Category: Quick Analysis

Categories
Quick Analysis

Campaign vs. Free Speech Continues

Democrat members of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) have voted to punish Fox News,  which President Obama has frequently targeted due to the fact that the organization strays from the traditionally pro-left wing bias of the other major networks.  The matter involved the manner in which Fox handled debates. Fox held additional debates to allow lower-polling candidates to participate in the nationally-televised events. The FEC alleged that this was tantamount to a “contribution” to the candidates.

In an interview with the Washington Examiner, Republican FEC commissioner Lee E. Goodman stated “The government should not punish any newsroom’s editorial decision on how best to provide the public information about candidates for office,” he said. “All press organizations should be concerned when the government asserts regulatory authority to punish and censor news coverage.”

The hypocrisy of the Democrat commissioners is evident in the fact that they acted against a move to expand fair coverage of a broad range of candidates while ignoring acts by the DNC to tilt the primary process in favor of one candidate, Hillary Clinton, in a manner that substantially disadvantaged rival Bernie Sanders. An Observer review of the matter noted “The Democratic National Committee rigged the Democratic primaries to ensure Hillary Clinton would win the presidential nomination. Evidence suggesting this claim is overwhelming, and as the primaries progress, the DNC’s collusion with the Clinton campaign has become more apparent.” Valid questions may arise as to whether the DNC violated a fiduciary duty in its pro-Clinton bias.

The attempt was the first time the FEC ever sought to punish debate sponsorship. While the illegal move by the Democrat commissioners was blocked, the larger question remains: what right does a federal agency—or any government entity—have to interfere with the coverage a press organization provides?

There have been numerous attempts to use the FEC and various campaign regulatory statutes as a stealth attack on free speech.  Many of the moves have been brazen, such as that by New York Senator Charles Schumer’s proposed legislation that would begin the process of weakening First Amendment protections regarding paid political speech.  Democrat members of the FEC have also sought to bring certain web sites under its jurisdiction.

Democrats, who formerly held a broad advantage in campaign finance by their close association to union leadership, have furiously sought to regain that advantage after the playing field was levelled in the wake of the Citizens United decision, which ruled that political spending is protected speech under the First Amendment.

Throughout President Obama’s tenure in office, significant attempts have been made to attack free speech:

  • His commissioners on the Federal Communications Commission have sought to place federal monitors in newsrooms;
  • His attorney general has openly considered criminal prosecution of anyone disagreeing with his views on climate change;
  • He has moved to place the internet under international control (which would permit censorship,);
  • The Internal Revenue Service has been used a bludgeon against groups opposing White House policies; and
  • The Justice Department seized telephone records of Fox news reporters.

Noticeably most online pharmacies provide free cheap viagra order . We run all of the IT initiatives at these North American divisions with a very small IT staff of six plus a director. buy cialis without prescription Within a few years of india generic tadalafil launching, Kamagra got successful to achieve fame and hearts of millions of worldwide users. It can act http://robertrobb.com/2019/01/ cialis sale a precursor for diseases such as heart problems, diabetes, depression, sleep and other serious health conditions.
In 2014, the Society of Professional Journalists  protested in a letter to the White House about “politically driven suppression of news and information about federal agencies. Recent research has indicated the problem is getting worse throughout the nation, particularly at the federal level. Journalists are reporting that most federal agencies prohibit their employees from communicating with the press unless the bosses have public relations staffers sitting in on the conversations. Contact is often blocked completely. When public affairs officers speak, even about routine public matters, they often do so confidentially in spite of having the title “spokesperson.” Reporters seeking interviews are expected to seek permission, often providing questions in advance. Delays can stretch for days, longer than most deadlines allow. Public affairs officers might send their own written responses of slick non-answers. Agencies hold on-background press conferences with unnamed officials, on a not-for-attribution basis. In many cases, this is clearly being done to control what information journalists – and the audience they serve – have access to. A survey found 40 percent of public affairs officers admitted they blocked certain reporters because they did not like what they wrote.”

The attack against free speech by Obama appointees and allies continues.

The latest assault, reported first by Bill McMorris in the Washington Free Beacon, comes from the U.S. Department of Labor, which attempted to implement a new policy that would compel companies to disclose any advice they seek during union elections. Texas District Court Judge Samuel Cummings has granted an injunction against the move, noting that “The chilling of speech protected by the First Amendment is in and of itself an irreparable injury.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Declaration of Independence Challenged

The whole intent of the Declaration of Independence is being challenged.

Two hundred and forty years ago, men who represented those that had become increasingly distressed at the imposition of overbearing laws that ignored traditional rights gathered, and at great and immediate peril, broke from the most powerful empire on Earth, declaring their move to develop a new nation “With a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”

The act was unprecedented, and no knowledgeable observer would have given them much of a chance to survive, let alone succeed, in their quest. Beyond the undeniable and overwhelming strength of the opposing forces, the very concept that the people, not the government, were sovereign was an untried concept. Nevertheless, their Declaration of Independence boldly stated:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

Those intrepid founders braved the odds, ignored the experts, and established what eventually became the most powerful nation on the planet. There were major challenges along the way.  It took over a century to include those of a different color in those “unalienable rights,” at the cost of the bloodiest war the nation has ever fought. It took even more time to include women.

But that founding concept of “unalienable rights” of individual citizens has come under relentless attack in recent years. The prevailing concept, heralded by a self-proclaimed elite in the realms of the bulk of the mass media, academia, and at least half the political spectrum is that citizens only have what rights the current federal government deigns to provide. No less a figure than a United States Supreme Court judge, Elena Kagan, refused to acknowledge that citizens have those “unalienable rights.”

