Quote of the day!

Quote of the Day "Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget that the state wants to live at the expense of everyone." -Frederic Basiat

Mike Church Interviews Ron Paul

All Hostile Action Should Be Approved by Congress....Even Libya

Across the political circles there has been a decent amount of debate about the involvement of the United States in hostile action in the country of Libya. We have been discussing it on this website, and the top officials of the U.S. Government have expressed their opinions about the situation.

The outgoing Secretary of Defense Robert Gates believes that the mission in Libya is not a violation of the War Powers Resolution and takes the side of his boss President Obama:

Outgoing Secretary of Defense Robert Gates defended the Obama administration Sunday against congressional critics who say President Barack Obama is in violation of the War Powers act over ongoing operations in Libya.

"I believe that President Obama has complied with the law consistent in a manner with virtually all of his predecessors," Gates said on "Fox News Sunday." "I don't think he's breaking any new ground here."

The War Powers Act generally requires the president to seek congressional approval within 60 days of the start of hostilities. The Obama administration has maintained that their mission in Libya is too limited to apply under the War Powers Act.

"From our standpoint at the Pentagon, we're involved in a limited kinetic operation," Gates told host Chris Wallace. "If I'm in [Libyan leader Muammar] Qadhafi's palace, I suspect I think I'm at war."

But here is the predicament...two of the Pentagons top lawyers (that we reported on the other day) believe that the President needs to seek the approval of Congress.  They sight the section of the War Powers Resolution of 1973 that requires the President to seek approval of Congress within 60 days of the start of hostilities.

The War Powers Resolution also states the explicit wording that gives Congress the power to check the power of the President when he tries to commit U.S. forces to action anywhere and under any circumstances:

SEC. 3. The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress  before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into  situation where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the  circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in  hostilities or have been removed from such situations.

 Gates, and the Obama Administration are clearly out of line when they suggest that the United States is not "really" involved in action in the country of Libya. From my understanding we are involved and we are dropping bombs and using our naval forces to conduct efforts in Libya to depose of the country's leader.

How about we start following the Constitution and the laws that are passed by our legislative body that fall under the guard of our founding documents. Stop circumventing the law and own up to the fact that you have broken the law and certain punishments should be dealt for that course of action.

McCain Doesn't Appreciate 'Isolationist' Republican Field

John McCain who was the defender of the senseless wars of the Bush Administration has bad filling towards the Republican field which is spouting the old ideas of the Republican Party that holds an isolationist approach to foreign policy.

Following the past decade of war and conflict the Republican Party is getting back to its pre-9/11 roots and taking the attitude that we no longer need to police the world and should use our conservative approach to fixing the problems of our own country.

Here is a transcript of John McCain's remarks in a taped interview earlier this week:

McCAIN: “Well, I was more concerned about what the candidates in New Hampshire the other night said. This is isolationism. There's always been an … isolation strain on the Republican Party — that Pat Buchanan wing of our party. But now it seems to have moved more center stage, so to speak. … If we had not intervened, Gadhafi was at the gates of Benghazi. He said he was going to go house to house to kill everybody. That's a city of 700,000 people. What would be saying now if we had allowed for that to happen?”

AMANPOUR: “Well, you were one of the key supports. And what you're talking is all the Republicans on the stage of that debate on Monday seeming to waver from what's a traditional Republican position on national security.” 

McCAIN: “Yes, I wonder what Ronald Reagan would be saying today.”

AMANPOUR: “What would he be saying today? If he heard, for instance, Michele Bachmann or Mitt Romney?”

McCAIN: “He would be saying: That's not the Republican Party of the 20th century, and now the 21st Century. That is not the Republican Party that has been willing to stand up for freedom for people for all over the world, whether it be in Grenada — that Ronald Reagan had a quick operation about — or whether it be in our enduring commitment to countering the Soviet Union.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57266.html#ixzz1PgirrBEP

Maybe it is time that John McCain gets off the neo-conservative horse and realizes the true history of his own party. We need to stop causing problems overseas and pay attention to our own situation and citizens.

Speculation of Presidential Run: Rick Perry Gives Fiery Speech to RLC

The Republican field for President is full of different men and women that believe they would be better suited to replace President Barack Obama for the top job in Washington. This website is a Ron Paul website, but we are always open to other candidates as long as they can prove their allegiance to smaller government and less control over the individual.

There are not a lot of candidates that fit this profile, but in my opinion Governor Rick Perry has a high probability of being that candidate and President.

It has been speculated for months that he might run for President, and with the crumble of Newt Gingrich, the possibility has become higher.

