MR and High School

Is this important…..as in who cares what Mitt did in High School?

Bottom l LINE: Would this cause you to now change your vote from MiR to Obama?? If it would, then most likely you were going to vote for Obama, anyway.

Isn’t it odd, the liberal media, now wants to vet MR, yet they gave Obama a free ride on EVERYTHING?

All this tells me is the liberal media is very afraid Obama will loose.

Anyone thinking crap like this is important is nothing but an uninformed idiot!

Obama, The 'Committed' Globalist and His New Executive Order

When it comes to Barack Obama, one of the most important things to understand is that he is a committed globalist.  He firmly believes that more "global governance" (the elite don't like to use the term "global government") will make the world a much better place.  Throughout his time in the White House, Obama has consistently sought to strengthen international institutions such as the UN, the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO.  At every turn, Obama has endeavored to more fully integrate America into the "global community".  Since he was elected, Obama has signed a whole host of new international economic agreements.  He regularly speaks of the need for "cooperation" among global religions and he has hosted a wide variety of different religious celebrations at the White House.  Obama once stated that "all nations must come together to build a stronger global regime".  If you do not want to live in a "global regime" that is just too bad.  To globalists such as Obama, it is inevitable that the United States of America will be merged into the emerging global system.  Just this week, Obama has issued a new executive order that seeks to "harmonize" U.S. economic regulations with the rest of the world.  This new executive order is yet another incremental step that is pushing us closer to a North American Union and a one world economic system.  Unfortunately, most Americans have absolutely no idea what is happening.

You can read the rest of this article here:

Conservative Bloggers .... Are They Effective?

I continue to see so many Conservative blog sites who's goal is helping to restore America.  Yet, about all I really see is many of these bloggers showing up at conventions at expensive hotels, etc.  Plus, many of them are continually asking for donations to support their efforts.  

My question to all these folks.....what have you really done to change anything in America? I am very skeptical of most of these folks as to what they are really up to?  I do know most are living a much better life than millions of Americans and they, bottom line, have accomplished nothing.  The only exception to this was Andrew Breitbart.  Let's face it, most of these high profile bloggers are really running a business and the #1 objective is to make money.

Again, my question:  Are Conservatives Bloggers Really Effective in what they do?  If they are why has nothing changed or am I just too impatient?

Romney Vs Obama (Evangelicals)

Much ink has been spilled (if that’s still an intelligible expression in this digital age) about the likely evangelical resistance to voting for Mitt Romney.  But, to my mind, the recent Pew poll paints a different picture.  Here’s what we learn:

  • Protestants favor Romney over Obama 51-43.
  • White non-Hispanic evangelicals favor Romney over Obama 73-20.
  • White non-Hispanic mainline Protestants favor Romney over Obama 50-42.
  • Weekly church attenders favor Romney over Obama 56-38.
  • White non-Hispanic evangelical weekly attenders favor Romney over Obama 80-16.

In other words, the most religiously observant white evangelicals are more likely–indeed, significantly more likely– than their less observant brethren to say they’re going to vote for Romney. (Evangelicals who attend less than once a week favor Romney over Obama 58-31.)

Gingrich Secret Service Costing Taxpayers Thousands Monthly!

From The Daily Caller

Even though by his own estimation he has very little prospect of winning the Republican nomination, Newt Gingrich is still likely costing the taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars a day with his Secret Service detail on the campaign trail.

Gingrich reportedly requested Secret Service protection in February and was granted a detail in early March. In April 2008, Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan told the Homeland Security Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee that it was then costing the agency roughly $38,000 a day to service each candidate receiving protection, which was then just Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

A source with knowledge of the inner workings of the Gingrich campaign told The Daily Caller that Gingrich recently had three people on his personal security detail, though sometimes there are "many more."

"Others on the campaign told me that some of the Secret Service members were even saying it was a waste of time and that he shouldn't have it," the source told The DC. "Staff members thought it was ridiculous too, and just another example of Newt's arrogance and self-importance."

COSMIC CONSTITUTIONAL THEORY....A MUST READ!!!

Judge_wilkinson_iii


Book Description

Publication Date: March 12, 2012 | Series: Inalienable Rights
American constitutional law has undergone a transformation. Issues once left to the people have increasingly become the province of the courts. Subjects as diverse as abortion rights and firearms regulations, health care reform and counterterrorism efforts, not to mention a millennial presidential election, are more and more the domain of judges. 

