Just so you know, Governor, it is far from incendiary to call illegal immigrants what they are; illegal immigrants.
Actually, beyond my disgust at your condescending scolding of Guy Benson in the interview, I am offended you seek to welcome those whose initial act within our borders was to violate our laws; a slap in the face to those whose perseverance gave them legal entry following the laws, proudly assimilating into our nation.
Many illegal immigrants here are on the public dole, participating in overwhelming our already bankrupt nation. Yes, the immigration system is broken, alarmingly so, but, just so you know, we are a nation of laws, and without adherence to those laws, we are not a nation at all.
As the open borders advocate that you are, maybe that suits you just fine, but not us in red state America, who value legal immigrants who demonstrate appreciation for the history, traditions and principles of our founding.
I recognize many are unable to cast a ballot for Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump, but we never considered Johnson a viable candidate and his defense of illegal immigrants and open borders alone should eliminate him from consideration of anyone wanting to protect the sovereignty of America.
Showing posts with label Common Law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Common Law. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 7, 2016
Tuesday, July 5, 2016
In The Face of Tyranny
It is official.
Under this administration, we have become a nation of men rather than a nation of laws, an egregious divergence from our founding.
FBI Director James Comey laid out a case of gross negligence and "extremely careless handling of very sensitive, highly classified information" by Mrs. Clinton.
Yet citing a lack of intent, which is not relevant in this case, Comey "viewed that no charges are appropriate." Charges are completely appropriate, as "Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation" as National Review's Andy McCarthy noted.
Comey's action in this matter, although not unexpected, is regretful. Thought to be a man of character by most, we can extend appreciation to Sen. Rand Paul, R:KY, the lone dissenter as James Comey confirmed for FBI post.
Obviously, there is one set of laws for the intellectual elites, and one for the rest of us,
In the face of tyranny, this must change.
First week of November would work by voting in Donald Trump for President.
Under this administration, we have become a nation of men rather than a nation of laws, an egregious divergence from our founding.
FBI Director James Comey laid out a case of gross negligence and "extremely careless handling of very sensitive, highly classified information" by Mrs. Clinton.
Yet citing a lack of intent, which is not relevant in this case, Comey "viewed that no charges are appropriate." Charges are completely appropriate, as "Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation" as National Review's Andy McCarthy noted.
Comey's action in this matter, although not unexpected, is regretful. Thought to be a man of character by most, we can extend appreciation to Sen. Rand Paul, R:KY, the lone dissenter as James Comey confirmed for FBI post.
Obviously, there is one set of laws for the intellectual elites, and one for the rest of us,
In the face of tyranny, this must change.
First week of November would work by voting in Donald Trump for President.
Thursday, May 5, 2016
Tale of the Tape
Perhaps no longer.
The evidence to indict Hillary Clinton is overwhelming.
We are in the middle of a process of electing our next president, and for Hillary Clinton to be leading the nomination for the Democrat party speaks volumes about the character of those within that party.
But, what does it say about our country when, for political expediency, those placed to uphold the laws of this nation fail to do the right thing?
Its says that our county appears lost, and it gives reason why so many Americans have turned to the perceived insurgent candidacies of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, however flawed they without question they are.
If Hillary Clinton remain without indictment, you will see support for Donald Trump (assuming Sanders fails to surpass Clinton in delegates) strengthen dramatically.
Perhaps we have been spending too much time with Otis Campbell, but we foresee the following.
Clinton is either indicted or steps aside to avoid disgrace for the Democratic Party. Joe Biden is tapped to run though Obama's influence. The GOP remains in disarray, with party leaders putting forth a third party independent run as many will not embrace Trump. Votes are split far and wide, and Biden sneaks it out, ready to do the bidding of President Obama in continuing the evil transformation of the United States of America.
Do you have your pitchfork?
Thursday, April 7, 2016
Tax Fraud as a Systematic Transfer of Wealth
MUST SEE VIDEO REPORT:
FOX News moderator Chris Wallace chastised Donald Trump for citing government waste as significant in a recent debate. If you only knew how correct Trump is.
