Napolitano in Embarrassing Position with Administration

Napolitano in Embarrassing Position with Administration
Al Ritter


In a ruling by the Supreme Court yesterday, Arizona will now have states power in the enforcement of business hiring practices involving legal versus illegal immigrants. The ironic part of this whole case revolves around the fact that it was Janet Napolitano, then governor of Arizona that signed this legislation into law in 2007.

Napolitano has since reversed her stance on the role of state’s rights versus federal rights. Now she makes it clear that the intent of this Administration is to ignore federal laws already on the books and continue as an “open border” country. It seems funny that this very law sought to give Arizona the right to enforce hiring practices within the state, that the federal government refused to enforce, but now she disagrees with it.

This Supreme Court opinion could give a small glimpse into a future ruling on Arizona bill SB1070 sure to eventually make its way to the higher court. The left says this is a victory for the conservatives, when in actuality it is a victory for our homeland security………..how ironic for Janet Napolitano!

Ashamed

Ashamed
Kevin Bryant

“Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it” – There are many versions of this quote attributed to many different people. Though we may never know the true version first spoken or who said it, one thing will always remain true and that is the truth of the statement itself.

To borrow and adapt a line from Michelle Obama, I can honestly say after this past week, for the first time in my life, I AM TRULY ASHAMED OF MY PRESIDENT AND MY GOVERNMENT.

First I would like to say this: How dare the President of the United States think he can speak for me alone much less two thirds of the American people when he stated; “While the core issues of the conflict must be negotiated, the basis of those negotiations is clear: a viable Palestine, a secure Israel. The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their full potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state”.

Every time Israel has given successions to a non-existent Palestinian state, it has been repaid with violence and betrayal by the Palestinian people, many times resulting in death of innocent Israeli citizens. To now demand Israel revert back to the 1967 borders is an invitation to the total destruction of Israel and its people. Since the days of the Trumann Administration, American Presidents have publicly backed and supported Israel. Our current President wants to kick Israel to the curb and place blame on the Israeli government for everything wrong in the Middle East. Obama received 70% of the Jewish vote and millions of dollars in support in 2008. For some reason I don’t think he will be getting the same support this time around.

Roughly two thirds of Americans were appalled by the president’s speech, me included. Is President Obama America’s equivalent of Arthur Neville Chamberlain, British Prime Minister May, 1937 to May, 1940 and arguably the world’s most spineless head of state. Does he desire peace though concessions? Does he actually believe Palestine will support Israel of they give up territory that never did belong to imaginary Palestinian state to begin with? History says Israel obtains the land in a war with Jordan. Why not demand Jordan to concede land for a Palestinian state? That would make more sense. Why must Israel pay?

Where are our elected leaders of congress on this? We know 90% of the democrats in congress only care about three things and in this order 1) their political survival, 2) amassing more power and 3) inflating their own bank accounts. I have never been a big fan of John Boehner and Eric Cantor, and from what I have seen over the past year, their spines combined do not equal that of Nancy Pelosi or Steny Hoyer and combined they do not equal half the amount of spine and guts of that of Dennis Kucinich. At least he will stand up on the house floor and speak and vote against the majority of democrats when he disagrees with them. Why are none of the members of either house of congress speaking out and saying the president may believe these things but the congress and the American people are standing with and support the rights of Israel to be a free and secure Middle East state and the President does not speak for us.

Yes, I AM ASHAMED of those in government who are supposed to be leaders, who were elected to be leaders and who are supposed represent me, you and America.

Why are Ron Paul Followers so Anti-Semitic?

Why are Ron Paul Followers so Anti-Semitic?
Al Ritter


Last night I participated in a conversation that was filled so much with hatred against the Israelis that it truly scared me. A woman and a man both in their early 30’s had swayed a conversation from GM cars to how the Israelis should be thrown from their country.


Ron Paul claims that he thinks that Israel should have their foreign aid cut along with every other country, but has no animosity towards Israel. Whatever he has done to brainwash the youth of this country is dangerous to well-being of our country. He denies that he himself is anti-Semitic but does nothing to change the stance of his followers.


Paul’s followers are an enigma to me, they follow no normal pattern, although they are young, they blindly follow a 76 year old who is clearly a confrontational bigot, and their allegiance is carried out in the typical way SEIU and Acorn handle theirs…….rudely and violently. The Libertarian Party claims to be the party of the “founding fathers,” but to anyone who has read the founding father‘s documents, it is clear that the founding fathers would be insulted by such an association.


Paul claims to have some exclusive connection to the Constitution, and to anyone who questions his motives, he answers with hostility and belligerence, and as a result his followers act in the same manner.


I urge everyone of sound mind to read ALL the founding father’s documents from the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, to the Federalist Papers, to the Constitution itself, and judge for yourself whether or not you fall into the category of a Ron Paul follower or a Constitutional thinker!

Differences in a Republic and Democracy According to Madison

Differences in a Republic and Democracy According to Madison
Al Ritter


I recently embarked on a quest for knowledge about the evolution of our government. I knew of course about the Declaration of Independence in 1776, but from that point forward my grasp on how we came to be took a clouded turn.


Our country formally began in 1776, but not under the Constitution as we know it now, but under “Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union.” This was our first “Constitution.” It only took 10 years for this document to be outdated, and as George Washington opined, “The problem is money, and we have none.” The original Constitution had no teeth from which to collect taxes from the various states. Certain states became the darlings of the Federal Government, and others flatly refused to pay taxes based on preferential treatment of others.


On September 17, 1787 a Constitutional Convention was convened in Philadelphia. The person whom presided over the convention was given the title of President of the Convention, and that person happened to be later the first president of our country, George Washington. The writing of the Constitution was accomplished in rather quick order, but the ratification process took almost 3 years. 13 original states ratified the document from December 1787 to May of 1790.


Three or our founding fathers who worked in anonymity took on the task of convincing the country through a series of 85 essays published at first In New York but eventually cross country of the importance of ratification of this new document known as the Constitution. So prolific were these essays (as often as three a week) that the people were totally mesmerized by the thought that went into them. It would later be known that the authors of these papers later to be known as the Federalist Papers were written by Alexander Hamilton (51 articles) James Madison (26 articles) and John Jay (5 articles).



