Meanwhile, just today, President Obama flew from Washington D.C. to Las Vegas to give a speech on immigration reform. Per the Weekly Standard, his trip cost taxpayers a $1.6 million or $182,000 per hour of flight on Air Force One. According to the transcript at the Chicago Sun Times, President Obama’s immigration speech was 3,079 words and applause instances, meaning that President Obama’s speech cost the taxpayers just under $520 per word and applause. Including the instances of applause is being generous to the President, as if those weren’t included, his speech would have cost taxpayers $527 per word. The transcript also notes that President Obama’s speech lasted 25 minutes. Using 2012 spending levels as a reference, the federal government spent $170 million during the President’s speech, at a rate of roughly $6.8 million per minute.
Those numbers won’t be found outside of the conservative blogosphere, however. The legacy media are more concerned with how much money a woman, who currently does hold publicly office, made for appearing a privately owned television station than they are with how much money the President’s junkets and astronomical spending are costing the taxpayers.
“Cautious, careful people, always casting about to preserve their reputation and social standing, never can bring about a reform. Those who are really in earnest must be willing to be anything or nothing in the world’s estimation, and publicly and privately, in season and out, avow their sympathy with despised and persecuted ideas and their advocates, and bear the consequences.” – Susan B. Anthony
Governor Palin’s decision not to renew her contract at Fox News has received a lot of discussion from the punditry as expected. Some have pretentiously referred to her as a fad. Others wrote her political obituary (just as they did when she stepped aside from the governorship), casting everything in past tense as if she just plans ride off into the aurora bourealis on a snow machine. Of course, Governor Palin isn’t the political equivalent of pogs or Shirley MaClaine, who has had more lives than most cats. Rumors of her political death are greatly exaggerated, which is just how she wants it. As Governor Palin said to Breitbart News on Saturday, ” we delight in those who underestimate us”.
Throughout her career, Governor Palin, just like Susan B. Anthony, has cared far more about reform than reputation. When she was on the city council, she took a stand by voting against a regulation for garbage pickup because it would have unethically steered business to the garbage company owned by other council member. Who was that council member? Nick Carney–the very person who encouraged Palin to run for city council. Reform was more important to her than social standing.
As an oil and gas regulator in the Murkowski administration, she stood up to Randy Ruedrich, a fellow member of the Alaska Oil and Gas Commission and the head of the Alaska Republican Party, when he did party business on state time and was engaged in other unethical behavior. Palin did all she could do with in her power to expose the corruption, but Governor Murkowski did not act. The only thing Palin felt she could do in good conscience was resign. She gave up a six figure job and risked her political future.Again, reform was more important to her than social standing.
Later, as Governor and following her time as the GOP vice presidential candidate, she was hit with a barrage of frivolous ethics complaints. Defending these complaints cost her family hundreds of thousands of dollars, her state upwards of two million dollars, and her staff eighty percent of their time. Governor Palin thought that remaining governor stood in the way of reform for Alaska, as the money and time suck of ethics complaints stymied progress for her state. Rather than bitterly clinging to power, Governor Palin resigned with the full understanding that it may negatively affect her political future.
Following her resignation, she used multiple media platforms to spread her conservative message. She became a commentator at FoxNews, endorsed and campaigned for reform minded candidates,spoke at Tea Party rallies and used social media outlets to voice her ideas and thoughts on issues ranging from energy independence to foreign policy to government ethics. She used somewhat unconventional outlets, like TLC’s Sarah Palin’s Alaska and appearances Conan O’Brien, to reach new groups and affect the culture beyond the traditional media used in politics. For much of this, she was mocked. Governor Palin takes to the her Facebook page far more often than the pages of the Wall Street Journal, although she does that on occasion too. However, using such a platform was poo pooed as unserious. In reality, it was a revolutionary way for politics to enter the social media, as people were exposed to energy policy right along side new pictures of their grand children and news of their favorite music artist’s tours. Her travelogue show exposed new people to Alaska’s vast resources and the application of a strong work ethic. Again, reforming the method of marketing conservatism in culture and new media was more important to her than her social standing within a party holding steadfast to a world where white papers, focus groups, and power point presentations are seen as the means to influencing the populace.