As reported by "The Gateway Pundit", "A staggering 80% of Latino illegal immigrant families in California are living in poverty and need government assistance.
The Obama administration wants to open to door to millions more." According to the video report, illegal immigrants, through fraud associated with their ITIN numbers, are using the IRS as a cash register; with your money!
This theft must be stopped Monday morning at 8AM; but don't hold your breath.
The original report noted this was happening through a tax loophole; however, with the video going viral, Forbes.com looked into it and found something even more disturbing. They proclaim it "tax fraud".
Forbes attempted to identify who the culprits are, but left out the elephant in the rook: the corrupt IRS.
The IRS is too busy auditing Tea Party organizations and the private citizens who support them. No doubt that the direction of the Obama administration, who is orchestrating and conducting a force invasion of our nation by illegal immigrants, the IRS has been told to look the other way.
The funneling of money, in most cases blatantly illegal, is simply considered by the administration as reparations, an organized systematic transfer of wealth. President Nixon was facing impeachment for threatening to utilize the IRS as a weapon against political opponents, but for some reason (our lawless Attorneys General), Obama can do it impunity.
This to must stop immediately, but it will not until we elect an individual who places the law above the men.
For the record, if elected, Donald Trump will build the wall and Ted Cruz will seek to "end the political targeting, simplify the tax code, and abolish the IRS as we know it."
FOX News moderator Chris Wallace chastised Donald Trump for citing government waste as significant in a recent debate. If you only knew how correct Trump is.
As reported by "The Gateway Pundit", "A staggering 80% of Latino illegal immigrant families in California are living in poverty and need government assistance.
The Obama administration wants to open to door to millions more." According to the video report, illegal immigrants, through fraud associated with their ITIN numbers, are using the IRS as a cash register; with your money!
This theft must be stopped Monday morning at 8AM; but don't hold your breath.
The original report noted this was happening through a tax loophole; however, with the video going viral, Forbes.com looked into it and found something even more disturbing. They proclaim it "tax fraud".
Forbes attempted to identify who the culprits are, but left out the elephant in the rook: the corrupt IRS.
The IRS is too busy auditing Tea Party organizations and the private citizens who support them. No doubt that the direction of the Obama administration, who is orchestrating and conducting a force invasion of our nation by illegal immigrants, the IRS has been told to look the other way.
The funneling of money, in most cases blatantly illegal, is simply considered by the administration as reparations, an organized systematic transfer of wealth. President Nixon was facing impeachment for threatening to utilize the IRS as a weapon against political opponents, but for some reason (our lawless Attorneys General), Obama can do it impunity.
This to must stop immediately, but it will not until we elect an individual who places the law above the men.
Tuesday, August 25, 2015
It Does Matter
Hillary Clinton, whose email saga of lies and distortion placing the safety and welfare of America in danger continues to engage in Chinese water torture on her fledgling campaign, got into a testy exchange with Ed Henry of FOX News the other day.
As usual, Ms. Clinton was dripping in arrogance, displaying the warmth of a dead fish all while laser beaming Ed Henry with condescension. It was quite a spectacle. Take a listen:
It appears Ms. Clinton's emails were not secure, and among the items that potentially got out to those with ill intentions against America was the activities and location of one Chris Stevens, our Ambassador who was murdered in Benghazi. Did Ms. Clinton's lackadaisical treatment of information presented her result in the death of our Ambassador and fellow service men who attempted to rescue him? Sure looks to be the case.
Ms. Clinton, as we have noted many times, is a progressive socialist who thinks America as founded is the problem, and as she learned well under her mentor Saul Alinksy, she would seek the reaching of her goals by any means necessary, legal or not.
In listening to the exchange with Henry, something caught my ear. I had recently read a very interesting piece by a guy I had previously never heard of, and found it extremely compelling. We posted some analysis of the piece on our Facebook page at BAHL Revere.