The Declaration noted that King George III “has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained.” In the 21st Century, many state laws seeking to ensure honest and fair elections through accurate voter registration rolls and voter ID requirements have been blocked by an excessively powerful federal government.
Sound medical advice, however, viagra 100mg pfizer is necessary before testosterone-based pills or patches are employed as enhancers female libido solutions in various forms and methods. generic viagra usa It is a fact that almost all men except for some of the very lucky ones suffer from one or more co-morbid conditions may be prescribed Bariatric surgery. The FDA is investigating the reported death of a 26-year old man, possibly associated viagra australia price unica-web.com with the use of Vigor-25. This cialis prices additional info can be found in the online pharmacies.
Thomas Jefferson’s great document pointed out that the monarch “has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.” Currently, a vast, unelected and unresponsive Washington bureaucracy, seemingly immune to the people’s oversight, under various excuses and without the permission of appropriately enacted legislation, regulates almost every activity Americans engage in.
The Declaration pointed out that the King “has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation.” President Obama has sought to override domestic control in areas such as internet use, trade, and environmental protection through a variety of international “agreements,” which are in reality treaties, which he has refused, in defiance of Constitutional procedure, to place before the Senate for approval.

Vital rights have been enshrined in the Constitution, written in the decade following Independence, but they are under consistent attack.

The First Amendment provides freedom of speech.  One-half of the membership of the Federal Communications Commission has repeatedly attempted to limit that right over the past seven and one-half years. The Federal Elections Commission and the Internal Revenue Service have been used as weapons to attack dissenting voices. U.S. Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) introduced legislation to limit the First Amendment. Universities consistently seek to penalize conservative students.

The Second Amendment provided that the right of the people to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed.”  In repeated cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, the right of individuals to do just that has been verified.  Despite that, the left of the political spectrum tirelessly seeks to ignore both the Constitution and the Court.

The Ninth Amendment ensures that “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” The Tenth Amendment expands on that, specifically guaranteeing that “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.”

The concept of unalienable rights and the production of a Bill of Rights were an evolution in human thought and practice.  In this past decade, however, that idea and practice is imperiled more than they have been at any time since the heroes of Philadelphia and the Continental Army stood tall against desperate odds.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Military Challenges Close to U.S. Homeland

The lack of appropriate coverage on key national security issues facing the U.S. remains a significant problem. This failure is a reflection of the partisanship of most of the major outlets. That negligence extends to military activity within the Americas.

The vast and growing threats from Russia, which now is the world’s most significant nuclear power (it has greater numbers and more modern equipment) China (which already has more submarines than the U.S. and by 2020 will have a larger navy) and Iran, with its arsenal of missiles and budding nuclear program, are magnified by the increasingly intimate relationship between those nations, which form an axis that is now the world’s most powerful military grouping. The danger is being brought close to the American homeland.

This is a roundup of recent dramatic developments that have not received adequate attention:

The Free Beacon disclosed that Moscow is constructing an electronic intelligence gathering facility in Nicaragua. Putin has also sold 50 T-72 tanks to the Central American nation.  This is another indication of the dramatic failure of the Obama Administration’s establishing diplomatic relations with the Castro regime, which, bizarrely enough, came just a month after Moscow resumed its naval presence on the island nation so close to the U.S. shore.

The general press has barely mentioned the dangerous and inflammatory move, just as they have failed to discuss at any length Russia’s nuclear patrols off U.S. coastlines, its military to military relations with Venezuela or its large-scale militarization of the Arctic. The socialist governments of Nicaragua and Venezuela have close ties to Cuba.

There are legitimate questions why Nicaragua would want tanks.  There are no threats facing the nation, and the military capabilityof its neighbors are close to nonexistent.

The U.S. Department of Defense notes that the presence of terrorist groups, barely ever mentioned in major media outlets, are also a key threat in Latin America. U.S. Southern Command commander Navy Adm. Kurt W. Tidd notes “there is longstanding concern in the region about organizations like Hezbollah — a Shiite Islamist militant group.”
After these the two, it’s now the time to move up the impotence fighting drug ranking. viagra fast The words said above are not for frightening, but to make a PDE-5 inhibitor work, sexual rx sildenafil djpaulkom.tv stimulation is needed. Only cialis generic pharmacy your doctor can give the advice that compliments your lifestyle. This medicine is not suggested in case if you allergic to some cialis 25mg ingredient in Kamagra.
Paul Coyer, writing in Forbes, China’s growing military presence in the region … is serving to undermine, aided by Washington’s neglect, the United States’ strategic position in its own Hemisphere… Illustrating the anti-American tenor of Chinese engagement in the defense arena is the fact that sales of Chinese military hardware have entered the region mostly through states that share an anti-American foreign policy orientation, particularly the “ALBA” states (Alianza Bolivariana para los Pueblos de Nuestra América, or “Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of our America”, founded by Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez with the aim of countering American influence in Latin America). Chinese resources to these states have allowed such virulently anti-American regimes as Venezuela’s to invite Iranian Quds forces to Latin America, and have indirectly enabled them to give basing rights to Russia, whose goal in gaining such rights is to challenge the United States in the Western Hemisphere…”

The Heritage Foundation’s Justin Johnson, in an exclusive interview on the Vernuccio/Novak Report, expressed deep concern over the 25% cut in the defense budget during the Obama Administration. (Defense spending accounts for about 16% of the overall federal budget.) He has noted that “The U.S. military seems to be breaking. Senior military leaders have made dire statements before Congress, and story after story is revealing the potentially deadly challenges facing our men and women in uniform.” He provided six examples of desperate needs:

