Tuesday, June 11, 2013

Transcript of Obama, Xi's remarks Friday at Sunnylands conference of the Biggies


Verne Strickland USA DOT COM  June 11, 2013


Presidents Obama, Xi exchange remarks at Sunnylands in Rancho Mirage California . . .



Barack Obama, Xi Jinping











PRESIDENT OBAMA:  
Well, it gives me great pleasure to welcome President Xi back to the United States.  We first met during my visit to China in 2009, and I had the opportunity to welcome him to the Oval Office last year when he was still Vice President and a guest of Vice President Biden's.
I think some of you may know that President Xi is no stranger to the United States.  He's remembered fondly in Iowa, where he once visited and stayed with a local family, and on his trip last year, he had a chance to come to California -- including, I understand, going to a Lakers game, which I was very jealous of.  (Laughter.)
President Xi just took office in March.  Our decision to meet so early, I think, signifies the importance of the U.S.-China relationship.  It's important not only for the prosperity of our two countries and the security of our two countries, but it's also important for the Asia Pacific region and important for the world.
And the importance of this relationship in some ways is reflected with this somewhat unusual setting that we are hosting the President in.  Our thought was that we would have the opportunity for a more extended and more informal conversation in which we were able to share both our visions for our respective countries and how we can forge a new model of cooperation between countries based on mutual interest and mutual respect.  I think both of us agree that continuous and candid and constructive conversation and communication is critically important to shaping our relationship for years to come.
And for my part, this will give me an opportunity to reiterate how the United States welcomes the continuing peaceful rise of China as a world power and that, in fact, it is in the United States' interest that China continues on the path of success, because we believe that a peaceful and stable and prosperous China is not only good for Chinese but also good for the world and for the United States.
Of course, as two of the largest economies in the world, we're going to have a healthy economic competition, but we also have a whole range of challenges on which we have to cooperate, from a nuclear North Korea -- or North Korea's nuclear and missile programs -- to proliferation, to issues like climate change.
And the United States seeks an international economy and international economic order where nations are playing by the same rules, where trade is free and fair, and where the United States and China work together to address issues like cybersecurity and the protection of intellectual property.
In addition to the strategic concerns that we share and the economic challenges that each of our countries face, I will continue to emphasize the importance of human rights.  President Xi has spoken of a nation and a people that are committed to continuous self-improvement and progress, and history shows that upholding universal rights are ultimately a key to success and prosperity and justice for all nations.
So I want to again welcome President Xi to the United States.  We're very glad that he's here.  Inevitably, there are areas of tension between our two countries, but what I've learned over the last four years is both the Chinese people and the American people want a strong, cooperative relationship, and that I think there's a strong recognition on the part of both President Xi and myself that it is very much in our interest to work together to meet the global challenges that we face.  And I'm very much looking forward to this being a strong foundation for the kind of new model of cooperation that we can establish for years to come.
So welcome, and thank you very much for being here.

PRESIDENT XI:

(As interpreted.)  Honorable President Obama, it's my great pleasure to meet you.  We're meeting with each other earlier than people might have expected.  They thought that we might have to wait until the Saint Petersburg G20 summit to meet with each other, but here we are.  I want to thank you for your invitation, and it's my great pleasure to meet you here at Sunnylands, the Annenberg Estate.
This is a wonderful place, a place of sunshine, and it's very close to the Pacific Ocean.  And on the other side of the ocean is China.  When I visited the United States last year, I stated that the vast Pacific Ocean has enough space for the two large countries of China and the United States.  I still believe so.
And, Mr. President, we're meeting here today to chart the future of China-U.S. relations and draw a blueprint for this relationship and continue our cooperation across the Pacific Ocean.
And this reminds us of what happened over 40 years ago when the leaders of China and the United States, with the strategists' political courage and wisdom, realized a handshake across the Pacific Ocean and reopened the door of exchanges between China and the United States.  And in the more than 40 years since then, the China-U.S. relationship has gone through winds and rains and it made historical progress.  And our two peoples and the people elsewhere in the world have reaped huge benefits from this.
And at present, the China-U.S. relationship has reached a new historical starting point.  Our two countries have vast convergence of shared interests, from promoting our respective economic growth at home to ensuring the stability of the global economy; from addressing international and regional hotspot issues to dealing with all kinds of global challenges.  On all these issues, our two countries need to increase exchanges and cooperation.
And under the new environment, we need to take a close look at our bilateral relationship:  What kind of China-U.S.  relationship do we both want?  What kind of cooperation can our two nations carry out for mutual benefit?  And how can our two nations join together to promote peace and development in the world?  These are things that not just the people in our two countries are watching closely, but the whole world is also watching very closely.
Both sides should proceed from the fundamental interests of our peoples and bear in mind human development and progress.  We need to think creatively and act energetically so that working together we can build a new model of major country relationship.
President Obama, I look forward to having in-depth communication with you on major strategic issues of common interest to deepen our mutual understanding and to push forward all-round cooperation.  I'm confident that our meeting will achieve positive outcomes and inject fresh momentum into the China-U.S. relationship.
Thank you.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Thank you very much, everybody.






