Poll: Justin Amash Trails Primary Challenger by Double Digits After Impeachment Call


RINOs beware! Primaries are coming AND your voters know who you are.

 

JRH 6/13/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

********************

Poll: Justin Amash Trails Primary Challenger by Double Digits After Impeachment Call

 

Justin Amash

 

By Joshua Caplan

June 12, 2019

BREITBART

 

Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI), the first Republican on Capitol Hill to call for impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump, trails primary challenger State Rep. Jim Lower by a sizeable margin, according to a poll released Tuesday.

 

A Practical Political Consulting/MIRS poll shows Amash (33 percent) behind Lower (49 percent) by 16 percent. The poll was conducted between June 5th-9th and served 360 likely Republican voters. Amash’s other primary challenger, Army National Guardsman Tim Norton, was not included in the poll.

 

 

The poll comes amid a Politico report stating President Trump has discussed the possibility of backing an Amash primary challenger with Vice President Mike Pence, Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), and Republican National Committee (RNC) chairwoman Ronna McDaniel. However, no firm decision has been made on the matter.

 

The Michigan Republican shocked the Beltway when he accused President Trump of committing “impeachable” offenses stemming from special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia report and claimed Attorney General William Barr misrepresented the special counsel’s key findings. Team Mueller found no criminal conspiracy occurred between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia, and shortly after, Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein determined that the president did not commit obstruction of justice during the sweeping investigation.

 

President Trump and top Republicans blasted Amash over his remarks, accusing him of being an attention-seeker with an unimpressive legislative track record to show for his four terms in Congress. “Never a fan of @justinamash, a total lightweight who opposes me and some of our great Republican ideas and policies just for the sake of getting his name out there through controversy,” the president tweeted last month. “If he actually read the biased Mueller Report, ‘composed’ by 18 Angry Dems who hated Trump, he would see that it was nevertheless strong on NO COLLUSION and, ultimately, NO OBSTRUCTION.”

 

“Justin is a loser who sadly plays right into our opponents [sic] hands!” he concluded.

 

On Monday evening, Amash resigned from the House Freedom Caucus, the conservative congressional group he helped start in 2015, after 30 of his now-former peers voted to condemn his remarks on impeachment.

 

“I have the highest regard for them and they’re my close friends,” he told CNN of the decision to leave. “I didn’t want to be a further distraction for the group.”

____________________

Copyright © 2019 Breitbart

 

BOTH RINOs & Leftists Malign Trump Tweets


John R. Houk

© March 13, 2017

 

I saw on Fox News that Senator John McCain is publicly telling President Trump to put-up or apologize to the treasonous President Obama pertaining to the accusation of wiretapping during the 2016-election cycle. I don’t have the Fox News clip but here’s the CNN clip that Fox was referring to:

 

VIDEO: McCain: Provide wiretap evidence or retract

 

Posted by CNN

Published on Mar 12, 2017

 

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said that President Trump should provide evidence for his unsubstantiated claim that former President Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower or retract the accusation.

 

My God! McCain might as well stop being a RINO and out right join the Deep State Democratic Party and become an overt Obama minion. No wonder McCain lost to the Marxist oriented Obama in 2008.

 

McCain is making all kinds of noise that more news will come out connecting President Trump yet keeping silent (copying MSM) on mounting evidence of Russian links to Crooked Hillary and family marking political favors for God only knows what nefarious purposes.

 

Check this out from Angry Patriot:

 

While the liberals are trying their hardest to set up the Republicans in questionable ties with Russia, it seems as though it is being used as a distraction to hide the Democrats’ own connection with Russia.

 

Hillary Clinton’s election campaign manager, John Podesta, was on the board of a small energy company, Joule Unlimited, when it was given $35 million from a Russian government fund which has ties to Putin. (via Breitbart)

 

This information was discovered in a 56-page report titled, “From Russia with Money: Hillary Clinton, the Russian Reset, and Cronyism.” Podesta did not disclose this, although he is required to do so by law.

 

This was written by a non-partisan government watchdog group, the Government Accountability Institute (GAI). Stephen Bannon, the Executive Chairman of Breitbart and the Chief Strategist in the Trump Administration, is also the Executive Chairman of GAI.

 

During the “Russian reset,” then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was the flag bearer of U.S. involvement in Russia’s technology initiative, called Skolkovo, which is intended to be the Slavic version of Silicon Valley.

 

This “innovation city” was to be located outside of Moscow and employ 30,000 people. Their technologically advanced facilities would be under the strict control of the Russian government. In 2013, the building was described, by Slate, as reminiscent of the Soviet “utopia” building projects.

 

The GAI report revealed that the Department of State, under Hillary Clinton, recruited companies like Intel, Cisco, and Google to participate in Russia’s project. Of the 28 companies that participated in Skolkovo, 17 were donors to the Clinton Foundation or had paid Bill Clinton to speak.

 

As Clinton’s involvement increased in the project, so did the chance that this technological investment was actually a way to spy on American military technology. In 2014, the FBI gave out an “extraordinary warning” to the companies participating in Skolkovo.

 

Podesta failed to mention that he had memberships to the board of this company, even while knowing that Russian investment in it may have been an attempt to steal our military technology. It all seems a bit suspicious. Why was Clinton, the U.S. State Department, and John Podesta tied up in this affair?

 

It would appear that they are the ones that need investigating into Russian ties rather than anyone in the Trump administration. (BREAKING: Hillary Connected to $35 MILLION Russian Bribe. Is This Treason? Angry Patriot; March 2017)

 

I can understand the Leftist MSM not picking up connections between Crooked Hillary and the Russians, but what Senator McCain goes after Trump for proof NOW when even the MSM has suggested improper violations of Obama Administration of wiretapping is just nuts. McCain would serve American Patriotism and the GOP better if he called out Obama to prove President Trump is incorrect.

 

Here are some news tidbits that implicate Obama wiretapping much more than President Trump angrily tweeting villainous Obama wiretapped the Trump campaign in a moment of emotional display.

 

JRH 3/13/17 (Hat Tip: Donald Moore of Blind Conservatives List)

Please Support NCCR

*****************

DC Secrets and Lies

 

By Clarice Feldman

March 12, 2017

American Thinker

 

 

A quick look at Obama’s history reveals he has always had the inclination, motivation, and opportunity to snoop on and disseminate information about his political opponents. It’s how he made his political career: getting his opponents’ private divorce records unsealed and leaked with the help of the Chicago Tribune.

 

He and his administration continued this pattern and practice of skirting laws throughout his eight years in office, As Matthew Vadum reminds readers:

 

“Obama used the IRS to target conservative and Tea Party nonprofits, along with Catholic, Jewish, and pro-Israel organizations. He brazenly lied about it, too. His Justice Department surreptitiously obtained telephone records for more than 100 reporters.”

 

Wikileaks revealed that under Obama, the NSA intercepted conversations of numerous foreign officials, including UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, Angela Merkel, Benjamin Netanyahu, Silvio Berlusconi, and Nicolas Sarkozy.

 

So it is rather astonishing that so many disregard Trump’s claim that Obama and his aides spied upon him and his staff. There were several means at his disposal for him to do so, and it is increasingly likely that they did so. He apparently sought — twice — to get the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court to approve tapping Trump communications, and was turned down once, in June of last year — a rare occurrence as in 10,000 applications in a six-year period only two were rejected. Reportedly the Obama administration tried again, using a slightly modified request and received permission. Heat Street reported this on November 7.

 

This week, investigative journalists Sara Carter and John Solomon confirmed that the FISA court warrant was granted in October.

 

 “What we don’t know is who was connected to that FISA,” Carter said on Sean Hannity’s show Wednesday night. “What was that FISA looking at? That is very highly classified. Nobody wants to talk about that particular FISA, right now. They said it did have to do with the Russian hacking on a very broad level, but it didn’t hone in directly on Trump is what I was told,” she said.

 

In addition to the FISA warrant in October, the FBI obtained a separate warrant that same month to look into a computer server tied to then-candidate Donald Trump’s businesses in Trump Towers (but not located in Trump Towers). According to the report, the feds used traditional investigative techniques to examine allegations of computer activity tied to two Russian banks and there had been no intercepts of Trump’s phone or emails.

 

The FBI quickly concluded, “the computer activity in question involved no nefarious contacts, bank transactions or encrypted communications with the Russians.”

 

The months-long FBI counterintelligence investigation into Russian efforts to influence the 2016 presidential campaign briefly investigated a computer server tied to Donald Trump’s businesses near the end of the election but has not gathered evidence of election tampering to date that would warrant criminal charges against any of the president’s associates, Circa has learned.

