America too far gone to save? ~ By Anthony Martin

"Yes, I will continue to fight, " he continued, "But frankly I don't see a lot of improvement. Not only do I have to fight politicians who are throwing our freedoms into the garbage can, trampling on the Constitution in the process, but I must constantly fight to attempt to educate my fellow citizens in what it means to live in a free society with a Constitution that is supposed to protect our freedoms with the full force of the law. The number of people in America today who understand that the Constitution exists to protect our freedoms from government encroachments is very small."

I do not know who the patriot is that Anthony is writing about. Hopefully, Anthony was able to offer the person some encouragement. I can certainly relate to Anthony's person of interest, however, it would be sad if they are right. Is America too far gone to save?

Many of us still hope and pray that good people that believe in our freedom will come along and get voted into office. But are there enough of those people to start getting into office and helping us get our freedom back? And maybe the bigger question is, can we eventually educate enough people so they will understand the need to vote those people into office? Well, then, we can't just give up working and fighting to get the right people on the ballots, and we can never give up trying to get enough voters for them to get into office. We must. There is only one alternative, as Anthony wrote:

Many if not most citizens have no intention of allowing themselves to become slaves to a government that has become drunk on its own power. Thus, the only alternative is war.

So, for those of us that are trying and doing our best despite our weariness and disillusionment, we have to keep on keeping on. We must remember what Winston Churchill said on October 29, 1941:

"[N]ever give in, never give in, never, never, never - in nothing, great or small, large or petty - never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy."

Winston Churchill is the one person that always had the right to say, "Just sayin'..."


America too far gone to save?

Anthony Martin

By Anthony Martin

August 27, 2014

From Examiner.com

"The country is too far gone to save," he stated with melancholic certainty. "Too many citizens are just like those in Europe who believe that the welfare state that provides cradle to the grave social giveaway programs is to be preserved and expanded at all costs, even if it pushes the nation over the financial cliff into bankruptcy."

The one who provided this sobering analysis is a long time patriot, a defender of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and a fierce opponent of the ever expanding scope and power of an authoritative, centralized government complex. But he shared something that he will tell no one else, something that eats away at his very soul day in and day out. "In spite of the fact that I will continue to fight," he said, "I have grown weary, tired beyond imagination, and disillusioned with not only the politicians who get sent back to Washington over and over but with my fellow citizens who don't have a clue about the nature of the battle we're in."

~~~ READ MORE on Examiner.com ~~~

*    *    *    *

As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text.  Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse!

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

VIDEO: The EPA comes likes thieves in the night

Please note:  To see the following video, you must be logged in to Facebook.

Post by Johnny2k's America.

*    *    *    *

As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text.  Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse!

Please note:  To see the johnny2k’s America videos on this blog, you must be logged in to Facebook.

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

WH ‘picking up the pace’ on executive actions ~ By Justin Sink

The White House has dismissed the select committee investigating the terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, announced earlier this month by Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) as redundant and politically motivated. Republicans have argued that the special panel was necessary after the release of a previously undisclosed email from White House deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes showing involvement in drafting then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice's infamous talking points.

The veteran White House aide did not detail exactly how the president would exert his executive authorities in the coming days, although Obama is expected to take at least two major actions on the environment.

On Wednesday, Obama is slated to designate the largest national monument of his presidency in the mountains of New Mexico. And Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy hinted Monday that the president would personally present new carbon emissions limits on coal-fired power plants. The White House has said that announcement would come in early June.

It looks like our glorious leader President Obama, the Tyrant-in-Chief, is all set to use the House Select Committee investigating the Benghazi terrorists attacks as an excuse to bypass Congress in order to put through extremely radical executive orders!

Dan Pfeiffer is using the Obama White House narrative-of-the-month, claiming that Congress is obsessing over Benghazi with the Select Committee, trying to repeal Obamacare, and along with all the various investigations into the many scandals, is not only wasting time, but keeps Congress from engaging in helping the Economy.

Really? In my opinion, I feel that the new carbon limits on coal plants are not going to do anything to help the economy.  In fact, his policies on climate change and environmental activist inspired mandates will severely damage the economy.  Sorry, Mr. Pfeiffer, no matter what you claim they are doing to waste time, the House sure wouldn't ever be wasting their time by approving any of Obama's agenda!  Just sayin'...

WH ‘picking up the pace’ on executive actions

By Justin Sink

May 20, 2014, 08:14 am

From TheHill.com

The White House will be “picking up the pace on executive actions,” as Congress focuses its efforts on the newly formed select committee investigating Benghazi, senior Obama adviser Dan Pfeiffer declared Tuesday.

In an op-ed for The Huffington Post, Pfeiffer argued that congressional Republicans are not interested in engaging on the economy, instead spending time “obsessively trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act” and “ginning up politically motivated investigations.”

“Given this dynamic, President Obama has only one option — use every ounce of his authority to unilaterally improve economic security,” Pfeiffer said.

“Next week, as congressional Republicans spend their energy on yet another partisan investigation, we'll be picking up the pace on the executive actions to help the economy,” Pfeiffer added.