The piece was titled The Disturbing Line Hillary Clinton Quoted from Her Favorite Book—and Why It Matters. It asked the following question: Is the presidential hopeful living out a theme from Dostoevsky?
The author of the piece has really discovered something extraordinary. He noted a previous interview with Hillary Clinton where "five words leapt of the screen, where they almost verbatim mirrored a key phrase in Dostoesky's book The Brothers Karamazov."
The phrase was "Everything I did was legally permitted." This phrase also turned up in the exchange with Henry, which you can go back note 0:33 seconds in. She made it a point of emphasis.
In the article, brilliantly put together by Matthew Becklo, he noted the following correlation which comes in a passage described as being about the connection between morality and a belief in immorality:
…were mankind’s belief in its immortality to be destroyed, not only love but also any living power to continue the life of the world would at once dry up in it. Not only that, but then nothing would be immoral any longer, everything would be permitted, even anthropophagy. And even that is not all: he ended with the assertion that for every separate person, like ourselves for instance, who believes neither in God nor in his own immortality, the moral law of nature ought to change immediately into the exact opposite of the former religious law, and that egoism, even to the point of evildoing, should not only be permitted to man but should be acknowledged as the necessary, the most reasonable, and all but the noblest result of his situation. (Emphasis added by the author Matthew Becklo)
This certainly implies Ms. Clinton has no belief in immortality and therefore concludes everything would be permitted. That would explain why Ms. Clinton does not feel obligated to be constrained by the laws you and I must adhere to, or feel compelled to obey any of the laws of governance in America, inclusive of laws she participated in legislating.
Enter the email scandal, where she acted with any means necessary to accomplish her objectives and deemed her actions throughout were legally permitted. Got it, thanks to Becklo.
Our language is being rewritten by the progressives. Seemingly innocuous phrases have meaningful and dangerous connotations few if any actually comprehend. Matthew Becklo caught Hillary, and it indeed does matter, as everything is not permitted.
Keep your ears open!
As usual, Ms. Clinton was dripping in arrogance, displaying the warmth of a dead fish all while laser beaming Ed Henry with condescension. It was quite a spectacle. Take a listen:
It appears Ms. Clinton's emails were not secure, and among the items that potentially got out to those with ill intentions against America was the activities and location of one Chris Stevens, our Ambassador who was murdered in Benghazi. Did Ms. Clinton's lackadaisical treatment of information presented her result in the death of our Ambassador and fellow service men who attempted to rescue him? Sure looks to be the case.
Ms. Clinton, as we have noted many times, is a progressive socialist who thinks America as founded is the problem, and as she learned well under her mentor Saul Alinksy, she would seek the reaching of her goals by any means necessary, legal or not.
In listening to the exchange with Henry, something caught my ear. I had recently read a very interesting piece by a guy I had previously never heard of, and found it extremely compelling. We posted some analysis of the piece on our Facebook page at BAHL Revere.
The piece was titled The Disturbing Line Hillary Clinton Quoted from Her Favorite Book—and Why It Matters. It asked the following question: Is the presidential hopeful living out a theme from Dostoevsky?
The author of the piece has really discovered something extraordinary. He noted a previous interview with Hillary Clinton where "five words leapt of the screen, where they almost verbatim mirrored a key phrase in Dostoesky's book The Brothers Karamazov."
The phrase was "Everything I did was legally permitted." This phrase also turned up in the exchange with Henry, which you can go back note 0:33 seconds in. She made it a point of emphasis.