 

But a FISA warrant is not the only way to surveil communications. Under Chapter 36 of Title 50 of the US Code, and pursuant to Executive Order 12333, the president can authorize electronic surveillance without a court order, and we don’t know if Obama utilized one of these means as well. Nor can we ascertain who’s leaking, as on his way out of office –-17 days before his term was up — Obama allowed the National Security Agency to circulate such intercepted messages among 16 other intelligence agencies without following longstanding protocols designed to insure privacy of those involved in the communications, in effect inviting selective leaking by partisans in those agencies.

 

This week former NSA official Bill Binney confirmed the veracity of Trump’s claim that his conversations had been tapped and monitored and claimed it was done outside the courts.

 

Binney told Fox the laws that fall under the FISA court’s jurisdiction are “simply out there for show” and “trying to show that the government is following the law, and being looked at and overseen by the Senate and House intelligence committees and the courts.”

 

“That’s not the main collection program for NSA,” Binney said.

 

In any event, both the former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and the head of the FBI James Comey have stated without equivocation that there was no evidence found of coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia.

 

On the other hand, there is increasing evidence of Russian ties to Hillary Clinton and those closely connected to her.

 

Jerome Corsi connects a Russian billionaire to Putin with close ties.  He provides documentary “evidence of the circuitous path the Russian government has been using since Hillary Clinton was secretary of state to make large financial payments to John Podesta and to the Clinton Foundation.”

 

These transfers were made at the same time Hillary Clinton was transferring “U.S. advanced technology to Russia.”

 

John Podesta is not the only family member enriched by the Russians. His brother Tony also rode the Russian gravy train.

 

Russia’s largest bank, Sberbank, has confirmed that it hired the consultancy of Tony Podesta, the elder brother of John Podesta who chaired Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, for lobbying its interests in the United States and proactively seeking the removal of various Obama-era sanctions, the press service of the Russian institution told TASS on Thursday.

 

[snip]

 

Previously, The Daily Caller reported that Tony Podesta was proactively lobbying for cancellation of a range of anti-Russian sanctions against the banking sector. In particular, he represented interests of Sberbank and was paid $170,000 for his efforts over a six-month period last year to seek to end one of the Obama administration’s economic sanctions against that country.  Podesta, founder and chairman of the Podesta Group, is listed as a key lobbyist on behalf of Sberbank, according to Senate lobbying disclosure forms. His firm received more than $24 million in fees in 2016, much of it coming from foreign governments, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

 

Former President Barack Obama imposed the Russian sanctions following the break out in violence in east Ukraine in 2014.

 

Podesta’s efforts were a key part of under-the-radar lobbying during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign led mainly by veteran Democratic strategists to remove sanctions against Sberbank and VTB Capital, Russia’s second largest bank.

 

[snip]

 

The lobbying campaign targeted Congress and the executive branch, with Podesta and other lobbyists arranging at least two meetings between Sberbank officers and Department of State officials, according to Elena Teplitskaya, Sberbank’s board chairman, who spoke to House aides in August.

 

[snip]

 

The Podesta Group represented Sberbank and its subsidiaries, Troika Dialog Group in the Cayman Islands, SBGB Cyprus Ltd in Nicosia, Cyprus, and SB International in Luxembourg. Troika Dialog also was related to Klein, Ltd., a Cayman Island organization that once funneled tens of millions of dollars to environmental groups to oppose low-cost fracking in the U.S., which was hurting the Russian oil industry.

 

[snip]

 

Sberbank was the lead financial institution in the Russian deal to purchase Uranium One, owned by one of Bill Clinton’s closest friends, Frank Giustra. Giustra and Bill Clinton lead the Clinton-Giustra Enterprise Partnership, an integral part of the Clinton Foundation. Giustra has additionally donated $25 million to the Clinton Foundation.

 

Giustra sought to sell his stake in uranium reserves that included ore deposits in the Western United States, and Hillary Clinton, who as secretary of state, approved the sale. And in one felled swoop, 20 percent of America’s uranium ore was sold to the Russian state atomic agency.

During the pending sale, the Podesta Group represented Giustra’s company and tried to advance the transaction.

 

So there probably was surveillance on Trump and his associates, although no connection with Russia was established with them. Instead, all the connections to Russia were with Clinton and her closest associates.

 

What we also know was that, like Hillary Clinton, the Congressional Democrats repeatedly demonstrate a shocking disregard for national security. The Daily Caller has documented what the mainstream media is largely ignoring: the fact that dozens of Democratic congressmen, including the former head of the DNC, engaged three brothers from Pakistan and two of their wives at salaries multiple times over those similarly situated (over $4 million), gave them passwords, and allowed them access to sensitive computer files, even though it is impossible to fathom how people with their record of financial troubles got security clearances. These brothers are presently under criminal investigation accused of stealing House computer equipment and transferring information from Congressional files to a personal server. They owe $100,000 to an Iraqi businessman believed to have with ties to Hezb’allah who is a fugitive from U.S. authorities. This week, to cap it off, the brothers are under investigation for kidnapping and holding prisoner their stepmother to prevent her from seeing her dying husband in Pakistan.

 

Politico reports that Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the former head of the DNC, refuses to fire one of the brothers even though he is banned from the House network. She’s keeping him on as an “adviser.”

 

Really, it’s impossible to parody Democrats these days. It would be too unbelievable.

 

+++

SUPERSTAR REPORTER GOES PUBLIC WITH OBAMA’S CREEPY SPYING ON HER

Shares bizarre details about hacked computer as she investigated scandals

 

By GARTH KANT

March 12, 2017

WND

 

Former Attorney General Eric Holder and former President Obama

 

“It was one of those pictures which are so contrived that the eyes follow you about when you move. BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU, the caption beneath it ran.” – George Orwell, “1984” 

 

WASHINGTON – The woman who is perhaps the nation’s top investigative journalist is fighting back against Big Brother.

 

Sharyl Attkisson shared with WND a detailed and harrowing description of what it was like to experience a reality straight out of Orwell: The reporter claims she was spied on by the Obama administration while investigating its scandals.

 

What tipped her off?

 

Imagine what it must be like to watch your computer turn itself on and off.

 

“That’s one visible sign I noticed over many months,” Attkisson told WND in an email interview.

 

“At the time, I suspected it was some sort of phishing program seeking my passwords and contacts, and was confident my computer had sufficient protections. I never suspected it was connected to an intrusion of my systems until sources and forensics told me that it was.”

 

She also watched a different computer that she used delete files by itself.

 

After Attkisson released a video showing that as it was happening, Vox’s Max Fisher claimed it was more likely that she had a stuck backspace key.

 

Sharyl Attkisson

 

WND asked, as an Emmy-award winning investigative journalist and now the anchor of her own Sunday morning national TV news program, Full Measure,” did she find Fisher’s claim that she was confused by a keyboard plausible?

 

“It was just a silly attempt by a noted propagandist blog that had no firsthand information to deflect from the surveillance,” she replied dismissively.

 

“The ‘expert’ didn’t even know enough to understand there is no ‘backspace’ key on the computer shown, and — in any event — that holding down such a key cannot duplicate the super fast deletions demonstrated at the beginning of that particular video clip.”

 

What do YOU think? Will President Trump spy on American citizens like Obama did? Sound off now in the WND Poll!

 

The five-time Emmy Award winner and recipient of the Edward R. Murrow award for investigative reporting announced in January she is suing the Justice Department and seeking $35 million in damages for illegally hacking her computers and monitoring her work between 2011 and 2013.

 

Three separate computer forensic exams of her computers revealed what appears to be stunning evidence pointing straight to the Obama administration.

 

“The most important and irrefutable finding is: forensic evidence of a government-owned I.P. (internet protocol) address accessing my computer,” Attkisson told WND.

 

She said she was told that was “better evidence than the U.S. had when it accused China of various acts of hacking into our government, which the government accepts as proven.”

 

Her computers were examined by three independent forensics examiners including: a confidential source, an examiner hired by CBS News, and an examiner hired by her attorney.

 

What they found is just stunning.

 

Attkisson provided an itemized overview of some of their findings, and described what a confidential source and examiner hired by her attorney found:

 

  • “A government-owned I.P. address was used to access my computer.”

 

  • “We are able to see instances of exact date and time that the intruders entered my computers, and the methods they used to do so.”

 

  • “They used commercial, non-attributable software proprietary to the CIA, FBI, NSA or DIA.”

 

  • “The malware was constantly running on my computers. It included a feature that logged my keystrokes, accessed all my emails and collected my passwords.”

 

  • “Skype was surreptitiously used to listen in on audio.”

 

  • “My smartphone was also infected.”

 

  • “Three classified documents had been put on my computer.”

 

  • “Once sources notified me that I was likely being surveilled, and I discussed this in emails, the intruders took steps to erase evidence of their presence. However, the deletions themselves create a record of evidence.”

 

CBS and its analyst found:

 

  • “Attkisson’s computer was accessed by an unauthorized, external, unknown party on multiple occasions in late 2012.”

 

  • “Evidence suggests this party performed all access remotely using Attkisson’s accounts.”

 

  • “An intruder had executed commands that appeared to involve search and exfiltration of data.”