He gave a speech today at the Republican Leadership Conference (where Ron Paul won the straw poll) that was down right fiery and eluded to the fact that he is ready to run for President:

Breaking News: Ron Paul Wins RLC Straw Poll

In a sign of strength, Congressman Ron Paul, Presidential candidate for President, has won the Republican Leadership Conference straw poll for the Republican nomination.

This is Congressman Paul's second consecutive win in conservative straw polls as Republicans try and figure out who they want running against President Barack Obama in 2012.

From the Ron Paul for President website:

LAKE JACKSON, Texas – Today, 2012 GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul again took first place in a straw poll at a major conservative gathering. The Republican Leadership Conference held in New Orleans was the setting for Congressman Paul’s latest victory, winning with 40 percent of the vote over the rest of the Republican field.

“This win is just the latest indicator of how the majority of American opinion is turning in Ron Paul’s direction,” said Jesse Benton, Paul campaign chairman. “Listening to all the other speakers and candidates, you hear them saying the things that Dr. Paul has been saying for years, and they are saying it because they know that’s what Americans are looking for right now.

“The American people want and deserve someone who will tell them the truth, tell them what needs to be done, and who has an untouchable record of consistency to back it up.”

It is time that the Republicans get behind the man that will truly fix this country and stop the out of control spending and senseless wars that are plaguing our country.

Ron Paul's full speech at the RLC 2011:

Why I’m suing the Obama administration over Libya

From the Daily Caller:

By Rep. Ron Paul

There is no issue more serious than war. Wars result in the loss of life and property. Wars are also expensive and an enormous economic burden.
Our Founders understood that waging war is not something that should be taken lightly, which is why Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution gives Congress — not the president — the authority to declare war. This was meant to be an important check on presidential power. The last thing the Founders wanted was an out-of-control executive branch engaging in unnecessary and unpopular wars without so much as a Congressional debate.
Unfortunately, that’s exactly the situation we have today in Libya.
That’s why I’ve joined several other members of Congress in a lawsuit against President Obama for engaging in military action in Libya without seeking the approval of Congress.
Of course, in 2007, then-Senator Obama spoke passionately about the need to go after the Bush administration for violating the War Powers Act — the very same thing he’s doing now. In fact, while speaking at DePaul University in October of 2007, then-Senator Barack Obama said the following:
“After Vietnam, Congress swore it would never again be duped into war, and even wrote a new law — the War Powers Act — to ensure it would not repeat its mistakes. But no law can force a Congress to stand up to the president. No law can make senators read the intelligence that showed the president was overstating the case for war. No law can give Congress a backbone if it refuses to stand up as the co-equal branch the Constitution made it.”
We are now taking Barack Obama’s past advice and standing up to the executive branch.
Of course, the War Powers Act is hardly an improvement on the U.S. Constitution because it does allow the president to go to war without the approval of Congress. But President Obama refuses to follow this law.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/06/16/why-im-suing-the-obama-administration-over-libya/#ixzz1Pe6xElIG

Breaking the Law: Top Lawyers Lost to Obama in Libya War Policy Debate

In this country we have this pesky little document we call the U.S. Constitution. It is an older document that is suppose to be considered the "law" of the land, but sometimes in this day and age we fail to see the importance of its words. Even the President of the United States fails to see the importance of the Constitution along with most politicians that govern our country from Washington D.C.

The President of the United States is breaking the law and he could care less. He dedicated our armed forces to action in Libya almost 90 days ago and by law he must report to the Congress of the United States and seek permission to extend the use of force past the 90 day limit under the War Powers Resolution of 1973.

However, the President has failed to listen to the advice of his lawyers and believes he does not need Congressional approval to use the U.S. Military in Libya.

From the New York Times:

WASHINGTON — President Obama rejected the views of top lawyers at the Pentagon and the Justice Department when he decided that he had the legal authority to continue American military participation in the air war in Libya without Congressional authorization, according to officials familiar with internal administration deliberations. 

Jeh C. Johnson, the Pentagon general counsel, and Caroline D. Krass, the acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, had told the White House that they believed that the United States military’s activities in the NATO-led air war amounted to “hostilities.” Under the War Powers Resolution, that would have required Mr. Obama to terminate or scale back the mission after May 20.

But Mr. Obama decided instead to adopt the legal analysis of several other senior members of his legal team — including the White House counsel, Robert Bauer, and the State Department legal adviser, Harold H. Koh — who argued that the United States military’s activities fell short of “hostilities.” Under that view, Mr. Obama needed no permission from Congress to continue the mission unchanged.

The President is currently being challenged by members of Congress who hold the power to authorize military force under the Constitution and hold the power of the purse for military action.

Members of Congress have currently introduced a lawsuit that challenges the authority the President believes he has to commit U.S. Military personnel to hostile action in Libya. They have a valid argument and can prove that the President is in direct violation of the law and his duties as President. 