In the article, brilliantly put together by Matthew Becklo, he noted the following correlation which comes in a passage described as being about the connection between morality and a belief in immorality:
…were mankind’s belief in its immortality to be destroyed, not only love but also any living power to continue the life of the world would at once dry up in it. Not only that, but then nothing would be immoral any longer, everything would be permitted, even anthropophagy. And even that is not all: he ended with the assertion that for every separate person, like ourselves for instance, who believes neither in God nor in his own immortality, the moral law of nature ought to change immediately into the exact opposite of the former religious law, and that egoism, even to the point of evildoing, should not only be permitted to man but should be acknowledged as the necessary, the most reasonable, and all but the noblest result of his situation. (Emphasis added by the author Matthew Becklo)
This certainly implies Ms. Clinton has no belief in immortality and therefore concludes everything would be permitted. That would explain why Ms. Clinton does not feel obligated to be constrained by the laws you and I must adhere to, or feel compelled to obey any of the laws of governance in America, inclusive of laws she participated in legislating.
Enter the email scandal, where she acted with any means necessary to accomplish her objectives and deemed her actions throughout were legally permitted. Got it, thanks to Becklo.
Our language is being rewritten by the progressives. Seemingly innocuous phrases have meaningful and dangerous connotations few if any actually comprehend. Matthew Becklo caught Hillary, and it indeed does matter, as everything is not permitted.
Keep your ears open!
Monday, July 6, 2015
Progressives Use LGBT Movement to Control Citizenry
With ISIS running roughshod and terror in the air, and with an economy that looks fair with manipulated data but is incredibly fragile and on the brink of collapse, in recent weeks, issues surrounding those not heterosexual have dominated the news. With age old common law and Christian values whipsawed from every angle, many of us feel we're climbing through the pages of Dr. Seuss's Inside Outside Upside Down.
The reasons for this embrace of the LGBT movement are plentiful; however, most notably,progressive activists in the United States want to use these kinds of laws to destroy free speech in America. Hate speech is defined as speech that offends, threatens or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, or other traits. There you have it, if your religion finds homosexuality offensive, and you think that, you have no doubt offended somebody, and this day and age, that somebody could force your incarceration.
I'll go ahead an offend someone, as I believe marriage is between a man and a woman, with same sex couples free to seek civil unions, allowing them equal rights under the law but not necessarily in the church.
Moving forward now, all legal forms must be altered, and for students filling out forms it will move to parent name rather than the name of the mother and father, diminishing the value of the traditional family. If churches fail to embrace the LGBT crowd, from performing marriages to hiring staff, even if this goes against traditional beliefs of the church, the churches risk losing their tax exempt status. Calls for the stripping of the tax exempt status have already begun.
Christian churches are officially under attack now, and will be set up to be in violation; however, you will not see such effort being made at any mosques. Islam is being championed; left alone, however, Christianity is deemed unworthy by these elites as traditional America must be discredited and destroyed for the new socialist utopia of one world governance to take root.
Hate speech can fly vigorously aimed at those who don't share admiration for the LGBT community, with labels of bigotry and racism tossed about with little ramification. Free speech will be punished in the court of public affairs if it is deemed inappropriate by the wizards of doublespeak.
If you own a private company, you will be declared ineligible for consideration for government contracts or dealings with government agencies if you are deemed to profess discrimination against the gay community, or for that matter, illegal immigrants.
If it were only gay marriage, that might be one thing.
However, the issue is never the issue with the left, and the floodgates of rewriting common law and destroying valued traditions with escalating government control is running roughshod, issuing punitive damage to those who dissent.
The LGBT crowd are useful idiots, utilized as a political mechanism by the progressive movement to gain control over the citizenry. With the help of a rogue Supreme Court who deems themselves able to operate outside of the Constitution, these doors have just been kicked wide open.
There have been attacks on bakeries, who due to their religious faith appropriately determined they would be unable to make a cake for a gay wedding. A similar issue arose for a pizza parlor in the middle of nowhere that got attacked from all points across the globe. Quite a disturbance for such a limited amount of people.
Then, there is the sad tale of former Olympian champion Bruce Jenner, who has determined he is actually a woman and has begun making his transition, now referred to as Caitlyn. I think he has major psychological issues, but I hope he finds peace.
These issues have not come to the forefront by accident. Nobody was shocked the media was poised to promptly react as each of these issues became public knowledge. Obama did not read about it in the news.