Governor Palin spoke unabashedly as a commentator at FoxNews. However, as an outlet primarily seen as the “Republican” channel, commenting at Fox became “preaching to the choir”. As she noted on Saturday, Governor Palin’s message of reform is taking on the “big government enablers” on our side and using opportunities to broaden “the message of the beauty of freedom and the imperative of defending our republic and restoring this most exceptional nation.” Interestingly and possibly purposefully, news of Governor Palin’s departure from Fox and her next steps came as the same time as the National Review held a summit, complete with participation from Joe Scarborough, to discuss the future of conservatism–i.e. the very preaching to the choir that she indicated that conservatives need to move away from. For all this, the mainstream media, many of whom try to cast FoxNews as inconsequential, are now trying to portray Governor Palin as irrelevant without Fox. Yet, if one is truly irrelevant, they usually do not require hundreds of news stories deeming them so. She is so “irrelevant” that a publicly funded university did a study to determine how much money she was paid per word at Fox. There still hasn’t been a study to determine how much money the federal government spends/borrows per word that President Obama reads off of a teleprompter.
Governor Palin’s next step of reform is to expand her previous steps of taking on the party establishment and continuing to broaden the message of conservatism. Reform is in her nature–whether is policy reform inside elected office or conservative messaging reform and supporting reform minded candidates outside of office. As she said in channeling Revolutionary war hero John Paul Jones, she has not yet begun to fight.
If anyone can fire up the base and shake things up in Washington, it is Sarah. If anyone can breathe fresh air back into the lifeless and suffocating Establishment GOP, it is Sarah. A Sarahless GOP is a hopeless GOP!
I have complete faith in Sarah Palin because not only does she have the brightest, most passionate, loyal and well-informed army of supporters in the Republican Party, but the Truth is on her side. She also has impeccable political instincts, and her words today were music to my ears: “We haven’t yet begun tofight”.
The GOP has a rigid and unimaginative mindset, and many voters are in denial about what is happening in our party. Our work is definitely cut out for us, but what better way to spend our time and sacrifice than for the cause of our lifetime?
Late Saturday afternoon, Stephen K. Bannon’s recent interview with Sarah Palin was published via Breitbart News:
The Governor has been at the forefront of the fight against the Permanent Political Class and, as such, inspired Peter Schweizer and myself in our worklast night on Fox News with Sean Hannity’s special “Boomtown.” We consider ourselves honored at Breitbart News to have her share with us her thoughts on the road ahead in this exclusive Q & A.
1. What’s next for you?
Short term: I encourage others to step out in faith, jump out of the comfort zone, and broaden our reach as believers in American exceptionalism. That means broadening our audience. I’m taking my own advice here as I free up opportunities to share more broadly the message of the beauty of freedom and the imperative of defending our republic and restoring this most exceptional nation. We can’t just preach to the choir; the message of liberty and true hope must be understood by a larger audience.
Focus on the 2014 election is also imperative. It’s going to be like 2010, but this time around we need to shake up the GOP machine that tries to orchestrate away too much of the will of constitutional conservatives who don’t give a hoot how they do it in DC. DC is out of touch, obviously. Voices on the right like Mark Levin, Rush, and the writers here at Breitbart have come out strongly against the “go along to get along” politicians who wave the white flag before the battle even begins. We’re not going to be able to advance the cause of limited constitutional government unless we deal with these big government enablers on our side. And this all ties into the problem of crony capitalism and the permanent political class in the Beltway. We need to consistently take them on election after election – ever vigilant.
As far as long-term plans, the door is wide open. I know the country needs more truth-telling in the media, and I’m willing to do that.
[…]
2. Where do you think the country stands at the beginning of the President’s 2nd term?
Before the November election I wrote that we all know what Obama’s second term will look like because we’ve seen his first. I said: “We know what we will get from a second Obama term. We will get the same failed policies. We will get Obamacare locked into law. We will get a debt crisis. We will get more inflation and higher gas prices. We will get tax increases. We will get fewer jobs. We will get more small businesses collapsing under the weight of higher taxes and unfair regulation. We will get more corruption and crony capitalism favoring the Obama administration’s friends. We will get less domestic energy development and increased dependence on terrorist sponsoring foreign regimes for our energy needs. We will get a ‘blame America first’ foreign policy that bows to our enemies and snubs our friends like Israel and leaves America and the world less safe. We will get less opportunity and security for ourselves and for our children.”
