilities, to sound construction principles, or especially to the costs. Estimates on the costs would not really matter, since the principle concern is on the "progressive" design, rather than based on any pragmatic values.
There are many ranchers, loggers and miners who feel strongly regarding the federal branch and their ownership of land within state borders. They maintain the federal branch does not hold a legitimate claim within a republic form of governance
Players in the dark. This was my initial thought when mainstream media organisations ‘went dark’ with a news embargo. It was as if the military-style operation the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) was mounting against Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy was of less interest than reporting the local weather. Players in the dark require a cloak but light is a disinfectant. There was to be no light shone on what was about to transpire.
But then, the people heard and the people came. This is good because when law and response is out of balance, it is the duty of citizens to challenge the law. A 67-year-old rancher had worked within the confines of his principled convictions through legal means. Available avenues for recourse were now limited in scope. This legal wrangling had been progressing through the court system for two decades. What happened next gutted my own visceral sense of justice.
Let us examine the players and look at events as they moved along at the Bundy ranch. Cliven Bundy: Mr Bundy hails from a ranching family with ancestral roots in the soil of Nevada, which go back to the mid-19th century. His family’s land use predates that of federal acquisition; the Bundy family began homesteading on the land in 1877. Since 1993, Mr Bundy has refused to pay grazing fees to the federal branch.
He has remained in current good standing on all fees and taxes due to the state of Nevada. He currently owes the federal branch approximately one million dollars in back taxes for grazing rights for his cattle.The Bureau of Land Management (BLM): like many of the federal alphabet agencies, the BLM has evolved into a powerful nebulous vortex of irresistible force. According to the department of the interior, the BLM
Environmental Protection Agency administrator Gina McCarthy has issued a warning to Republicans who continue to question the integrity of the agency’s scientific data: we’re coming for you.
McCarthy told an audience at the National Academy of Sciences on Monday morning the agency will go after a “small but vocal group of critics” who are arguing the EPA is using “secret science” to push costly clean air regulations.
“Those critics conjure up claims of EPA secret science — but it’s not really about EPA science or secrets. It’s about challenging the credibility of world renowned scientists and institutions like Harvard University and the American Cancer Society,” McCarthy said, according to Politico.
“It’s about claiming that research is secret if researchers protect confidential personal health data from those who are not qualified to analyze it — and won’t agree to protect it,” she added. “If EPA is being accused of secret science because we rely on real scientists to conduct research, and independent scientists to peer review it, and scientists who’ve spent a lifetime studying the science to reproduce it — then so be it.”
(continue reading at The Daily Caller)
No, the issue is that the science is not accurate, it is not settled, it is part of a bigger agenda....
These are the same people that tell us we only have 10 more years.
The same people that tell us cows must be re-engineered so that their farts don't destroy the atmosphere. (I think God did a find job.)
The same same people that tell us dogs and cats are contributing to climate change.
The same people that are pro-abortion, killing unborn children, ... the fewer humans, the less global warming.
The same people that fire professors who voice an opinion that global warming is a hoax.
Yet Conservatives and Republicans let them get away with this money-making, people-controlling, church of global warming hoax.
There is great good news for those, who like myself, were looking for a loophole to evade the unconstitutional, and unaffordable, Affordable Healthcare Act, AKA Obamacare. John Berlau and Michael Mayfield have provided an excellent run down at American Spectator in their Praying for an Obamacare Escape, Health care ministries offer IRS-free shelter (see here).
As to Obamacare (which crashed again today), well, I have a few questions about that:
• How could more people have healthcare, at a lower price yet there would be the same number (or fewer) doctors?
Obama promised that if you liked your doctor, you could keep your doctor (same number of doctors?) and if you liked your policy, you could keep your policy. Both lies of course, but how could that be? It could not. Doctors are quitting at high numbers. Also enrollment in medical schools, so I have heard but have no data, is down. Numbers of nurse practitioners is increasing. This is problematic, since many have no or little practical experience and certainly little training as compared to physicians. Yet, they will be treating patients as if they were doctors. Patients may not know the difference, they may think they are seeing a physician when in fact he/she is a nurse practitioner.
• Intimidation is a powerful force, and it is pretty clear that the general population of America is not that well educated thanks to public schools. BUT did anyone seriously believe that in a country where nearly everyone has a cell phone, and/or, internet access, plus nearly everyone capable of using either has a strong sense of privacy, that like lemmings the population of the United States would accept the violation of their privacy necessary to enroll in Obamacare?
Apparently the Obama administration thought so, evidence that this administration really, really doesn’t understand the American people and American culture.