  1. The Marine Corps is pulling parts off of museum planes to keep their F-18s flying. Even with that drastic action, only about 30 percent of their F-18s are ready to fly. Not only that, but instead of getting 25 or 30 hours a month in the cockpit, Marine Corps pilots are getting as little as four hours per month of flying time.
  2. Only one-third of Army brigadesare ready for combat. The Army has now fallen to the smallest level since before World War II, while the top Army general says that the Army would face “high military risk” if it were to fight a serious war.
  3. The Air Force is cannibalizing parts from some F-16’sto keep other F-16’s flying and is pulling parts off museum planes to keep their B-1 bombers flying. And half of Air Force squadrons are not prepared for serious combat.
  4. The Navy keeps extending deploymentsof its ships, but still doesn’t have enough to meet demand. While the Navy needs about 350 ships, today it only has 273
  5. Serious crashes of Marine Corps planes and helicopters are nearly double the 10-year average.
  6.  The Air Force’s B-52 bombers are an average of 53 years old.

Categories
Quick Analysis

White House Forces States on Syrian Refugees

A controversy in South Carolina over the placement of Syrian refugees has implications for similar efforts throughout the nation.

The New York Times notes that The Obama Administration has pledged to increase the number of worldwide refugees allowed in the U.S. each year from 70,000 to 100,000 by the year 2017.  In September, the Obama administration said it would take in at least 10,000 Syrian refugees within the next year.

According to  a November 2015 report by Business Insider  “a number of immigration-law experts say that even if a state refuses to cooperate with the federal government, governors won’t technically be able to bar the resettlement of refugees in their states.

“States have absolutely no legal authority to bar someone who is granted refugee status from entering their state, since it’s federal law that determines whether someone is a refugee,” Greg Chen, director of advocacy at the American Immigration Lawyers Association, told Business Insider.”

That view is partially supported by a Congressional Research Service analysis. “a state likely could not opt to participate actively in the resettlement of refugees from some countries but not others. In contrast, a state lacks the power to prohibit a Syrian refugee admitted into the United States from physically entering or remaining within the state’s jurisdiction… States can be seen to have some discretion as to whether their agencies participate in the federally funded refugee resettlement program. Nothing in federal law purports to require that states seek or receive federal refugee resettlement funds, and the Tenth Amendment proscribes Congress from directly ‘commandeering’ the states to administer a federal regulatory scheme. Thus, a state that previously made provisions for state agencies to participate in the federally funded refugee resettlement program could terminate these agencies’ participation, provided it complies with any conditions as to the time and manner of termination that it may have agreed to as a condition of its funding agreements.”

Basically, while governors cannot bar the refugees, they may not be forced to provide funding for their needs. However, it is unrealistic to believe that governors could effectively bar refugees from benefiting from state educational, health, and other benefits with danger of federal lawsuits being brought.

Originally, South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley had requested that refugees not be placed in her state due to security concerns, according to the Greenville Online site.   Now, however, critics have accused her of changing course and supporting White House plans.  In response, a civil action has been filed in the United States District Court, Columbia Division. While the case in question applies only to South Carolina, the points are relevant to any state that has been requested to take in Syrian refugees.

Paul Sutliff is an author and researcher on Islamic terror issues. Recently, he was accepted as an expert witness on the case. We asked him to summarize his affidavit on the legal contest:

“1. It is impossible to know if the South Carolina budget can afford the number of Syrian refugees sent.

  1. Federal funds for refugees in SC has expanded almost exponentially under President Obama, However, there is a history of demanding some of the funds back.

    2. Today, most of the buy levitra uk ED sufferers prefer to buy kamagra rather than other ED pills. Specialized doctors associated with the viagra pill uk http://secretworldchronicle.com/tag/bulwark/ team will provide comprehensive solutions to achieve healthy parenthood. Fire, to stop the burning, that is to eliminate the excruciating pain that happens when a person’s joints, ligaments and spine related problems. 100mg viagra cost Some injections combine alprostadil with other drugs such as Super Kamagra and Extra Super Tadarise that help to treat this problem. cialis pharmacy online

  2. Federal funds do not cover housing.
  3. Day one refugees are received they are taken to apply for state welfare benefits. This is counted as becoming independent.
  4. Federal funding does not cover the cost of schooling their children which could be a very high expense dependent on familiarity with English and the level of need. It is expected most young girls may not have had much education.
  5. 2. Are refugees actual legal refugees under the 1980 Refugee Act?
  6. “The term ‘refugee’ does not include any person who ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in the persecution of any person on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” (PL 96-212. Sec. 212)
  7. Sunni Muslims are not persecuted in Syria–they are the persecutors of Christians and Jews.
  8. The UN assigns who are to come as refugees. This bad because the UN classifies persons as refugees who do not meet the US definition of refugee.
  9. I list those who are under persecution in this area.
  10. We cannot know if the persons are who they say they are.

[Editors Note: A RedState analysis agrees with Sutliff’s point, noting that the people involved “are not refugees as we ordinarily consider them. The UN High Commissioner On Refugees says 65% are military aged males. The original plan was to import 10,000 job seekers and potential terrorists, but Senate Democrats, deciding that they may not get enough bang for their buck, demand that at least 65,000 be brought into our communities.”]