Monday, June 10, 2013

IRS to Pro-Life Group: Keep Your Faith to Yourself (Text, Audio). This shorted out my Pacemaker.

 

Verne Strickland USA DOT COM June 10, 2013

AniaJoseph
Ania Joseph, President of Pro-Life Revolution

| June 10, 2013

Alliance Defending Freedom released audio today of a phone conversation that an IRS agent had with Ania Joseph, President of Pro-Life Revolution.  In this recorded conversation an IRS agent, Sherry Wan, lectured Joseph about forcing its religious beliefs on others and then explains, inaccurately, that the group must remain neutral on issues like abortion.

Pro-Life Revolution, whom Alliance Defending Freedom represents, applied for tax-exempt status in January of 2011.  The IRS regularly grants exemptions to religious, educational, and/or charitable organizations.  The Texas-based organization operates under all three purposes.
After four months, Joseph received a letter from the IRS that requested more information and asked for an explanation of how her organization’s activities are educational or charitable.  IRS rules specify that an organization only needs to operate under “one or more” of the tax exempt purpose.  Joseph replied anyway and answered the IRS’s questions.

Then in March 2012, Joseph received a call from IRS Exempt Organization Specialist Sherry Wan, who told her that, in order to obtain a tax exemption, “You cannot force your religion or force your beliefs on somebody else…. You have to know your boundaries. You have to know your limits. You have to respect other people’s beliefs.” The IRS has approved applications for tax exemption for pro-abortion groups such as Planned Parenthood and Life and Liberty for Women.