 

  • “This party also used sophisticated methods to remove all possible indications of unauthorized activity, and alter system times to cause further confusion.”

 

  • “[Attkisson’s] systems were indeed subject to non-standard interactions between June 2012 and January 2013.”

 

  • “Definitive evidence that shows commands were run from Sharyl’s user account that she did not personally authorize.”

 

  • “This history has been deliberately removed from Sharyl’s hard drive.”

 

  • The intruders conducted an inordinate number of internal computer clock “time stamp” changes, likely to try to confuse any forensics that might be conducted.

 

Why her?

 

WND asked the former CBS Washington bureau investigative correspondent, did she think the administration considered her a foe? And acted to stop her out of purely political concerns?

 

“I have no idea, the perpetrators would have to answer that question and they certainly aren’t stepping forward,” she replied.

 

“But,” she continued, “my computer intrusions occurred in context of the Obama administration’s crackdown on whistleblowers and a lot of my work deals with whistleblowers.”

 

“Additionally, we know the administration was aggressively trying to control the narrative on a number of stories it saw as damaging, especially as the re-election year of 2012 shaped up.”

 

Attkisson detailed her experience under surveillance in 2014 in her highly acclaimed New York Times bestseller, “Stonewalled: My Fight for Truth Against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation, and Harassment in Obama’s Washington.”

 

Stonewalled by Sharyl Attkisson

 

Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, records previously obtained by the government watchdog group Judicial Watch indicate Attkisson was targeted by the Obama administration because of critical reporting.

 

In 2014, Judicial Watch said it “obtained an October 4, 2011, email to White House Deputy Press Secretary Eric Schultz, Attorney General Eric Holder’s top press aide, (in which) Tracy Schmaler, described Attkisson as ‘out of control.’

 

“Schmaler added ominously, ‘I’m also calling Sharryl’s [sic] editor and reaching out to Scheiffer’ (an apparent reference to CBS’ Chief Washington Correspondent and Face the Nation moderator Bob Scheiffer). Schultz responded, ‘Good. Her piece was really bad for the AG’ (attorney general.)”

 

Given that Obama’s Justice Department had labeled her as “out of control” and tried to get the reporter’s employer to rein her in, WND asked Attkisson:  What did she make of an administration that seeks to control reporters?

 

“I expect it,” was the sober response. “But it’s our job to resist it and we aren’t doing a very good job of that as an industry.”

 

(Attkisson described problems endemic in the news media, including the genesis of fake news, in an interview with WND in December previewing her new book titled “The Smear: How Shady Political Operatives Control What You See, What You Think, and How You Vote,” due to be published on May 22, 2017.)

 

The Smear by Sharyl Attkisson

 

Did she think her experience and that of the Associated Press and Fox News reporter James Rosen (both spied on by the Obama administration) were part of a pattern?

 

“Yes. I was informed about my case prior to us knowing about any of the other cases, just before the Snowden revelations, and prior to former DNI (Director of National Intelligence James) Clapper falsely telling Congress that the government was not collecting data of millions of Americans…but all of these events occurred in the same general time frame.”

 

So, was it the administration that was “out of control?”

 

“You decide!” she replied, echoing a famous news slogan.

 

Investigating the truth about her own story, the award-winning reporter has faced what she called a Catch-22 dilemma.

 

“To find out who accessed my computer, we need the government’s cooperation, but the government isn’t cooperating.”

 

“In my lawsuit, we seek to learn who had access to the I.P. address that was used to infiltrate my computer,” she continued. “To date, the Department of Justice has taken multiple steps to block us from finding this answer.”

 

However, her persistence has revealed some compelling results.

 

“Finally, at my request, the DOJ (Department of Justice) Inspector General’s office sent investigators to look at a separate computer, my personal home computer.”

 

Attkisson said that although the Justice Department’s inspector general’s office will not release their notes and records, “and have improperly failed to respond to my Freedom of Information Act request for the information,” their forensics investigators reported to her that they found the following on her personal computer:

 

  • “Evidence of suspicious deletions of files that could not have been done by me.

 

  • “Use of my computer in ‘advanced mode’ (which was not done by me).”

 

  • “‘Someone’ installed software onto my desktop and executed it and overwrote some important logs effectively covering their tracks and erasing much evidence of their actions.”

 

  • “As with my CBS computer, they found a lot of unusual time and date setting changes on my personal computer as well (15 times in four days).”

 

  • “They executed data recovery, recovering previously deleted logs.”

 

Attkisson said the forensics examiners working for the Justice Department’s inspector general “told me they believed the intruder(s) were actually working in my house at the computer conducting these acts, rather than conducting them remotely, but, in fact, the acts were conducted remotely, as with the work computers referenced above.”

 

“Furthermore,” she continued, “the examiners indicated that prior to their supervisors signing off on their findings, ‘somebody’ narrowed their mission to only reporting on any ‘remote’ intrusions (i.e. not addressing the suspicious forensics they found by someone they believed was actually in my house working at the computer.)”

 

And that’s when the investigation hit a wall.

 

“At this point, as their report was sent to higher-ups for approval, they dialed back their communications with me and would not deliver the promised final report or the notes that went with it.”

 

Attkisson said she filed a FOIA to obtain them but it was ignored. Many months went by.

 

“When Congress pressed the issue, the DOJ IG issued only a summary and emphasized there was no evidence of ‘remote’ intrusion in that computer and left out the suspicious forensics they discovered,” explained the investigative super-sleuth. “To this day, the DOJ IG has failed to properly respond to my FOIA requests seeking the full information and report.”

 

As a result, “Many in the media misreported that this DOJ IG report was somehow conclusive evidence that my computers had not been infiltrated.”

 

“In fact,” she clarified, “the DOJ IG didn’t even examine the primary computers in question — referenced in the other exams above— because CBS would not allow them to look at the computers.”

 

Did she think the problem was specific to the previous administration, or was it due the growth of the surveillance community, its powers and lack of oversight?

 

“I think this is an outgrowth of technology that makes such surveillance possible, politicians and corporate interests who are willing to use it for improper purposes, and a weak and conflicted news media that has done little to stop it.”

 

Finally, WND said it would be remiss if it did not ask the ace reporter if her experience had given her any insight into President Trump’s accusations that his campaign had been spied on by the Obama administration.

 

However, Attkisson said she has not looked at, or reported, on those allegations.

__________________

BOTH RINOs & Leftists Malign Trump Tweets

John R. Houk

© March 13, 2017

________________

DC Secrets and Lies

 

© American Thinker 2017

 

About American Thinker

 

American Thinker is a daily internet publication devoted to the thoughtful exploration of issues of importance to Americans. Contributors are accomplished in fields beyond journalism and animated to write for the general public out of concern for the complex and morally significant questions on the national agenda.

 

There is no limit to the topics appearing on American Thinker. National security in all its dimensions — strategic, economic, diplomatic, and military — is emphasized. The right to exist and the survival of the State of Israel are of great importance to us. Business, science, technology, medicine, management, and economics in their practical and ethical dimensions are also emphasized, as is the state of  READ THE REST

___________

SUPERSTAR REPORTER GOES PUBLIC WITH OBAMA’S CREEPY SPYING ON HER

 

Copyright 2017 WND

 

Hard Votes


Boehner the Cowardly Lion


Justin Smith displays his dislike for the GOP reelecting John Boehner as Speaker of the House. Justin very effectively makes his case
 
JRH 1/10/15

Please Support NCCR

**************************
Hard Votes
 
By Justin O. Smith
Sent: 1/9/2015 12:35 AM
 
The American people have been deceived and betrayed once more by the newly elected Republicans, who portrayed themselves as conservatives. These newly elected joined the rank and file establishment Republicans, and on January 6th, they helped reelect a big spending, Republican-in-Name-Only Statist, John Boehner, as Speaker of the House to the 114th Congress, which illustrates that despite a Republican majority, the 114th Congress will not be truly conservative in its character.

Boehner won the Speaker position with 216 votes of 408 cast, less than a majority of the full House. With 164 Democrats voting along ideological lines for Nancy Pelosi, twenty-four courageous Republican Congressmen remembered their oath to the Constitution and set aside personal ambition and partial considerations for committee chairs, and they voted for the true interests of America and Her people, by voting for alternative Republican candidates for Speaker of the House.

Despite claims to the contrary, every Republican Congressman was aware of the fact that 64% of Republican voters wanted to “dump Boehner”, due to a campaign by Joseph Farah at ‘WND’, which generated over 500,000 letters urging House members to fire Boehner. Most of the new Congressmen received votes, during their campaigns, based on their assurances that they would seek Boehner’s removal as Speaker.

Many disturbing reasons led to the movement to oust Boehner. He has overseen the largest government spending spree of any Speaker in U.S. history, including Nancy Pelosi; he insisted on fully funding Obamacare at the end of the last Congressional session, when he also pushed House members to fund Obama’s immigration amnesty until February 27, 2015; and he gave a $1.1 trillion spending bill his blessing in December of 2014.