These papers are used today as a peek into the past of the rationalization of though on the making of the Constitution. In these papers is the exploration of the history of governments throughout time and the reasons for their demise. It was determined that the best form of government would be a republic rather than a democracy. Madison opined that a republic is a representative government rather than a democratic government which needed to be done in person rather than by representative. He sighted the governments of Rome and Greece as having democratic rule and thus was the lead reason of their downfall. Sighted below are Madison’s remarks pertaining to the two different style governments.

“The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended.

The effect of the first difference is, on the one hand, to refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations. Under such a regulation, it may well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the purpose. On the other hand, the effect may be inverted. Men of factious tempers, of local prejudices, or of sinister designs, may, by intrigue, by corruption, or by other means, first obtain the suffrages, and then betray the interests, of the people. The question resulting is, whether small or extensive republics are more favorable to the election of proper guardians of the public weal; and it is clearly decided in favor of the latter by two obvious considerations:

In the first place, it is to be remarked that, however small the republic may be, the representatives must be raised to a certain number, in order to guard against the cabals of a few; and that, however large it may be, they must be limited to a certain number, in order to guard against the confusion of a multitude. Hence, the number of representatives in the two cases not being in proportion to that of the two constituents, and being proportionally greater in the small republic, it follows that, if the proportion of fit characters be not less in the large than in the small republic, the former will present a greater option, and consequently a greater probability of a fit choice.

In the next place, as each representative will be chosen by a greater number of citizens in the large than in the small republic, it will be more difficult for unworthy candidates to practice with success the vicious arts by which elections are too often carried; and the suffrages of the people being more free, will be more likely to centre in men who possess the most attractive merit and the most diffusive and established characters.
It must be confessed that in this, as in most other cases, there is a mean, on both sides of which inconveniences will be found to lie. By enlarging too much the number of electors, you render the representatives too little acquainted with all their local circumstances and lesser interests; as by reducing it too much, you render him unduly attached to these, and too little fit to comprehend and pursue great and national objects. The federal Constitution forms a happy combination in this respect; the great and aggregate interests being referred to the national, the local and particular to the State legislatures.

The other point of difference is, the greater number of citizens and extent of territory which may be brought within the compass of republican than of democratic government; and it is this circumstance principally which renders factious combinations less to be dreaded in the former than in the latter. The smaller the society, the fewer probably will be the distinct parties and interests composing it; the fewer the distinct parties and interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of the same party; and the smaller the number of individuals composing a majority, and the smaller the compass within which they are placed, the more easily will they concert and execute their plans of oppression. Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests; you make it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens; or if such a common motive exists, it will be more difficult for all who feel it to discover their own strength, and to act in unison with each other.

Besides other impediments, it may be remarked that, where there is a consciousness of unjust or dishonorable purposes, communication is always checked by distrust in proportion to the number whose concurrence is necessary.

Hence, it clearly appears, that the same advantage which a republic has over a democracy, in controlling the effects of faction, is enjoyed by a large over a small republic,--is enjoyed by the Union over the States composing it. Does the advantage consist in the substitution of representatives whose enlightened views and virtuous sentiments render them superior to local prejudices and schemes of injustice? It will not be denied that the representation of the Union will be most likely to possess these requisite endowments. Does it consist in the greater security afforded by a greater variety of parties, against the event of any one party being able to outnumber and oppress the rest? In an equal degree does the increased variety of parties comprised within the Union, increase this security. Does it, in fine, consist in the greater obstacles opposed to the concert and accomplishment of the secret wishes of an unjust and interested majority? Here, again, the extent of the Union gives it the most palpable advantage.”

James Madison, Federalist Papers # 10 Nov. 23, 1787

Dear Patriots

Dear Patriots:
William G. Burmer

It appears as each new day passes we are forced to endure more and more lies and distortions from our elected officials at all levels of government. I would say government service; but I purposely omitted the term because it has become all too obvious that they are where they are to serve themselves and not the people who elected them. I remain hopeful that some will be more forceful and (using the adjective) forthright in their efforts as time moves forward. I have taken the liberty to borrow sentences and phrases in the following paragraphs which have come from others much more gifted in speech than I. The words are not mine, I however endorse them and wish they were; for all of my efforts I could do no better.

Next to life itself I am thankful for the gift of free agency, indeed a free gift from God for which each of us should be grateful. It is the source from which Liberty is spoken, and from which conscience became an integral part of human nature; freedom not only to think, but to speak and act, I might add, intelligently, using common sense, not, non-sense.

I have made it no secret that my faith teaches me that the Constitution is not only the true and only Law of the land, but that, in addition, the Lord affixed his personal approval of its very existence.

Preceding this great document was the Declaration of Independence which, in truth contains our rights as free men and woman in America. Scarcely one year after the “shot heard round the world” was sounded, during the speeches prior to its adoption and transmission to King George III, our great patriot John Adams said this:

“Sink or swim, live or die, survive or perish, I have my hand and my heart to this vote. It is true, indeed, that in the beginning we aimed not at independence. But there’s a Divinity which shapes our ends . . . Why, then, should we defer the Declaration? . . . You and I, indeed, may rue it. We may not live to the time when this Declaration shall be made good. We May die; die Colonists, die slaves, die, it may be, ignominiously and on the scaffold.

Be it so. Be it so.

It may be the pleasure of Heaven that my country shall require the poor offering of my life; the victim shall be ready. . . But while I do live, let me have a country, or at least the hope of a country, and that a free country.

But whatever may be our fate, be assured . . . that this Declaration will stand. It may cost treasure, and it may cost blood; but it will stand and it will richly compensate for both.

Through the thick gloom of the present, I see the brightness of the future as the sun in heaven. We shall make this a glorious, an immortal day. When we are in our graves, our children will honor it. They will celebrate it with thanksgiving, with festivity, with bonfires, and illuminations. On its annual return they will shed tears, copious, gushing tears, not of subjection and slavery, not of agony and distress, but of exultation, of gratitude and of joy.