Here is the entire transcript in full (you can listen to the audio here):
(:00-:05) – [Unintelligible]
Agent Sherry Wan (:06-:41) – “…so you have your right. You have your freedom. You have your religious rights. You have a right to believe what you believe. You have the right to think about what you should do, what is right for you to do. OK. And, but, however, this freedom also [unintelligible] to other people. Other people also have the freedom. You know, for the personal view, maybe I go with you. However, I have to [unintelligible] the Internal Revenue Service. I have to stick with the law. Because, you know, we have to keep it neutral.
Client Ania Joseph (:41-:44) – I understand that you have to stick with the law.
Agent (:44-1:17) – Yeah, you have the religious freedom; the freedom of speech. And other people also have the civil rights; human rights. You cannot, you know, use your religious belief to tell other people you don’t have a belief, so I don’t believe you need the right to do this, start confrontation, protesting, uh, prot, uh, protest. [unintelligible] You don’t apply for tax exemption.
Crosstalk (1:17-1:18)
Agent (1:18-1:38) – Nobody will go after you as long as you don’t violate the law. But when you come to apply for tax exemption, you have to keep your action to, you know, exactly what is educational or religious, you know you [unintelligible].
Crosstalk (1:38-1:41)
Agent (1:41-1:56) – And like I said, you can’t, you have, your right to believe. You have your right of belief to do what you’re supposed to do. But you have no right to, against, other people’s beliefs.
Client (1:56-1:57) – I understand your concerns, but…
Agent (1:57-2:29) – There are really complicated, really subtle, you know, issues here. And they are also very complicated. This not you, you know, you and I, can’t solve it. This is a court. They decide, you know, whether it is right or not. So, but, as I said, we both, everybody, has the right to believe, have the right to do what is supposed to do. You believe your religion told you this is evil; that not supposed to do. [unintelligible]
Client (2:29-2:39) – My religion says that, you know, we have to reach out to women who are hurting, who are considering killing their own babies.
Agent (2:39-3:02) – You reach out to woman, you can’t do that. You can, you know, to educate the woman, to do, you know, you don’t do that. However, you can’t just like say, you know, the [unintelligible] woman, you fear the woman. You have to get the woman the opportunity to listen to you. You cannot force your religion or force your beliefs on somebody else.
Client (3:02-3:14) – Now can I ask you a question? [Crosstalk] I just have a question. I just have a question, Sherry. Is handing a brochure to somebody forcing somebody to do something they don’t want to do?
Agent (3:14-3:25) – No, handing a brochure [unintelligible] you can’t just leave and [unintelligible] brochure. You send the brochure to somebody, that’s right, that’s because you’ve just given them the opportunity to learn your belief.
Client (3:25-3:27) – Yeah, and that’s not forcing them…let me tell you what…
Agent (3:27-3:53) – You convince them. But when you take a lot of action, [unintelligible] other people. For example, when you, you know, go to, you know, the abortion clinic, and you found them [unintelligible], we don’t want, you know, to come against them. You can’t take all kinds of confrontation activities and also put something on a website and ask people to take action against the abortion clinic. That’s not, that’s not really educational.
Agent (3:53-4:01) – [unintelligible]
Agent (4:01-4:06) – So here, your action is based on more blind, emotional feelings.
Client (4:06-4:08) – It’s based on what?
Agent (4:08-4:10) – …an objective, factually a violation.
Client (4:10-4:12) –It’s a violation of what?
Agent (4:13-4:15) – [unintelligible]
Agent (4:15-4:46) – …we have a seminar. We have a workshop. We have materials [unintelligible]. Nobody will say you really forced your religion on them. But when you go to the door, go to the front of the abortion clinic, and [unintelligible] come for protesting activity, and then go up to the woman and tell the woman they should not do that, that is the kind of activity…
Crosstalk (4:46-4:48)
Client (4:48-4:51) – Actually, actually, a peaceful prayer vigil is not…
Agent (4:51-5:46) – You could speak to your value. OK. So that’s why, that’s why this is kind of like you know, kind of, you started from the beginning, I feel that when you’re talking to the [unintelligible] my religion, my religion [unintelligible]. And like I said, you have the right to believe. You have the right to do, your religion told you what’s right. You have a right to, you know, outreach to other people. But meanwhile, you have to know your boundaries. You have to know your limits. You have to respect other people’s beliefs. You have somebody else come to your door and know you don’t like them. When they come to you, how do you feel? [unintelligible]
Client (5:47-6:20) – OK, I understand what you’re saying and I think that we’re going to take it from here in a different manner. I’m going to have to seek some legal counsel in this case. So, I’m going to be contacting you through writing again through regular mail and we’ll take it from there. But I appreciate your phone call and your concerns and I understand your position. [Pause] Hello?
Agent (6:20-6:29) – Oh, OK, I’m trying yeah, you know, I’m just trying to say, OK, so you’re saying your claim to counsel, talking to your counsel, consulting legal counsel, right?
Client (6:30-6:51) – Yeah, I’m going to have to consult somebody because you know I understand your point, but I also understand as a ministry we have certain rights as well and I want to consult somebody and just take it from there and to get more information and…
Agent (6:51-7:32) – Yeah I can hear, yeah that’s good. I think, like I said, you know, you understand my point now? That means we have to, you know, we, we, everybody has their religious rights and religious belief. [unintelligible] But you have to respect other people’s beliefs, other people’s rights and not, you know, use some kind of confrontation, you know, practice, against, or court action against another group.
Client (7:33-7:36) – I understand your concerns and I will be in touch.
Agent (7:36-8:20) – That’s why I say, you know, I think this was, and if you wanted to send me something[unintelligible], you know, you are welcome to do so. OK? And if you, after you, you talk to your lawyer, or talk to your legal consultant, and if you say, OK, here we understand the position, I feel that you know, you know, we understand your position, understand your point and that we wanted to, wanted to, you know, get this kicked down quickly and we are willing to take those, no longer can do the activities, [unintelligible]. OK?
Client (8:20-8:23) – OK, so I will talk to somebody and I will be in touch from there, so.
Agent (8:23-8:48) – Yeah, I’ll just call you within one week, and then you know, I’ll just come back from my other project so then I can try to get everything done. And then you’ll be sending me something, you know, I’ll make a follow-up call within one week, and then we’ll see how we handle this situation. OK?
Client (8:48-8:52) – OK, great. I appreciate you getting back with me though.
Agent (8:52-9:57) – Yeah. I apologize for this because it is a holiday and everything and I’m off and on another project, so I apologize for the delay, but I think we’re talking about more time to discuss and think about your application and want to give you more time to think about this, too. So, I just want you to know that, you know, we understand your position, we know where you’re coming from, and we want to respect your religion, and we think that you think your intentions are good, OK? You want to do something good for the society, your religion, and we understand that. But meanwhile, we want you to be aware that, you know, when you conduct religious activities, meanwhile you have to respect other people’s beliefs, other people’s religion. You cannot use any kind of, you know, confrontation way, or to, or against other groups or devalue other groups, other people’s beliefs. OK?
Client (9:57-10:03) – I understand and we’ll be in touch. Thank you, though, for calling.
Agent (10:03-10:09) – OK, you’re welcome anytime. Thank you very much for your time.
Client (10:09-10:11) – Great, no problem. Have a great day.
Agent (10:11-10:12) – Oh, you, too.
In February of this year, the IRS requested yet more information in another letter and attempted to apply a standard for tax exemption to Pro-Life Revolution that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held to be unconstitutional in 1980. Alliance Defending Freedom pointed this out in a letter responding to the IRS, which finally granted tax-exempt status to the organization in a letter received Thursday.
“The IRS is a tax collector; it shouldn’t be allowed to be the speech and belief police,” said Senior Legal Counsel Erik Stanley. “The current scandal isn’t new but has merely exposed the abuse of power that characterizes this agency and threatens our fundamental freedoms.”
“The power to tax is the power to destroy.  Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. We cannot allow the IRS to ruthlessly dictate against legitimate non-profits simply because it does not approve of the organization’s mission. It must be held accountable,” Stanley added.