~~~ READ MORE on TheHill.com ~~~

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE! 
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

Now That the Feds Have Backed Off, Where Does This Leave the Nevada Rancher in His Battle With the Gov’t?

‘The Door Isn’t Closed’

For now, however, a relative calm has fallen on Gold Butte and Bunkerville, the return of armed federal agents increasingly unlikely. But Washington’s decision over the weekend to cease its roundup operations does not mean it has abandoned its plans to exercise authority over Nevada’s public lands.

“The door isn’t closed,” Bureau of Land Management spokesman Craig Leff said after federal agents retreated from the area. “We’ll figure out how to move forward with this.”

Aided by armed militiamen, some of whom were reportedly in Nevada at Bundy’s invitation, the veteran rancher has won himself a brief reprieve.

But it’s unlikely he’ll win any meaningful legal battles in the near future.

As I stated in a post yesterday, "When I wrote the description for this video, I did my very best to stay neutral, and just allow the video to speak for itself." I am maintaining the same stance in providing this story.  The opinions coming from various legal sources, however, seem to say that Mr. Bundy may not have the grazing rights that he believes he does.  There are still many questions to be answered, such as the big one:  What is the government going to do now about the Bundy ranch situation? 

Last Saturday (April 12, 2014), we were just an itchy trigger finger away from what could have been a disaster for everybody involved.  Many lives could have been lost in a standoff gone very wrong.  Thankfully, the U.S. government decided to stand down.

So, how is the government going to find a way to resolve the dispute without a future blood bath?  All I can say is that we'll have to wait and see.  I can imagine that, for a very different reason than what Sen. Harry Reid said, "It's Not Over," we may still be on the brink of a looming tragedy.  Whether he is right or wrong, we would hope that the federal government doesn't want to make a martyr out of Cliven Bundy.  The timing would be somewhat embarrassing for Obama's administration due to the ongoing situation in Ukraine.  Trying to negotiate a peaceful resolution in the Geneva talks would make diplomacy a little more difficult if we had a violent resolution of our own disagreement over state sovereignty with a rancher in Nevada!  Just sayin'...

RELATED STORIES:

• VIDEO: What happens when We the People rise up?

• Sen. Harry Reid on Nevada Ranch Battle: ‘It’s Not Over’

• Is Harry Reid Involved? Seven Answers to Seven Questions You’re Probably Asking Right Now About the Nevada Rancher Situation

• Nevada rancher standoff turns on a states’ rights debate

*    *    *    *

Now That the Feds Have Backed Off, Where Does This Leave the Nevada Rancher in His Battle With the Gov’t?

By Becket Adams

Apr. 17, 2014 10:27am

From theblaze.com

Cliven Bundy

Federal agents waved the white flag Saturday and retreated from Gold Butte, Nev., releasing some 389 “trespass cattle” that had been rounded up as the result of an ongoing land dispute between rancher Cliven Bundy and the United States.

But as Bundy family members celebrate what they call a decisive victory in their decades-long struggle against the federal government, the legal battle between the Clark County rancher and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management is far from over.

“He’s still making these arguments about how the federal courts don’t have jurisdiction because the United States doesn’t own the land in question,” Dan Greenberg, an attorney and president of the Advance Arkansas Institute, a nonprofit that advocates for public policy based on the principles of limited government, told TheBlaze.