Sir, before God, I believe the hour is come. My judgment approves this measure, and my whole heart is in it. All that I have, and all that I am, and all that I hope, in this life, I am now ready here to stake upon it; and I leave off as I began, that live or die, survive or perish, I am for the Declaration. It is my living sentiment, and by the blessing of God it shall be my dying sentiment, Independence now, and Independence forever. [The Works of Daniel Webster, 4th ed., 1:133–:36]”

Thus it was in those colonial days that men such as Adams came, who were to stand firm against any form of dictatorship. Their faith flourished in the bright sunlight of free agency, and their ability to govern themselves. Thus the seed of freedom began to grow. These may have been the horse and buggy days of which our modern leaders besmirch and deride but the idea of freedom has never at any time in history taken a back seat to time or place.

Yes, I love this nation. To me it is not just another nation, not just a member of the family of nations. It is a great and glorious nation with a divine mission, brought into being under the inspiration of heaven. I make no apologies for this fact. Our founders, and the freedoms, and principles they sacrificed for were inspired of God; for they turned to the scriptures, and to religion, in order to have their great experiment make sense to them.

In these challenging days, when there are so many influences which would divert us, there is a need to rededicate ourselves to the lofty principles and practices of our Founding Fathers.

We have allowed our courts, through their anti-prayer, anti-God decisions, to outlaw in the schools the positive belief of the truths contained in the Declaration of Independence, and the very foundation of our nation.

What are needed today is the same faith and fearless attitudes that our founders displayed. To be steady as we teach our children and grandchildren that freedom is not free. It take diligence but more, it takes a knowledge of the truth; we must dedicate ourselves to preserving and teaching the truth about our great Nation , we must shout it from the housetops and in every breath, and in every action we take.. We must stand firm with an unwavering faith in God. , we must not be distracted by the liberal children on the Marxist left.

Governmental Policy of Regressive Energy

Governmental Policy of Regressive Energy
Al Ritter

The year was 1977, and then President Carter was still reeling from the gas embargo. As a direct result of the gas crisis the Department of Energy was formed to “release us from the dependency on foreign oil.” As time went on the Department of Energy was saddled with other responsibilities, and as often happens with governmental excess the original reason for its inception was lost in bureaucracy.

Obama has declared the burning of fossil fuels as harmful to the world, even though Al Gore’s original claim has been shown to be a scam on the public. Cap and Trade is what this greedy President believes in, and he is poised to present it one way or another, even if it circumvents the senate through executive order. Originally Obama claimed that our aim was much like President Carter……to decrease our dependency on foreign oil. Obama has now proved that his REAL aim is to drive the price of oil so high that it can compete on an even scale with renewable resources.

Unfortunately the Administration is driving prices through the ceiling by driving more people into the unemployment line. Denying America the oil industry denies Americans jobs. This isn’t a big secret, the less domestic production of oil ties the hands of capitalism. We don’t need one man’s personal vendetta on fossil fuel we need JOBS to recover our economic status in the world. We need a fast line to approve drilling permits to put people back to work, and to lower fuel prices.

The Department of Energy needs to either reorganize, or the responsibilities need to be redistributed and the whole department dissolved. The bureaucracy of government has once again lost its way.

Obama wants to blame high oil prices on price gouging and speculation, but his view is rather skewed. Let’s look at supply and demand this way. China and India, along with the US are the largest oil users in the world, and at present they produce more oil than we do. This figure doesn’t just happen by choice. China and India run their oil exploration at full capacity, but we do not. We artificially hold production low……our country only produces 2% of the earth’s oil production, we could be MUCH higher. Now take into account that countries such as China, India, Egypt, Venezuela, etc. not only don’t charge tax on fuel, they actually subsidize gasoline and diesel to their citizens! Is there any incentive for their citizens to use less fuel when they can buy gasoline for 18 cents a gallon? You have to understand, when in a country of poverty, (making less than $2 a day), they can’t compete with a world price on oil, so the government has to subsidize it.

Obama has actually increased our dependency on foreign oil, and thusly puts our national security in jeopardy. He has shown his hand in the oil problem as being a grand falsehood, he doesn’t care at all about being dependent on foreign, in fact it plays better for his “one world order” intent. The people who suffer are Americans, and it’s up to us to change the direction of self-destruction.

The Country Suffers While Obama Shifts Attention

The Country Suffers While Obama Shifts Attention
Al Ritter

They latest trick is the Obama Administration’s ability to shift attention to various issues while they stay perplexed over the main problems in our country. Last week’s recent filing figures for unemployment rose to 474,000 staggering our economy even further. The Administration continues to artificially prop up the stock market through the Federal Bank, claiming that the jobs that have been lost “might never come back.”


No country has ever had an economic recovery without putting people back to work, and yet the Obama Administration continually claims that we are in a “jobless recovery.” To further confuse the public, the way the unemployment figure is calculated was changed by Bill Clinton in his Welfare Reform Act. Once all benefits are exhausted and the recipient doesn’t return to work they are taken off the roles of the “unemployed.” The real figure is closer to double the 9% the Administration claims.


All the while the important issues are continuing the sleight of hand tricks continue with the Administration. I am not minimizing the fact that Osama bin laden has been killed, or that President has finally presented his long form birth certificate, but it does seem odd that those two things have come to light in the last two weeks amidst the president’s falling approval numbers.


Albert Einstein once said that insanity is doing things over and over again the same way and expecting a different outcome. Our president continues on the same trail merely throwing money we don’t have at a problem that isn’t fixed by money alone. Obviously the current cure isn’t working, and the liberals refuse to admit it.

Trickle Down Destruction, A Conspiracy Theory

Trickle Down Destruction, A Conspiracy Theory
Kevin Bryant

Ronald Reagan may not have coined the phrase Trickle Down Economics but he made it a household phrase in the 80”s. I call this piece Trickle Down Destruction because it works on basically the same theory but just with different players.