About the Author ()

Shane Vander Hart is the founder and editor-in-chief of Caffeinated Thoughts.  He is also the President of 4:15 Communications, LLC, a social media & communications consulting/management firm.  He is a communications director for American Principles Project’s Preserve Innocence Initiative.  Prior to this Shane spent 20 years in youth ministry serving in church, parachurch, and school settings.  He has also served as an interim pastor and is a sought after speaker and pulpit fill-in.  Shane has been married to his wife Cheryl since 1993 and they have three kids.  Shane and his family reside near Des Moines, IA.  You can connect with Shane on Facebook or follow him on Twitter and Google +.

Saturday, June 8, 2013

NEW REPORTS: REPRISING THE 2013 NC REPUBLICAN CONVENTION

 

RANDOM NOTES FROM A GRAND MEETING 

Verne Strickland June 10, 2013

 

NEW Charlotte Observer SUNDAY, JUNE 10, 2013

THOM TILLIS

House Speaker Thom Tillis, who announced (U.S. Senste) last month, was the only one to speak Saturday. In a speech that lasted little more than a minute, he focused on Hagan.
“How many people think we need a cheerleader for Barack Obama?” he said. “How many people (want) a Democratic, liberal progressive senator from North Carolina representing us for six more years?”
Cary physician Greg Brannon is the only other announced candidate. Convention organizers had him speak Friday, when fewer delegates were in the audience. Brannon is a favorite of many tea party supporters.
He focused on the primacy of the Constitution and talked about “buzz words like bipartisanship, crossing the aisle or compromise.”
“This is where Mr. Tillis and I are going to disagree in the primary,” he said. “We do not compromise.”
The two are among at least seven Republicans talked about as possible candidates.
Two others, former Ambassador Jim Cain of Raleigh and Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger of Eden, did not attend the convention.
Two members of Congress often mentioned as possible candidates did, though neither spoke about the Senate race.
U.S. Rep. Virginia Foxx of Banner Elk said she’s been “urged not to say no yet” to a Senate run. But, she added, “it’s a huge mountain to climb in terms of fundraising, and I love what I’m doing.”
U.S. Rep. Renee Ellmers of Dunn said she’s “a couple weeks away” from deciding.
“I do have a lot on my plate,” she said.
Making the rounds Saturday in a possible Senate bid was the Rev. Mark Harris, pastor of Charlotte’s First Baptist Church and president of the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina. Last month Harris supporters filed papers to form an exploratory committee with the Federal Election Commission.
“I’m certainly encouraged by what I’m hearing,” said Harris, who’s undertaking a “listening tour” of the state. “I’m hearing a lot of positive feedback.”
While Tillis appeals to many establishment Republicans, and Brannon to libertarian or tea party Republicans, Harris could appeal to social conservatives. He was an outspoken backer of last year’s constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. Supporter Mary Frances Forrester of Gaston County, also a leader in the effort, called him “a new Jesse Helms.”
“Obviously, Mark has a built-in base,” Lt. Gov. Forest said when asked about his possible candidacy. “You’re going to have a tight race in the primary.”
Tillis, meanwhile, is a proven fundraiser. The Cornelius lawmaker raised $1.7 million for the 2012 election, using most of it to help elect fellow Republicans. His supporters have also organized a so-called super PAC, which can raise and spend unlimited amounts.
And Brannon could tap a national network of like-minded supporters. He said he’s already talked to Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, a tea party favorite.
Pope, the new chairman, said he’s not worried about preserving party unity.
“The party has many flavors of conservatism,” he said. “And it’s not disloyal to disagree.”