What sparked this development? In this engaging volume, Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson argues that America's most brilliant legal minds have launched a set of cosmic constitutional theories that, for all their value, are undermining self-governance. Thinkers as diverse as Justices William Brennan and Antonin Scalia, Professor John Hart Ely, Judges Robert Bork and Richard Posner, have all produced seminal interpretations of our Founding document, but ones that promise to imbue courts with unprecedented powers. While crediting the theorists for the sparkling quality of their thoughts, Judge Wilkinson argues they will slowly erode the role of representative institutions in America and leave our children bereft of democratic liberty. 

The loser in all the theoretical fireworks is the old and honorable tradition of judicial restraint. The judicial modesty once practiced by Learned Hand, John Harlan, and Oliver Wendell Holmes has given way to competing schools of liberal and conservative activism seeking sanctuary in Living Constitutionalism, Originalism, Process Theory, or the supposedly anti-theoretical creed of Pragmatism. Each of these seemingly disparate theories promises their followers an intellectually respectable route to congenial political outcomes from the bench. Judge Wilkinson calls for a plainer, simpler, self-disciplined commitment to judicial restraint and democratic governance, a course that alas may be impossible so long as the cosmic constitutionalists so dominate contemporary legal thought.

COSMIC CONSTITUTIONAL THEORY....A MUST READ!!!

Judge_wilkinson_iii


Book Description

Publication Date: March 12, 2012 | Series: Inalienable Rights
American constitutional law has undergone a transformation. Issues once left to the people have increasingly become the province of the courts. Subjects as diverse as abortion rights and firearms regulations, health care reform and counterterrorism efforts, not to mention a millennial presidential election, are more and more the domain of judges. 

What sparked this development? In this engaging volume, Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson argues that America's most brilliant legal minds have launched a set of cosmic constitutional theories that, for all their value, are undermining self-governance. Thinkers as diverse as Justices William Brennan and Antonin Scalia, Professor John Hart Ely, Judges Robert Bork and Richard Posner, have all produced seminal interpretations of our Founding document, but ones that promise to imbue courts with unprecedented powers. While crediting the theorists for the sparkling quality of their thoughts, Judge Wilkinson argues they will slowly erode the role of representative institutions in America and leave our children bereft of democratic liberty. 

The loser in all the theoretical fireworks is the old and honorable tradition of judicial restraint. The judicial modesty once practiced by Learned Hand, John Harlan, and Oliver Wendell Holmes has given way to competing schools of liberal and conservative activism seeking sanctuary in Living Constitutionalism, Originalism, Process Theory, or the supposedly anti-theoretical creed of Pragmatism. Each of these seemingly disparate theories promises their followers an intellectually respectable route to congenial political outcomes from the bench. Judge Wilkinson calls for a plainer, simpler, self-disciplined commitment to judicial restraint and democratic governance, a course that alas may be impossible so long as the cosmic constitutionalists so dominate contemporary legal thought.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry touts budget limits as crucial to state’s future at Plano Chamber

In a room packed with members of the Plano Chamber of Commerce and more than a few sitting or would-be state legislators, Gov. Rick Perry set the parameters for crafting the next state budget by presenting what he called the five simple tenets to his Texas Budget Compact.


Those principles – truth in budgeting, a Constitutional limit on spending tied to population growth and inflation, rejecting new taxes or increases and making the small business tax exemption permanent, preserving a strong Rainy Day fund, and cutting unnecessary or duplicative programs and agencies – will help assure that Texas remains atop the other states in job creation and other economic categories, Perry said.

He paused at one point and directed a comment at new Plano Schools Superintendent Richard Matkin, whose background is in accounting. “Superintendent, if you did your budgeting like the Texas Legislature did in recent years, you’d be in trouble,” the governor said.

Matkin quickly assured him he wouldn't.

Perry underscored that with the business crowd – how revenue and income determine how they operate, and how they live.
It has to be the same with the state, Perry said.

“As we focus on the next Legislative session, we’re going to continue to be thoughtful in our budget process in Austin, Texas,” he said.
Truth in budgeting will give the state’s residents’ faith and trust in government. And to reinforce that, setting state budget limits based on population growth and inflation rather than on personal income is crucial, Perry said.

So is making the small business tax exemption permanent, he said. “Why should [small business owners] have to come to Austin every two years and beg for it?” Perry asked.
With those kinds of guarantees in place, Texas can continue as a leader in job creation, the governor said. But the future also rests on decisions in Washington, D.C. – notably Medicaid and President Obama’s health plan, “the ticking time bomb” for state spending, Perry said.

Good Economist

---by Walter Williams

It's difficult to be a good economist and simultaneously be perceived as compassionate. To be a good economist, one has to deal with reality. To appear compassionate, often one has to avoid unpleasant questions, use "caring" terminology and view reality as optional.