First I would like to say, welcome to Kevin’s wonderful world of conspiracy theories. To many of you this is going to sound a little Glenn Beckish and probably rightfully so. This has been floating around in my head for several weeks but I couldn’t put all the pieces of it together. A Glenn Beck show managed to fill in some of the pieces I found myself looking for but couldn’t quite come up with.

Had it not been for a younger black senator from Illinois who had terrific speechwriters, the weight of the Chicago political machine behind him coming out of nowhere with a list of friends even more devious and better behind the scenes players than those of the Clinton political machine, she would be president right now. Let’s be real now, there is no way she would have ever lost to John McCain. Hillary won almost all the primary states against Obama where left leaning independents outnumber left wing democrats.

Once the primaries were over, Obama faced an even bigger hurdle than beating Hillary. He needed her and Bill’s support. We all know Obama is a mere puppet of the radical left which is something Hillary would have never been. Obama verbally trash talked Hillary in the primaries, all but called her husband a racist and a second rate president. How do you convince these people to help you win an election? Enter the two best married political minds of the latter 20th century along with John Podesta and the George Soros and Hillary Clinton founded Center for American Progress.

Shortly after Obama took office, it “slipped” that Joe Biden was given his choice of either VP or Secretary of State. If you believe this to be fact, I have some great ocean front property in Kansas that I would love to sell you. Look at the facts, Joe Biden was whipped in the democratic primaries by almost every candidate. Obama knew he could not be elected if he did not have the support of the Clintons regardless of who his running mate was. Then it is leaked he gave the choice of office to Biden while Hillary is just to roll over and play second fiddle to Biden, I don’t think so.

Hillary, since the middle of 2010 has not done Obama any favors. She has publicly second guessed Obama’s choices a few times while you never hear her single him out in praise. As Secretary of State, she gets to fly under the radar more-so than that of a VP and at the same time she is in the position of meeting a lot more global players in private. Hillary is too smart to do anything publicly to undermine the president and too smart to do anything to boost his ratings.

Conspiracy Time:

Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton are the only two people elected to the office of President of the United States in the past 75 years who unseated a current sitting president. George Soros has publicly stated on more than a few occasions that Obama is not living up to the expectations of Soros’s Center for American Progress or Soros’s Tides Foundation or the 50+ satellite organizations where Soros is a major contributor.

Obama has to have the Clintons to get elected, no way around this. You don’t think there was some back door deals made for that support? Who heads Obama’s transition team but the one and only John Podesta, former Clinton insider. Who heads the CIA, another former Clinton insider. Some of Obama’s highest advisors are former Clinton insiders. Obama’s entire administration is either former Clinton insiders or Marxist revolutionaries who are going to exactly what the Clintons and Soros want, which is in line with Obama’s views of how things should be.

Obama is likely to go by the wayside like Jimmy Carter. Most smart democrats know this and it won’t take an overly popular republican candidate to defeat him. I once thought Hillary might run against Obama in 2012 but that was never her intention. I now believe it was a well thought out misdirection move on the part of the Clintons to maintain control of Obama’s actions. Make a move that appears to be a threatening one and Obama backs down. That is his nature. I once like many others believed it was Soros who was pulling Obama’s puppet strings. I was wrong. If Washington DC were a theatre, Soros would be the production manager and show’s producer, Obama would still be a mere puppet but it is the Clintons would be the directing the show and pulling Obama’s strings.

Hillary is not going to run in 2012. The Clintons and George Soros could care less who wins the white house in 2012. If Obama is somehow re-elected, the puppet stays in place to do their bidding. If he is defeated, he will have already caused so much damage that it can’t be repaired in a mere 3 years and the republican 2012 winner will take a fall despite his or her best efforts to right a sinking ship. The Clintons, with the financial backing of Soros will make an all out assault on capturing the white house in 2016 and unless some miracle happens between 2013 & 2015, Hillary will win the 2016 election. Remember, Bill beat a sitting president, George Herbert Walker Bush and his popularity numbers were higher than those of George W. Bush when he was re-elected to office.

Picture any newly elected President taking office in 2013. Now look at the shape of the world in 2014. The only true friend America will have left is Canada. Most of the Middle East governments that were in place in 2010 will have been overthrown and replaced by even more extreme Islamic governments. Those that haven’t been overthrown will capitulate to the will of the others for their own survival. I can easily see Israel in a full blown war with multiple Islamic countries and only Great Britain there fully backing them militarily. We know Obama won’t lift a finger to help. Hillary, as Sec of State will have already brokered her own deals in exchange for keeping America out of the fight. Russia and China could care less if Israel stands or falls and will use their stranglehold on the rest of Europe and Asia to stay out of it. The economy is going to be severely wrecked by 2014 and again, barring a miracle, the economy, unemployment and inflation will have American people lashing out at anyone and everyone because the damage will have been done in such a manner that no administration and no congress can completely turn things around in 3.5 years.

A world in chaos, America is on the edge of imploding and there is no real world leadership. Who better to come to the rescue but the wife of a very popular former president who herself was a United States Senator and a former Secretary of State. Foreign diplomatic experience coupled with first hand American government experience. The only thing she will be missing is a white horse to ride in on. Once Hillary is elected, there is only one miracle left that will save America as we know it today, but will she have the courage to give America that miracle, will she have the guts to defy her master, George Soros and do the right thing by America?

Yes, this is a conspiracy theory and you all probably think it is more whacked out than anything that has come from Glenn Beck. Maybe so, but I promise this, If I do see things shaping up as how I described, you bet your ass I will be on the first plane headed to a yet to be determined destination in South America.

Was the Capture of bin Laden a Political Ploy?

Was the Capture of bin Laden a Political Ploy?
Al Ritter


With spiraling approval polls Obama used two issues within a 7 day period to drive up his popularity. The first issue was the production of his long form certificate of live birth, which sought to finally put to rest the question of his citizenship.

It seems to me that the “discovery” of Osama bin Laden’s hideaway was more than just a coincidence some 7 days later. The Seal Team 6 had been practicing mock attacks on a staged area in the Bagram Airbase facility in Afghanistan since April in hopes of catching him off guard in the near future in his makeshift home in Pakistan.