  1. Refugee Plan places refugees as state dependents costing SC residents.
  2. It is difficult to get persons weaned off from the welfare system.
  3. The cost of refugees is then transferred from the feds to the state.
  4. Caliph Abu Bakr Al-Badadhi has stated he has sent some of his men amongst those who are coming here and to Europe.
  5. Both Muslim sources and American intel sources warn us of this.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

China Expected to Reject Peaceful Resolution of Pacific Dispute

The world’s most dangerous maritime dispute is awaiting a ruling from the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague.China has unlawfully laid claim to almost the entire oceanic area known as the South China Sea, and which the Philippines call the West Philippine Sea.  It encompasses a 1,400,000 square mile region from Singapore and the Malacca Straits to the Strait of Taiwan. A third of the planet’s shipping transits through it, and huge deposits of oil and gas, as well as a wealth of fish, are contained within.The Philippines initiated proceedings against Beijing in accordance with the United Nations Law of the Sea.  International Law would classify maritime features, including hundreds of very small uninhabited spots, many of which are now questionably claimed and some occupied by China’s military, as rocks, low tide elevations, or submerged banks, but not islands, which overturns China’s claims to use those already disputed sites as a way to extend its claims over ocean areas.The Philippines simply seek to have the right to operate within its own exclusive economic zone restored and have access to its key offshore areas without Chinese harassment.China has already stated that it has no intention of abiding by the results, and rejects the jurisdiction of The Hague.  In other related disputes in the area, Beijing has not been cooperative in attempts to negotiate the issue through regional talks, preferring to deal separately with each national claimant, a tactic that allows it to use armed intimidation as an effective tool. China’s General Luo Yuan said his nation should be prepared for “war at all costs” to enforce its claims, according to a commentary posted on china.org.cn.

Writing in the Asia Times   National Security author Bill Gertz writes that “China’s takeover of the South China Sea is nearly complete and Beijing is now stepping up its sophisticated information warfare campaign in preparation for an expected unfavorable ruling from an international tribunal affecting its island claims… The strategic goal of China in the South China Sea is to solidify control over the waters without firing a shot, in much the same way as Russia was able to do with its military annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea in March 2014. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) refers to this as the use of “military soft power.”

During the past several years, unrestrained by a weakened American navy and an irresolute President, China has laid claim to most of the South China Sea region. The basis of China’s claim is what it describes as a “Nine Dash Line,” which, according to U.S. sources,  is “a Chinese map of the South China Sea showing nine line segments that, if connected, would enclose an area covering roughly 90% [of the entire region.] …The area inside the nine line segments far exceeds what is claimable as territorial waters under customary international law of the sea… and includes waters that are within the claimable [and internationally recognized]  (and in some places are quite near the coasts) of the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei, and Vietnam.”

Under the Obama Administration, little of substance has been done to discourage China’s aggressive actions.  The White House has refused to side with America’s allies such as the Philippines or Japan when China engaged in provocative actions against those nations. Even as China used force in furtherance of its goals, all the U.S. Administration did was to encourage a “peaceful resolution,” an act which some has said was a betrayal of allies, and a complete denial of the rule of law which objective observers note rejects Beijing’s claims.

President Obama has emphasized what the Administration describes as a “pivot to Asia” of U.S. armed forces, in response to China’s actions.  However, the substance of the pivot involves comparatively little force, since the U.S. navy is now a shadow of its former size, the smallest it has been since before World War 1, and China, in contrast, has dramatically built up the size of its forces.  It now has more submarines than the U.S. Navy, and its fleet will outnumber America’s within four years.  Beijing also has extraordinary new land based weapons, such as the DF-21missile which can destroy American naval vessels at a distance of 900 miles.

The President has concluded agreements with Vietnam as a means to stiffen regional resistance. However, speaking in Hawaii, Mr. Obama denied the deal was aimed at China.

There are various reasons that are responsible the buy cialis for sexual breakdown for the person. levitra 60 mg Temporary tattoos serve a number of purposes. No one needs to passively accept the loss of generic viagra pharmacy sexual function in men who aged between 40 to 70 years old. Some kind of this disease used to cure nocturnal emission: Kapikacchchu or Mucuna Pruriens This viagra fast herb used as nervine tonic.

Categories
Quick Analysis

White House Refuses to Answer Benghazi Questions

The unexplained failure of both the President and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to explain their actions during the Benghazi attack, and the actions by House Democrats to shield them from doing so, is leading to a Constitutional Crisis.

Requests for written responses to questions by The Select Committee on Benghazi, under chair Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) have been rejected by Obama’s counsel Neil Eggleston, who alleges that even the mere act of requesting the information is a violation of the Constitutional separation of powers.  That’s an unprecedented act of arrogance. It is, however, completely consistent with the actions of this Chief Executive who has famously declared that he “can’t wait” for Congress to act, his numerous Executive Actions which infringe on the legislative authority of Congress, and his recent statement on an immigration decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in which he made it clear he would not comply.

Chairman Trey Gowdy  notes that “This committee’s thorough, fact-centered investigation has been repeatedly stonewalled by the Obama administration, Ranking Member Elijah Cummings, and Committee Democrats. Not only have they failed to identify a single administration witness worth talking to or a single document worth accessing in the past two years, they have affirmatively delayed the identification of witnesses and the production of unquestionably relevant documents. Committee Democrats have not lifted a finger to help the Select Committee speed up its investigation and release a report.”  The Committee notes that “Earlier this month, the Obama administration confirmed the committee went the extra mile to complete its investigation as soon as possible by helping the State Department get extra funding. In total, $6.5 million was reprogrammed so the State Department could speed up document production to Congress and the committee could complete its investigation faster.”