Predicting the future has never been easier because here we are! Already we see higher taxes, a stagnant economy, the same inflationary monetary policies, Obamacare looming like a dark cloud over small businesses, yet another demand for “debt ceiling” increases, continued stonewalling about the tragic Benghazi attacks, a Secretary of Defense nominee who has a history of being antagonistic to our ally Israel, and the attack on our Second Amendment rights by an administration that has no respect for the Constitution or the separation of powers.
*****
Please watch this clip about Stephen K. Bannon’s next documentary film, “Boomtown”, with Peter Schweizer. It is truly eye-opening and shocking.
I want you to take a good look at this picture. Does it make you feel proud and confident, or does it make you cringe and want to scream in frustration? Is this the face of a someone who represents you? Someone who looks healthy? Strong? Vibrant? Self-assured? It is not for me. One look at the body language of these two and all I think of is, insecurity issues compounded by a partner with co-dependent ones. It does not take a psychology degree to see that something is wrong. Looking at this picture makes me feel embarrassed for our party; however, John Boehner is the Speaker, and this is the face of the lame, weak and failed politics of not ours, but the Bush’s GOP establishment party.
What could be more pathetic than the look on John Boehner’s face? The fact that representatives on our side voted to renew his Speakership on January 3rd.
Voters, it’s time to get tough, and with some love, gather some courage to do something about the unhealthy state our party is in. This picture should make you angry, not sad.
Although John Boehner answers to Obama, he shows contempt for us. Although he is afraid of Obama’s shadow, he has much bravado for the Conservatives in his base. It is lamentable and unacceptable that he continue to be rewarded for failing us. John Boehner was losing support for his speakership and had to resort to bribing representatives with favors in exchange for votes to retain his position, so it cannot be that hard to do. We do not have to deal with him.
John Boehner must be pressured to RESIGN!
Just this week, at the Inaugural speech, the president suggested “to the people” that Congress wasn’t needed to pass an agenda on their behalf. He had also expressed through a spokesman, that his goal was to annihilate the Republican party, which John Boehner has openly admitted to. This picture of Mr. Wuss and Mrs. Wuss-Enabler is not a joke. I did not post it to poke fun at him or their marriage. Mocking or making jokes will not change anything. What must change is our refusal to accept this dysfunctional situation we are in, where those who fail to represent us are rewarded, time and time again.
This crisis of leadership requires intervention. Let’s face it, we are leaderless. John Boehner’s character flaws and style of leadership have produced positive results for our President and his policies, not ours, which is why Obama loves him. Is that who we should accept as Speaker? How much more punishment can we take before it is too late and even more damage will have been done? Speak up, Conservatives, or forever you will have to hold your peace! At least let your position be known ~ I am against John Boehner because he is against me.
One more picture to bring the point home. We can be the enablers, or are we can be the heroes who show John Boehner the door to have a healthy leadership again. There is no excuse for him to continue as Speaker. None. A lot is at stake, and it’s up to you to MAKE it happen. Don’t forget, it’s OUR party, not Theirs.
Intransigence
Even if his supporters don’t like it, I will continue to insist that Marco Rubio is carrying water for Jeb Bush. I am not seeking to single out, mock or trash Senator Rubio. I still like even love him because he is a fellow Cuban-American, but I know that his greatest weakness is his blind ambition, and it is being exploited by both the left and right on our side who continue to think, in all their self-unawareness, that they (via him) will have a winning message for 2016. It is beyond frustrating to witness.