Obama’s amnesty for illegal aliens could have been fought by passing month to month continuing resolutions and demanding concessions at every juncture to keep government funded. But now, by passing the “Cromnibus” [Link] and funding the Dept. of Homeland Security through February, Boehner and the House allowed Obama to build the administrative structure needed to issue his deferred prosecution orders and work permits for the parents of the DREAM “children.”

 
Reported by several journalists including Melissa Quinn at the ‘Daily Signal’ (Jan 5), Rep. Jim Bridenstine placed this fight in its proper perspective, stating:
 

The CR/omnibus legislation ($1.1 trillion spending bill) sufficiently undermines the checks and balances enshrined in the Constitution that it warrants my pending vote against the Speaker. John Boehner went too far when he teamed with Obama to advance this legislation. He relinquished the power of the purse, and with it he lost my vote.”

Some Congressmen, such as Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) Vice-Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, expressed their fear that they would lose their position if they opposed Boehner. They called it “a hard vote” to go against their principles, but they haven’t any principles; the hard votes were delivered by the twenty-four courageous American patriots, men of honor, integrity and principle, who stood and opposed Boehner, including Scott DesJarlais, Ted Yoho and Louie Gohmert.

And yes, the retaliations are already underway. Rep Daniel Webster (R-FLA), who opposed Boehner, and Rep Richard Nugent (R-FLA), who voted for Webster, were both removed from the Rules Committee hours after the vote. Boehner also used retaliation in 2012, when he threw Representatives Tim Huelskamp (R-KS), Justin Amash (R-MI) and David Schweikert off their committees.

Given the numbers, there was going to be a Republican Speaker no matter who the candidates were, since the vote continues until one candidate gains a simple majority. At the very least, the true conservative Republicans were hoping to force a second vote for the first time since 1923, when Frederick Gillett (R-MA) needed nine ballots to win the Speaker’s seat (Congressional Research Service).

Statements similar to Rep. Diane Black’s (R-TN), that opposing Boehner would “position Democrats to exert greater influence over the outcome”, are nothing more than a weak, blatant attempt to cover their own self-serving cowardice. And every Republican vote for Boehner was a vote for their own personal ambition and massive government and its associated expenditures.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) stated, “Critics may call my vote unwise … but I challenge them instead to defend the undemocratic manner in which the Speaker has moved legislation through the House of Representatives.”

In 2015, Obamacare, illegal immigration, energy, jobs, the tax code and education, along with appropriations and budget issues, will all present America a string of failures under John Boehner’s direction as Speaker of the House. The next two years will be full of faux conservatives full of feigned anger, and Republicans still will have accomplished nothing.

 
How can Boehner continue to lead the cooperation – err, ugh – “opposition” to Obama (as the crowd laughs uproariously), when he has lost the confidence of his own party?
 
It’s no wonder Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) was gushing as she handed the Speaker’s gavel to Boehner. Her party sees John Boehner as being malleable in Obama’s hands.
 
How could any Republican vote for Boehner for Speaker of the House in good conscience, knowing that he is working to undermine conservative principles?
 
When Americans vote for candidates calling themselves “conservatives”, they expect to receive honorable leaders, who understand the basis for true conservatism, determined to uphold their oath to the Constitution. Time and again, John Boehner has violated his oath and blocked the efforts of new Congressmen to advance conservative policies that would have had better than expected results, if only one gathered the strength to do the right thing.
 
Twenty-four Republicans who opposed Speaker Boehner, as they fought for Constitutional government, are an inspiration for many Americans. Their votes also represent the largest in-party repudiation of a sitting Speaker since 1923.
 
Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots, observed:
 

Republicans should study the names of those who were brave enough to stand up and cast their vote against the status quo of the Boehner establishment. One day, they will lead that party, and the party and the nation will be far better for it. Tea Party Patriots everywhere salute them.”


The 2014 election was about making the changes the American people demand, something Boehner has refused to do. Every single Republican was tasked by America to dump Boehner, but the majority of them were too busy running to protect their cushy assignments and their committee positions and running scared from a whiny Fool’s retaliation. Every single Republican who cast their vote for Boehner betrayed the U.S. Constitution and the American people in so doing.

 
By Justin O Smith
_____________________________
Edited by John R. Houk
 
© Justin O. Smith

Boehner is the Chain that Binds Conservatives


boehner-slams-conservative-critics

John R. Houk

© January 6, 2014

 

Self-proclaimed Conservative John Boehner (R-OH) is the Speaker of the House. Many Conservatives have questioned whether or not Boehner is a bona fide Conservative or a part of the Republican in Name Only (RINO) crowd. RINOs can Center-Left to Center-Right but definitely not committed to the entirety of Conservative principles that have been a part of the Republican Party Platform for some time. In Boehner’s case he has taken the GOP Establishment line that the Tea Party Movement needs to be minimized if not downright ostracized from the Republican Party. If the Republican Establishment has their way the removal of the Tea Party will mean we will have to come up with a new acronym representing the present day RINO. Maybe something like Republican Establishment Party Only (REPO). Or maybe something like Republican Elitist Party Only (REPO). You get the point, no true Conservatives are a part of the GOP.

 

Now if Boehner and his Establishment buddies’ war on the Tea Party is not bad enough here is a thought that should make you want to flush Boehner and the Republican Establishment down the political toilet. Retired Lieutenant Colonel and former Representative Allen West wonders if the Speaker is helping Obama cover-up Benghazigate.

 

No matter how much it might hurt in 2016, it is time for Conservatives and Tea Partiers to form a new Political Party to give American voters an opportunity to side with the Conservative vision to return the Original Intent of the Constitution which includes less government and fair taxes.

 

JRH 1/6/14

Please Support NCCR

***********************

EXCLUSIVE–ALLEN WEST QUESTIONS IF BOEHNER, CANTOR HELPING COVER UP BENGHAZI

 

By MATTHEW BOYLE

6 Jan 2014, 1:50 PM PDT

Breitbart

 

Former Rep. Allen West (R-FL), a leader in the conservative movement and retired Lt. Colonel of the United States Army, told Breitbart News that he thinks House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) might be trying to help the Obama administration cover up the Benghazi scandal.

 

West is a signer of the letter from a coalition of conservative and military leaders, along with three family members of the victims in the Benghazi terrorist attack, that demanded Boehner create a select committee to investigate the Benghazi terrorist attack. Boehner has been blocking the House Resolution from Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) that would create such a committee, even though H. Res. 36 has 178 cosponsors in addition to Wolf.

 

“There is widespread support for a select committee to get to the bottom of disturbing questions surrounding the attack, as H. Res. 36 has 178 cosponsors,” West said in an email to Breitbart News. “Yet Speaker of the House John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor refuse to bring it to the House floor for a vote. You have to wonder, is there something they know that they prefer not come to light?”

 

The letter delivered to Boehner on Monday similarly questioned whether Boehner is helping President Barack Obama’s administration cover up the Benghazi scandal. Specifically, because Boehner is a member of the “Super 8”—congressional leaders who are briefed on national security matters—the coalition wondered if he knew something that a full investigation into Benghazi would reveal.

 

“Some analysts believe your inaction and passivity towards getting to the truth concerning Benghazi is because you were briefed on the intelligence and special operations activities in Libya as a member of the ‘Super 8,’” the group wrote. “You may possess ‘guilty knowledge.’ We recall how then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi developed a form of ‘amnesia’ concerning a documented briefing she received on so-called ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ – later termed ‘torture’ for political purposes.”

**************************

Editor: As I was preparing to post this I came upon another Breitbart article on Boehner’s minions pertaining to a Benghazigate investigation. Boehner insinuates he still desires to investigate Benghazi. Now that sounds fishy to me because if Boehner is serious I have to ask, “What is the hold-up?”

 

JRH 1/6/14

***********************

GOP LEADERSHIP: BENGHAZI VICTIMS’ FAMILIES ‘ABSURD AND INACCURATE’ IN SELECT COMMITTEE DEMAND

 

By MATTHEW BOYLE

6 Jan 2014, 3:52 PM PDT

Breitbart

 

An anonymous aide for House GOP leadership told the Washington Examiner Monday it believes three family members of the victims of the Benghazi terrorist attack and other conservative movement and military community leaders are being untruthful in their demand for a select committee investigation into Benghazi.

 

The unidentified aide would work for either Speaker John Boehner, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, or Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy, per the Examiner’s identification.

 

Pat Smith, the mother of murdered Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith, and Charles Woods, the father of murdered security officer Tyrone Woods, along with Smith’s uncle Michael Ingmire, joined scores of conservative movement leaders in demanding Boehner install a select committee.