As someone who studies the Constitution and the Law, this could turn out to be an impeachable offense under the Constitution if it is decided the President violated the War Powers Resolution of 1973.

We will stay updated on all breaking aspects of this story and keep you in the loop....more to come!

Save The Economy: BAN ATMs

President Obama said, "There are some structural issues with our economy, where a lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient, with a lot fewer workers. You see it when you go to the bank and use an ATM -- you don't go to a bank teller." We sent our crew to the streets of Alexandria, Virginia and they asked people to sign a petition to ban ATMs to save jobs.

40 Years Later: Cost of the failed drug war

Foundation for Economic Education has a new video out today breaking down the cost of the war on drugs.  Today is the 40th Anniversary of the beginning of our modern day prohibition - FEE calls for bringing an end to this ever escalating war through decriminalization.

Quote of the day!

Free market-anti-socialist Quote of the Day "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest." -Adam Smith

The Right Choice for 2012...

Before I began we can all agree that anybody (and I mean anybody!) will be better than President Barack Obama.

Now, we must make choice on who should be the person that challenges the power of Obama and unseats him from his position in the White House. The Republicans are starting to come out in full force and candidates are lining up on the GOP side.

I will say this...I did not vote for either McCain or Obama in 2008. I was disgusted with both candidates and endorsed the Libertarian candidate for President Bob Barr.

Our choices are vast, but who is the right candidate for this country...not just the one who will cream President Obama.  At this point any Republican can beat Obama, and that is from a Gallup Poll released today.  There can not be an argument that goes like this "that Republican can not beat Obama!" The likely hood is quite clear...probably whomever the Republicans put up at this point can beat the President.

So...who do we chose? For the daily readers of this website they probably know where I am going and whom I am about to mention. The right choice for 2012 is Ron Paul.

Ron Paul got hammered in the 2008 primary election for the GOP nomination for President partly because of his positions on foreign policy. But that had changed....Republicans are getting on board with the idea again that we should not be policing the world, that we need to stop spending Billions of dollars everyday in wars that do nothing to protect our national security.  These people are getting on board with the idea that our economic problems at home are more important than fighting a bunch of crazy terrorists in caves that have little capability of attacking us in the near future.

Ron Paul has the right ideas for America and has the ability to fix this economic crisis from day one. The other Republican candidates spew the same rhetoric about fixing the economy, but Ron Paul is the only one that will actually stay true to reducing the size of government.

His foreign policy is that of a true conservative, his economics is that of a true conservative...what more do you want?

Libya: Illegal War

Yesterday, Rep. Walter Jones and Rep. Tim Johnson, were both on Fox Business discussing their lawsuit against Obama's illegal war in Libya.

Quote of the day!

Quote of the Day "Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other." -Ronald Reagan

Quote of the Day!

Quote of the Day "The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." -Thomas Jefferson

POTUS Politics 2012: Are You Prepared? - Self-Help Advice

By Roger F. Gay

The great quadrennial talent show and liars competition is underway, now pitting impressionist against impressionist. One side features ruling Chicago gangster Barack Obama, who won in 2008 with his Martin Luther King impersonation. Up first on the other side is Massachusetts con-man Mitt Romney channeling the patron saint of the RINO movement Ronald Reagan. Both have chosen highly inspirational figures. It's shaping up to be yet another contest with all the thrill of an amateur flea circus building to a critical moment of choice between white and off-white hand towels for the bathroom. (*)

Let me tell you a secret. They and their “positions” on issues aren't the focus of the real game. (**) You are. And you need to face some serious questions. Are you prepared for the onslaught of propaganda aimed at your emotional hot-spots and intellectual weak-points? Will you emerge from the election process with your humanity intact and your brain still functioning? Or will your name be one of many in the office pool for guessing the date you officially become a partisan zombie; wandering the halls with a blank stare, mindlessly repeating talking points, and mumbling something about the fate of the world?

If you're concerned; and especially if you still haven't returned to the land of the living since the last one, take heed. I have found an antidote that's easy to swallow.

Get a copy of the 2007 film: Futurama: Bender's Big Score and watch it repeatedly. You'll learn everything you need to know about modern American politics. Pay particularly close attention to the nude beach scene in which members of the Planet Express crew are talked into signing petitions. That's you – the voters.

Rest assured, any way you look at it - we're boned!

* Not a racial comment. Hand towels are not people - not even on South Park.
** Because, on average, you don't understand any of that anyway.

Quote of the Day

Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of the day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period, and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers (adminstrators) too plainly proves a deliberate, systematic plan of reducing us to slavery. -Thomas Jefferson

WSJ Question of the Day: Can Ron Paul win the GOP presidential nomination?

Click to vote and comment: Can Ron Paul win the GOP presidential nomination?