“He’s losing on all these claims,” Greenberg said, noting that Bundy’s arguments have already been rejected twice by the courts. “Unfortunately for him, his arguments – that he simply doesn’t recognize federal authority – will not be recognized in the courts. … The legal theory here that Mr. Bundy’s using is radical in its implications.”

~~~ READ MORE on theblaze.com ~~~

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

WIFLI Briefing for Apr 30, 2012 - We the People CAN Win!

Welcome to this edition of Time 2 Escape WIFLI Briefing!

What is WIFLI?
You may be wondering what the acronym "WIFLI" means. I started out by calling these issues the Time 2 Escape Daily, but that didn't work out very well. I quickly learned that putting these issues together on a daily basis was a task I was unable to accomplish. To replace "Daily" in the title, I borrowed the acronym WIFLI, which literally means "When I Feel Like It." Putting together a post on this blog WIFLI works much better for my schedule, and for the higher quality of each issue that is eventually published!

FAIR USE NOTICE: This edition of the Time 2 Escape WIFLI Briefing may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes only. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 106A-117 of the U.S. Copyright Law.

I am hoping that if you have read a few of my blog posts in this venue,that you will understand that I lean considerably toward being Conservative. And I hope that you have determined that I excel at delivering a narrative that exhibits the confidant personal belief... that I'm right.

However, I have to admit it, I've had times of wondering why I should bother to spend the time working on my blogs. Am I going to change anyone's mind, or am I just preaching to the choir? How would I know if my efforts make a difference?

I really do not have a way to answer that question. There's no tangible statistics like homeruns or strikeouts that tells me if I have a measurable influence in the direction this country was heading. The Rasmussen Report hasn't offered that information to me yet; and if they did, I'd be running for President. If I was a history-maker, you would have heard about it by now.

But I have learned something new this weekend. Hopefully, you will totally understand what was revealed to me. The toughest part of the lesson is knowing that not everyone will agree with everything that we believe. There was the good news that on The Weekend last Saturday when Michael Berry explained very astutely how we must not be dejected when we can not convince a liberal to our way of thinking. It does happen, but not often. What really matters is how many people we touch that had not yet made a decision on which side they are on.

The announcement that you will hear today, the one that will resonate strongly within yourself, is "Game ON!" Hopefully, the resonance will be deep, The stark reality that you will learn about below is that we will win a few when we fight back. We can't win every battle even when we are on the right side.  But here's the deal: The liberals need to understand that we're not going to just lay down and comply, even when they pick five to crucify.  I'm just sayin'...

*     *     *     *

Rural kids, parents angry about Labor Dept. rule banning farm chores
From The Daily Caller ~ By Patrick Richardson ~ Published Apr 25, 2012 1:31 AM

Update, April 26, 7:55 p.m.: Citing public outrage, the Department of Labor has withdrawn the controversial rulemaking proposal described in this article.

——

A proposal from the Obama administration to prevent children from doing farm chores has drawn plenty of criticism from rural-district members of Congress. But now it’s attracting barbs from farm kids themselves.

The Department of Labor is poised to put the finishing touches on a rule that would apply child labor laws to children working on family farms, prohibiting them from performing a list of jobs on their own families’ land.

Under the rules, most children under 18 could no longer work “in the storing, marketing and transporting of farm product raw materials.”

“Prohibited places of employment,” a Department press release read, “would include country grain elevators, grain bins, silos, feed lots, stockyards, livestock exchanges and livestock auctions.”

U.S. Labor Secy. Hilda Solis
with her new boss,
President Barack Obama

The new regulations, first proposed August 31 by Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, would also revoke the government’s approval of safety training and certification taught by independent groups like 4-H and FFA, replacing them instead with a 90-hour federal government training course.

Rossie Blinson, a 21-year-old college student from Buis Creek, N.C., told The Daily Caller that the federal government’s plan will do far more harm than good.

“The main concern I have is that it would prevent kids from doing 4-H and FFA projects if they’re not at their parents’ house,” said Blinson.

“I started showing sheep when I was four years old. I started with cattle around 8. It’s been very important. I learned a lot of responsibility being a farm kid.”



~~~ READ MORE ~~~

*    *    *    *

Here is a superb video about why the Labor Deptartment's proposed rules needed to be withdrawn. This illustrates the reason why this was a great win for We the People!

Child Labor Law Endangers Family Farms

Each year, an estimated 800,000 children work on farms across the United States.
Mending fences, feeding cattle, and driving tractors are all part of the daily chores for farm kids. But a new U.S. Department of Labor rule could make all of those tasks-- illegal.

Kristen Oaks shows us how those rules could threaten the future of one family farm.