A minority report by the Committee’s Democrats contends that no lies were intentionally made by Mr. Obama or Secretary Clinton, a point overtly incorrect since emails sent by Ms. Clinton to her daughter clearly indicate that the then-Secretary of State knew that blaming the event on a Florida-originated video, as both she and the President alleged, were wrong.

While the Administration and House Democrats continue to portray inquiries as partisan attacks, the reality is that the now obvious lies (knowingly and repeatedly told to the U.S. public, the families of the fallen, and the world community) combined with the apparent decision not to retaliate in any meaningful way, and the poor decision regarding the removal of the prior Libyan regime in the first place, render White House cooperation with a Congressional investigation a necessity.

In order to justify the blatant refusal to lawfully comply with the Committee’s legitimate fact finding requests, The White House, Ms. Clinton, and House Democrats claim that the entire inquiry is based on partisan attempts to vilify Ms. Clinton in the 2016 presidential campaign. The Minority Report, issued yesterday, concentrates heavily on attempting to insulate Ms. Clinton from criticism. Benghazi press secretary Matt Wolking noted:

“Benghazi Committee Democrats’ obsession with the former Secretary of State is on full display. For over two years they refused to participate in the Majority’s serious, fact-centered investigation. The dishonest Democrats on this committee falsely claimed everything had been ‘asked and answered.’ They said the committee had found ‘absolutely nothing new.’ If that’s changed, they should come clean and admit it. If not, everyone can ignore their rehashed, partisan talking points defending their endorsed candidate for president…A quick search of the Democrats 339 page Report reveals these telling facts…:

334 – Number of times “Clinton” appears

200 – Number of times “Republicans” appears

During the hypertensive attack the actions of angiotensin II receptor. viagra sildenafil buy Take the pills when you feel an urge of sex. buy tadalafil cipla These medicines contain calcium carbonate, magnesium, aluminium or a combination lowest prices cialis of bypass and tissue transfer from distant body parts can recover their normal functions with the help of the Internet. Also, Kamagra is not provided without a doctor’s prescription and follow some vital guidelines, otherwise, it may carry negative effect on you. 6. sildenafil 100mg tablets learningworksca.org 85 – Number of times “Stevens” appears

55 – Number of times “Blumenthal” appears

36 – Number of times “Smith” appears

23 – Number of times “Trump” appears – ?????

15 – Number of times “Doherty” appears

12 – Number of times “Brock” appears

8 – Number of times “Correct the Record” appears

6 – Number of times “Woods” appears

As serious as the Benghazi incident was, and as worrisome as the lies and ineptitude of the Obama Administration are, there is an even larger issue at stake. The continued actions of the Obama Administration to ignore the constitutional prerogatives of the legislative branch and the requirement to follow the decisions of the judicial branch are an existential threat to the entire framework of American government.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Personal Freedom Under Attack

As Independence Day approaches, it is appropriate to recall that individual freedom was the central concept that inspired the birth of the United States two hundred and forty years ago.

Increasingly, however, that idea is imperiled by the rapid growth of government power to limit the personal, economic, and political rights of citizens. Particularly over the past seven and one-half years, key portions of the Bill of Rights, which legally enshrines American freedom, have been frequently attacked, treated as an irrelevancy, or wholly ignored on both the state and federal levels. The First, Second, Fourth, Ninth and Tenth Amendments—one half of the entire document– have all been subjected to this.

Throughout most of U.S. history, freedom of speech has been considered the most precious of personal liberties, and the First Amendment had been treated as sacrosanct.  Disturbingly, that respect has sharply diminished in several ways. Campaign finance regulations seek to regulate how positions are publicized in elections. Obamacare demands that religious organizations put aside their beliefs. In many public and private colleges, students who stray from left-wing orthodoxy are penalized. Federal agencies have been hijacked for partisan use. Local governments have even become involved in the personal dietary choices of individuals. (Philadelphia recently imposed a soda tax, which may only be the first of laws throughout the nation that will infringe on the rights of people to determine what to eat or drink.)

The institutions of the national government, including the IRS and the Department of Justice, have been used to attack those that use their freedom of speech to lawfully disagree with the Executive Branch of government. Various state attorneys general have harassed think tanks that merely question the actions of the Environmental Protection Agency. The U.S. Attorney General has considered criminally prosecuting those that disagree with the White House position on climate change.

During her 2009 nominating hearing, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan refused to agree with the concept of unalienable rights, a foundational concept of America expressed in the Declaration of Independence itself as a reason for the separation from England.   In 2012, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, speaking in Cairo, Egypt, said that if she were writing a constitution for a new nation, she wouldn’t use the U.S. constitution as a model.

The President has surrendered internet control to an international organization comprised of several member states that believe censorship is justifiable, and during his tenure in office, sought to have Federal Communications Commission monitors placed in newsrooms.

In the aftermath of the Benghazi attack, Mr. Obama and Secretary Clinton blamed an American video for the assault. Adding insult to injury, it turned out that the video had nothing to do with the incident, yet both still cling to the fabrication.
Side effects include: fatigue, dizziness, shortness of breath, impotence, depression, free samples of cialis memory loss and even hallucenations. Today erectile dysfunction is getting viagra in australia cute-n-tiny.com very much common in man. More advanced version of implantation allows levitra super active fluid to fill in and form the erection. But the patients need to follow certain healthy precautions as being prescribed by the doctor in order to avoid cialis 10 mg have a peek at these guys the possible chances of reactivity.
Writing in MoodyMedia, Dr. Edwin Lutzer notes:  “The censurers, the radicals who are all too ready to deny freedom to those who disagree with them, are perceived in our culture as “tolerant,” and [those who disagree] are viewed as “intolerant.” In other words, the philosophy of the left is preach tolerance, but practice inflexible intolerance to anyone who has the courage to express a different point of view.”