Affordable housing and health care costs are terms with considerable emotional appeal that politicians exploit but have absolutely no useful meaning or analytical worth. For example, can anyone tell me in actual dollars and cents the price of an affordable car, house or myomectomy? It's probably more pleasant to pretend that there is universal agreement about what is or is not affordable.

If you think my criticism of affordability is unpleasant, you'll hate my vision of harm. A good economist recognizes that harm is not a one-way street; it's reciprocal. For example, if I own a lot and erect a house in front of your house and block your view of a beautiful scene, I've harmed you; however, if I am prevented from building my house in front of yours, I'm harmed. Whose harm is more important? You say, "Williams, you can't tell." You can stop me from harming you by persuading some government thugs to stop me from building. It's the same thing with smoking. If I smoke a cigarette, you're harmed — or at least bothered. If I'm prevented from smoking a cigarette, I'm harmed by reduced pleasure. Whose harm is more important? Again, you can't tell. But as in the building example, the person who is harmed can use government thugs to have things his way.

How many times have we heard that "if it will save just one human life, it's worth it" or that "human life is priceless"? Both are nonsense statements. If either statement were true, we'd see lower speed limits, bans on auto racing and fewer airplanes in the sky. We can always be safer than we are. For example, cars could be produced such that occupants could survive unscathed in a 50-mph head-on collision, but how many of us could buy such a car? Don't get me wrong; I might think my life is priceless, but I don't view yours in the same light. I admire Greta Garbo's objectivity about her life. She said, "I'm a completely worthless woman, and no man should risk his life for me."

Speaking of worthlessness, I'd be worthless as an adviser to either the White House or Congress because if they asked me what they should do to get the economy going, I'd answer, "Do nothing!" Let's look at it. Between 1787 and 1930, our nation suffered both mild and severe economic downturns. There was no intervention to stimulate the economy, but the economy always recovered.

During the 1930s, there were massive interventions, starting with President Herbert Hoover and later with President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Their actions turned what would have been a sharp three- or four-year economic downturn into a 10-year affair. In 1930, when Hoover began to "fix" the economy, unemployment was 6 percent. FDR did even more to "fix" the economy. As a result, unemployment remained in double digits throughout the decade and reached 20 percent in 1939. President Roosevelt blamed the high unemployment on his predecessor. Presidential blaming of predecessors is a practice that continues to this day.

You say, "Williams, the White House and Congress should do something." The track record of doing nothing is pretty good compared with doing something. None of our economic downturns in the century and a half prior to 1930 lasted as long as the Great Depression.

It would be political suicide for a politician to follow my counsel — and for good reason. Americans have been miseducated into thinking that Roosevelt's New Deal saved our economy. That miseducation extends to most academics, including economists, at our universities, who are arrogant enough to believe that it's possible for a few people in Washington to have the information and knowledge necessary to manage the economic lives of 313 million people. Good economists recognize our limitations, making us not nice people to be around.

America 2012!!

It seems that America has become the land of the special interest and the home of the double standard. If we lie to Congress it's a felony, but if Congress lies to us it's just politics; if we dislike a black person we're racist, but if a black person dislikes us it's their 1st Amendment right; the government spends millions to rehabilitate criminals, but the do almost nothing for the victims; in public schools you can teach that homosexuality is OK, but you better not use the word God in the process; you can kill an unborn child, but it's wrong to execute a mass murderer; we don't burn books in America, we simply rewrite them; we got rid of the communist and socialist threat by renaming them progressives; we are unable to close our border to Mexico, but have no problem protecting the 38th parallel in Korea; if you protest President Obama's policies you are a terrorist, but if you burned an American flag or George Bush in effigy it is your 1st Amendment right.

You can have pornography on TV or the internet, but you better not put a nativity scene in a public park during Christmas; we have eliminated all criminals in America, but now we call them sick people; we can use a human fetus for medical research, but it's wrong to use an animal.

We take money from those who work hard for it and give it to those who don't want to work; we all support the Constitution, but only when it supports our political ideology; we still have freedom of speech, but only if we are being politically correct; parenting has been replaced with Ritalin and video games; the land of opportunity is now the land of hand-outs; the similarity between Hurricane Katrina and the gulf oil spill is that neither president did anything to help.

And how do we handle a major crisis today? The government appoints a committee to determine who's at fault, then threatens them, passes a law, raises our taxes, and tells us the problem is solved so they can get back to their reelection campaign.

We have candidates running for office wooing us with promises and platitudes for our votes and when elected become "hookers" for the corporations and caring little for those that elected them; we have Governors, Dept of Agriculture heads, Attorney Generals and Legislators that eagerly accept campaign contributions from food polluting companies that think nothing of threatening lawsuits to states that want to pass bills giving the people the opportunity of knowing what they eat.

What has happened to the land of the free and the home of the brave?

​