SPEAKNOWCONSERVATIVES.ORG

The Buffet Rule

JTDCON2009 — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 05:30:00 GMT

Obama's Class / Race Warfare

Barack Obama can’t run on his record, so he capitalizes on events that are distractions to his inept tenure as president. It all follows the same script class / race warfare. If you can’t run on your record, which he surely can’t, you simply "change the subject" and divert to other issues that will generate support. When will Obama learn that not everyone is drinking his Kool Aid.

This "taxing the rich" mumbo-jumbo is sickening. The "Buffet Rule" is supposed to tax at a minimum rate of 30% on businesses (many small businesses) and families earning $1 million. As if this is going to do anything to put a dent in the massive debt that Obama has accumulated. Is it any wonder why the Obama "budget" got zero votes because of his ineptness? He's just playing to his "gimme" base!

One may be surprised to learn that a lot of people on welfare believe that if rich paid more taxes they could have more government money to spend. If any of them had any doubt whom they would vote for that will convince them to vote Obama.

If we tax the 1% at 100% of their income it would not make a dent in our deficit. The Democrats cannot see that we do not have a revenue problem we have a spending problem. Unless and until Congress stops appropriating excess money our deficit problem will just continue to grow.

"If the Buffett Rule—officially named the Paying a Fair Share Act of 2012—became law, the number of people required to pay substantially more in taxes would be relatively small. Of the 217,000 households that would be affected by the rule, 4,000 will have incomes exceeding $1 million and tax rates below 15 percent, according to estimates for 2015 by the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan research group. The average rate, including payroll tax, for the middle 20 percent of taxpayers will be 15.9 percent, the center projects.

To many people forget that the people like Buffett make most of their income from long term capital gains which is taxed at 15%. Also most people do not understand, and the news have not reported that the Buffett rule only applies to ordinary income so Buffett still will not be taxed at a higher rate.

Buffett still owes almost a billion in taxes

Obama's buddy Warren Buffett is going through litigation now because he owes almost a billion dollars in taxes and refuses to pay it. As the old cliché goes..Put your money where your mouth is. When big corporations circumvent the tax code through loop holes or other subversive methods, this is where our nation's revenue is being lost. Couple that with out of control spending and there you have it. We have the highest corporate tax rate, yet when you add in all the perks, loop holes and incentives, these corporate crooks don't pay squat.

Obama is a smart politician, but do you think Obama’s efforts to distract and his divisive fight over "fairness" and class / race warfare going to work?

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

Moms, Dads, Grandparents need a place to vent about the direction our government is taking? Go to MomsAndDadsBeHeard and speak out. Be part of bringing our Great country back.

Obama Better Actor Than President

JTDCON2009 — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 05:30:00 GMT

His Mantra Of More Government

Barack Obama is the first thespian president. An accomplished actor displays the ability to assume any role that the situation dictates. He is an expert psychological master of words, phrases, slogans and clichés tailored to targeted events that present an opportunity to proffer his socialistic dogma.

He is further aided by his charming smile just as an actor enamors himself to the spectators. The substance or truth becomes irrelevant. Obama utilizes speaking opportunities at colleges and universities. He subtly massages the brains of impressionable youths with speeches on class warfare and propagates an entitlement attitude.

Bashing capitalistic ideology promotes governmental dependency, which, in effect, destroys personal freedom.

Obama has taken national politics to a new personal level. I don't remember any President Democrat or Republican that has inserted his personal opinion into so many local news stories. From the Boston police and Henry Gates to Trayvon Martin we learn Obama's opinion about this crime or that with his personal spin. Who cares what he thinks? All he has done with this buttinsky approach is to further complicate matters and his comments have never been helpful. Why do it?

I don't think Obama gets it at all and politically he can't afford to "get it". His sole solution to date to correct the deficit is to raise taxes. He has not made one substantive priority of cutting anything other than defense and even that has been primarily to let the "Bush Wars" fade away.

You, he and Democrats sincerely believe in at least 3 tenets:

- Government does it better

- no one is allowed to fail

- wealth redistribution is morally right

In a pure capitalistic system there are wild swings in the economy, tremendous booms and busts. The Depression and recessions occur periodically and the economy reorganizes and comes roaring back. This model drove the US to unmatched economic success and dragged EVERY OTHER COUNTRY in the world up with it. But you pay a price for this in the downturns and some people suffer.

Under the Obama (European Socialist) system it becomes a smooth ride. The government steps in and takes more money from the wealthy, redistributes it to the poor, regulates away the chance for big booms and profits and then bails out failing corporations and individuals so no one fails anymore.

It's the old maxim, " If there are no losers then there are no winners."

Communism took about 70 years to fail economically fail. Socialism will take a little longer. We are beginning to see their economies start to go under now from the weight of their entitlement programs.

The difference is conservatives think capitalism works with a light hand of government regulation whereas liberal Democrats feel the government either runs the show or controls it very strictly.

A steady, controlled 1-2% growth may be OK for you but it will lead to a steady decline in innovation, risk taking and explosive growth that has marked our US history. Nobody fails. Nobody wins. A predictable slow steady decline to second rate status that will rapidly be eclipsed by China who preaches Socialism but practices Capitalism.

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

America do you need a place to vent about the direction our government is taking? Do you want to find ways to help make a change? Go to MomsAndDadsBeHeard a forum for you to speak out. Be part of bringing our Great country back.