Regardless of the implications of the Pakistani government’s involvement in the hiding of bin Laden, Barack Obama certainly benefitted from his capture and execution. Whether the Islamic world approves or disapproves of his actions Sunday night/Monday morning, it is certain that his approval polls have gone up some 9 points.

I have long said that there are NO coincidences in politics and I certainly believe that this is no exception. Obama has taken a page directly from Rahm Emanuel’s book of, “never let a crisis go to waste.” The larger question is, will this recent climb in his approval rating have any staying power, or will the multitude of his problems drag him back, and if so in what time period?

Osama Bin Laden’s Life comes to an End

Osama Bin Laden’s Life comes to an End
Al Ritter

Mastermind of the attack on the USS Cole, the attack on two African embassies, the infamous attack that toppled both the world trade centers and the attack on the pentagon was killed Sunday evening early by an Elite Seal Unit “Navy Six”.

In a compound built in 2005 very close to a Pakistani Military compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. The raid lasted less than 40 minutes and three males were killed which included Osama and one of his sons, although it wasn’t reported which son was killed. The attack was in a million dollar compound owned by one of bin Laden’s couriers and included 18 foot fencing surrounded with razor ribbon. Fortunately the attack cost no American lives.

Confirmation of the death of Bin Laden was done through DNA and fingerprint then the body was immediately buried at sea. The military said the burial was carried out according to Islamic law. The Whitehouse sited the reason for the burial at sea was because no country would have accepted his remains, but it is clear that a grave site would have created a martyr status for the leading world’s terrorist personally responsible for over 3400 American deaths and countless deaths from other countries.

Obviously this won’t be the end of radical Islamic Attacks around the world, but it certainly cut the head of the snake. The ten year hunt for the most prolific terrorist came to an end when he held a female hostage in front of himself to avoid being shot; he died the same way he lived, as a coward!

Obama’s Birth Certificate Means Nothing!

Obama’s Birth Certificate Means Nothing!
Al Ritter

The recent release of Obama’s birth certificate means nothing in the general picture. It might be real or it could be a fraud, but the result is the same, nothing legally would be done if it was a forgery in the remaining part of Obama’s presidency. It’s clear that the Supreme Court won’t touch this issue with a 20 foot pole, from the past cases they have passed on. Why should we assume anything will change now? The conservative Supreme Court Justices have made a few cryptic inferences that there IS a way to present the challenge, but nobody has done so yet. Why continue another 2 years down the road in court cases doomed to failure?

Unfortunately the framers of the Constitution make a few mistakes in crafting the prerequisites to be President of the United States. First off they never included a definition of what constitutes a natural born citizen, and secondly they never spelled out a vehicle for candidates to supply the needed documents to prove eligibility to be placed on ballots of the office of the Presidency.

Interestingly enough the Constitution offers another avenue to assure compliance. State sovereignty is the key to elections, each state may chose the way they conduct elections, and the Constitution doesn’t differentiate between federal elections and state elections. This offers an interesting twist to Presidential requirements. If each state requires proof of eligibility to be placed on a Presidential ballot, this non sense of who was born where could be finally put to rest.

We wouldn’t even need every state to draft such a law, this would only be needed in a few key political states, Iowa, Ohio, or Texas could be the turning point of this issue. We need to put this to rest, accept what we are saddled with for the next two years, but fix the problem for future elections! Who can possibly disagree with following the Constitution to the letter of the law?.........Yea I know, stupid question!

Will Rising Costs Keep Obama From Being Re-elected?

Will Rising Costs Keep Obama From Being Re-elected?
Al Ritter

The administration from the very beginning wanted energy costs to “necessarily skyrocket,” but the question is…..Will it keep the president from being re-elected? It is no coincidence that oil prices and food prices are not factors in figuring the federal Cost of Living index. Many things can be affected by a formal raise in the federal cost of living index, including social security payments, which the government wants to purposely keep low.

The recent monetization of the debt, (government buying up bond paper) that the federal bank never said would happen has contributed to the devaluation of the dollar. Each year the government prints more and more money, and if 2011 holds true to the pattern established by past administrations will approach $900 billion give or take $20 billion. To put that figure into perspective, the money printed in 2005 was only $380 billion. The treasury department prints so much money a day that they consume 18 TONS of ink daily! President Nixon started this inflationary practice when he was the commander in chief, by taking the gold reserve standard off the table, meaning that the government could only print as much money as they had gold to back it.

Now money is created from thin air, and the more that is made the less the overall production is worth. Keep in mind that the government prints money, they then hand it over to the 12 branches of the Federal Bank for distribution. Now also keep in mind that the Federal Bank is not part of our government, regardless of their name. They answer to no one, not even the President, and the only one that can even remove their power is congress, and they refuse to intervene. The fed decides who gets money and how much they get; basically they control our economy, not Timothy Geithner.

How can deflationary practices lead to inflation? View the economy like this; deflationary practices make our money worth less than it was last year. When we have to buy more as a country than we produce, it means we have to import materials. If we use the money that is now worth less than it was last year we will have to use more of it to acquire the same goods. Thusly we have inflation. Oil and food stuffs are the leading contributors to inflation, and correspondingly are NOT included in the cost of living indexes the government releases. A rise in food and oil prices affects everyone equally, and when that happens, it disproportionately affects the poor to a greater amount.

Keep this in mind as President Obama demonizes oil “price gougers.” According to the EIA, the oil companies made on the average 8.3% profit after taxes last year, that 8 cents on the dollar folks. For 8% they drill they refine, and they do research and development. Now let’s look at the REAL PRICE GOUGERS, the government taxes that gasoline at about 40 cents per gallon (depending on what state you live in), but the federal government tax alone represents 13.7% of each gallon. The government produces NOTHING other than money so don’t think for a minute that there is a cost for each gallon of fuel they tax on other than in the collection of that tax. 13.7% clear profit, for doing NOTHING! If the definition of “price gouger” is nothing more than making an exorbitant profit on the back of someone else, the administration has no farther to look then their own back yard!