Video provided by kristenoaks on Feb 23, 2012

Of course, such ridiculously stupid proposals for more government regulations ended up being withdrawn. And the great news is that this shows us that when the American citizens are awake and alert, We the People can actually overcome the desires of Big Government!

Child Labor Rule Withdrawn
Focus turns to educational programs to reduce farm accidents
From AGWEB (Powered by Farm Journal) ~ By Jennifer Russell ~ Published Apr 27, 2012

The U.S. Department of Labor announced April 26 that it is withdrawing its proposed rule dealing with children who work in the agriculture sector.

The department said in its statement:

"The Obama administration is firmly committed to promoting family farmers and respecting the rural way of life, especially the role that parents and other family members play in passing those traditions down through the generations. The Obama administration is also deeply committed to listening and responding to what Americans across the country have to say about proposed rules and regulations.

"As a result, the Department of Labor is announcing today the withdrawal of the proposed rule dealing with children under the age of 16 who work in agricultural vocations.

"The decision to withdraw this rule — including provisions to define the 'parental exemption' — was made in response to thousands of comments expressing concerns about the effect of the proposed rules on small family-owned farms. To be clear, this regulation will not be pursued for the duration of the Obama administration.

"Instead, the Departments of Labor and Agriculture will work with rural stakeholders — such as the American Farm Bureau Federation, the National Farmers Union, the Future Farmers of America, and 4-H — to develop an educational program to reduce accidents to young workers and promote safer agricultural working practices."

Farmers and politicians alike have applauded the decision.

~~~ READ MORE ~~~

Oh, wait... Now that the problem of the attack on family farms is over, maybe we should start thinking about the fact that the Obama administration is just plain anti-capitalism. The most recent attack came from the EPA, in the form of a bureaucrat trying to set an example. Did you hear about this story? What if it is true? Would a video of the EPA official saying how he'd crucify business operators change your mind?

That's right, I detected some skepticism regarding the Obama attack on free enterprise. But here you go, this is the proof that the transformation of America is not about making sure everyone has a fair chance to succeed. It seems that the real agenda is making sure everyone has a fair chance to have equal results regardless of their efforts.

Al Armendariz, Obama's EPA Regional Administrator Wants To Crucify

Video provided by by WallStreetistVideos on Apr 25, 2012

Inhofe Responds to EPA Apology For Using The Word "Crucify" on Fox and Friends

Video provided by JimInhofePressOffice on Apr 26, 2012

See what I'm sayin'?

*     *     *     *

Here is the proof of the collusion between the Obama administration and the leftist mainstream media minions. It is the smoking gun.

Obama slow jams the news & the economy
From GlennBeck.com ~ Published Friday, Apr 27, 2012 at 2:12 PM CDT

Nothing like a little propaganda on late night television – that’s exactly what America got when Obama stopped by Jimmy Fallon’s program to participate in his ‘slow jam’ the news bit. Only, there was nothing really that funny, just Obama giving a speech and the host making it appear cool.

Watch the video of the Fallon show below:

Video provided by latenight on Apr 24, 2012

~~~ READ MORE ~~~

America doesn't need a cool president. We need a president that doesn't have to resort to brazenly using the late night show circuit in order to get things done, like improving our economy and cutting the size of the government.

So... I guess if the "preezy of the United steezy" wants to utilize his left-wing media minions for free propaganda, which seems a little sleazy, let's give him a little taste of some well deserved derision.

It isn't all that often that people try to take credit for such a pathetic performance in the last three-plus years of a one-term presidency. But this one-term president shows his arrogance in believing that his base is ignorant enough to want to vote for him again, just because Barack Obama is so cool.

Right back at you, President Obama.  Game on!

From American Crossroads: "Cool"

After four years of a celebrity president, is your life any better?

Video provided by AmericanCrossroads on Apr 26, 2012

Democrats' Rainbows and Unicorns

No mandatory health care, trillions of new jobs, and low-emission unicorns. President Obama is the greatest president ever. http://www.nrsc.org

Video provided by TheNRSC on Mar 31, 2010

A Tale of Two Leaders

America's not laughing, Mr. President. http://www.GOP.com

Video provided by rnc on Apr 25, 2012

*     *     *     *

I saved the best for last. A week ago, I mentioned the story about Ted Nugent's run-in with the Secret Service regarding remarks during the NRA 2012 Annual Convention on a radio show. In fact, I even linked to the story, "Nugent Ousted From Fort Knox Concert Line-Up." In the story below, Nugent responds to the cancellation.