Democrats Real War On Women

JTDCON2009 — Fri, 13 Apr 2012 21:15:00 GMT

YouTube: Rosen Bashes Stay At Home Moms

An old adage states that if one tells a big enough lie often enough, the majority of people will eventually believe it is true. Along comes the Barack Obama administration and Democrats with the bogus claim that Republicans are at war against women. The MSM, both print and electronic, continue to provide mindless regurgitation of the administration’s utterances rather than challenging such fabricated issues.

Hillary Rosen, one of Obama's top advisors and is a Democrat National Committee strategist, attacked Ann Romney, wife of George Romney, saying "She never worked a day in her life." She is belittling all stay at home moms.

Ann Romney raised 5 children. In 1998, she contracted MS, and has battled breast cancer. She has worked at numerous charitable organizations.

YouTube Obama and DNC advisor Hilary Rosen Attacks Ann Romney:

Employment statistics show that Obama's war on the economy has hurt women the most. This is incontrovertible news. Women in Obama's White House make less than the men do. Women in the Obama White House feel belittled by Obama and the men on his staff.

The real war on women is being raged by Barack Obama and his administration. Republicans respect women. You never hear Republicans calling women the horrid names Democrats do.

Obama WHAT A HYPOCRITE!!!!

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

Moms, Dads, Grandparents need a place to vent about the direction our government is taking? Go to MomsAndDadsBeHeard and speak out. Be part of bringing our Great country back.

It’s ‘Freedom of Religion, Not Freedom From Religion

JTDCON2009 — Tue, 10 Apr 2012 08:50:00 GMT

Atheism Is Legally A Religion

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

On March 23, Florida Governor Rick Scott signed SB 98 allowing student-led inspirational words including prayer at school. The ACLU in less than a week threatened to squash any school board that implements this law.

In our democracy "all men are created equal under God with certain inalienable rights," any and all religious believers are protected. So one must ask, why do we have to do things the atheist way? Why have we given atheism ultimate power to point its "secular scepter" at any event they desire and ban prayer (and God’s blessing) from that event? By default we violate our own laws by establishing atheism as our national religion (it is legally a religion). At graduations, band banquets, and sporting events, we do it the atheist way.

So, at graduation why can’t we have a Godly prayer of thanksgiving, celebration, and well wishing? No. You will get arrested as the ACLU tells us this is unacceptable public behavior. If you want to hear a graduation prayer you’ll have to go to the back of the bus, be segregated to baccalaureate services ... or, better yet say a quiet prayer to yourself and effectively silence prayer in our society.

Some people say prayer is strictly a private matter. True if one is praying just on their own behalf. Yet in law and in spirituality there is the concept of the corporate body or group. Why should our schools and nation forfeit the blessings that prayer can bring? It has to be one of the most cost effective things a group can do.

This started when American atheist Madalyn Murray O’Hare tried but was denied immigration to atheist Communist Russia. Returning to Boston she objected to son William being subjected to prayer and Bible reading. If he were excused from class he reportedly would be subject to prejudice. Her case, Murray vs Curlett, was combined with the Supreme Court case, Abington vs Schempp, and, along with Engel vs Vitale, in 1963 prayer was banned from school. By and by William Murray converted and became a pastor. Later Madalyn’s own American Atheist office manager kidnapped her, her son Al, and granddaughter for a $500,000 sack of gold coins, and then killed them.

Ultimately the ACLU being well organized and funded will likely prevail. Pastors, priests and rabbis are too busy saving the poor of Africa and Haiti while at home we swelter. According to some polls 76% of North Floridians want prayer back in school. Yet this will be a million-dollar case as one will have to ride it all the way to the Supreme Court to get them to overrule their previous decision as we see it establishes atheism by default. Who will champion this cause, to intercede for the freedom of present and future generations?

Just like in 1776, it’s about freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

Atheism is a religion. In Torasco vs Watkins ... even Judge Hugo Black recognized Atheism as a religion as Torasco did not have to swear by God to be a notary public.

In Kaufman vs McCaughtry 2005 ... Atheism is a religion in nature, a parallel position to religion ... therefore inmates can have "Freethinker" meetings just like anyone else can have a Bible study in prison.

Blacks Law Dictionary... "religion addresses God's role in one's life and the deference due God". Atheism's stance is there is no God therefore there is nothing due him.

Atheist organizations enjoy the same tax status as theistic charities.

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

Visit MomsAndDadsBeHeard a forum for you to express your views and concerns. Be part of bringing our Great Christian country back.

Ryan Thrashes Out On Obama Demagoguery

JTDCON2009 — Fri, 06 Apr 2012 05:30:00 GMT

YouTube: Ryan Obama's Speech: "Exploiting People's Emotions"

Paul Ryan was on Larry Kudlow's report on CNBC Tuesday evening. Kudlow referring to Barack Obama's tirade said, "I'm not sure I even understand what he means by 'social Darwinism,' Congressman Ryan. I remember the Trojan horse from my Greek mythology, but somehow he was pretty nasty to you. What is your first reaction to Obama's attack on you?"

Ryan responded: Virtually none of the claims he makes about our budget are actually true. We've kind of come to expect this from the president. This is fairly common for him these days. He's distorting the truth, he's dividing the country, and he's becoming more bitter and partisan by the day. Frankly, it's kind of sad to see. I think his office is bigger than this. I think if you look at the tone of his speech, the substance of his budget, it's beneath the office that he occupies. And so what we're getting here is not solutions. We're just getting demagoguery. We're getting desperation. We're getting partisan attacks from a campaigner-in-chief. Not solutions from a leader who sees a debt crisis coming. Because we're the ones who are actually proposing a fix to prevent this debt crisis. He's not, and therefore he's attacking us. And I just don't think that's leadership.