Immigration Reform is not the answer to our problems. Hispanics do not vote on Immigration. It is a myth that needs to be dispelled. Charismatic leaders with a winning Conservative message are
The Establishment’s party does not care about the fact that constituents do not want Amnesty. Rubio’s case looks strong, but is quite weak. He has to resort to posting positive comments from the list below to push a phony buzz about it. This ill-conceived notion that Immigration Reform will bring the party back comes from Jeb Bush’s concerns about us not being the party of the white guy. I hate to be repetitive, but he is behind all this, and Rubio is his useful idiot, as well as the useful tool for the left who wants us to be divided. The party is pushing Immigration Reform as the answer to our problems the same way they pushed the mantra that Romney was “the most electable” in 2012. On the one hand, it is laughable; but again, the stakes are so high, that we cannot afford to joke about this. It is who and what we are dealing with.
Here is Marco Rubio’s impressive list (not) of supporters of his plan:
1. Representative Paul Ryan: “Senator Rubio Is Exactly Right On The Need To Fix Our Broken Immigration System. I Support The Principles He’s Outlined (Paul Ryan will do or say anything to get along in Washington.)
2. James Pethokoukisfrom American Enterprise Institute: “But The Rubio Plan Is A Thoughtful, Solid Start, And I Look Forward To Hearing More Details, Including The Parts Concerning Legal Immigration, High-Skill And Otherwise.” (Who is he?)
3. Grover NorquistOf The Americans For Tax Reform Told Right Turn It Was ‘A Good Step In The Right Direction. (Norquist is no friend of Conservatives. He has links to the Muslim Brotherhood and also wants to make Puerto Rico a fifty-first state.)
4. American Conservative Union’s Al Cardenas: “Kudos to @MarcoRubio for leading on immigration reform w/ conservative principles. Now the hard work begins. Don’t let libs get ahead.” Remember Al Cardenas was the one pushing for Jeb Bush to be drafted at last year’s CPAC.
5. (My personal favorites): Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly, both whose comments were taken out of context.
Do you know who is not on the list? You and I. Why is the humble opinion of those who voted for him not on there? Eat Your Peas, GOP Voters! We know what is best for you. Just sit down and shut up! Rubio does not answer to us, but to the Establishment leaders of our paty who helped groom him to be the “Rising Star” and future of the Republican Party? It reminds me of this clip in the movie “City Hall” (please don’t miss it!)
Intolerance
Speaking of eating your peas, and insecurities.. I want to be clear: I do not want to see the party split, but we are dealing with a GOP mentality that it can do no wrong: dense, self-unaware and intolerant.
The Republican “Insecurity” Council
is so insecure and intolerant that I was banned from posting these comments on their wall: “GOP and BUSH Inc. IS AGAINST We-the-PEOPLE. Enough of the touchy-feely Bushy wishy-washy RINO-y distractions. Get With the PROGRAM! It’s not about personality, it’s about MESSAGE and the Message has not been delivered ~ conservative principles, not “reform conservatism” or “compassionate conservatism” or “immigration reform”. None of those terms are in the Constitution or Bill of Rights. We need GOP Reform! Wake UP GOP Voters! Your party is against you.”
The fact is, the GOP is against We-the-People. It is the party of Bush, Inc., and it has not been listening to us for 25 years. It’s time to mercilessly let them know their party is over. Step aside! We’re here. We’re not going anywhere.
I shall end my activist commentary with this question: Do you want to continue being the party of WUSS or be respected and feared as the party of FIGHT? It’s up to you. I know who leads me. I feel his spirit in me, and I hope you will, too. We must speak up. We must tell the truth relentlessly. We must have each others’ backs. We are in the belly of the beast already so there’s no turning back. It’s time to confront our enemy and overcome our fears. Self-preserve. Stay healthy. Be patient. But, above all..
Today marks the forty years since the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade which legalized abortion. Since then, millions of unborn children have been aborted. In its most recent fiscal year report, Planned Parenthood noted it had aborted 333, 964 unborn babies–a record year. That’s like wiping the city of St. Louis off the map.
When Thomas Jefferson penned the Declaration of Independence, he noted that we were endowed my our Creator with certain inalienable rights–life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Life precludes all the others. If we deny someone that first right, how can they have liberty? How can they purse happiness? Abortion is the ultimate form of prejudice–where personal convenience is pre-judged as more important than another person’s existence and those inalienable rights are denied.