• The government was going to get involved (as if the post-office, or anything else the government is involved in really works). Wouldn’t the government taking on one sixth of the economy be kind of expensive?
Billions has been spent, untold and unreported Billions, on the website, promotions by the government, payments to organizations to promote, and eventually insurance companies will be bailed out (even more than they already are?).
• The government, aka Obamacare, was going to do the enrolling, but you would still be going through some sort of health insurance company. Don’t insurance companies have costs? Doesn't this just add another layer (government) of costs?
Since the government has no 'insurance company', existing health insurance companies must be involved (until they go out of business or the government forces a national insurance on Americans). Costs? A financial burden has been placed on insurance companies that must change policies, update policies so they meet government standards - to what extent we really have no information.
• One party, the Democrat Party, had been trying to persuade the American people that they needed nationalized health care for more than 30 years. Why was their opposition so opposed?
•Nationalized health care has never worked in any country, and many who have it are trying to get rid of it. So why would it work in America?
• Finally, it is my understanding that the Constitution of the United States of America is the law of the land. When was there a repeal of 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 the people.
Seeing as the Constitution of the United States of America makes no mention of health care, federal taxes, education, nor any department or regulatory body related to these activities doesn’t that make Obamacare an illegal, i.e. unconstitutional, law?
For those who still believe that Obamacare is the law of the land, let me say just this: so was slavery.
Even though you put pretend everything is hunky-dory between us, it's not. The truth is, we're not happy, happy, happy with you.
Do you wonder why?
It's the economy, stupid!
The jobless, labor-less, non-recovery economic mess you've been "gonna" fix since 2008. (By the way: "going to" is two words, not one.)
We-the-People have had enough of your promises and your lies.
You promised to create jobs and rebuild our lack-luster economy. We believed you. But, today, 91.8 million able-to-work Americans sit idle. There are fewer jobs in our country than before you burst onto the scene promoting "hope and change." One thing for certain, our lives have changed, but not in the way we'd hoped. We never would have imagined you're promote a "non-work" ethic and encourage people to escape "job lock," sit on their butts, contemplate their navels, and live on welfare, food stamps, and subsidies to pay for crappy healthcare coverage.
Did you really believe We-the-People would be happy, happy, happy to pay higher taxes and support moochers who'd rather find their muse than find a job?
Are you seeing a happy face here?
You double pinky-promised Obamacare would create jobs and solve our unemployment problems. We believed you. But, thanks to your un-affordable healthcare monster, America has become a nation of part-time workers. You promised medical care would be more affordable. It isn't. You promised it would become available to everybody. It isn't. You promised the tiny "wrinkles" in the program (including the enrollment mess) would work their way out and everyone would be happy with the outcome. They haven't and we aren't!
Surprise, surprise, surprise. We-the-People are not happy about losing our doctors. We're not happy to pay more for prescriptions, deductibles, and premiums. We're not happy that Obamacare adds at least $1.3 Trillion dollars to the $6 Trillion dollar debt you've racked up since becoming president.
Did you really believe we would be happy, happy, happy to dump this debt onto the backs of our kids and grandkids?
Are you seeing a happy face here?
You promised to oh-so-carefully trim government spending. We believed you. Then you grabbed your machete and slashed right and left to shrink and undermine the moral of our military. You cut salaries, retirement benefits, closed Veteran's hospitals and commissaries, and reneged on veterans' desperately needed healthcare. You ordered budget cutbacks that have weakened our military at a time when our enemies are strengthening theirs.
Did you really believe we would be happy, happy, happy while you continue to pour money into the bottomless pit of Afghanistan, but don't support our brave warriors who fought there?
It was suggested heavily before the Sochi 2014 Olympics that it was going to be hit by terrorism, or somewhere in Russia, since the security machine of Russia was aimed directly at securing the Olympic site.
As we know now, AS OF THIS WRITING, nothing of a terror related incident has happened, anywhere in Russia. Are we to believe that the terrorists that have been at war with Russia for decades, and especially Putin’s Russia, in one form or another, would not strike now and lose that opportunity to deal the arrogant Putin a major black eye before the entire world? NOT A CHANCE!
The cost of the Olympics has been placed at 50 billion dollars… Did some of that money find its way to the terrorist evil that Putin swore to destroy?
Democrats smirk that the muscle of the Hispanic vote is going to make them a permanent majority and make the Republicans extinct, while much of the GOP consultant class pontificates that the 2012 election was a message for the Republican to embrace amnesty and to drop any vestige of conservatism.