YouTube Ryan Obama's Speech: "Exploiting People's Emotions":

Kudlow said, "He got pretty specific in this speech, saying that your budget is gonna end research and development; is gonna end infrastructure; gonna end prescription drugs. That you don't want to forecast the weather anymore, won't be able to know about hurricanes. You're against education and training. You're basically gonna get rid of everything but the Washington Monument. What is your response to that?"

Ryan answered: This is surreal, really bizarre. He has to put this assumption to make all those claims that's not an assumption we have in our budget. So they're literally just making this stuff up. What he's trying to do is, he's not offering solutions, so he's gotta distract the country, divide the country, and attack those of us who are offering solutions. And I think it's his only chance left to try and win reelection. And so he's resorting to these very sophomoric tactics. And it's just very unbecoming of the presidency of the United States, if you ask me.

Ryan went on: It's beyond the pale of ridiculousness. We're keeping program levels where they are. We're just not having this massive increase and then a funding cliff like he does. We actually save Medicare. We don't have a board of 15 bureaucrats that are unelected, unaccountable, that he puts in charge of rationing the program. What I think we're getting from here is sort of a desperate political attack so beyond the pale. What I get out of this is it's sort of a desperate move, which is, if you go with these Republicans, they're gonna feed you to the wolves, it's gonna be a dog-eat-dog society. It's a false choice, and it's for a lack of leadership that it's taking place. And I just don't think people are gonna buy it. I don't even really know how to describe all of this stuff, but I think he's just getting sort of desperate and demagogic. And it's just part and parcel of the kind of campaign I think we're gonna expect this fall.

When is the MSM going to call Obama out on his lies and distortions They are completely in bed with Obama and do his bidding by lying for him and attacking those who do call him out.

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

Moms, Dads, Grandparents need a place to vent about the direction our government is taking? Go to MomsAndDadsBeHeard and speak out. Be part of bringing our Great country back.

Justice Kagan And Obamacare

JTDCON2009 — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 05:30:00 GMT

Kagan Should Recues Herself

Is anyone else wondering why Justice Elena Kagan is still sitting on the court and participating in the Obamacare decision? When she was Solicitor General, she was actively involved and she advised the DOJ attorneys and expressed opinions concerning the merits of Obamacare. During questioning by the Senate Judiciary Committee, she testified that she had no involvement in preparing the government's defense for Obamacare. If you can believe that.

Is this why Barack Obama nominated her to the Supreme Court in the first place, knowing she was totally in favor of Obamacare and would cast her vote accordingly? There appears to be a lot of calculating minds involved in this process combined with deceit and deception.

Is Kagan in violation of federal law by refusing to recues herself from being involved in the Supreme Court Obamacare decision? Federal statutes demand that judges recues themselves from participation in a case "where he(she) has served in governmental employment and in such capacity participated in council, adviser or material witness concerning the proceeding of expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy."

Why is Kagan not being challenged for failing to recues herself?

Once again Obama and the Democrats don't care how they do it, as long as they get what they want. "The hell with rules and regulations; they only apply to the common man, not us superior caring liberals!"

The left could care less how wrong something is, they will get away with it. What would happen if a conservative Justice did this?

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

Obama Threatening Supreme Court

JTDCON2009 — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 18:20:00 GMT

Is Obama President or Supreme Ruler?

Barack Obama has waded into the legal battle surrounding Obamacare with a stern warning to the Supreme Court not to overturn it. Specifically, Obama argues that the Supreme Court deciding in such a way would be an "unprecedented" example of "judicial activism" undertaken by "unelected" judges.

He spoke at length about the case at a joint press conference with the leaders of Mexico and Canada. Obama, adopting what he described as the language of conservatives who fret about judicial activism, questioned how an "unelected group of people" could overturn a law approved by Congress.

"Ultimately, I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress."[...]

"And I’d just remind conservative commentators that, for years, what we have heard is, the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism, or a lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law," Obama said.

"Well, this is a good example, and I’m pretty confident that this court will recognize that and not take that step," he said.

According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "Stalinism is associated with a regime of terror and totalitarian rule." Forcing people to buy a commodity like healthcare is the very definition of totalitarianism.

The 2,700-page "Affordable Care Act" (Obamacare) can be nothing but totalitarian. There are so many unknowns in the law that lawyers and bureaucrats are going to have a field day with it. We know that Nancy Pelosi and other members of Congress have not read the Act. This is mindboggling. Of course, they haven’t read the Constitution either, and if they have they don’t pay any attention to it. The Constitution and the laws that Congress makes are props in the hands of totalitarians.

Is Obama President or Supreme Ruler?

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

Infrastructure Spending Won't Come For A Decade

JTDCON2009 — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 05:30:00 GMT

Stimulus And Obama Wants More Tax Dollars

They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

That’s what spending more on infrastructure and transportation to improve the economy would be: insanity. Infrastructure and transportation may have benefits, but turning the economy around isn’t one of them.

For one thing, major highway projects are S-L-O-W. The Federal Highway Administration says major highway construction projects take 13 years to complete. Any project that won’t be finished until today’s first graders are in college is hardly going to jumpstart the economy.