In fact, I deem the whole thing orchestrated.
I recall something I found interesting while watching the Celebrity Apprentice in 2012, noting that a disproportional amount of the charities designated by the contestants were associated with some arm of the LGBT movement. We posted here on BAHL Revere about this the time.
Vice President Joe Biden supposedly misspoke regarding Obama being a supporter of gay marriage, but that was not the case, simply presented that was to open the door for Obama, no doubt a man of principle, to change course once the wind changed direction allowing political expediency. Same with Hillary Clinton, who for decades stood tall for marriage between a man and woman, citing it as a "bedrock principle".
These folks are liars. They do not give a damn about gay people, although seemingly non-credible reports indicated both may be bisexual. Both Obama and Clinton are using the LGBT movement, which again, represents approximately five percent of the population with a full stretch of the figures, to further their political ambitions.
And now, with the Supreme Court recently ruling in favor of same sex marriage, the slippery slope begins a frantic struggle for friction.
As famed economist and Hoover Institution Senior Fellow Thomas Sowell so eloquently stated recently stated in the supreme editorial pages of Investors Business Daily, "When any branch of government can exercise powers not authorized by either statutes or the Constitution, "we the people" are no longer free citizens but subjects, and our "public servants" are really our public masters. And America is no longer America. The freedom for which whole generations of Americans have fought and died is gradually but increasingly being taken away from us with smooth and slippery words".
And now, with the Supreme Court recently ruling in favor of same sex marriage, the slippery slope begins a frantic struggle for friction.
As famed economist and Hoover Institution Senior Fellow Thomas Sowell so eloquently stated recently stated in the supreme editorial pages of Investors Business Daily, "When any branch of government can exercise powers not authorized by either statutes or the Constitution, "we the people" are no longer free citizens but subjects, and our "public servants" are really our public masters. And America is no longer America. The freedom for which whole generations of Americans have fought and died is gradually but increasingly being taken away from us with smooth and slippery words".
The reasons for this embrace of the LGBT movement are plentiful; however, most notably,progressive activists in the United States want to use these kinds of laws to destroy free speech in America. Hate speech is defined as speech that offends, threatens or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, or other traits. There you have it, if your religion finds homosexuality offensive, and you think that, you have no doubt offended somebody, and this day and age, that somebody could force your incarceration.
I'll go ahead an offend someone, as I believe marriage is between a man and a woman, with same sex couples free to seek civil unions, allowing them equal rights under the law but not necessarily in the church.
Moving forward now, all legal forms must be altered, and for students filling out forms it will move to parent name rather than the name of the mother and father, diminishing the value of the traditional family. If churches fail to embrace the LGBT crowd, from performing marriages to hiring staff, even if this goes against traditional beliefs of the church, the churches risk losing their tax exempt status. Calls for the stripping of the tax exempt status have already begun.
Christian churches are officially under attack now, and will be set up to be in violation; however, you will not see such effort being made at any mosques. Islam is being championed; left alone, however, Christianity is deemed unworthy by these elites as traditional America must be discredited and destroyed for the new socialist utopia of one world governance to take root.
Hate speech can fly vigorously aimed at those who don't share admiration for the LGBT community, with labels of bigotry and racism tossed about with little ramification. Free speech will be punished in the court of public affairs if it is deemed inappropriate by the wizards of doublespeak.
If you own a private company, you will be declared ineligible for consideration for government contracts or dealings with government agencies if you are deemed to profess discrimination against the gay community, or for that matter, illegal immigrants.
If it were only gay marriage, that might be one thing.
However, the issue is never the issue with the left, and the floodgates of rewriting common law and destroying valued traditions with escalating government control is running roughshod, issuing punitive damage to those who dissent.
The LGBT crowd are useful idiots, utilized as a political mechanism by the progressive movement to gain control over the citizenry. With the help of a rogue Supreme Court who deems themselves able to operate outside of the Constitution, these doors have just been kicked wide open.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