Ted Nugent says he's insulted by Army base concert cancellation after remarks about Obama
From Yahoo News (AP) ~ By Ryan Pearson, The Associated Press ~ Published Apr 27, 2012

LOS ANGELES, Calif. - Ted Nugent said he was insulted by the cancellation of his planned concert at an Army post over his comments about President Obama.

CONSERVATIVE ROCK-STAR TED NUGENT

Commanders at the Fort Knox, Kentucky, post nixed Nugent's segment of a June concert after the rocker and conservative activist said at a recent National Rifle Association meeting that he would be "dead or in jail by this time next year" if Obama is re-elected.

Nugent told The Associated Press this week that his words were not intended as a threat against the president.

"To think that there's a bureaucrat in the United States Army that would consider the use or abuse of First Amendment rights in determining who is going to perform at an Army base is an insult and defiles the sacrifices of those heroes who fought for the U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights," Nugent said.

~~~ READ MORE ~~~

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

Government termites ~ By Henry Lamb

These are only a few ways the progressive termites are eating away at the foundations of freedom in America. Where is the exterminator? Every person who is old enough to vote is a potential exterminator of the elected officials who support or allow measures that erode freedom. Throughout the next 18 months, tens of thousands of officials and candidates will confront a ballot box. Unless the potential exterminators use their unique power to banish the termites eating away at America's freedoms, the house that freedom built will surely fall.

Another new exterminator at the ballot box is born: In the Facebook comments section on this WND column, Cheryl Rickards wrote, "Interesting. I hadn't heard of Agenda 21 before. And, the Termites [sic] analogy is all too perfect." 

Cheryl gets it!

Well, I was pretty sure that there seemed to be no interest in such a minor issue as "sustainable development," and its link to the U.N.'s Agenda 21. Fortunately, though, a reader of the column wrote a comment stating that it was "interesting." And here I was beginning to see little reason to be increasing awareness of this little piece of the puzzle.

No, I know, it's hard to get people's attention anymore, especially when we're just talking about our freedom. It isn't like we're being shipped to internment camps in railroad cars. It isn't like we're suffering with a lack of food, a collapsed economy, or hyper-inflation... That couldn't happen here, right?

And all this time, we just thought it was the good ol' boys network that made sure their buddies got on the local planning commissions so that certain land developers and construction companies would prosper. Just a little corrupt, but hey, at least it isn't like a bunch of Communists want to eliminate our freedom by taking away our property rights.

Of course, the above paragraph was written with sarcasm intended. Our freedoms are in danger. There are scary people that want to control our every move, if they can. There is only one antidote, and that is to make sure a few people out there are aware, especially those who won't hesitate to make others aware. (And by the way, I hate that "awareness" label, as it is easy to picture Hollywood celebrities trying to spread "awareness" about their various personal special interests.)

With all of the above being said, it doesn't seem like people are willing to be all that emotional about the possibilities of losing our freedom. I'm frightened by the fact that a reader of Henry's column wasn't aware of Agenda 21, but I am encouraged by knowing that one more person IS aware of it now.

Wouldn't you know it? I realized that there was one more thing for me to worry about. It isn't so much that there are multitudes that read this story. The real important thing is that the multitudes begin to understand the significance of our Freedom. I'm just sayin'...

RELATED STORIES:

• What could be bad about 'sustainability'? ~ By Henry Lamb

• Government control goes that extra mile ~ By Henry Lamb
  

*  *  *  *  *

Government termites

HENRY LAMB

By Henry Lamb

July 16, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2011

Editor's note: Listen to this column online.

Termites don't care whether there's a hurricane or tornado raging outside. They just keep chomping away at the foundation of their host structure. Homeowners care. When a hurricane, tornado or storms threaten, homeowners do whatever they can to prevent their home from blowing away. Rarely are they even aware that the termites are chomping away, night and day, rain or shine – until it's too late to save the structure.

Advocates for Agenda 21 and sustainable development operate a lot like termites. It doesn't matter to them whether hurricanes, tornados, debt ceilings or deficits are in the news. They try to operate well below the headlines – and just keep chomping away at private property rights, individuals freedoms, free markets and the foundational pillars of the host governing system. They chomp away at city council meetings, at county commission meetings, at "visioning sessions" and anywhere else they can get their teeth into an unsuspecting official who still thinks Agenda 21 is just a conspiracy theory and that the word "sustainable" means "acceptable" to the green lobby.

When a visioning process blossoms into a comprehensive land-use plan for the county that is adopted by local elected officials, no one puts the spotlight on the provision that requires all landowners to get permission from the government for any proposed land-use change. In Los Angeles County, no one put the spotlight on the provision that subjected property owners to eviction and forfeiture of their property when they failed to bring their property up to the new codes contained in the plan.