 

A bill that would do so is sitting in the House with 179 cosponsors including lead sponsor Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA), more than a substantial majority of the House GOP conference. Boehner, Cantor, and McCarthy will not schedule a vote on the matter, despite overwhelming support from the conservative movement, victims’ families, the American people, and the GOP conference.

 

Instead, an anonymous House GOP leadership aide responded to Monday’s letter, which was exclusively reported by Breitbart News, to the Washington Examiner’s Paul Bedard by accusing the coalition writing the letter of making false statements in the letter regarding the GOP leadership’s incapacity to lead an investigation into Benghazi.

 

“These complaints are absurd and factually inaccurate,” the anonymous GOP leadership aide said. “The committees’ efforts are coordinated by a full-time leadership staffer, administration witnesses have testified publicly and privately, and the committees have both professional investigators and subpoena authority.”

 

Boehner aide Michael Steel added that Boehner wants to still investigate Benghazi. “House Republicans are committed to finding the truth about what happened in Benghazi and why the White House failed to level with the American people,” Steel told Bedard.

 

Steel has not responded to a series of questions on the matter from Breitbart News, including details on the lone staffer he says House GOP leadership has working to coordinate the investigation among the various committees.

___________________________

Boehner is the Chain that Binds Conservatives

John R. Houk

© January 6, 2014

_________________________

EXCLUSIVE–ALLEN WEST QUESTIONS IF BOEHNER, CANTOR HELPING COVER UP BENGHAZI

 

GOP LEADERSHIP: BENGHAZI VICTIMS’ FAMILIES ‘ABSURD AND INACCURATE’ IN SELECT COMMITTEE DEMAND

 

Copyright © 2013 Breitbart

 

Against Israel?


Chuck Hagel anti-Israel Jew-hating RINO Comrade

Hmm … President Barack Hussein Obama nominates Senator Chuck as Secretary Defense. This is the same Chuck Hagel that desires to support Jew-Hating Islamic terrorists to endear America to Arabs even though such a necessary is throwing Israel under the bus. Hagel will actually say the USA is committed to Israel on one side of his mouth and on the other side of his mouth wants to extend diplomatic talks with surround Islamic terrorists that have only one goal; viz., the destruction of Israel and the genocide of Jews.

 

The ACLJ has started a petition that is probably as much of a fund raiser as it is a voice to such a ridiculous choice as a Hagel nominee; nonetheless a donation is not required at it adds a voice of dissention that is made public by American voters.

 

JRH 1/8/13

Please Support NCCR

*********************

Against Israel?

 

By Jay Sekulow

Sent: Jan 7, 2013 at 1:24 PM

American Center for Law and Justice

 

President Obama has nominated an anti-Israel former Senator to be Secretary of Defense. Senator Chuck Hagel has blamed American support for Israel on the “Jewish lobby,” refused to sign a letter supporting Israel, and opposed labeling Hezbollah a “terrorist organization.”

 

But that’s not all. Senator Hagel supported direct dialogue with Hamas – a terrorist group that launches near-daily attacks on Israeli civilians – and even refused to label the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps as terrorists.

A former Senator with this record of appeasement cannot be second in command of our Armed Forces.

 

Make your voice heard. Tell the United States Senate to vote against President Obama’s nomination of Senator Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense.

 

Sign the petition to stop Obama’s anti-Israel nomination.

 

Defend Israel - ACLJ

 

Above Photo not a part of original email

 

Jay Sekulow
ACLJ Chief Counsel

 

P.S. Please forward this critical petition to anyone you know who supports Israel and share it on Facebook.

_______________________

Does a Hagel Nomination Mean a Giant Leap Forward for Iran’s Nuclear Program?

 

By Jay Sekulow

Jan. 7, 2013 10:55 AM

ACLJ

 

Since 1948, the hostile governments of the Middle East have done everything in their military power to completely destroy the state of Israel.  Immediately after Israel’s declaration of independence, Arab armies united to invade the new nation.  In 1967, Israel found itself surrounded by hundreds of thousands of troops and thousands of tanks.  In 1973, Egypt and Syria breached the peace and sanctity of Yom Kippur and launched a surprise attack that brought Israel to the brink of extinction.

 

Each time, Israel was saved by the providence of God and the indescribable courage of its armed forces.  Each time, the American people rallied in support of our most faithful ally.

 

But not even courage can prevail against a nuclear detonation.  For the first time since its declaration of independence, Israel is on the verge of facing a nuclear-armed enemy – a nation that has vowed to destroy the Jewish state.

 

In the face of this threat, President Obama has nominated a former Senator, Chuck Hagel, who has a record of appeasing Iran that is perhaps unmatched by any Senator, current or past.  Over at the Weekly Standard, Bill Kristol has done invaluable work compiling the sad details of Senator Hagel’s record. Consider the following:

 

-He has voted against labeling Iran’s Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization, even though the Revolutionary Guard has been fighting a low-intensity war against America, Israel, and other allies for years;

 

He voted against labeling Hezbollah – Iran’s army in Lebanon – a terrorist organization in spite of its long record of attacks on Israeli civilians and perhaps even American Marines;

 

-He voted against the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act at a time when both countries had recently engaged in direct attacks against Americans;

 

-He opposed the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act; and

 

-He said – while still a senator – that “[A] military strike against Iran, a military option, is not a viable, feasible, responsible option.” (Emphasis NCCR)

 

While no one wants war with Iran, a military strike is preferable to a nuclear Holocaust.  Yet Chuck Hagel has taken such an option off the table.

 

Perhaps most disturbing of all, this nomination – in the face of Democratic and Republican opposition – signals that President Obama values Israel’s security less than any other modern American president. Fortunately, however, he will soon discover that he faces a united American people – from across party lines – that understand a simple moral imperative: Terrorist nations should not possess nuclear weapons.  Americans deserve a Secretary of Defense who shares that core moral understanding.

 

The fact is that Senator Chuck Hagel is not the right person for the job.

 

 

Send a powerful message to the Senate: we must protect Israel and that means rejecting Senator Hagel’s nomination. Add your name here.

 

Jay Sekulow

__________________________

American Center for Law and Justice | Washington D.C. | Copyright © 2012, ACLJ


The ACLJ is an organization
dedicated to the defense of constitutional liberties secured by law.

 

Support ACLJ

 

The RINO of Mass. Vs. the Leftist of Mass.


Brown vs Warren

John R. Houk

© May 24, 2012

 

Elizabeth Warren is a Democrat challenging GOP incumbent Scott Brown in heavily Liberal Massachusetts. Brown pulled off a bit of a surprise in 2010 to be elected Senator from Massachusetts because he won his seat against a favored Dem in a special election to replace über-Liberal Ted Kennedy after his passing. So there is no surprise that Warren is mounting a good campaign that has drawn that Senate race to a near dead heat.

 

Here is a little 2010 Republican humor on Brown winning Kennedy’s old Senate Seat:

 

VIDEO: Hitler Finds Out the Massachusetts Senate Seat Was Won by Republican Scott Brown

 

 

As is often the case of the Left Warren turns out not to be too honest of a Democrat. She managed to get managed to get hired at Harvard Law School and took the time honored route of becoming special by claiming to have a Native American heritage. That had to make Affirmative Action proponents pleased, right?

 

On the other hand Massachusetts voters seem to be true blue Liberal voters because it is no big deal that a candidate is a liar and deceptive exploiting politician.

 

And here is an irony about Senator Scott Brown. Most of the Conservatives that got behind his campaign in 2010 are beginning to be swayed that Brown is a RINO.

 

At any rate I sense Brown will vote with Republicans more often than with the fringe Leftists of the Dem Party that control the Party agenda in the present. So RINO or not, I pray Brown wins over liar Warren.

 

Below are some thoughts from Tony Newbill on the Elizabeth Warren connection to President Barrack Hussein Obama.

 

JRH 5/24/12

Please Support NCCR

**************************

 Elizabeth Warren, Obama and Predatory Lending

 

By Tony Newbill

Sent: 5/9/2012 9:23 AM

 

Let’s talk about why Elizabeth Warren and Obama in 2003 were going to work on the Ills of Predatory lending that has crippled the American people and financial system that now seems to be a Conspiracy that evolved during Obama’s Presidency. For crying out loud it looks like the insiders are getting cover and access to off shore accounting for the Funds that were extracted out of the people’s home and other assets that now has the USA in a Devaluing deflationary spiral that is forcing the Federal Reserve to keep having to try and prop up the economy with QE [SlantRight Editor: Understanding Quantitative Easing] stimulus spending.

 

 http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2011/05/23/elizabeth-warren-to-obama-you-had-me-at-predatory-lending  

 

Why isn’t Mrs. Warren talking about this? Is it because she was an advocate about the banking sectors fraud against predatory lending to home buyers? Home Owners Across the Nation Sue All Bank Servicers and Their Offshore Havens; Spire Law Officially Announces Filing of Landmark Lawsuit.