For all the pearl clutching pro-choice women do regarding having men interfering with their “health” care choices, they seem to forget that it was nine men who decided Roe v. Wade. Men are allowed to make “health” care decisions for these pro-choice women, so long as it is convenient for them. Sadly, we live in a world where health care legislation indicates that a twenty-six year old is considered a child for insurance purposes, but baby in her eleventh week in her mother’s womb is not considered a child.
So much of politics is purportedly “for the children”, yet when we deny them the right to life, what does any other legislation matter? In light of the recent ineffably saddening shooting in Newtown, CT, this well done video edit asks President Obama that very question.
Advocating for life is not solely dependent upon court cases and legislation. It’s about a culture where life is valued. This is the culture we want to help create and cultivate. Andrew Breitbart once said that culture is upstream of politics. This does not only apply to those facets of culture like entertainment or sports, but also the lens through which our society sees. Let that lens be life.
Earlier this weekend, I finally read one of the books that has been on my “To Read” list for a couple of years–The Law by Frederic Bastiat. Bastiat was a 19th century French economist who focused on liberty and the overreaches of government’s “legal plunder”. The Law is a mere 55 pages long, but speaks volumes to the barrier to liberty that government becomes far too often. The words he writes ring just as true today as they did when he wrote his book in 1850. As King Solomon wrote in the book of Ecclesiastes in the Bible, “there is nothing new under the sun”. This includes the fallibility of government and the need to emphasize the God-given right of liberty.
The Law is beautifully simple, which is why it has such a powerful message. Bastiat discusses how God has given us the rights of personality, liberty, and property and how the law is the collective organization to defend these rights. However, the law is perverted too often by two causes: naked greed and misconstrued philanthropy, as he refers to them. Diversion from the law’s true purposes leads to what Bastiat refers to as legal plunder. He also spends time railing against the elitism of politicians comparing them to gardeners wanting to prune their trees (constituents) or a scientists wanting to perform social experiments on their subjects.
Of particular intrigue to me personally was Bastiat’s discussion of naked greed and misconstrued philanthropy. His rebuke of naked greed is not akin to the charge of the Occupy movement, but that of “the law” creating a system when “plunder” becomes less burdensome than working. This plunder by the few (politicians) comes at the expense of the many. Legal plunder then results in people wanting to either create laws to protect themselves against such plunder (support for selective tax credits, subsidies, etc) or organize so that they can become a recipient of it (welfare state, politically connect grants, and protectionism in today’s society).
Misconstrued philanthropy, to me at least, seems almost synonymous to the “compassionate conservatism” espoused by the Bush administration and perpetuated by many Establishment Republicans today. Bastiat decries a system of law that infringes upon liberties to organize labor, charity, agriculture, education, etc. Socialists, Bastiat says, want to government to combine “fraternity” and “liberty”. He argues that forced attachment of fraternity actually destroys liberty. He is a proponent of what he calls ” spontaneous fraternity”. After all, conservatives can be spontaneously compassionate, and we should! True “fraternity” or compassion fails to exist when it is only the result of legal plunder redistributed to those determined in need by those who engaged in the plunder.
Bastiat also goes on to very concisely characterize socialism and the subsequent lies that socialists project onto those who object to the State’s role. He writes:
Socialism, like the old policy from which it emanates confounds society and government. And so, every time we object to a thing being done by Government, it concludes we object to its being done at all.
[…]
They might as well accuse us of wishing men not to eat, because we object to cultivation of corn by the State.
In short, Bastiat was prescient about our current “Sandra Fluke” society, where lovers of liberty are accused of being anti-[fill-in-the blank] because we don’t want government to pay for it with our money.
Bastiat continues by sharply criticizing the elitism and arrogance of elected leaders once they are in power, juxtaposing his views with those of his socialist contemporaries. He sums it up well when he says:
Since the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to allow them liberty, how comes it pass that the tendencies of organizers are always good?
Government is not god. It is not a moral force. It is not intrinsically good. It should not serve as an arbiter of liberty.
Brevity is beautiful, and Bastiat did it well. While there are many more current, well written books about ideology also, re-visiting the words of the past can help us understand our present and help preserve liberty for our future.
Late business professor Aaron Levenstein once said, “statistics are like a bikini. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital”. He is right, and President Obama’s “executive actions” are a great example of this.