Second, it’s been tried and it failed. Barack Obama’s stimulus had $105.9 billion in infrastructure spending. The unemployment rate when it became law in February 2009 was 8.1 percent. In February 2012, it was 8.3 percent. Whatever the stimulus went for, it clearly wasn’t jobs.

There are things our government can do to help the economy turn itself around:

■ The administration and Congress should recognize that regulations cost jobs, and then eliminate those we don’t need. A case in point is the administration’s new Utility MACT rule, which requires utilities to spend $6 billion on new equipment for plants — officially to cut pollution — but unofficially to phase out coal to make wind and solar more competitive. The utilities don’t have $6 billion lying around, so they’re closing plants, cutting an estimated 1,850 jobs now and ultimately leading, directly and indirectly, to the loss of as many as 1.44 million jobs by 2020. The pain doesn’t stop there. Because as many as 68 fewer plants will be available to supply the nation’s electricity needs, and wind and solar can’t make up the difference, electricity prices are rising — which makes it more expensive for businesses to grow, and more difficult for many ordinary citizens to make ends meet.

■ The Senate should pass the REINS Act, approved by the House in December, to require federal agencies to submit major new regulations to Congress for approval before they take effect. During the first 26 months of the Obama administration, federal agencies imposed more than 100 major regulations, defined as a regulation costing over $100 million to implement. This costs the public $38 billion, on top of the estimated $1.75 trillion the federal government itself estimates that regulations were already costing the public every year.

■ Congress should facilitate the approval of the Keystone Pipeline, the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline, responsible drilling offshore and in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. It also should enforce laws currently being broken that require the Department of the Interior to issue drilling leases in a timely manner. Drilling for natural gas in the Marcellus shale formation in Pennsylvania and West Virginia alone created 57,000 jobs in 2009. Imagine what a responsible permitting policy for oil and natural gas nationally could do for employment, and what good a more stable and lower-cost energy supply could do for private sector confidence.

■ Repeal Davis-Bacon Act. There is, however, something related to infrastructure and highways the federal government can do to help jumpstart the economy: eliminate the racist pork that is the Davis-Bacon Act. Davis-Bacon was adopted in 1931 to keep "undesired" racial and ethnic groups from employment on federal construction jobs and to enhance the political benefits of pork-barrel spending. Davis-Bacon remains racist, as it discriminates against the non-union labor force, where most blacks in the construction industry are employed. Repeal of Davis-Bacon would create approximately 31,000 jobs quickly and save the taxpayers a billion dollars a year.

The road to prosperity has been blocked by needless regulations. More government spending on infrastructure and highways isn’t the best way forward. There are far more effective routes available.

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

Moms, Dads, Grandparents need a place to vent about the direction our government is taking? Go to MomsAndDadsBeHeard and speak out. Be part of bringing our Great country back.

Market Based Health Care Is The Solution

JTDCON2009 — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 05:30:00 GMT

Obamacare Will Destroy The Economy

Before the issue of the federal government mandating contraceptive and sterilization services "at no charge" by insurance companies, was there a lack of access to contraceptives? Certainly not. They have been available at reasonable or at no cost through Planned Parenthood.

The highly touted "compromise" by Barack Obama was to remove all exemptions and just have insurance companies give these products and services away for free (paid with monopoly money, apparently). That doesn’t seem to work, especially for self-funded church organizations!

This ideology highlights the problem with Obamacare — that it works against the best method for controlling price. It is anti-market. In a market system, the sure way to cause prices to increase is to increase demand and to decrease supply. By mandating coverage for products without co-payment, we are sure to create increased demand, as people have no disincentive to overutilization.

By government reducing pay to suppliers and physicians, they will create decreased supply of the products and services that they provide.

Like President Richard Nixon’s wage and price controls of 40 years ago and the more recent Community Reinvestment Act, which helped to destroy the housing market, when government regulates markets, they become distorted — and eventually snap back with fearful, unintended consequences to cost and supply.

Yes, it’s all about markets. The Catholic Church is a market. If I don’t agree with its doctrines, I’m free to leave that church. If an insurance plan doesn’t cover a service or product, I’m free to abandon that plan for another.

For every mandate of Obamacare (and many more are on the horizon) we lose a piece of that freedom. If you think health care is expensive now, just wait until the government mandates that we get all of this health care for "free"!

Hopefully the Supreme Court will do its job and uphold the Constitution and our freedom. Obamacare would be a disaster and would collapse our economy.

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

Progressive Liberals Plan For More Government

JTDCON2009 — Fri, 30 Mar 2012 05:30:00 GMT

More Tax And Spend

The progressive liberals in the House have a vision for your future. They, unlike their Democrat Senate counterparts, have unveiled a budget for 2013. If you want to see the big-government desires of the progressive liberals, this budget spells it out …

•The proposed budget increases taxes by $4.7 trillion more than Obama proposed in his own budget last month. Those tax increases come from …

•$897 billion from imposing an energy tax on carbon fuels

•$849 billion from taxing Wall Street trades

•$319 billion comes from a millionaires surtax

•Ending the Bush-era tax rates for the wealthy

•$2.9 trillion in new stimulus spending to "put Americans back to work," creating a new jobs corps program

•Cancels the cuts in last Augusts' debt-ceiling deal

•Establishes an infrastructure bank

The progressive liberals are intent on two things: growing the size of government and demonizing private enterprise or success. Notice that the only people "punished" by their tax increases are Wall Street, the evil rich and energy producers. These progressive liberals are intent on growing the size of our government – not of our economic pie – but of our government, and they will do this by redistributing the wealth from those who are successful in the private marketplace.