Dear Patriots

Dear Patriots:
William G Burmer

I have a friend who eschews most of the editorials regarding government problems and the people involved. Indeed I confess I also feel somewhat overwhelmed by all the negative rhetoric that comes to me in the email and airwaves; as a result I delete or tune out a large percentage of it.

It certainly appears that between government chicanery and Conservative commentary there is little change from week to week; certainly nothing much to hear of an edifying nature, i.e. optimistic or hopeful. It is understandable that many would rather just tune out rather than be assaulted with a constant barrage of negative tripe.

Most all of us are largely fed up with what goes on in government at all levels, but ( and I say it in a positive vein, because the word in most circumstances negates everything that came before it) so again, but it is imperative that we remain informed, armed with truth, and are engaged in righteous doing. Remember that there has always been a battle between right and wrong, good and evil since the beginning of man. There is no denying the fact that, that battle appears more intense now than before any time in the past history of our nation with the exception of perhaps the events of the Revolutionary War. I am sure this is how it should be; it is always darkest before the light.

Most of us are of the mindset that Principle does matter, the constitution is and remains the Law of the Land to spite certain elected officers obvious contempt for it. We cling to the hope that our vote and diligent pursuit of right will prevail. It remains painfully obvious however that there is a ruling majority in offices that are in every sense of the word Marxist, and they need to be defeated.

There is a story of interest in the Scriptures of the Prophet Elisha who was a consultant to the King of Israel. When the People of Israel desired a more spacious place to dwell than they were previously confined they trespassed upon Syrian land and the King of Syria came to war against Israel by night and surrounded them. Elisha’s young Servant rose early in the morning to discover the army of Syria and with fear in his heart alerted Elisha., Elisha’s response was “Fear not: for they that be with us are more than they that be with them.’ And Elisha prayed, and said Lord I prey the, open his eyes, that he may see. And the Lord opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha” 2 Kings 6:16-17.

It is important for us to know that our course is true and correct, that even though it may appear our efforts are not bearing much fruit, the armies of the Lord are round about us, and will bear us up in our efforts; may we have our eyes opened that we might see as did the servant of Elisha that we are truly not alone in our efforts to restore and heal our great Nation.

Arizona is Becoming the State of “Yes We Can!”

Arizona is Becoming the State of “Yes We Can!”
Al Ritter

Arizona, under the leadership of Gov. Jan Brewer has moved into the legislative realm of being the state of, “If the federal government won’t do it we will!” On the heels of SB1070, the illegal alien bill which Arizona passed to enforce the laws of federal government that the Obama Administration refuses to, Gov. Jan Brewer has signed into law the “birther bill.”

Clearly the Constitution gives all power of elections to the individual states, and Arizona has taken the lead in the country by making any candidate (including presidential) present a birth certificate to them before being put on any ballot for office in their state.

Brewer’s challenges to Obamacare and SB1070 may be open for legal interpretation, but this birther legislation is CLEARLY within their realm of rights. Article 1 Section 4 of the Constitution states; The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Place of Chusing Senators.

So unless Congress passes an amendment to the Constitution superseding this section in the future this law enabling Arizona to demand proof of birth as a “natural citizen,” the case is closed. Hopefully other conservative states will exercise their state sovereignty by demanding the very proof that is outlined in the Constitution for the eligibility of potential candidates, thereby averting future questions.

Only one office in the United States makes the requirement of being a natural citizen and that is the Presidency, and to ignore that requirement is disrespectful in the least and treasonous at the worst. I personally salute Gov. Jan Brewer for making her stand!

Article Update: Monday Jan Brewer formally vetoed the Arizona bill to show proof of citizenship for presidential candidates, I must say I am not only shocked, but dissappointed in Gov. Brewer's satnd on this. I would encourage the Arizona legislature to remove the baptismal requirement and resubmit it once again.

Missing Piece

Missing Piece
Kevin Bryant

There have been several times when I leave the house in the mornings with the gut feeling that I forgot something and usually I find out later that I was right. When my kids were growing up, they would come in late and give me some excuse as to why. Sometimes I was satisfied with the reason and others, there just seemed to be something missing from the story. When Obama or any of the last 9 presidents give a speech, the speech is on a grand scale but the substance seems to be missing. The leaders in congress are the same way. They tell you on a grand scale exactly what you want to hear but not any of the particulars. Nancy Pelosi says Tea Party people want the elderly to eat dog food but lied to get to the point where she could make that statement. Reid, Boehner and Obama all lied to the American people about cutting 38 Billion in spending when most of the money “cut” was not going to be spent or was a one-time appropriation and was never going to be renewed anyway. They all told a grand story but left out many of the pieces to cover up the lie.

I have for some time now wondered about this. Tell a lie to your neighbor and later you ask God for forgiveness and according to the bible if you ask for forgiveness, you shall receive it. Do you think God forgives politicians who on a grand scale lie to the American people? Do you think the politicians even bother to ask for forgiveness or do they attempt to justify the lie in their heads claiming it’s for the greater good?

One of the first things I ever learned in church was that God helps those who help themselves. Now this can’t always be true for if it were, then God is helping the politicians who are helping themselves to our money and taking our liberties to enrich their power. Endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights. No, I don’t see God helping politicians take back that which he granted to all.

We the People have lost about 90% of the control of our government in my opinion. Government has been taken over mainly by corrupt union leaders like those of SEIU and the AFL-CIO. Those in government owe much to those associated with ACORN, GE, Planned Parenthood and a host of George Soros funded organizations. You no longer need White House Lobbyist because many of them are now part of the administration and they hate competition. These unions and organizations have attacked the Tea Party and 9-12 organizations without hesitation. They have no fear because they know Eric Holder will not hold them accountable for their actions.

In old Scotland, the Scots never had a single victory over the English until the clans united in a common cause. In America, the army gathering together to fight the English were few until preachers started recruiting at the end of service from the pulpit. Churches can lose their tax exempt status if they involve themselves into politics, but can they lose it if they preach about the evils that come with a power concentrated and held by a mere few instead of many? This I doubt.