As part of his cache of executive actions, President Obama issued “a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence”. The press secretary’s release elaborating on this action states:
But for years, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC)and other scientific agencies have been barred by Congress from using funds to“advocate or promote gun control,” and some members of Congress have claimed this prohibition also bans the CDC from conducting any research on the causes of gun violence. However, research on gun violence is not advocacy; it is critical public health research that gives all Americans information they need.
President Obama bemoans the supposedly unclear language barring funding of research that would advocate for gun control, but President Obama signed the most recent consolidated appropriations act which had the language he criticized. Additionally, the Obama administration’s Department of Justice and its research arm the National Institute for Justice (NIJ) has not funded a “single public study on firearms” during his presidency (and that’s according to a report by his gun control comrade in arms, Michael Bloomberg, who would likely would have gone out of his way to show deference to the President on this matter). Meanwhile, a quick cursory search found that under President Bush, NIJ funded at least one study on ballistics analysis in crime and one on smart gun technology. If these issues are so important to the president, why did he sign a bill with murky language? Why did his Justice Department not fund studies on firearms?
Additionally, the President decries the lack of “critical public health research” being performed while at the same time using suspect and uncited non-federally funded research in his press release. President Obama notes that “40% of guns are purchased without a background check”. However, as Breitbart’s AWR Hawkins notes, the source of that statistic is a study done by New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg, and the 40% on refers to guns already in circulation, not new guns. In his remarks, President Obama fails to indicate the source of his numbers. Additionally, John Fund at the National Review notes that what Bloomberg references is a small survey done during the Clinton administration nearly 20 years ago . Much of the self reported survey (surveys that intrinsically have social desirability bias) was performed prior to the passage of the Brady Act requiring federal background checks. Like Levenstein suggests, President Obama’s gun statistics are revealing of his agenda they suggest, but what he conceals is vital.
If President Obama Department of Justice can’t even fund the research that President Bush funded and if his staffers have to resort to statistics that are old enough to vote, what can be said about the research he wants to actually fund now? I think it can say what University of Illinois sociologist David Bordura and epidemiologist David Cowan said when the CDC had funded studies last during the mid 1990s (emphasis added):
In a presentation at the American Society of Criminology’s 1994 meeting, for example, University of Illinois sociologist David Bordua and epidemiologist David Cowan called the public health literature on guns “advocacy based on political beliefs rather than scientific fact.” Bordua and Cowan noted that The New England Journal of Medicine and the Journal of the American Medical Association, the main outlets for CDC-funded studies of firearms, are consistent supporters of strict gun control. They found that “reports with findings not supporting the position of the journal are rarely cited,” “little is cited from the criminological or sociological field,” and the articles that are cited “are almost always by medical or public health researchers.”
For more, please see Jacob Sullum’s piece atReasonabout the problems with publicly funded firearms research and the subsequent bias often found in the journals that publish such research. Suffice it to say, this latest proposal by President Obama appears to be nothing more than his version of conceal-carry–conceal the truth, and carry the misrepresentations.
As much as I would like to reclaim our party and ask the elite to take a hike, I have to admit on days like this, I just want to throw my hands up in the air and quit. They will never change! But I won’t. That is what they want me to do.. feel discouraged and left out. We have seen this play itself out year after year, but this IS OUR Party, and I am not going away!
So the GOP is not interested in our input. What’s new? Everything has always been mapped out for us anyway, so instead of giving up, why not use their predictable ways to our favor? Surely we can beat them this time. I think it is revealing (and unflattering!) that the GOP has had to resort to this kind of early promotion and campaigning. It only affirms how strong and effective the Conservative base has been. Consider this a good sign to not feel defeated.
Here is the youtube clip of Marco Rubio’s appearance last night on The O’Reilly Factor. Notice how Mr. OReilly is not really pressingMr. Rubio very hard on the issues he disagrees with him on.
It is undeniable that Marco Rubio is part of the next in line for the presidential race in 2016, second to Jeb Bush, of course, his mentor, who is at the top of the GOP heirarchy. As early as two days following the election, I found out that Jeb Bush had a book coming out on Immigration Reform. This appearance is a natural way to start getting some buzz out there on the subject. The term “Immigration Reform” probably came from the same genius consultants who brought us “Compassionate Conservatism” for Bush 43’s campaign, and “Reform Conservatism” at this same time last year during CPAC.