The entire concept of lumping a very diverse group of people into a convenient label should be a warning sign in itself that something's amiss here.
That is, after all, the sort of identity politics more commonly practiced by Democrats. But using figures that come from Pew, the math tells us a different story altogether.
Hispanics are 9.07 percent of the current electorate (23.7 million voters). Of those, only 12 million or so of that 23.7 million voted in 2012 and they went for President Obama by 67.5 percent, a whopping eight million of the 12 million whom voted. That's just about one third of the entire Hispanic vote available.
In my universe, that means almost two thirds of the current Hispanic vote is either Republican or up for grabs.
It was hard to write this article because I was laughing so hard at the notion of Joe Biden as President. Yes, that is what “good ole Joe” is aiming for if recent reports are to be believed.
It has been reported at Breitbart.com and on CNN that Vice President Joe Biden intends to run for the office of President in 2016. He has been quoted as saying, “There may be reasons I don't run, but there's no obvious reason for me why I think I should not run." Having run for president in 1988 and 2008 and failed both times, doesn’t that tell you something? Obviously it doesn’t tell Joe Biden anything.Among the many reasons for Biden not to run, the most obvious reason is Hillary Clinton, and his whole “I may run” talk may be simply a gambit in case she decides not to run. But there are a great many other reasons (see below) I can think of to oppose his election (it would be great for the Republicans though), and not one single reason the Democrat Party would want him as their candidate (except of course they seem to love the destruction of America.)
There is a reason Joe Biden is considered Barack Obama’s insurance policy. Joe is a major disaster, and should anything happen to the President of the United States (POTUS), by law the Vice President automatically becomes president. No one should want to see that happen, no one, and perhaps that is why Obama has not yet been impeached.
In every election between 1970 and 2008 Joe Biden never received more than 65% of the vote in Delaware, a heavily Democrat state. If not the 2008 election, it is certain that the 2012 national election was won by cheating, and in both elections he occupied the second spot with a very charismatic half black candidate, thus insuring a win.
Here are a few of the reasons I call Joe Biden a disaster who should not run for president:
• Anyone who is willing to run for anything on the same ticket with egotistical, inexperienced, delusional narcissist thug is either desperate or naive (or cunning, as the historic black thing seems to float the boat of a lot of low information voters).But desperate, naive, or cunning are not good reasons to vote for the man.
• Anyone who believes that our current foreign policy is sound and based on the rational interest of the United States as Biden told CNN recently, is himself delusional or doesn’t know what “sound” or “rational” means.
• In the same CNN interview Biden claimed that he had spent his whole life on American foreign policy and “giving ordinary people a fightin’ chance to make it.” No Joe, ordinary people had a much better chance to make it prior to Obama, and prior to Lyndon Johnson, another American disaster of a president.
• Anyone who disparages America as often, crudely and inaccurately as Biden has done is not patriotic and has no common sense (note his recent comment on New York’s LaGuardia Airport which he referred to as feeling like “in some third world country.” Nice. LaGuardia is one of the busiest airports in the world). And is that a compliment or an insult to the airports of third world countries?
• He has supported: labor unions, Obamacare, “progressive” taxation (tax the rich), the EPA, public education, cap and trade, and dismantling the Constitution of the United States. None of which are good for the country or individual citizens.
•The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) has given him a 0% rating, while the National Rifle Association (NRA) has awarded him an F. So I guess abortion, euthanasia, and assisted suicide are okay with Joe, but not killing anyone (even in self-defense) with a gun.
• Joe seems to have a real problem connecting the dots. He recently asked, “Why did we lead the world economically for so long? We had the most modern infrastructure in the world.”
Could it be that our policies were based to some extent on the Constitution? Could it be that as we seek to implement the same kind of central planning, failed policies of the third world, we lose our cutting edge, become an economic follower, not a leader, and fall further and further behind? While much of the world tries to reject the tyranny of the central planning, socialist left, the United States seems to be seeking to be more like them rather than less like them. Just asking.
This blog is an exercise in the author's First Amendment Rights as pertaining to Free Speech with all the protections as afforded & granted by the Constitution of the United States of America.
The blog owner is not responsible for content of sites linking to this blog or sites that this blog links to.
Opinions quoted on this blog or left as comments on this blog, do not necessarily represent the opinions of the blog owner.
Opinions included in articles written by anyone other than the blog owner, do not necessarily represent the opinions of the blog owner.
If you are offended by anything written, quoted, excerpted, referenced, linked to ... on this blog: Then go somewhere else.