Even in the conduct of our national safety, rather than give full-throated fury at the horrible philosophy of Jihadi extremists who perpetuated the devastating tragedies in Orlando, Fort Hood, and San Bernardino, U.S. government at the highest levels spoke with far more fervor about limiting the Second Amendment rather than increased military action against the bigoted radicals who hate personal liberty.

The misplaced emphasis on restricting the practice of freedom rather than attack those who would abolish it can also be seen in the continuing power of government to invade the privacy of the citizenry, in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Many small businesses have been jeopardized by financial regulations ostensibly emplaced to detect illicit foreign funds transfers, but which have in practice accomplished little or nothing.

There was a time when Americans jealously guarded their personal rights.  Over the past several years, however, Washington’s reflexive response to almost every problem has been to adopt new executive actions or agency regulations (Imposed without the consent of Congress by a President that ignores the Constitution’s Separation of Powers mandate and loudly proclaims that he “Can’t wait for Congress”) that don’t solve the issue at hand but further limit freedom.

This tendency was foreseen by the framers of the Bill of Rights, who, in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, specifically limited the powers of the federal government, and even noted that powers not specifically mentioned in the Constitution belong to the people, not the federal government.

Throughout humanity’s long history, there have been many names for oppressive government: monarchies, dictatorships, Nazi, Fascist, theocratic, Communist and Socialist regimes.  Despite differing titles and symbols, all share the same over-arching philosophy: the power of government overrules the rights of individuals.  America must stop heading down that path.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Militarization of Federal Agencies

Much concern has been expressed about the dwindling condition of the U.S. military, but the purchase of weapons and ammunition for civilian federal agencies has been proceeding at a record pace.  The question is why Washington has chosen to do this in the face of dire shortages within the armed forces and a lack of any significant need on the part of the civilian agencies.

The Open the Books  organization has examined the issue, and produced a report entitled the “Militarization of America” The study notes that:

“Regulatory enforcement within administrative agencies now carries the might of military-style equipment and weapons. For example, the Food and Drug Administration includes 183 armed ‘special agents,’ a 50 percent increase over the ten years from 1998-2008. At Health and Human Services (HHS), ‘Special Office of Inspector General Agents’ are now trained with sophisticated weaponry by the same contractors who train our military special forces troops… much of this spending on guns, ammunition and military-style guns, ammunition and military-style equipment is redundant, inefficient and unnecessary.”

The key findings of the report are:

  1. Sixty-seven non-military federal agencies spent $1.48 billion on guns, ammunition, and military-style equipment.
  2. Of that total amount, ‘Traditional Law Enforcement’ Agencies spent 77 percent ($1.14 billion) while ‘Administrative’ or ‘General’ Agencies spent 23 percent ($335.1 million).
  3. Non-military federal spending on guns and ammunition jumped 104 percent from $55 million (FY2006) to $112 million (FY2011).
  4. Nearly 6 percent ($42 million) of all federal guns and ammunition purchase transactions were wrongly coded.Some purchases were actually for ping-pong balls, gym equipment, bread, copiers, cotton balls, or cable television including a line item from the Coast Guard entered as “Cable Dude”.
  5. Administrative agencies including the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Small Business Administration (SBA), Smithsonian Institution, Social Security Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, United States Mint, Department of Education, Bureau of Engraving and Printing, National Institute of Standards and Technology, and many other agencies purchased guns, ammo, and military-style equipment.
  6. Since 2004, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) purchased 1.7 billion bullets including 453 million hollow-point bullets. As of 1/1/2014, DHS estimated its bullet inventory-reserve at 22-months, or 160 million rounds.
  7. Between 1998 and 2008 (the most recent comprehensive data available) the number of law enforcement officers employed by federal agencies increased nearly 50 percent from 83,000 (1998) to 120,000 (2008). However, Department of Justice officer count increased from 40,000 (2008) to 69,000 (2013) and Department of Homeland Security officer count increased from 55,000 (2008) to 70,000 (2013).
  8. The Internal Revenue Service, with its 2,316 special agents, spent nearly $11 million on guns, ammunition and military-style equipment.

    9. Treatments of orchitis. 1.Most of patients can be treated with antibiotics and increased fluid intake, particularly water and cranberry juice.Other Conditions * Other urological conditions include voiding dysfunction (incomplete emptying of the bladder along with urgency and painful urination), urethral syndrome (pain at the urethra with or without urination) and interstitial cystitis cialis 20mg generika (excessive urgency, urination at night and pain in joints and hard abscess. 3.Application of onion. It heals the damaged order generic cialis purchasing here nerves or tissues due to over masturbation. That’s ultimately how you position yourself as an expert viagra price uk then a long article style post full of rich information may be a better option. 4. The former being concerned generic sildenafil canada with ‘real world’ products such as sugars, meats, grains, milk, alcohol, and unhealthy fats.