Immigration Reform is code for Amnesty. The left knows this, and it knows it is a losing strategy for Republicans because it divides us. That is why they are beginning to use Marco Rubio as the new GOP useful idiot, just like McCain was in 08, and Romney in 12. See the pattern? If we are to REFORM and take back our party back, we must address how issues like this are used by the left to divide us.
It’s not about whether immigration reform works or not (it does not). It’s about whether it is the message we want to represent our party. And it is not. Like I said in my video clip in December, our party leaders have hijacked our message to push an agenda we do not identify with.
Let’s push back and push back hard! Rubio’s personal blind ambition is a target for exploitation. Please read how the elite The New York Times now writes about him in a favorable way. It was shared by a personal friend and special colleague who has witnessed my gradual disillusion with Rubio and the realization over time of who he really is.
Marco Rubio would sell us down the river because of blind personal ambition and he would sell his soul to the devil for personal power, opponents down here in Miami say. I’ve also heard some say he came from modest means, and we should give him a break. What I see right now is someone all too eager to please those who helped him get to where “he has arrived”. The fact is, he should not be beholden to his mentor (which he is), but to us.
Pandering to Hispanics hurts the party. Now what? I will share with you that I have asked his campaign manager from 2010 to appear in our group to answer questions. I hope to have the opportunity to confront him, and to express my concerns, including my disappointment and convictions that what he is doing is wrong. Wrong for the party. I wish he wasn’t, but he is part of the Establishment problem in our party and not the solution. Like I said in the video, Hispanics DON’T VOTE on Immigration! He does not speak for all Hispanics on this, specifically, he does not speak for me.
I will not take up more of your time. There is not much more to say. GOP Voters, I TOLD YA SO in December in this clip (just go to 2:18-4:43).
Colin Powell was doing his rounds on Sunday talk shows insinuating how the Republican Party is intolerant. He used as an example a phrase by Sarah Palin to make his point: “When I see a former governor say that the president is shuckin’ and jivin’, that’s a racial era slave term.” This proves he is not only out of touch, but ignorant as well because this has been explained at length by her and her brother, but I don’t want to make the article about his comments today.
This is to reveal the true character of Colin Powell ~ a man whose is guided not by a moral compass but by what he gains from those who he is trying to impress. His actions, both recent and past, should be known by all, especially GOP Voters. So-called Republicans like him do not help our cause, and are convenient tools our opponents use to further divide us.
Colin Powell is wrong about our party. It is the party of the Right Message.. a message which is NOT racist, intolerant or extreme. Unlike others who think he should stay in the Party to expose what a fool he is, I would rather suggest to him to find the nearest EXIT door and start his own “C” (for Cocktail) Party if he does not like ours. I wouldn’t care if he left today.
The following is a personal account of what Colin Powell did during the My Lai Massacre incident in Vietnam by a friend who shared it in my group yesterday.
By Carl Irwin
Everyone has heard about the My Lai Massacre that took place in Vietnam, I know a lot about that incident because I was in that unit, not the infantry company that did the killing, but the infantry battalion they belonged to. I am not going to go into what happened or waht caused it to happen, but the aftermath.
A high ranking officer in our unit withheld letters from soldiers telling about what happened and also lied to reporters and military investigators about what
happened, and that officer was Captain Colin Powell, and he was rewarded very well for his loyalty. Look at his background, there is nothing there that ever qualified the man for the high positions he was later given. The guy will do or say anything to promote Colin Powell and will stab anyone or group in the back if that is what it takes.
This is a picture of our firebase which was only about 5 miles from My Lai. At the top right of the picture is the village of Tu Mai, which is a refugee camp we set up. Any people outside of that camp were considered enemy and were fired upon. The firebase you are looking at was hit every single day with anywhere from 5 to 30 motor and rocket rounds. The only way in and out of the base was by air. For most of its existence the NVA had the base cut off from roads leading into it.