Advocates of Agenda 21's sustainable development did not want people who live outside the Urban Boundary Zones in Richland County, S.C., to know that the value of their property fell to nearly zero when their county plan denied all development possibilities.

Advocates of Agenda 21's sustainable development often believe that capitalism is obsolete, that government must manage the marketplace. Congress was dominated by people who share this belief when they voted in 2007 to ban the incandescent light bulb, forcing people to buy a light bulb that cost five times as much, and was made in China.

These folks applaud actions by the Environmental Protection Administration that seek to force car manufacturers to increase their mileage efficiency to more than 56 miles per gallon. Like termites chomping at the foundation of a structure, government continues to take bits and pieces of freedom from its citizens. Unless someone calls the exterminator, the great structure freedom built will inevitably collapse.

READ MORE at WND.com

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

Obama’s Faith-Based Programs Pushing Global Warming, Climate Change, Green Issues

I just started hearing about this in the last few days this week. It is very disturbing. Obama is now talking a lot about "environmental justice" to go along with "social justice," and he is attempting to expand this very secular religion by injecting it into churches. This article talks a little about that strategy, and how hypocritical the left is when it comes to the "faith based initiative."

So, Obama wants to use federal subsidies offered through he EPA and his faith-based outreach to get churches to promulgate the green faith.

Of course, it’s hard to see Obama’s use of faith-based initiatives to push his environmental message and spending millions of tax dollars to do so differs in any material way when measured by the left’s anti-Bush yard stick when they criticized his policies. The left universally cried that Bush was cynically using religion to further his political policies. No one can look at Obama’s current policies and see any reason to excuse him from being smeared with the same brush the left used to tar Bush.

By Warner Todd Huston

May 16, 2010

Widely reviled by the left, Bush’s faith-based initiatives were claimed to be evidence that Bush was a “religious zealot” trying to destroy America with evil Christianity. Now, two years into the Obama administration, we are seeing what Obama intends to do with his continuation of Bush’s faith-based offices: he wants to use them to push the religion of Greenicanism on America’s churches.

This month Obama’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships issued its final report of recommendations and the result is nothing short of astonishing. (download .pdf file)

The question that immediately comes to mind, of course, is if the left will explode in excoriation of Obama’s faith-based policies as it did with Bush’s?

The left was out of its mind over Bush’s ideas. In 2004, for instance, the website TheocracyWatch.org hyperbolically said, “Under the Bush administration, our country is experiencing a major transformation from a secular to a religious government. The President’s faith-based initiative is central to this transformation and raises serious questions about church-state separation.” This was the left-wing talking points du jour on Bush’s faith-based programs.

It wasn’t just the left, but even from the libertarian side Bush’s ideas were attacked. Alex Epstein of the Ayn Rand Institute said that the faith-based initiative was a “direct violation” of the Constitution.

And the media universally hated the idea. Lew Daly of Boston Review magazine tried to color Bush’s program as a “seismic change in American politics,” and for The New York Times Ron Suskind breathlessly burbled that Bush had, “created the faith-based presidency.” And those were what passed for the civil proclamations, others were more nutty by claiming that Bush was a religious zealot that was destroying the country through that evil Christianity stuff.

Candidate Obama was widely expected to dispense with the faith-based office. But in 2008 when the AP reported that Obama intended to leave the Bush faith-based programs in place, the left was apoplectic. Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State criticized Obama over it. “I am disappointed that any presidential candidate would want to continue a failed policy of the Bush administration,” Lynn said. “It ought to be shut down, not continued.”

After the AP’s report candidate Obama himself spun reports as a distortion. In July of 2008, Obama addressed the issue in a speech in Zanesville, Ohio.

“Now, make no mistake, as someone who used to teach constitutional law, I believe deeply in the separation of church and state, but I don’t believe this partnership will endanger that idea – so long as we follow a few basic principles. First, if you get a federal grant, you can’t use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can’t discriminate against them – or against the people you hire – on the basis of their religion. Second, federal dollars that go directly to churches, temples, and mosques can only be used on secular programs. And we’ll also ensure that taxpayer dollars only go to those programs that actually work.”