Senate progressive liberals have come up with their own version of a small business tax cut. The proposal would give a 10% tax cut for hiring new workers or raising employee pay. The bill would also allow for a full deduction of any significant investments made this year.

Harry Reid says, "The tax cut we provide is targeted to small businesses, not big corporations that are already raking in profits." He went on to say, "That is a key distinction between the way Democrats and Republicans approach this very important issue. Our tax cut is targeted to help small businesses while Republican efforts are just camouflaged handouts to the wealthiest in America."

The Democrats hate of those who succeed is disturbing. Democrats aren’t interested in growing the pie. They are interested in redistributing wealth to those who are "less fortunate." They know their success in elections is predicated on buying votes from the non-producers.

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

More Black Panther Threats

JTDCON2009 — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 05:30:00 GMT

YouTube: Representative Bobby Rush

Representative Bobby Rush (D-IL) was on the floor of the House yesterday. Rush was dressed in a hoodie to show solidarity with the Trayvon Martin situation and with the Civil Rights Coalitions. There's a dress code in the House that does not include hoodies, and he was chastised and stopped from speaking. He was cut off for breaking the House dress code.

YouTube Representative Bobby Rush on House floor:

Bobby Rush: Just because someone wears a hoodie does not make them (gaveling) a hoodlum. (gaveling) The Bible teaches us, Mr. Speaker, in the book of... (crosstalk)

Chair: The member will suspend...

Bobby Rush: ...these words... (gaveling)

Chair: The member will sus...

Bobby Rush: These words. (gaveling)

Chair: The member... (gaveling and crosstalk) the member will suspend.

Bobby Rush: ...what is good.

Chair: The chair must remind...

Bobby Rush: What does... (crosstalk)

Chair: ... clause 5 of Rule 17. (crosstalk)

Bobby Rush: ...what does the Lord require you but to do justly... (crosstalk)

Chair: Member is out of order.

Bobby Rush: ...and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God. (crosstalk)

Chair: The member is no longer recognized. The chair will ask the sergeant-at-arms to enforce the prohibition on decor.

Why would a member of the House showboat like this? We have come to expect this kind of showboating by the likes of Al Sharpton and Spike Lee. Then too Bobby Rush is a former Black Panther.

The Black Panthers have raised the bounty they have placed. Barack Obama nor Eric Holder have said a word about what the Black Panthers or any others are doing. J. Christian Adams' book is Injustice: Exposing the Racial Agenda of the Obama Justice Department. He was talking about the New Black Panther Party bounty for the capture of George Zimmerman with Brian Kilmeade. Kilmeade said, "You investigated the Black Panthers for what they were doing in 2008. That went nowhere. Why is this case with the New Black Panthers now, why is this one going nowhere or why is it slow off the mark?"

Adams: It's because the New Black Panthers think they're above the law. What would have given them that idea? I mean we all know the answer. The answer is Eric Holder. Look, we live in a country where lawless mobs don't offer bounties on citizens' heads to be captured. We don't live in that country, but these guys think we do. You cannot solicit kidnapping in the state of Florida. It's a felony in Florida. It's a felony to travel across interstate lines to solicit kidnapping. So here we have the New Black Panthers once again probably committing crimes and going completely unpunished.

Kilmeade then said, "Besides Eric Holder, is there fear of inflaming race relations if you crack down on people who want to inflame race relations like the Black Panther Party?"

Adams: There's a fear among some, but there's no fear among people like Al Sharpton. Even the president has inserted himself in a racial way saying that Trayvon looks like --

Kilmeade: Do you think wrongly?

Adams: Absolutely wrongly. No president in our country's history would have injected himself into a criminal matter using racial code like Barack Obama did.

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

Visit MomsAndDadsBeHeard a forum for you to express your views and concerns. Be part of bringing our Great Christian country back.

Obama Has No Morals Or Scruples

JTDCON2009 — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 05:30:00 GMT

Obama Campaign Hoodies Exploits Trayvon Martin

When you think Barack Obama can stoop no lower he proves you wrong. He has no morals or scruples. The Obama reelect campaign -- Obama 2012 -- is now selling hoodies that say, "Obama 2012" on them.

The Obama reelection effort is exploiting the death of Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida, in order to secure votes (as though he needs them) from black Americans. Hoodies, 2012! Geraldo Rivera took some heat because he suggested that Trayvon Martin should get rid of the hoodie. (paraphrased) "For crying out loud, you're telling everybody who you are! They call it a hoodie for a reason: You're a hood. Don't wear the hood!"

Thomas Sowell said (paraphrased), "Wait a second here. It does matter how people dress. It does say something about you. There are uniforms for gangs and other things. If you're gonna be walking through a neighborhood that you know is dangerous," and he cites an example when he was at Harvard. When he had to walk through a very tough Irish neighborhood near the campus, he would never wear anything that would incite them, 'cause it was reality. Yeah, it was a shame he had to do it. So he comes out in defense of Geraldo. Here is the Barack Obama reelection committee, campaign, exploiting the death of Trayvon Martin by selling Obama 2012 hoodies.

The killing of Trayvon Martin was uncalled for. Justice needs to be served. A young man it appears was killed for no good reason. George Zimmerman could have left the area.