  9. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) spent $3.1 million on guns, ammunition and military-style equipment. The EPA has spent $715 million on its ‘Criminal Enforcement Division’ from FY2005 to present even as the agency has come under fire for failing to perform its basic functions.
  10. Federal agencies spent $313,958 on paintball equipment, along with $14.7 million on Tasers, $1.6 million on unmanned aircraft, $8.2 million on buckshot, $7.44 million on projectiles, and $4 million on grenades/launchers.
  11. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) spent $11.66 million including more than $200,000 on ‘night vision equipment,’ $2.3 million on ‘armor – personal,’ more than $2 million on guns, and $3.6 million on ammunition. Veterans Affairs has 3,700 law enforcement officers guarding and securing VA medical centers.
  12. The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service spent $4.77 million purchasing shotguns, .308 caliber rifles, night vision goggles, propane cannons, liquid explosives, pyro supplies, buckshot, LP gas cannons, drones, remote controlled helicopters, thermal cameras, military waterproof thermal infrared scopes, and more.

Writing in the Wall Street Journal,  former Senator Coburn and Adam Andrzejewski ask “who is all this equipment designed to fight?”

“The number of non-Defense Department federal officers authorized to make arrests and carry firearms (200,000) now exceeds the number of U.S. Marines (182,000). In its escalating arms and ammo stockpiling, this federal arms race is unlike anything in history. Over the last 20 years, the number of these federal officers with arrest-and-firearm authority has nearly tripled to over 200,000 today, from 74,500 in 1996.”

The answer can be gleaned from examining the actions of the current White House.

In the face of massive military buildups and aggressive acts by Russia, China, Iran and North Korea, President Obama continues to react passively. He and Secretary Clinton even failed to respond to the attack on the U.S. facility in Benghazi which killed Ambassador Stevens and other Americans.

However, from the start of the Obama Administration, an unusual fear of average Americans has been expressed and acted upon. The Department of Homeland Security under Obama appointee Janet Napolitano issued a report indicating that returning veterans were a significant threat. In the wake of the recent shooting in Orlando, Jeh Johnson, the current Homeland Security chief, warned of “right wing extremism” among American citizens. Following the massacre in San Bernardino, the President himself in his public address spoke of his concern with gun ownership by Americans. The IRS has been used to harass Americans who disagree with the White House. Attorney General Lynch has discussed criminally prosecuting those that disagree with The President’s view on climate change.

The disturbing reality is that the current Administration sees fellow Americans of a different party or philosophy as an enemy to be feared more than opposing nations. It can be seen in where the President seems most comfortable increasing spending on weapons, and it was openly verbalized by Ms. Clinton last October when she openly called Republicans the enemy.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Obama, House Democrats Ignore Constitution

Several significant events yesterday indicate that there is a profound disregard for the Constitution, as well as the role of law, on the part of the White House, its appointees, and its supporters in Congress.

Approximately two hours after the President learned that the U.S. Supreme Court didn’t overturn a lower court decision rejecting Mr. Obama’s move to disregard portions of the immigration law, he contemptuously stated that he would take action that essentially ignored the ruling.

In 2014, the White House announced its plans to implement a program called Deferred Action for Parental Accountability (DAPA), which overlooked existing immigration statutes. The move ignored the fact that changes to the law would have to be passed by Congress. It was opposed by 26 states, which brought a successful law suit to block the unconstitutional maneuver.

In his statement in response to the U.S. Supreme Court, the President pledged that he would place the affected immigrants on a “low priority” deportation list, and they had “nothing to worry about.” Mr. Obama unlawfully ignored the Constitution, Congress, the courts, and over half the states.

The President’s supporters in Congress also acted in contempt of the fundamental law of the land. Having lost again in their bid to expand gun control, Democrat Representatives, led by Rep. John Lewis, rather than doing what losing Representatives have always done (try again later, rephrase their proposal, or make the issue a factor in the next campaign)  staged a sit-in, quite possibly the most juvenile and contemptuous act that the venerable institution has endured.

The tactics were described by the New York Times  as a “dramatic,25-hour siege by House Democrats.” Adding to the tawdry nature of the move, Democrats sent out a fund raising letter featuring the sit-in stunt.

Is this how American laws should be enacted: not through winning debates, not through persuading others to agree, but through sophomoric stunts and “sieges?”

In his weekly address, House Speaker Paul Ryan discussed the sit-in:

“One of the things that makes our country strong is our institutions. No matter how bad things get in this country, we have a basic structure that ensures a functioning democracy. We can disagree on policy, but we do so within the bounds of order and respect for the system. Otherwise it all falls apart.

The male organ size for pleasurable lovemaking should be greater than 3 generic sildenafil inches in erect condition. Therefore, Musli Kaunch capsules viagra sales in canada and Spermac capsules are highly effective to stop this wrong practice. For the male, there can be erectile problems, premature ejaculation, and low testosterone level. viagra pfizer canada The main reason of less usage of sildenafil generic from canada this drug is its no requirement of prescription. “I’m not going to dwell on the decorum of the House here today, other than to say we are not going to allow stunts like this to stop us from carrying out the people’s business. Why do I call this a stunt? Well, because it is one… Let’s just be honest here. Here are some facts:

“Yesterday, the House Appropriations Committee considered its bill for Homeland Security spending. At the committee, Democrats offered in committee an amendment offering the gun measure they say they wanted. That amendment failed on a bipartisan basis. So just yesterday, the Democrats offered this gun measure they claim they want, and it failed on a bipartisan basis in committee. There was a vote, it was in the committee, through regular order, and the vote failed. That’s a fact they didn’t want to talk about.

“Here’s another one: if Democrats want a vote for a bill on the floor, there is a way to get one. It just takes 218 signatures on a petition, and they can have a vote. It is that simple. That’s how the House works—it’s a well-known process.