NEW FB POSTS JUNE 10, 2013
  • Thom Tillis Kelly Mullins Common Core was adopted under a democratic General Assembly and democratic Governor. Like so many other sins of the past, we are trying to figure out an orderly way to deal with it.

  • Jeff Foster There is nothing like a 140 year old knot of Democrat threads to have to unravel.

  • Teresa Grant Thom Tillis, I wish I had a triple like button on that answer to common core!

CLAUDE POPE -- NEW CHAIRMAN OF NCGOP. CONGRATULATIONS!


I ran for Chairman of the North Carolina Republican Party because I want to build on the successes we’ve had in the past two election cycles and establish the Republican Party as the dominant political organization in our state for the foreseeable future.
Staying on top is even tougher than getting to the top, in my opinion, but I believe my combination of business and political experience has prepared me to lead the Republican Party to a successful future in North Carolina – and that will be good news for the state and its people.
Our great new Governor, Pat McCrory, and our Republican majority in the legislature are going to make the reforms and changes North Carolina needs to get its economy moving again, put an end to the constant tax increases and pervasive corruption that marked the recent Democrat years, and give all North Carolinians a government that works efficiently and treats them like they were valued customers.
But the Democrats aren’t going to roll over and play dead.  You’ve probably read that they have a plan to “cripple” and “eviscerate” Republican leaders and “weaken their ability to govern.”  They promise to use private investigators and other shady tactics to dig up dirt on Republicans.
To fight that kind of disgusting negativism, our party is going to have to be strong, and I’m ready for the challenge.

NEW More on Chairman Claude Pope & VP Race
June 10, 2013 Beaufort Observer

Well, it looks like the NCGOP will be led for the next two years by by Chairman Claude Pope of Brunswick County (formerly of Wake) and Vice-chairman Joyce Krawiec of Winston-Salem. Pope handily defeated Charlotte area Tea Partier Jack Brosch. Krawiec topped a four-person field with former legislator Glen Bradley coming in second, former Guilford GOP chairman Marcus Kindley coming in third, and Tea Party activist Dave "Major Dave" Goetze pulling in at a distant fourth.

Pope has publicly admitted to being the hand-picked choice of Gov. Pat. But a surprising number of Tea Party activists I've spoken with are quite content with Pope at the helm of the state party. They tell me he was very helpful to Tea Party efforts while serving as chairman of The Wake County GOP.




JOYCE CLEANS HOUSE -- WINS VP POST BIG TIME!

"As our Vice Chair, I would like to reach out to all conservatives across
North Carolina and to form a partnership that will make our state
Republican Party even stronger.”
A resident of Kernersville, Krawiec works in real estate with her husband,
Ray, and is a former member of the NC House. She represented District 73,
which included areas of Forsyth and Davidson counties. In addition to her
current position with the NC Federation of Republican Women, she has also
served as the Legislative Chair, New Membership director and Regional Vice
President of the organization. 
Krawiec has also served on committees of the National Federation of 
Republican Women. Krawiec is the FreedomWorks North Carolina Grass Roots
Coordinator. She has traveled the Southeast to speak to conservative groups and lead
training seminars. As the group’s membership was nearing 1 million members
in 2003, Krawiec was named the FreedomWorks National Activist of the Year.