It turns out that George Zimmerman is a registered Democrat and self-identified Hispanic-American, not "white Hispanic" American. He's a Hispanic-American. George Zimmerman is a registered Democrat, and there are other interesting things that are surfacing in that whole case.

Obama and Al Sharpton are playing this tragedy for all it's worth. Neither man has any morals or scruples.

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

Visit MomsAndDadsBeHeard a forum for you to express your views and concerns. Be part of bringing our Great Christian country back.

Is Romney The Inevitable Nominee?

JTDCON2009 — Tue, 27 Mar 2012 05:30:00 GMT

Does Romney Have A Real Vision For America?

Most of the polls and the pundits say it is inevitable Mitt Romney will win the Republican nomination, although the conditions that made him the front runner in the primaries are the direct opposite of the conditions for the general election.

Romney has outspent each of his rivals, and all of his rivals put together. His campaign organization has been operating for years, and it has put his name on the ballot everywhere, while neither Santorum nor Gingrich had a big enough organization to get on the ballot in an important state like Virginia.

In the general election, Barack Obama will have all the advantages against Romney that Romney currently has against his Republican rivals. Obama will have boots on the ground everywhere. Not just members of the Democratic Party organization but thousands of labor union members as well.

Incumbency alone guarantees the president plenty of money to finance his campaign, not only from enthusiastic supporters but also from businesses regulated by the government, who know that holders of political power demand tribute. And the mainstream media will give Obama more publicity than Romney can buy.

How does anyone ever defeat a sitting president then? They do it because they have a message that rings and resonates. The last Republican to defeat a sitting president was Ronald Reagan. He was the only Republican to do so in the 20th century.

The question is not which Republican looks better against Barack Obama in the polls today, before the general election campaign begins. The question is which Republican can take the fight to Barack Obama, as Reagan took the fight to Carter, and win the poll that ultimately matters, the vote on Election Day.

The biggest fighting issue for Republicans is Obamacare. Can the author of RomneyCare as governor of Massachusetts make that an effective issue by splitting hairs over state versus federal mandates? Can a man who has been defensive about his own wealth fight off the standard class warfare of Barack Obama, who can push all the demagogic buttons against Mitt Romney as one of the one-per-centers?

Rick Santorum, and especially Newt Gingrich, are fighters --- and this election is going to be a fight to the finish, with the fate of this country in the balance. Mitt Romney has depended on massive character assassination advertising campaigns to undermine his rivals. That will not work against Barack Obama.

Even a truthful account of the Obama administration's many disastrous failures, at home and abroad, will be automatically countered by the mainstream media, 90% of whom voted for Obama in the 2008 election.

It is truer in this election than in most that "it takes a candidate to beat a candidate." And that candidate has to offer both himself and his vision. A massive ad campaign against rivals is not a vision.

The vision matters, more than the polls and even more than incumbency in the White House. So far Romney has shown no vision.

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

Moms, Dads, Grandparents need a place to vent about the direction our government is taking? Go to MomsAndDadsBeHeard and speak out. Be part of bringing our Great country back.

HHS College Must be Offered Free Sterilization

JTDCON2009 — Tue, 20 Mar 2012 12:15:00 GMT

What Has Happened To Our Constitution

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced late Friday afternoon that all student health care plans covering female college students in the United States must include coverage for free voluntary sterilization surgery.

Women of college age who do not attend school will also get free sterilization coverage whether they are insured through an employer, their parents, or some form of government-subsidized plan.

All student health plans, HHS said Friday as it finalized a new regulation under the Affordable Care Act (otherwise known as Obamacare) must cover the full set of cost-free women’s "preventive services" that HHS ordered last month must be covered by all U.S. health care plans.

These free "preventive services" include surgical sterilization procedures and all Food and Drug Administration-approved contraceptives, including those that cause abortions.

In announcing the rule for college-based health plans, HHS said it would follow the same system for enforcing the rule on religious colleges and universities that object to purchasing sterilizations, contraceptives and abortifacients for its students that President Barack Obama has proposed for enforcing the regulation on religious non-profit organizations in the coverage for their employees: The insurer will be forced to provide the sterilizations, contraceptives and abortifacients to the students free of charge.

Where does our Constitution give the government to tell insurance companies what must be in their policies. Further to tell the insurance companies there will be no co pays and can't charge for the coverage. When did America become a socialist country with a dictator?

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

Visit MomsAndDadsBeHeard a forum for you to express your views and concerns. Be part of bringing our Great Christian country back.

2009: Administration Policies Sought to Discourage ‘Overproduction’ of Oil

JTDCON2009 — Mon, 19 Mar 2012 05:30:00 GMT

Geithner Obama Doesn't Want To Distort Oil Prices

In a May 2009 letter Timothy (the tax cheat) Geithner wrote: The Administration believes that oil and gas preferences distort markets by encouraging more investment in the oil and gas industry than would occur under a neutral system. To the extent the credit (sic) encourages overproduction of oil, it is detrimental to long-term energy security and is also inconsistent with the Administration’s policy of reducing carbon emissions and encouraging the use of renewable energy sources through a cap-and-trade program. Moreover, the credit (sic) must ultimately be financed with taxes that result in underinvestment in other, potentially more productive, areas of the economy.

Treasury Secretary Geithner doesn’t know the difference between a tax deduction and a tax credit. Given his difficulties with his own taxes this should not be surprising.