Americans are slowing being pulled into government bondage. I think we are on the right track in resisting this government power grab but I also think we are missing a piece of armament to use against government; the word of God. Our country was founded on Judeo-Christian principals. Leaving God out of the fight is like taking a knife to a gun fight. It will inflict damage, but unfortunately you will never get close enough to use it. If you want to beat the government, then you have to use the laws and principals that the government was founded on, and God was a huge part of it.

The Right’s Preoccupation with Donald Trump

The Right’s Preoccupation with Donald Trump
Al Ritter

Like a moth that is attracted to a flame, the Tea Party right has recently been drawn to Donald Trump. The issue as I see it revolves more around Trump’s single issue of Obama’s birth certificate rather than his ability to win a republican primary for the presidency.

Trump is speaking the conscience of the right because he doesn’t have the political clout to lose like many other presidential hopefuls. His popular themes on oil production, Chinese debt domination, and Obama’s birth certificate seem to be the most important ones in the public eye right now.

The question remains, “Who is Donald Trump, and what are his stands on the issues? Delving into his statements of the past is really the only way to root out his personal views. His most recent support of the Tea Party goes against his actions of the last campaign where he donated to Harry Reid’s campaign over Sharron Angle; He also supported RINO Charlie Crist over Marco Rubio. He supported Arlen Spector over Pat Toomey. He supported Rahm Emanuel in the run for Chicago Mayor’s seat. He supported the far left candidates Anthony Weiner, Chuck Schumer, and Charlie Rangel. His donations leaned 2/3 to the Democratic Party and one third to the republicans.

His stand on abortion has flip flopped from pro-choice in 2009 to pro-life in 2010, blurring the lines. His stance on guns follows more of a democratic stance than that of a republican, demanding more weapon to fall into the assault weapon ban, and increasingly tougher rules for firearm registration. His stance on healthcare is to go one step farther on healthcare than Obamacare has, to have an equivalent of a single payer system.

Trump wants to tax the “super rich” 14.25% on their net wealth, money that has already been taxed to eliminate the national debt.

Many of his supporter’s claim that what America needs is a “businessman who can run the country more like a business than a social experiment.” Nice sentiment, but less we forget that this wonderful businessman has declared bankruptcy 4 times since 1991………..not much of a statement on his wise business decisions is it?

Republicans here is your candidate if you want him!

Dear Patriots

Dear Patriots:
William G Burmer

When I was barely 6 years old living in Santa Cruz, California my little brother and I had a Cocker Spaniel we named Sparkle. We played outside; our favorite activity was playing cowboys and Indians. We used to argue about who would be Roy Rogers or Hop along Cassidy. The argument really was more over a scarf my mother let us use. To us it was a real indicator of a true cowboy. Sparkle would be tied up to our red wagon as a pretend horse.

The year was 1950 and about early October. For those who remember the 50s they were good years. People were pretty friendly and helpful towards one another. Best part of our young life was getting into the Kiddy Matinee at the local theater on Saturdays for .10cents. With another dime we could get a candy bar. This treat of course all depended upon being good during the previous week.

At any event, our yard was our world and around it was a white picket fence just high enough we could barely see over it but an adult could straddle over it with ease. Not even Sparkle could get out. One day however the front gate was left open a bit and our dog got out, we dared not pursue him as we would get into trouble ourselves. Sparkle was hit by a car. Amidst our screams dad sent us into the house each of us crying our eyes out. For all we knew at the time, and were told, Sparkle was a goner. Eventually we got over it and as they say “moved on.”

A couple days before Christmas there was a knock on our door, sometime in the evening because my dad answered it. At the door was a man with a dog in his arms. To our surprise it was Sparkle. He had a cast on one of his legs but after the man put him down he immediately recognized my brother and I and we were overjoyed to be reunited together once again. I know my father must have thanked him profusely. What a great thing for a stranger to do. It was our favorite Christmas gift ever. He obviously had to have paid all the Vet expenses and cared for Sparkle until he brought him back to us. As I have pondered that time over 60 years ago, I wonder if such a kind gesture of love would be played out in today’s world. I would hope this would be the case because I know there are many good people in the world to spite the selfish extremes we see constantly on the news.

In obedience to the second great commandment in the law “love they Neighbor” in the book of Hebrews chapter 6 we find in verse 19 “For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love, which ye have shewed toward his name, in that yea have ministered to the saints, and do minister. And in verse 12 “that ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises--- of Abraham.”

Throughout the scriptures the Lord is not apt to reward anyone who is not willing to work, and show by their works that they love God. This attitude taught by the Lord to his children, you and I, underscores the problem we have in the world of government today in the U S of A.

No place in the Constitution will you find where government is authorized to care for anything other than protecting our liberty to care for ourselves, and in the extremities of our existence to care for others as only God has prescribed.

In today’s world Men have become slaves to a system of government where all their needs are taken care of on the backs of those who labor, burdened with a tax system that spells tyranny plain and simple. It is a tyrannical form of slavery where one is made dependent upon another for their existence. Too many people have become so accustomed to the idea that it is government money they receive they are truly blinded to the reality that it is tax money; money taken from those in the private labor sector, who are forced to pay tribute. Government produces no wealth of itself, if only they knew it.

Our Constitution does not prescribe such a system as we currently endure; a system that has greater force than the Constitution itself. It is called the IRS, in California it includes the Franchise Tax Board, in Washington DC it is a Legislature maintaining power over We the People it is sworn by oath to serve, in other words a form of unrighteous dominion. This is done by promising goodies to slothful individuals, creating in its wake a dependency undeserved, unneeded, unappreciated, and detrimental to the common industry that lies dormant or dead on the individual recipient.

It is beyond my comprehension how anyone with any common sense can think otherwise. My faith is in men and women who love the Lord our God. Those who follow His teachings, who love our country and its God given Constitution.

In 1950 my father was young, he worked hard, and he was poor with a small family to support. Someone was moved with compassion and saw to it that two little boys who lost their pet were not dismissed as insignificant. It would have been easy to have Sparkle euphenized, instead his wounds were bound up, and he was cared for, and at the appropriate time returned to its owners. That my friends are the kind of people America has produced and are of the kind and character that will restore our country to its rightful place in the world, a leader among all the nations of the earth; a people who love God more than they fear the world created by those in Babylon .