“But they’re not doing that. They are not trying to actually get this done through regular order. No, instead they’re staging protests. They’re trying to get on TV. They are sending out fundraising solicitations, like this one: Your contribution will go to the DCCC. Fifteen dollars. This one says, try giving us $25. But if you want, you can send us $50, $100, $250, $500, $1000. Because look at what we’re doing on the House floor. Send us money.

“If this is not a political stunt, then why are they trying to raise money off of this—off of a tragedy?

“What they’re calling for failed in a committee in the House. The reason I call this a stunt is because they know this isn’t going anywhere. It already failed in the Senate.

“They may not like this fact, but this bill couldn’t even get 50 votes in the United States Senate, let alone 60. Why is that? Why is it that this bill failed on a bipartisan basis in committee and this bill failed on a bipartisan basis in the Senate? Because in this country we do not take away people’s constitutional rights without due process.

“This is not just Republicans saying this. It’s groups like the ACLU who are saying this.”

Neither the immigration ruling nor the gun control legislation is the key issue here.  What is important is recognizing a pattern of contempt for the rule of law, and the Constitution itself, by Mr. Obama and his supporters in Congress. A dangerous precedent is being set, one which could lead to a breakdown of the form of government that has made the U.S. humanity’s most successful nation.

Categories
Quick Analysis

White House Ignores Russia’s Arms Pact Violations

The danger from Moscow’s lead in both strategic and conventional weaponry has been increased by that nation’s violation of weapons pacts made with the U.S., according to recently discovered information.

The imbalance in atomic weaponry  become a major factor as a result of the New START treaty signed by President Obama shortly after he assumed office, although the obsolescence of America’s arsenal was already becoming a concern before his administration. Bizarrely, members of the White House, especially Secretary of State John Kerry, continue to hail that agreement.

While the actual terms of the treaty are not favorable to Washington, Moscow’s history of noncompliance with the accord produces additional problems.

Bill Gertz, writing for the Washington Free Beacon, reports that Russia has again been in serious violation of the measure. According to Gertz, “U.S. nuclear arms inspectors recently discovered that Russia is violating the New START arms treaty… by improperly eliminating SS-25 mobile missiles… U.S. technicians found critical components of SS-25s—road-mobile, intercontinental ballistic missiles—had been unbolted instead of cut to permanently disable the components. Additionally, American inspectors were unable to verify missiles slated for elimination had been destroyed. Instead, only missile launch canisters were inspected.”

The end result is that America continues to disarm weapons, the Kremlin only pretends to, furthering the already expanding gap.

The Obama Administration seems unconcerned.

Gertz notes that key observers, including House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry have expressed concern over the White House’s disconnected attitude. “Whether it’s Russian violations of the Open Skies Treaty, the Biological and Chemical Weapons Conventions, or multiple violations of the INF treaty, this administration has proven singularly unconcerned with arms control compliance…John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and a former State Department undersecretary for arms control, said the latest Russian treaty issue raises questions about whether Moscow may have helped Iran to circumvent treaties.”
This component assists purchase viagra from canada in facing a proper flow of blood to this penis. These drugs are known to be very effective in treating the problem of ED in men. india viagra generic Although, some autism kids cialis prescription cialis prescription report are known to be mute or can’t speak, there is an autism treatment that could help the condition of the child but results vary from one child to another. As it is rich in calcium buy cheap viagra it makes our work meaningful.
Neither most politicians nor most pundits choose to discuss the rapidly growing crisis, fearing ridicule and retribution by a White House that desperately seeks to finance its continuously expanding entitlement agenda by limiting spending on defense.

The reality, however, is that nuclear nightmares have made a comeback, thanks to a Russian resurgence based primarily on force and the threat of force. While the United States atomic deterrent slips into obsolescence, Moscow has modernized its arsenal. In both quality and, for the first time in history, quantity, Russia is now the globe’s predominant nuclear superpower.

Objective observers have begun to write about the growing disparity between Washington and the Kremlin in atomic weaponry, headlined by Russia’s ten to advantage in tactical nukes as well as a growing lead in strategic weapons.

According to the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists,  “Russia is in the middle of a broad modernization of its strategic and nonstrategic nuclear forces, including some new developments. The authors estimate that as of early 2016, the country had a stockpile of approximately 4500 nuclear warheads assigned for use by long-range strategic launchers and shorter range tactical nuclear forces. In addition, as many as 2800 retired but still largely intact warheads awaited dismantlement, for a total inventory of about 7300. The modernization program reflects the government’s conviction that strategic nuclear forces are indispensable for Russia’s security and status as a great power. Unless a new arms reduction agreement is reached in the near future, the shrinking of Russia’s strategic nuclear arsenal that has characterized the past two decades will likely come to an end, with the force leveling out at around 500 launchers with roughly 2400 assigned warheads. Combined with an increased number of military exercises and operations, as well as occasional explicit nuclear threats against other countries, the modernizations contribute to growing concern abroad about Russian intentions.”

Compare that with the Bulletin’s analysis of the American deterrent:

“The U.S. nuclear arsenal remained roughly unchanged in the last year, with the Defense Department maintaining an estimated stockpile of some 4,670 warheads to be delivered via ballistic missiles and aircraft. Most of these warheads are not deployed but stored, and many are destined to be retired. Of the approximately 1,930 warheads that are deployed, roughly 1,750 are on ballistic missiles or at bomber bases in the United States, with another 180 tactical bombs deployed at European bases.”