As with most things that Obama says, this claim that was then. While Obama is following the left-wing penchant to eschew actual religiosity, Obama has apparently decided that his own special brand of religion would be what is promulgated with his continuation of Bush’s faith-based policies. The money he’s spending to “proselytize” his green ideas apparently doesn’t strike him as a violation of his 2008 proclamations.

READ FULL STORY at Andrew Breitbart's BigGovernment.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Profits derived from your purchases
will help me to attend tea party rallies,
(especially the one in Las Vegas, on July 15-17)!

When America began its descent ~ By Henry Lamb

Every week, Henry somehow comes up with these columns that tell us how the U.S. government is assuming more power than the Constitution allows for. And, they always leave me asking questions, such as, "How do we not just stop this from happening, but how do WE get back in control of the government?" Or, "How do we take back the public schools that indoctrinate our kids and teach them that parents and tea parties are wrong, and government and Barack Obama is good?" And, "How do we find good candidates for national offices that don't end up being corrupted by Beltway politics?"  Just sayin'...

How does a nation of people thirsting for freedom so fervently that they were willing to fight the king of England to win it, move to a nation of people that allow its government to impose far more onerous taxes and living restrictions than the king of England ever did? Not only does this nation now allow its government to impose these unauthorized powers, many people celebrate the new "sustainable" (read: government-managed) society.

The moment the United States government gained and began to exercise control over its people is the moment the United States began its descent. The nation is no longer the sum total of the pursuit of happiness of its individuals, but is becoming the managed product of the current power brokers.

By Henry Lamb

Posted: May 08, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

The government of the United States of America exists for one purpose, according to the Declaration of Independence: to secure the unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, endowed to every individual by their Creator. The people who adopted this profound declaration knew only too well the heavy weight of government oppression. In addition to declaring the purpose of the government they were creating, they wrote and adopted another document: the Constitution of the United States of America.

The Declaration of Independence declares the purpose of government; the Constitution declares the source and limit of power entrusted to the new government by its creators.

From the outset, there have been people who disagreed with the underlying philosophy on which the Declaration and Constitution were constructed, but they were distinctly in the minority for the first century or so. In the last half-century, this paradigm – and the purpose of government – has been shifting.

The purpose of government is no longer to "secure the unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" for every individual. The purpose of government today is to dictate to every individual what he may or may not do, and to impose a fee for the privilege of doing it.

The people who created the United States wanted their government to defend them from invading enemies who might inflict bodily harm and steal their property. They wanted a system of law that dealt justice equally to all who would dare harm or damage their neighbors. They wanted a system of standard weights and measures and money to facilitate free and fair trade among the people.

The people who created the United States did not want their government involved in their personal affairs. In fact, the Constitution says quite explicitly that no government official may enter the private property of an individual without a warrant signed by a judge, after a sworn affidavit of probable cause of a crime.

No one remembers the first time the federal government ignored this limitation of power and sent an official into private property without a warrant for whatever purpose seemed justified at the moment. Now, no one questions the Environmental Protection Agency official who can show up on your property to declare that the ditch you are digging is polluting the waters of the United States.

Most employees of the Department of Agriculture – and too many in Congress – believe that government has every right to send its agents onto a private farm to count the number of livestock animals, to retrieve all sorts of information about the source age, and movements of these animals and to require the owner to report his activities to the government on a regular basis.

The Constitution was not amended; how did the government gain all this new, unspecified power?

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Profits derived from your purchases
will help me to attend tea party rallies!

Copenhagen’s political science ~ By Sarah Palin

From Sarah Palin's Notes (Facebook page)