Remember Barack Obama campaigned on the idea that, if we are to finally reduce our dependence on foreign oil, we need to set aside old political battles and instead make the investments in new clean energy technology that will create good jobs here at home.

Obama's policy:

•Encouraging more investment (drilling) is a bad thing, because

•More drilling leads to too much production (!), which is

•… detrimental to the nation’s long-term energy security (!!)

•Cheaper hydrocarbon fuel would work against the Administration’s goal of reducing carbon emissions.

•Carbon-based fuels were destined cost more (via taxation) under a cap-and-trade system anyway.

•We can raise the taxes on industry by taking away the deductions (not "credits") which have historically, and successfully, encouraged drilling, and

•Redirect that money, and then some, to our political friends who are invested in "green" technologies (read: Solyndra, Fisker, et al).

This remains the Obama Administration’s policy; only the rhetoric has shifted.

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

Moms, Dads, Grandparents need a place to vent about the direction our government is taking? Go to MomsAndDadsBeHeard and speak out. Be part of bringing our Great country back.

Michelle Obama Challenged By 11 Year Old

JTDCON2009 — Thu, 15 Mar 2012 05:30:00 GMT

YouTube: Does Michele Lie To Girl?

An 11-year-old reporter named Topanga Sena challenged the first lady Let’s Move! anti-obesity program. Michelle Obama was asked to respond to critics of the program who say the government has no business telling people how to eat.

YouTube Michelle Obama and Topanga:

Topanga Sena: How do you respond to critics who say the government should not be telling people how to eat or to stay active?

Michelle Obama: You know, that’s absolutely right—and Let’s Move! doesn’t do that. Let’s Move! is not about having government telling people what to do, because government doesn’t have all the answers. I mean, a problem that’s this big and affects so many people requires everyone to step up. So we’re asking everyone to do their part. Parents have to make some changes at home, but they need the information to be able to make those choices. And they have to have access to affordable foods in their communities—fresh and healthy foods, right? We need government to do its part, but we need businesses to do their part, as well.

The first lady’s anti-childhood obesity push has done everything from revamp the menu at Olive Gardens to include "kid-friendly," low sodium options nationwide to take the happy out of Happy Meals by requiring the fast food giant to include — whether it is asked for or not — apple wedges and less french fries in every child’s Happy Meal.

We now have the government checking children's bag lunches from home to determine if they are proper for the child. If not fit according to government employee the child is made to eat school lunch and parents are sent a bill for the lunch.

So did Michelle Obama lie to Topanga? Yes, she thinks government should control what we eat.

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

Who Will Save The Black Culture

JTDCON2009 — Wed, 14 Mar 2012 05:30:00 GMT

The Democrats Have Destroyed It

Once again Democrat leaders are calling for the spiritual leaders in the black community to organize their congregations with an eye single to the glory of the Democrat party. That same party that has so thoroughly enslaved them by willfully or ignorantly destroying the black family with a soul deadening toll.

Even in the wicked days of Jim Crow, which was not so long ago, The black family was strong, when their children were reared by fathers and mothers. Times were hard and discrimination was oppressive but black families hung together to teach their children Christian precepts to guide their lives.

Their Ministers were actively preaching the Biblical Word of God, exhorting the members of the community to live moral Christian lives. Now the black family has been destroyed and most are single parent households living on the "largess" of their Masters. Yes, the Southern Plantation Squires have only been replaced by the Democrat Party and their overseers in the Welfare Bureaucracy.

Unfortunately, many in the ministry have become accomplices in their enslavement. Did they not see what the chains of the Welfare system was doing to the families in their flocks? Are they not witnesses to the ever increasing out of wedlock births? Haven’t they seen the degradation of their culture by the Gangster Rappers.

What about the anti-education culture that permeates the black community where children who try to excel in school are hounded by classmates because they are "trying to be white"? What about the rampant violence of the black community. Every week there are killings, frequently of innocent children.

When are the religious leaders going take responsibility and act instead of waiting for government to save them. When will you rise up and lead a Crusade to set things right in your own community and culture? When?

I know there are many in the black community who abhor these conditions but they need another Martin Luther King to lead them. Who will take up the cross of leadership and begin the Crusade as if it was passed to them by Dr. King himself?

How long will you wait for the government to fix everything? The government does not have the capacity or the will to save your culture. It is in your hands. Where is the new, Dr. King? He will likely be an unknown to the rest of society but with the courage and vision that so marked the character of Dr. King his name will become a byword to be praised and held up as an example of greatness for all time.

Whoever you are act quickly before it is too late.

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

Visit MomsAndDadsBeHeard a forum for you to express your views and concerns. Be part of bringing our Great Christian country back.

Contraceptive Issue Has Nothing To Do With Contraceptives

JTDCON2009 — Tue, 13 Mar 2012 19:27:48 GMT

Obama Trampling The Constitution

The mandate by Barack Obama to have insurance companies cover the cost of contraceptives has been argued by both sides with great fervor. That argument is a big distraction. They should not argue about the churches having to pay for contraceptives. They should spend their time on the mandate itself.

Obama touts himself as a Harvard educated constitutional lawyer. If one reads the Constitution, they find that a President cannot mandate anything. An absolute ruler may, but a President must answer to the Congress and to the people. Changes to the normal operation of the country must come in the form of a bill from Congress. Congress is to consider the bill based on the benefit and welfare of their constituents and vote as to how they think the constituents would. The power of the president is limited to signing the bill or to veto it.