*****
Carl thinks that Colin Powell’s portrayal as being an honorable is a myth and a symptom of the times we live in. His military accomplishments are questionable at best. The fact is, according to Carl, his importance is blown way out of proportion. I agree!
Just for your reference, and to reinforce what was written above, I was able to obtain the article below provided by two other friends. It supports Carl’s version of Captain Colin Powell’s choice to lie about the My Lai Massacre. All of this leaves us wondering, what else has he been lying about? And why would anyone in the GOP ever want support or have associations with him if he is so dishonorable?
Thomas MASSIE, Representative of Kentucky, 4th District
Representative Massie speaks his mind without political strings attached. His portfolio includes a Bachelor and Master of Science in Electrical and Mechanical Engineering, both respectively from MIT, 24 patents, and the endorsements of FreedomWorks, Young Americans for Liberty, and the official Tea Party of Kentucky. He has campaigned on behalf of Rand Paul, Senator from Kentucky, which I will not hold against him on this day. He voted for Lipinski instead of Boehner, so he gets my Kudos!
Steve PEARCE, Representative of New Mexico, 2nd District
He served in the Vietnam War as a C-130 pilot in the United States Air Force
Congressman Pearce explains why he voted for Eric Cantor for Speaker and not John Boehner in this 1:41 clip. He wants to change directions, in a nutshell.
Ted Yoho, Representative of (North Central) Florida, 3rd District
Congressman Yoho is from Florida. He was sworn in this January 2013. He was endorsed by Sarah Palin, so he has a special status in my book, and a high calling. Here is his statement in an interview with a CNN “Journalist”, Erin Burnett. RIGHT ON, Mr. Yoho! Thank you for your voting FOR and not AGAINST the People!
Steven Ernest STOCKMAN, Representative of Texas, 36th District
“Steve” Stockman was just sworn in as U.S. Representative for Texas’s 36th district. He previously served for Texas’s 9th district from 1995-97. Congressman Stockman voted PRESENT on January 3rd. This was his statement prior to the vote: “I will not vote for or support Congressman Boehner’s bid to remain Speaker of the House. This is not something I do lightly, but out of bedrock conservative principle and a dire need to save this nation from its current course. We cannot tolerate betrayal of conservative principle and economic reality.” He kept his word and should be commended for it!
Now the best part: “I have sharp disagreements with the manner in which he has handled President Obama and House conservatives. While he is all too eager to favorably negotiate with a liberal White House that has outmaneuvered him at every turn, he has been harsh and punitive in dealing with conservatives.” Is there more you can ask of a true Republican? I don’t think so! This Congressman is telling the truth.
Abstained: Raúl Rafael LABRADOR, Representative of Idaho, 1st District
Representative Labrador won an upset victory in the Republican primary in November, defeating Vaughn Ward, DC’s GOP establishment candidate of choice. Congressman Labrador wrote an article on how big business loves big government. In it he writes: “As a conservative, I believe in small government and in the individual. I did not become a conservative to defend the rich. I became a conservative because I believe that my party has a message that resonates with the American people.” I love it! What can I add except a slogan that comes to mind: small business loves small government! Thank you, Sir! You are doing awesome work on our behalf! By the way, Justin Amash voted for him instead of John Boehner.
Mick MULVANEY, Representative of South Carolina, 5th District
Congressman Mulvaney won his first election in 2010 serving the 16th District of South Carolina. He has recently been sworn in to represent the 5th District.
I thought I was satisfied with everyone so far, I may have left the best for last. This Congressman did what I was hoping everyone else would do: Abstain, but I cannot ask for more from the rest who also voted their conscious (at least they have one!). Here is a highlight from his official Congressional page: “Mulvaney Returns More Than $160K, Requests Speaker Boehner Pay Down National Debt!” He is approachable as evidenced by the comments on his wall. Like Justin Amash he also posts all his votes on his pages, for everyon to see. That is called transparency and accountability. It is just right. I wish the rest would understand that. Please take the time to thank him if you can. I just did.
![sarah-marvelous-eyes-trig[2]](https://thespeechatimeforchoosing.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/sarah-marvelous-eyes-trig2.jpg)
A Time For Choosing 