AND YOU KNOW WHAT ELSE? SHE IS GOING TO BE A WONDERFUL VICE
CHAIRWOMAN OF THE N.C. REPUBLICAN PARTY. SO LET'S RALLY
AROUND HER AND GIVE HER OUR ROUSING SUPPORT!



NEW   LETTER FROM JOYCE ON SUNDAY, JUNE 10, 2013
  
Joyce Krawiec
Thank you friends for the warm wishes and Congratulations. The grassroots team who worked on my campaign is amazing. I love you every one. There were way too many to name but do want to recognize a few of them and say Thank you from the bottom of my heart. Tracy Bengtson, Lori Jones Bardsley, Velvet Shelton Cowan, Julie Scott Emmons, Joanne Wittenborn, Robert Watkens, Brenda Formo, Lori Goins Clark.. you are all amazing women.
Well, it looks like the NCGOP will be led for the next two years by by Chairman Claude Pope of Brunswick County (formerly of Wake) and Vice-chairman Joyce Krawiec of Winston-Salem. Pope handily defeated Charlotte area Tea Partier Jack Brosch. Krawiec topped a four-person field with former legislator Glen Bradley coming in second, former Guilford GOP chairman Marcus Kindley coming in third, and Tea Party activist Dave "Major Dave" Goetze pulling in at a distant fourth.

Pope has publicly admitted to being the hand-picked choice of Gov. Pat. But a surprising number of Tea Party activists I've spoken with are quite content with Pope at the helm of the state party. They tell me he was very helpful to Tea Party efforts while serving as chairman of The Wake County GOP.


GLEN BRADLEY  JUNE 9, 2013

We need to do a couple things. First we need to establish a reputation as a true conservative block, and a powerful block at that. Yesterday (Friday) with attendance numbering 409 delegates, we brought 40 people and swung a block of around 98 votes. Establishing a 24% conservative voting block is not something that will be ignored in a party which has been slowly losing it's conservative base now for the last 20 years! If we can bring every possible delegate to the convention today, we may be able to swing as much as a 35% block, or a 40% block, but we need your help to do it.

And I, too, need your help. I have been graciously nominated to run for national committeeman against the incumbent David Lewis. David Lewis is currently a member of the NC General Assembly and has a great deal of time and experience in NC Politics. His current position as National Committeeman was an emergency executive appointment 4 months ago, and he will be running for election for the first time today. I happen to like David personally, but politically he is a neoconservative, and he recently caused a major party fracture over siding with McCain against the NC GOP regarding the Barack Obama/Pastor Wright ad. In the end, we may or may not be able to wield enough votes to put a strict constructionist on the National Committee from North Carolina, but every single vote against him will be a message that conservancy is not dead in the NCGOP, that we are here to stay, that we are here for the long haul, and that we WILL see our party returned to the values held by Barry Goldwater and in the early years of Ronald Reagan.
Glen Bradley
2nd District
Franklin Co
Go Gunny someone wrote.

VS: He ain't no "Gunny". Make him prove that claim!







NC Republican Party 2013 Convention Launches in Charlotte; Heated Party VP Contest on Tap

 SEE VERNE STRICKLAND'S USA DOT COM REPORT BELOW 'FIRST DAY'


Special Credit: News 14  Updated 06/07/2013 09:33 PM

First day of NC GOP Convention begins in Queen City

CHARLOTTE—At this weekend's NC GOP Convention, Republicans across the state are laying out their vision and goals for the upcoming year.

The plans include a key priority, getting new minority members and bringing more minority leaders into the fold.

African-American and Hispanic NC GOP delegates said they are excited about their recruitment efforts this year and the progress made in the 2012 election, where a boost in Republican minority votes helped turn the state Red in both the presidential and gubernatorial races.

In the past year, Hispanic and African-American NC GOP leaders have traveled the state, working to recruit new members and volunteering at events.

The Republican National Hispanic Assembly is now a permanent group within the NC GOP, as it works to start up Hispanic chapters in counties across the state. GOP Leaders say the steady outreach paid off in the 2012 election, when according to exit polls nearly 11 percent more minorities voted Republican compared to the 2008 election.