Largest International Money Laundering Network in History Formed During Obama Administration; U.S. Banks’ Theft of Home Owners’ Money Laundered Through Cayman Islands, Isle of Man and Numerous Offshore-Based Affiliates:

 

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/home-owners-across-the-nation-sue-all-bank-servicers-and-their-offshore-havens-spire-law-officially-announces-filing-of-landmark-lawsuit-2012-04-23 

 

Why isn’t Mrs. Warren getting to the Bottom of this Predatory lending that looks like Obama administration is caught up in? Where were those Obama Regulators???

 

http://www.cjr.org/feature/how_subprime_crushed_predatory_1.php?page=all

_________________________

I need help understanding this – A Way to Meet People like Elizabeth Warren?

 

By Tony Newbill

Sent: 5/17/2012 10:29 PM

 

I need help understanding this…. is this Obama Literary Agent like the Elizabeth Warren Native American heritage claim turn out to be a way to just meet people like her?

 

 http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/05/16/cherokee_genealogist_to_elizabeth_warren_tell_the_truth.html 

 

Obama’s literary agent says he was ‘born in Kenya’. How did the mainstream media miss this? 

 

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100158834/obama-used-to-be-a-kenyan/  

 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/17/The-Vetting-Barack-Obama-Literary-Agent-1991-Born-in-Kenya-Raised-Indonesia-Hawaii  

 

If they knew this was a mistake then why wait till now to say so???

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/born-kenya-obamas-literary-agent-misidentified-birthplace-1991/story?id=16372566#.T7WQcVvDVoY 

 

I want to know why they waited to say this was a Mistake?? Is this a claim that is similar to what Elizabeth Warren said she did to create more access to a better venue of society? And if this is the case then why didn’t President Obama and his advisers say so in the first place???

 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/17/A-Fact-Checking-Error-Repeated-Multiple-Times-Over-Several-Years-by-Different-Agencies

No-Romney BUT Especially No-Obama


No RomneyNo Obama

John R. Houk

© March 10, 2012

 

In 2008 the candidates for the Office of President were Barack Hussein Obama (Democrat) and John McCain (Republican).

 

From the beginning of BHO’s campaign I perceived he was less than honest person that too many voters accepted the promise of Change as if that meant merely change from the GWOT-President policies of eight years. Voters ignored what was known of Obama’s past and didn’t care about the past that Obama has still successfully hidden from the public eye.

 

The Republicans needed a charismatic person to overcome voter weariness of President George W. Bush policies of his 8 year tenure. Frankly I don’t believe voters would have been so weary of President GW if the Left Slanted MSM had not hated him so much. You will never see the media vilify Obama the way it did Bush even though the deceptiveness of Obama is well worth the vilification.

 

The Republican elites therefore sought a nominee that could swing Center-Left on some issues and Center-Right on other issues. In the beginning that candidate appeared to be Mitt Romney. Then the cantankerousness of McCain and the Social Conservatism of Huckabee gave GOP voters an alternative to the former Governor of Massachusetts which is one of the most Liberal States in the U.S. Union. In the 2008 the Conservatives were still the nerve center of the Republican Party and Romney’s record did not jive with Conservative issues.

 

Eventually the GOP race in 2008 became a race between the self-described rogue in McCain and the Social Conservative (but not necessarily a full-fledged fiscal Conservative) in Huckabee.

 

I believed then as I do now that McCain was a RINO. He was the perfect GOP Elite choice to try distance from Bush as a Center-Right and the hope of retaining the White House with McCain’s Center-Left thinking. McCain overcame Huckabee. By this time the Democrats had sold the voters that Obama would be the chosen one to bring back bi-partisan, transparent politics and the hope of ending an already long war in 2008.

 

Obama’s promises and vision was a bill of bad goods that a majority of American voters bought into. Obama had the leg up before McCain could paint a picture of a Moderate Centrist to receive the baton from Bush. In fact I am of the opinion McCain would have been crushed political even in worse terms if had not the foresight to choose a Family Values-Fiscal Conservative as a running mate. Indeed Sarah Palin captured the hearts of the GOP so much that the Left Wing MSM went on the attack on Palin to the point of making stories up to castigate her to the voters.

 

I did not like McCain but I did like Palin. I voted for the McCain/Palin ticket despite McCain’s RINO credentials because I knew Obama backed by the Clintonista political machine would take America down a path of “Change” that voters did not comprehend in 2008. I am no political pundit genius however Obama has lived up to everything I thought he would do.

 

The Obama mantra of “Change” had less to do with repudiating President Bush and more to do with transforming America into the Socialist European style democracy. Socialism European style means the shredding of the U.S. Constitution. The Living Constitution crap of the Left is turning the Original Intent of the U.S. Constitution into a historical fable of days gone by.

 

It appears that 2012 is a path that is mirroring 2008. Only this time Mitt Romney has more money and better organization. Romney has become the slow and steady tortoise racking up delegates while GOP Conservatives have been messing themselves up by splitting Conservative voters into fractured camps as Romney keeps collecting delegates. Many people are doing the math and the general consensus is Mr. slow and steady will win the GOP nomination because of the failure of Conservatives to unite behind one candidate.

 

Part of the problem is that the GOP candidates still in the running for the nomination have a bit of baggage that Conservative true-hearts find objectionable. An honest look at the records of Santorum and Gingrich will demonstrate their Conservative legislative decisions outweigh their Center-Left decisions. Can Romney make the same claim?

 

Anyway, I am still in the anyone-but-Romney crowd as a GOP voter and in the anyone-but-Obama voters when it comes to the General Election in November 2012. An Obama reelection will validate the course he has chosen for America. This means the Obamunistic Radical Left will continue to Change-Transform America into a Leftist Utopia solidifying Moral Relativity over Biblical Morality, Government intrusion over Limited Government, the agenda to denigrate Christianity over America’s Christian heritage, Demand Divisive Diversity over E Pluribus Unum (Out of many, ONE) and so on with the picture of Leftist Change.

 

I am voting for whoever wins the GOP nomination even if they are a RINO – again. It would take super star Conservative leadership to reverse the Leftist curse of EIGHT years of Obama. If the Tea Party Movement remains strong there will be a counter-balance of preventing a RINO from going too far to the Left. AND I know a RINO will not endorse the utopian agenda dreams of Obamunism.

 

Still there are Conservative purists that would rather vote on principle rather than succumb to a GOP President that might have tendencies to make some Center-Left decisions. My son Adam is one of those kind of Conservative purists. Another person is a Facebook friend Danny Jeffrey. Here is Jeffrey’s reasoning on sticking to principle.

 

JRH 3/10/12

Romney Supported De-Population Enthusiasts and Eco-Marxists


Romney RINO rides Dem Ass

 

John R. Houk

© December 23, 2011

 

Tony Newbill has been loading me up with links that demonstrate Mitt Romney is a Republican in Name ONLY (RINO) in a huge way.

 

In a 12/21/2011 email Newbill sent three links that tie Romney to Leftist thought on population control. And when I say population control I mean de-populating the earth to make earth resources more sustainable for those chosen humans to use in a way that is comfortable for the chosen few and the Secular Humanist Green Earth.

 

Now two of those links are the same story from the same author so I’m using the Human Events story. The first link is from a blog that begins with Mitt Romney’s connection and association with John Holdren which is one of President Barack Hussein Obama’s Czars. Holdren is one of these Left Wing de-populate the earth at all costs to save the earth.

 

The blog post on Romney-Holdren is excellent but lengthy and spends most of its space on Holdren. I am going to excerpt the part that relate to Romney; however if wish to know the Obama-Holdren agenda for planet earth and humanity you would do well to read the whole thing.

 

The Human Events article focuses on Mitt Romney’s connect to Paul Tsongas a former Dem Senator from Massachusetts. Romney was supporting Tsongas’ run for the Dem nomination for President in 1992. Tsongas was plugged into Holdren thoughts on de-population of the human race and eco-Marxist concepts of extreme Green ideology at the expense of Liberty and the Free Market to return the earth to some kind of illusory pristine utopian magical environment for the chosen few. The first half of the article is about Paul Tsongas the second half is about Romney’s support for Tsongas’ run for the Dem nomination in 1992.

 

JRH 12/23/11

********************************

Republican Mitt Romney consulted Population Control Eugenics Czar John Holdren

 

By Saynsumthn

October 18, 2011

Excerpted from: Saynsumthn’s Blog

Original Newbill Link: World Freedom Watch

 

H/T Pajamas Media

 

So we’ve learned over the past few days that a trio of Mitt Romney’s chosen advisers helped the Obama administration craft ObamaCare. And on top of that, that Gov. Romney sought the advice of Malthusian green activist John Holdren, when Romney was considering a cap and trade regime for Massachusetts.

 

Holdren’s views humanity as a plague on the planet and the Industrial Revolution as a tragic mistake. The fewer people, he believes, the better, and he’s not shy about the ways he would use to reduce their number.