Obama Continues to Do What He Does Best

Obama Continues to Do What He Does Best
Al Ritter

This week signaled the beginning of the 2012 campaign for a reelection to the presidency for Barack Obama. Of course President Obama has never wasted a chance to do what he has done best for the last 4 years and that is campaign. This time he has to do something he has never done before in a campaign and that is to run on his record. When the Senator Obama ran for the presidency in 2007 he ran on a record of “present” votes while serving the senate.

Obama dismissed his shortcomings in the first two years of his administration and leftovers from the Bush era and what else was he to do? The President received the Nobel Peace Prize for accomplishments he was to promise, but never completed. In fact just the opposite was true; he wages war in four countries now, with no real end in sight.

A promised lower unemployment figure never materialized from the Stimulus Program, but our President reminded us that it COULD have been much worse. He later reminded us of the jobs he saved or created, although those figures could never be proven. Each President of the United States has printed more money than the President before them, but the Obama Administration is working at an unprecedented increase. Although specific figures are not being reported, we do know he is using 18 tons of ink a day!

Obama promised transparency and openness at the beginning of his Presidency and although Jay Cutler the Whitehouse press secretary says that the President has proven that claim many times, he never sighted even on instance. Various groups have tried repeatedly to obtain documents through the freedom of information act, but have been unsuccessful.

Obama promised to close Gitmo and pull troops from Iraq, neither of which has happened as yet. The candidate Obama promised to work with world leaders to restore the respect that George Bush had destroyed. Once in office Obama embarked on a mission to insult our allies, and burn past bridges of many friendly nations. His attempt to make America more acceptant of Muslim nations has been largely unsuccessful.

Obama’s open door policy to protect our country against foreign invaders has been non-existent, and his policy of open enrollment to social programs for illegal aliens has been expanded. He has even taken the side of Mexico in the lawsuit against the State of Arizona. He approved a sting operation to arm Mexican drug cartels that eventually ended in the death of an American Border Patrol officer with one of those guns.

Violations of the Constitution are many and often, the latest being the lack of consultation of congress to install a no-fly zone over Libya on just the UN’s approval.

Obama will do what he does best in the next two years and that is campaign, we can not ignore his ability to do that well, nor can we merely sit complacently and watch. The only way to remove this President is to call him out on his record, something we couldn’t do in 2007.

The actions of the last two years can no longer be placed on the shoulders of a past president, President Obama will sink or swim based on what the people think his involvement was, and it is our job to show them the light.

My Two Day Break

My Two Day Break
Al Ritter

The last two days when I should have been writing, instead I have been enjoying myself. Writing about politics and specifically Obama is a sobering experience that can overpower even the strongest anti-depressant. Never in my life have I been so concerned about a president than I am now.

For the last two years every day I awaken to yet something else President Obama has done that infringes just a little more on my personal freedom. He has invented major problems where only minor ones existed, has contributed to the financial meltdown, and been a contributing factor in rising unemployment. He has invented new words in an attempt to describe old problems that never seem to get fixed. He has played “bait and switch” with problems and sleight of hand with others. He makes you believe he is concerned with one problem, and under cloak of darkness passes legislation or an executive order to remove yet another one of your freedoms.

Barack Obama is driven by a One World Order, which explains why he waited for a UN directive rather than a Congressional approval before installing a no-fly zone over Libya. Obviously he feels that the UN directive is more important than the legislative body that he supposedly works with hand in hand. Obama has blurred the lines between the 3 branches of government more than any President since FDR. His heavy handed style of micromanagement has infuriated even his closest allies on the hill. He has circumvented the court systems in the auto maker’s bailout by deciding personally the terms of stock distributions to favor union pensions rather than the rule of bankruptcy laws.

Obama has used the DOJ to personally pick and choose which laws to enforce and which one to ignore, which has had the effect of showing favoritism toward specific groups. The president has supported a foreign country against our own in our court system, while he has approved a covert operation to supply weapons to the drug cartels of that same country that ultimately caused the death of one of our Border Patrol Agents.

The president refuses to acknowledge the threat that radical Islamic poses, despite proof to the contrary. His open border policies have made our country more susceptible to personal danger for our citizens. His constant violations of the Constitution of the United States have left us weak and open to socialism.

In his inauguration Obama promised to uphold the Constitution, and to protect us from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Those violations alone should demand his removal from office, when will our people say “enough is enough?”

Barack Obama has done what he promised in his campaign, he has begun to “fundamentally transform America,” but the question remains…………In whose image?

Does Poverty Follow Democratic Strongholds?

Does Poverty Follow Democratic Strongholds?
Al Ritter

In the last election in Maryland, Baltimore County for the first time was almost lost to the Democratic incumbent. Baltimore County has always been known as the Republican stronghold, but 2010 told a different story.

Shortly after the election the census results became public, and they showed almost a 2% jump in poverty in Baltimore County. It is no secret that Baltimore City, Prince Georges, and Montgomery County are the democratic areas that sway the whole state blue. It is also no secret that these counties are some of the largest poverty areas of the state.

With poverty creeping into new areas the state becomes eligible for more and more federal funds, which makes Maryland more and more dependent on federal funds to survive. This situation seems a natural for the political environment of this point in time. Change is inevitable the political winds blow differently on the federal level from decade to decade. The sad part is that Maryland’s political wind only blows in one direction, and has since 1959…….it blows from the left.

Rather than seeking a more bipartisan approach Maryland is true blue, seeking continual destructive social programs that will someday fall on deaf ears in a Republican controlled Whitehouse. As we know a democrat has never met a social program or a tax he doesn’t like. History has shown us that programs are seldom cut, and taxes only rarely. The question is, where will the money come from once the sympathetic ears are gone in the Whitehouse, and the democratic states are FORCED to live within their own means?

The answer is simple, they will come for YOU!

What came first? The areas of poverty, or the Democratic leadership?