Why Republicans Will Lose 2012

By Roger F. Gay

You might expect that I will lead this article by pointing to the extraordinarily weak field of candidates currently led by Mitt Romney (code-name: Chameleon). OK, that's fair. I should and in fact I already have. But there's something else. The lamestream media has started its quadrennial preoccupation with the (so-called) “women's vote”. The social policy agenda, and indeed the fate of Constitutional rule, will once again rest in the hands of radical feminists. The RINOs can't handle it.

Early on, there will be much focus on the Obama agenda; the New World Order, “socializing” American industry, broader and more intensive cronyism. We'll certainly not believe candidates in the current field, who've taken credit for advancing all three during their careers. But even if another fresh, clean candidate should appear and gain in popularity, he or she will have to overcome the final barrier. A Republican candidate cannot win without winning quite solidly among men. And that's where every potential Republican nominee will be sabotaged by professional campaign advisers and party leaders.

Remember John McCain and the way he chased the skirts of “Hillary voters”? Sarah Palin said she'd do the same thing again if she had the chance. I believe she would; and then we'd find ourselves in the midst of the same spitting and snarling cat-fights as before, stuck month after month in the great competition over who's a better feminist. If there's any bright side at all, it might only be that there will be even less attention paid to MSNBC's racial slurs. But that won't save the Republicans.

The Party has a secret, and it's a doozy. When it came to the feminist vote, Ronald Reagan was farther left than Barack Obama. As Governor of California, he led the national charge to annul traditional marriage and family laws. He followed through as president, with the full support of NOW, under the Republican cover of child support and “welfare reform.” And the Party succeeded.

When Federal court challenges arose during the Clinton years, the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals formally put an end to traditional marriage and individual rights at the same time. In P.O.P.S. v. Gardner (1993), the Court reclassified marriage and family law from civil law to social policy. This effectively (legally) redefined both marriage and the relationship between the individual and government. A year later, the nation saw the Republican “Contract with America” (Newt Gingrich) that whole-heartedly supported the transition and not surprisingly attempted to replace the concept of Constitutional protection with political party promises.

“Welfare reform” led to both an enormous increase in welfare spending and an all-encompassing expansion of the reach of the welfare state. Think the federal government telling individuals how to spend their money is something started by Obamacare? It's not. The welfare reforms of the 1980s opened the door. Tens of millions of American men, who had nothing to do with welfare benefits, began to experience living without Constitutional rights, in a country where one's wealth and happiness are entirely at the mercy of political whim.

Do you think spying on innocent Americans and great government databases filled with personal information began with The Patriot Act? Think again. It was “welfare reform” that authorized the tens of billions of dollars to build and operate the national computer systems and all the information gathering mechanisms (such as access to bank records, mandatory employment reporting, etc.). They said they were keeping track of “deadbeat dads” or “illegal aliens” or …. anyway, they were compiling information and automatically tracking the activities of everyone with a Social Security card.

It's no wonder that RINOs like Mitt Romney (and Newt Gingrich, and …) love to drop Reagan's name. It was all done in the name of fiscal conservatism and spun with socially conservative brain-teasers like “government enforcement of personal responsibility”.

They called the increased spending “investment” that was supposed to reduce welfare dependency and spending in the long run. The spin was in fact the brain-child of a leftist social science professor, Irwin Garfinkel. Among other propaganda, Garfinkel produced a “study” that concluded that socialists have a higher standard of living because their income tends toward equality (i.e. the masses are better off being equally poor because they're less relatively poor) and participated in far-left academic-level New World Order groups.

Working at the Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty, Garfinkel convinced then Wisconsin Governor and later to be HHS Secretary under George W. Bush, Tommy Thompson to adapt his welfare reform concept. Thompson's far-left social policy agenda on child support and welfare reform was in the 1980s and 1990s worse than Romney's health-care socialism in Massachusetts. The welfare reform revolution went national without serious public scrutiny, legally ended traditional marriage, led to the downfall of Constitutional rule, and opened the door to the national undoing.

No, the Father's Rights Movement is not dead. The lamestream media stopped reporting when public opinion swayed to their side. You may not have noticed, but every Republican presidential candidate was quizzed about this issue in 2008 – and their responses posted on YouTube. They weren't good. Meanwhile, tens of millions of men - that's a lot of voters - who have suffered greatly from the reforms are waiting for a candidate to emerge who'll actually tell the truth and lead the country back to Constitutional rule and protection of their individual rights. It's not going to be done if no one is willing to acknowledge the root cause. And those men aren't going to vote Republican if the candidate can't or won't deal with it honorably.

And they won't. If they were, they wouldn't grasp defeat from the jaws of victory by pursuing "Hillary voters." And that's why Republicans will lose 2012.