Has a passed a bill for mandatory inclusion of birth control and been sent to the President, or is he acting beyond his powers as defined by the Constitution? A good debater will create an argument as a distraction to keep you from focusing on the real issue. They win their position while your head is buried in the sand.

The answer is simple. If Company A, who is paying for the coverage, is paying for a plan that includes that coverage, then no it is not a problem. If the Federal government TELLS Company A they have to include that coverage and pay for it. THAT is the problem. The government should has no authority to tell any religion, business or other institution what it must cover in the area of elective treatments / options. That would be like telling the same parties they must cover condom expenses via insurance because it can prevent STDs and pregnancy.

The entire contraceptive brouhaha was about power. It's about taking rights form people and businesses. Further Obama can't run on his record. Obama, the Democrats, and the MSM will tell any lies they need too in an attempt to divert attention for Obama's pathetic record.

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

Moms, Dads, Grandparents need a place to vent about the direction our government is taking? Go to MomsAndDadsBeHeard and speak out. Be part of bringing our Great country back.

Sebelius Less Americans Will Save On Obamacare

JTDCON2009 — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 05:30:00 GMT

YouTube: Sebelius Contraceptive Mandate At House Hearing

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told a House panel last Thursday that a reduction in the number of human beings born in the United States will compensate employers and insurers for the cost of complying with the new HHS mandate that will require all health-care plans to cover sterilizations and all FDA-approved contraceptives, including those that cause abortions.

"The reduction in the number of pregnancies compensates for the cost of contraception," Sebelius said. She went on to say the estimated cost is "down not up."

Because the Catholic church teaches that sterilization, contraception or abortion are wrong and that Catholics must not be involved in them, the regulation forces Catholics–and members of other religious denominations that share those views–to act against the teachings of their faith. Numerous lawsuits have already been asserting that the rule violates the First Amendment’s guarantee to the free exercise of religion. Many of the nation’s Catholic bishops have published letters saying: "We cannot–we will not–comply with this unjust law."

Sebelius, however, insisted that the mandate "upholds religious liberty.""The rule which we intend to promulgate in the near future around implementation will require insurance companies, not a religious employer, but the insurance company to provide coverage for contraceptives," Sebelius told the subcommittee.

YouTube Sebelius At Subcommittee hearing:

During the subcommittee hearing, Representative Tim Murphy (R-PA) said that contraception provided by insurance companies to people employed by religious organizations under the future form of the rule Sebelius described would not be was not free.

"Who pays for it? There’s no such thing as a free service," Murphy asked.

Sebelius responded that that is not the case with insurance. "The reduction in the number of pregnancies compensates for cost of contraception," Sebelius answered.

Murphy expressed surprise by the answer. "So you are saying, by not having babies born, we are going to save money on health care?" Murphy asked.

Sebelius replied, "Providing contraception is a critical preventive health benefit for women and for their children."

Barack Obama and his administration are unbelievable. They refuse to uphold our Constitution and forcing what they want on America.

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

Moms, Dads, Grandparents need a place to vent about the direction our government is taking? Go to MomsAndDadsBeHeard and speak out. Be part of bringing our Great country back.

Pelosi Shut Down Business Not Union

JTDCON2009 — Thu, 08 Mar 2012 16:00:00 GMT

YouTube: Pelosi NLRB Should Shut Down Business

In an interview late last week, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told CNBC that Boeing should either unionize its production facilities in South Carolina, or shut them down entirely.

In a CNBC interview with Nancy Pelosi last week, as Maria Bartiromo queried Barack Obama’s favorite House Speaker on the role of government in business expansion. Should agencies like the NLRB have the authority to shut down private-sector plants simply for not being unionized? Pelosi barely waits for the question to conclude before blurting out her "yes."

YouTube Pelosi NLRB Should Shut Down Business:

In the interview late last week, Pelosi told CNBC that Boeing should either unionize its production facilities in South Carolina, or shut them down entirely.

"Do you think it’s right that Boeing has to close down that plant in South Carolina because it’s non union?" asked host Maria Bartiromo. Pelosi’s reply: "Yes."

The minority leader quickly added that she would rather it simply unionize and stay open. But barring unionization, by Pelosi’s reasoning, it should simply shut down.

Lachlan Markay wonders when Pelosi and the Democrats became so anti-jobs, anti-worker, and … anti-democracy.

Does Pelosi know that workers at the South Carolina plant in question voted resoundingly (199-68) to decertify their union two years ago? Government policies that would close the plant for being a non-union shop would simply be punishing those workers for exercising their right to determine union representation for themselves.

The government should have no interest in whether a particular plant is unionized or not, let alone assert authority in this area. Government exists to uniformly enforce the law without bias. Agencies like the NLRB want to use the color of authority to favor unions because they see that as a preferred social-engineering outcome — whether or not workers themselves want union representation or not.

We have come far from the legitimate exercise of government in this and many other areas. It’s time to demand a return of government to its proper boundaries, and perhaps eliminating altogether those agencies that have arrogated to themselves the power to impose their preferred social prescriptions through the abuse of agency authority. That would include the NLRB, the EPA, and a number of other federal entities.

Comment here and email us at YourVoice@speaknowconservatives.org.

Moms, Dads, Grandparents need a place to vent about the direction our government is taking? Go to MomsAndDadsBeHeard and speak out. Be part of bringing our Great country back.