Copenhagen’s political science The Washington Post Op-ed and Response to Climate Change and Gravity By Sarah Palin Wednesday, December 9, 2009 With the publication of damaging e-mails from a climate research center in Britain, the radical environmental movement appears to face a tipping point. The revelation of appalling actions by so-called climate change experts allows the American public to finally understand the concerns so many of us have articulated on this issue. “Climate-gate,” as the e-mails and other documents from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia have become known, exposes a highly politicized scientific circle -- the same circle whose work underlies efforts at the Copenhagen climate change conference. The agenda-driven policies being pushed in Copenhagen won’t change the weather, but they would change our economy for the worse. The e-mails reveal that leading climate “experts” deliberately destroyed records, manipulated data to “hide the decline” in global temperatures, and tried to silence their critics by preventing them from publishing in peer-reviewed journals. What’s more, the documents show that there was no real consensus even within the CRU crowd. Some scientists had strong doubts about the accuracy of estimates of temperatures from centuries ago, estimates used to back claims that more recent temperatures are rising at an alarming rate. This scandal obviously calls into question the proposals being pushed in Copenhagen. I’ve always believed that policy should be based on sound science, not politics. As governor of Alaska, I took a stand against politicized science when I sued the federal government over its decision to list the polar bear as an endangered species despite the fact that the polar bear population had more than doubled. I got clobbered for my actions by radical environmentalists nationwide, but I stood by my view that adding a healthy species to the endangered list under the guise of “climate change impacts” was an abuse of the Endangered Species Act. This would have irreversibly hurt both Alaska’s economy and the nation’s, while also reducing opportunities for responsible development. READ FULL STORY>>

EPA's own research expert 'shut up' on climate change

Government analyst silenced after he critiques CO2 findings By Chelsea Schilling Posted: June 24, 2009 11:05 pm Eastern © 2009 WorldNetDaily Environmental Protection Agency officials have silenced one of their own senior researchers after the 38-year employee issued an internal critique of the EPA's climate change position. Alan Carlin, senior operations research analyst at the EPA's National Center for Environmental Economics, or NCEE, submitted his research on the agency's greenhouse gases endangerment findings and offered a fundamental critique on the EPA's approach to combating CO2 emissions. But officials refused to share his conclusion in an open internal discussion, claiming his research would have "a very negative impact on our office." His study was barred from circulation within the EPA and was never disclosed to the public for political reasons, according to the Competitive Enterprise Institute, or CEI, a group that has accessed four internal e-mails on the subject. CEI General Counsel Sam Kazman told WND, "His boss basically told him, 'No, I'm not going to send your study further up. It's going to stay within this bureau.'" A March 12 e-mail to Carlin warned him not to have "any direct communication with anyone outside NCEE on endangerment." Carlin, a researcher who earned his doctorate in economics from Massachusetts Institute of Technology and an undergraduate degree in physics from California Institute of Technology, informed officials that two-thirds of his references were from peer-reviewed publications and defended his inclusion of new research on the topic. "It is also my view that the critical attribute of good science is its correspondence to observable data rather than where it appears in the technical literature," he wrote. "I believe my comments are valid, significant and contain references to significant new research … They are significant because they present information critical to justification (or lack thereof) for the proposed [greenhouse gas] endangerment finding." After nearly one week of discussion, NCEE Director Al McGartland informed Carlin on March 17 that he would not include the research in the internal EPA discussion. "Alan, I decided not to forward your comments," he wrote. "… The administrator and the administration has decided to move forward on endangerment, and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision. … I can only see one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office." [CONTINUE READING]

Our new trillion-dollar credit card - By Henry Lamb

Everyone in America wants the government to do something to end the economic tailspin – quick. The problem, of course, is that there is little agreement on what the government should do. Democrats, generally speaking, want to put a trillion dollars in purchases on a new credit card. The new purchases will provide the goods and services the government wants the people to have. Republicans, generally speaking, want to reduce taxes sufficiently to leave a trillion dollars in the pockets of the people so they can purchase the goods and services they want. The proposed solution is an awkward combination of the goals of the Democrats and the Republicans. At best, it is little more than a Band-Aid on a cancer that has been growing in America for half a century. It took Pearl Harbor to convince Americans of the threats to freedom that gathered in the 1930s. When called upon, Americans focused like a laser beam on doing whatever it took to defeat the enemies of freedom. Congress borrowed the money necessary to stoke the nation's manufacturing capacity to produce the goods needed to defeat the enemy. Men went to war; and women went to work. [Continue reading]

digg story

Hot enough for you? -- By Joseph Farah

The Environmental Protection Agency, a wholly unconstitutional government bureaucracy to begin with, is authorized by the Clean Air Act to regulate certain pollutants. It is not technically authorized to do anything about carbon dioxide because, well, CO2 is not a pollutant. But when Obama takes office, EPA will be declaring CO2 is a pollutant.

read more | digg story