 

Why Gov. Romney, a reasonable person, would pick such a man to advise him on anything is beyond us.

 

On Jan. 1, 2006, Massachusetts became the first state to regulate CO2 emissions from power plants, something the Obama administration is trying to do to all states through the Environmental Protection Agency’s draconian job-killing regulations and mandates.

 

A Dec. 7, 2005 memo from the governor’s office announcing the new policy listed among the “environmental and policy experts” providing input to the policy one “John Holdren, professor of environmental policy at Harvard University.”

 

This is the same person who wrote that a “massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop the United States.”

Holdren wrote that along with Paul and Anne H. Ehrlich in the “recommendations” section of their 1973 book, “Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions.”

 

Paul Ehrlich is also the author of the 1968 tome, “The Population Bomb,” which warned of imminent mass starvation from overpopulation unless excess humanity is dispensed with.

Holdren has spoken in favor of such things as forced abortions, confiscation of babies, mass involuntary sterilization, bureaucratic regulation of family size, and a planetary regime to enforce climate regulation and population control.

 

Read Rest of story here [SlantRight: a further excerpt]

 

Campaigning: The GOP front-runner for 2012 sought advice on global warming and carbon emissions from the president’s current science czar — an advocate of de-developing America and population control.

 

Politics is said to make strange bedfellows, but no coupling in our view is more bizarre than when John Holdren, now President Obama’s assistant for science and technology, once advised GOP presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney on environmental policy.

 

Holdren’s bizarre views are best suited for an adviser to someone like, say, Pol Pot.

 

He views humanity as a plague on the planet and the Industrial Revolution as a tragic mistake. The fewer people, he believes, the better, and he’s not shy about the ways he would use to reduce their number.

 

Why Gov. Romney, a reasonable person, would pick such a man to advise him on anything is beyond us.

 

On Jan. 1, 2006, Massachusetts became the first state to regulate CO2 emissions from power plants, something the Obama administration is trying to do to all states through the Environmental Protection Agency’s draconian job-killing regulations and mandates.

 

 

Romney, speaking at a University of New Hampshire town hall on June 3, said: “I don’t speak for the scientific community, of course, but I believe the world’s getting warmer. I can’t prove that, but I believe based on what I read that the world is getting warmer. And number two, I believe that humans contribute to that.”

 

So do Holdren and Al Gore.

 

In June, Gore, on his blog, praised Romney’s climate stance: “While other Republicans are running from the truth, he is sticking to his guns in the face of the anti-science wing of the Republican Party.”

 

After researching eugenics and I reading several chapters of the book, Ecoscience, written in the 70s, by Paul Holdren, who is Obama’s Science Czar, I can see clear signs that everything that is coming down from Washington was being birthed in our society in READ THE REST FOCUSING JOHN HOLDREN

__________________________________

Romney Voted for Population-Control Fanatic Presidential Candidate

 

By Terence P. Jeffrey

11/30/2011

Human Events

 

When he ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1992, Paul Tsongas repeatedly made it clear: He loathed President George H.W. Bush‘s flip-flopping on abortion and his inattentiveness to what Tsongas perceived as the urgent need for global population control.
       
And he won
Mitt Romney‘s vote in the 1992 Massachusetts presidential primary.
       
“This land, this water, this air, this planet, this rain, this is our legacy to our young, yet the Reagan-Bush years have been a time of cynical avoidance of one environmental issue after another — acid rain, energy conservation, depletion of the ozone layer, global warming and uncontrolled world population,” Tsongas, a former U.S. senator from Massachusetts, said when he announced his presidential campaign in April 1991.
       

       
“I will tell you very strongly the No. 1 environmental issue I’m going to push for when I’m president is population control around this world so we can turn to later generations and say something except, ‘Sorry, folks,'” Tsongas vowed.
       
Two months later, Romney cast his vote for Tsongas.
       
That Massachusetts primary was a landslide in both parties. Bush beat Pat Buchanan
(who I served as research and issues director that year) 66 percent to 28 percent. Among Democrats, native son Tsongas took 66 percent to then-former California Gov. Jerry Brown’s 15 percent and Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton‘s 11 percent.
       
Two years later, when he announced he would seek the Republican Senate nomination to challenge Ted Kennedy, Romney told the Boston Globe
about his vote for Tsongas.
       
“Romney confirmed he voted for former U.S. Sen. Paul Tsongas in the state’s 1992 Democratic presidential primary, saying he did so both because Tsongas was from Massachusetts and because he favored his ideas over those of Bill Clinton,” the Globe reported on Feb. 4, 1994. “He added he had been sure the GOP would renominate George Bush, for whom he voted in the fall election.”
       
Romney’s vote for Tsongas came up again in a profile the Globe published Aug. 7, 1994.
       
“Like his father, he wasn’t a strong party man,” the Globe said. “He had been a registered independent all his life. He still was, as he pondered the Kennedy challenge. He had even voted for Paul Tsongas in the 1992 Massachusetts Democratic presidential primary.”
       
When the Los Angeles Times mentioned the Tsongas vote in a profile published Oct. 7, 1994, it did so in the context of Romney’s wife pointing out that Romney had considered running for the Senate as an independent.
       
“When Romney decided to run, Republicans exchanged quizzical looks: ‘We didn’t know a single Republican when we jumped in in December,’ his wife, Ann, says,” the Times reported.
       
“As a registered independent, Romney had voted in the Democratic presidential primary in 1992 to support Paul E. Tsongas (though he backed George Bush in the general election, he says),” the Times reported. “He briefly considered running for the Senate seat as an independent, as well, his wife says, before rejecting the idea as impractical.”
       
Thirteen years later, when Romney was seeking the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, he appeared on ABC’s “This Week With George Stephanopoulos.”  Stephanopoulos asked him about the Tsongas vote.
       
Now, Romney said he did it because he wanted the Democrats to nominate the weakest candidate.
       
“When there was no real contest in the Republican primary, I’d vote in the Democrat primary, vote for the person who I thought would be the weakest opponent for Republican,” Romney said.
       
“I’m a Republican and have been through my life,” Romney said. “I was with Young Republicans when I was in college back at Stanford. But a registered independent, so I could vote in either primary.”
       
And that is the core of his explanation.

__________________________________

 

Romney Supported De-Population Enthusiasts and Eco-Marxists

John R. Houk

© December 23, 2011

________________________________

Republican Mitt Romney consulted Population Control Eugenics Czar John Holdren

 

Saynsumthn’s Blog Home Page

_______________________________

Romney Voted for Population-Control Fanatic Presidential Candidate

 

Terence P. Jeffrey is the author of  Control Freaks: 7 Ways Liberals Plan to Ruin Your Life (Regnery, 2010.)

 

Copyright 2011 HUMAN EVENTS. All Rights Reserved.

The Romney Plan for America


Romney Believe in America

 

John R. Houk

© November 1, 2011

 

I am definitely not in former Governor Mitt Romney’s camp for the GOP nomination for President. I have to own-up to the primary reason for this is Romney is a Mormon and Mormonism is not Christianity yet pretends to be Christianity. As a Christian I have a problem with that. The secondary problem I have with Romney he appears pretty close to being a RINO. Full-on RINOs make no bones about their Liberal leanings. Then there is RINOs like Romney that is Conservative Republicans in some areas but is politically liberal or socially liberal in others.

 

On the other hand if Romney does win the GOP nomination I am definitely voting for him over President Barack Hussein Obama. At the very least Romney does not have an agenda to transform America into a socialistic nation dependent on government entitlements to move the economy and secretly enslave the poor by making the Federal government the poor’s source of livelihood.

 

Romney’s major campaign agenda is his 59 point plan to get America’s economy on track. Just like Rep. Michele Bachmann, the Romney plan has less to do with tax reform and more to do with traditional tax cuts and strategies for jobs growth international trade.

 

Romney’s answer is a 59-point plan, including 10 steps he vows to take his first day as president. “Each proposal is rooted in the conservative premise that government itself cannot create jobs. At best, government can provide a framework in which economic growth can occur. All too often, however, government gets in the way. The past three years of unparalleled government expansion have retaught that lesson all too well,” he wrote. The candidate didn’t go into deep detail about the 59 items on his jobs agenda, but he did offer a shout out to those starting their own companies: “Only the individual initiative of entrepreneurs, workers, investors and inventors enables companies, and our economy as a whole, to flourish.” (ELECTIONEERING; By J. Jennings Moss; Portfolio.com, 9-6-11)

 

With both Cain and Perry now offering dramatic pro-growth tax reform proposals, Romney will either jump on the tax reform bandwagon or be left in the dust (or possibly both).

 

The only pro-growth tax cuts in Romney’s 59-point economic plan are a reduction in the corporate income tax rate to 25% (from 35% today) and the elimination of the death tax.  However, both Perry and Cain are similarly calling for repeal of the death tax.  Also, Perry’s plan would cut the corporate income tax rate to 20%, and Cain’s plan would reduce it to the equivalent of 9%.

 

Romney is advocating eliminating taxes on interest, dividends, and capital gains, but only for people making less than $200,000 a year.  This “cap” would vitiate any benefit to economic growth.  Worse, this element of Romney’s plan implicitly validates Obama’s “class warfare” rhetoric. (Fundamental Tax Reform Is Now Unstoppable; By Louis Woodhill; Forbes, 10/26/2011)

 

Tomorrow, I will introduce a plan consisting of 59 specific proposals — including 10 concrete actions I will take on my first day in office — to turn around America’s economy. Each proposal is rooted in the conservative premise that government itself cannot create jobs. At best, government can provide a framework in which economic growth can occur. All too often, however, government gets in the way. The past three years of unparalleled government expansion have retaught that lesson all too well.

 

Only the individual initiative of entrepreneurs, workers, investors and inventors enables companies, and our economy as a whole, to flourish. We must once again unleash the tremendous economic potential of the American people. The contrast between what the Obama administration has done and what I would do as president could not be starker.

 

 

As this catalogue of differences makes clear, our country has arrived at a fork in the road. In one direction lies the heavy hand of the state, indebtedness and decline. In the other direction lies limited government, free enterprise and economic growth. I know which direction is the American way. And I know in which direction lie the millions of jobs we need. (MY PLAN TO TURN AROUND THE U.S. ECONOMY; By Mitt Romney; MittRomney.com, 9-5-11)

 

Q: A Wall Street Journal editorial recently called your 59-point economic plan “surprisingly timid & tactical considering our economic predicament.” Specifically, they had a problem with you picking the $200,000 income threshold for eliminating interest, dividends, and capital gains taxes, writing that you were afraid of “class warfare rhetoric.”

 

ROMNEY: What you have to do is make America the most attractive place in the world for business, and that means our corporate tax rates have to be competitive #2: government and regulators have to be allies of business, not foes.#3: we’ve got to become energy secure in this country. #4: we have to have trade policies that work for us, and crack down on cheaters like China. And my list goes on in my 59 points. I know there are some that say, look, we should lower taxes for the very highest-income people. My view is very simple: The people that have been hurt most by the Obama economy, has been the middle class. That’s why I cut taxes for the middle class.

 

 

Q: Do you support the FairTax?

 

ROMNEY: The idea of a national sales tax or a consumption tax has a lot to go for it. One, it would make us more competitive globally, as we send products around the world, because under the provisions of the World Trade Organization, you can reimburse that to an exporter. We can’t reimburse our taxes right now. It also would level the playing field in the country, making sure everybody is paying some part of their fair share. But the way the fair tax has been structured it has a real problem and that is it lowers the burden on the very highest income folks and the very lowest and raises it on middle income people. And the people who have been hurt most by the economy are the middle class. And so my plan is for middle income Americans, no tax on interest, dividends or capital gains. Let people save their money as the way they think is best. We’re taxing too much, we’re spending too much and middle income Americans need a break and I’ll give it to them.

 

 

If we want to make more capital available for investment, we will have to lower taxes on saving and investing, either at the corporate or the individual level, or preferably both. A lower corporate tax rate would accomplish all that the myriad special tax breaks do, and improve the incentives for investment and entrepreneurship as well. Personal taxes on dividends, interest, and capital gains for all middle-income families should be completely eliminated.

 

Some people advocate the “FairTax” as a means of boosting savings, a system that would entirely replace income taxes with a consumption tax–a kind of sales tax. FairTax proponents estimate that a tax rate of 23% would be sufficient, but detractors claim that it would be closer to 40%. The enormous amount saved by the wealthiest under the FairTax would be made up by a higher tax burden on the middle class. This is not an outcome that will or should gain traction with the American public. (Mitt Romney on Tax Reform; Q & A On The Issues)

 

Five Bills for Day One

 

The American Competitiveness Act: Reduces the corporate income tax rate to 25 percent

 

The Open Markets Act: Implements the Colombia, Panama, and South Korea Free Trade Agreements

 

The Domestic Energy Act: Directs the Department of the Interior to undertake a comprehensive survey of American energy reserves in partnership with exploration companies and initiates leasing in all areas currently approved for exploration

 

The Retraining Reform Act: Consolidates the sprawl of federal retraining programs and returns funding and responsibility for these programs to the states

 

The Down Payment on Fiscal Sanity Act: Immediately cuts non-security discretionary spending by 5 percent, reducing the annual federal budget by $20 billion

 

Five Executive Orders for Day One

 

An Order to Pave the Way to End Obamacare: Directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services and all relevant federal officials to return the maximum possible authority to the states to innovate and design health care solutions that work best for them

 

An Order to Cut Red Tape: Directs all agencies to immediately initiate the elimination of Obama-era regulations that unduly burden the economy or job creation, and then caps annual increases in regulatory costs at zero dollars

 

An Order to Boost Domestic Energy Production: Directs the Department of the Interior to implement a process for rapid issuance of drilling permits to developers with established safety records seeking to use pre-approved techniques in pre-approved areas

 

An Order to Sanction China for Unfair Trade Practices: Directs the Department of the Treasury to list China as a currency manipulator in its biannual report and directs the Department of Commerce to assess countervailing duties on Chinese imports if China does not quickly move to float its currency

 

An Order to Empower American Businesses and Workers: Reverses the executive orders issued by President Obama that tilt the playing field in favor of organized labor, including the one encouraging the use of union labor on major government construction projects

 

Mitt Romney’s Plan for Jobs and Economic Growth

 

The book released by the campaign underscores President Obama’s failed approach to each policy area crucial to turning around the economy, and lays out precisely how Mitt Romney will address the issues as president:

 

Tax Policy

 

Mitt Romney will push for a fundamental redesign of our tax system. He recognizes the need to simplify the system. He also recognizes the need both to lower rates and to broaden the tax base so that taxation becomes an instrument for promoting economic growth. As president, Romney will hold the line on individual income tax rates and eliminate taxes on interest, dividends, and capital gains for low- and middle-income taxpayers. He will eliminate the estate tax. And he will pursue a conservative overhaul that applies lower and flatter rates to a broader tax base.

 

Romney will also reform the corporate tax system. He will immediately lower the corporate income tax rate, and then explore opportunities to further lower the marginal rate while broadening the tax base. He will also begin the process of transitioning to a territorial corporate tax system. A territorial system must be designed to encourage multinational companies to bring their profits back into the U.S. and it must avoid the creation of incentives for outsourcing. (Excerpted from FACT SHEET: MITT ROMNEY’S PLAN TO TURN AROUND THE ECONOMY; By Mitt Romney; MittRomney.com, 9-6-11)

 

Like I wrote, I am not voting for Romney in my State Primary but I will probably vote for Romney as the GOP nominee the General Election of November 6, 2012.

 

JRH 11/1/11

Who are the Real Republicans in New York State?


John R. Houk

© May 18, 2011

 

The New York Times has ran an article exposing (as called by NYT) Right Wing Contributors and Right Wing Republicans that are giving big bucks to the homosexual agenda of lifestyle validation and of same-sex marriage.

 

Now I am fairly certain the intent of the story is to show GOP hypocrisy in the typical Republican Party platform of standing for family values. In case there is some actual misunderstanding, homosexual values do not equate family values!

 

And yet, if you read this NYT article the way that Russians had to read the old USSR controlled Tass wire service, you can glean some information that tells you the difference between RINOs, Libertarian Republicans, Tea Party Republicans and Social Values Republicans.

 

I believe I can be safe in stipulating the Republicans and so-called Right Wing contributors supporting the homosexual agenda are a combination of RINOs and Libertarian Republicans. I would be surprised if any Tea Party Republicans supported the homosexual agenda; however let’s be honest that there are a large amount of Libertarians in the Tea Party Movement that are there because of less government and less unjust taxation. That leaves Social Values Republicans. I believe I can safely say that only an insane Social Values Conservative would favor the homosexual agenda.

 

Homosexuals that are open about their sexuality in public are creepy. I am willing to guess a large amount of committed heterosexuals that are not even remotely religious or nominal Christians feel that open homosexuality is creepy. Heterosexuals would not hesitate to announce that homosexuality is creepy except for this age of political correctness and a massive pro-homosexual propaganda campaign from homosexual activists, Leftists, MSM, Hollywood and Television bombarding America with the propaganda. There is a use of propaganda that places heterosexuals that find homosexuality is creepy into feelings of shame. Friends this is the kind of transformation that comes from the Barack Obama agenda to undermine traditional Christian values in order for our culture to accept moral relativity which will enable the government to make choices for Americans by influencing voters with smoke and mirrors.

 

So read that NYT article with discernment and make a value judgment in who you will vote for in 2012 whether it is a local election or the National elections in November 2012.

 

JRH 5/18/11 (Hat Tip: Solid Snake)