“Engage the minority community with the truth, and let them know all we have in common, which is less taxes, smaller government and more freedoms,” said NCGOP delegate Earl Phillip.

According to exit polls, 14 percent of minority voters in North Carolina cast a ballot for Gov. Pat McCrory in 2012. Minority Republican leaders say that their goal is to get that number to 20 percent in 2016.
Saturday, the NCGOP will elect a new chair and vice-chair to a two-year term. Current NCGOP Chairperson Robin Hayes is stepping down.

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

SPECIAL REPORT FROM VERNE STRICKLAND OF USA DOT COM:
To set the stage for the NCGOP 2013 Convention in Charlotte, we interviewed Andy Yates, veteran conservative analyst and co-founder of full-service political agency RED DOME GROUP in Charlotte:

We'll all very excited about our convention. This is a good chance to get together and reflect on where’ll we go in 2014. We jave some good choices going forward. The selection of our Speaker is one of the best we’ve ever had. Chairman Hayes done good job of setting up the convention. 

The race for Vice Chair has been nothing short of a stem-winder. That’s where the real excitement will be. There are four people running. 

Candidates include GOP stalwarts Major Dave Goetz, Marcus Kindley, and Joyce Krawiec, who agree that the party must fight to retain its brand as the statewide political party that supports the US Constitution and fights for God, traditional families, fiscal restraint, leaner government, and other social and pocketbook issues, and Glen Bradley.
           Author note:
The “stand-out” entry is Glen Bradley, who has created an uproar by proclaiminjg: Glen Bradley stated this at a Monsanto rally on May 25, 2013 in Greensboro:
“Occupy America calls the Tea Party right wing nut theocratic fascists and Tea Parties call Occupy left wing nut hippie communist and we are all too busy hating each other to recognize that we all have more in common than we have against each other.”
 The chairman’s race will lack the excitement of the the vice chair race race. In this contest there are clear differences between the candidates, between the candidates. This will probably go to a second ballot. In my memory of conventions, and I’ve been to just about every one since’99, I cannot remember an election that has gone to two ballots. 

That will add to the intrigue and the interest, and unfortunately it may depend on who hangs around to vote on the second ballot. You’ve got some good canaidates there, and then, I guess you’d say there are some interesting candidates. That race will determine a lot about where the party’s going. As far as where the libertarian-leaning candidates are, and the more conservative traditional repubs, if you want to keep an eye on the convention that will be the most interesting part.

Another area will be the buzz about who may run for Senate, whether it be Speaker Tillis, or Mark Harris, or Brannon. Among those rumored to become candidates are high-profile politicans such as Fox or Ellmers. That hasn’t really taken shape yet. Will be a lot of gossip about that race this week-end, and you’ll start to see who’s taking sides there.
It’s very nice to have the first convention with a Republican Governor in modern times. This is historic in that it is the first time we’ve had a convention where we’ve actually been in charge of the state. We have a Rep[ublican Governor, Republican House, Republican Senate, Republican Supreme Court. I hope this face is properly celebrated this week-end. We must bear in mind that, while it is good to be in this position, we will have to work hard to keep our gains.
The rumor mill always runs rampant at the convention, and maybe you can believe a quarter of it, but a least it provides some entertainment. 

At any rate, this convention is a landmark meeting for the North Carolina Republican Party, and we intend to enjoy it, as well as ramp up the energy looking forward to 2014. 

About Us

Poole-Yates
 Partners Todd Poole (left) and Andy Yates of RED DOME GROUP



Party activists Jennifer Mauney (left) and friend cover GOP sign-up
desk for special issues including Property Rights, Right to Life,
Education and Hot Lanes.









Friday, June 7, 2013

wounded and dangerous

Wounded...and dangerous

June 7, 2013, 8:17 AM
 |  Bookmark and Share  |   
 
Obama.jpg

US Secretary of State John Kerry looks like a bit of an idiot these days. On Monday he announced that he will be returning to Israel and the Palestinian Authority and Jordan for the fifth time since he was sworn into office on February 1. That is an average of more than one visit a month.

And aside from frequent flier miles, the only thing he has to show for it is a big black eye from PLO chief and Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

When Kerry was here last month he unveiled a stunning plan to bring $4 billion in investment funds to the PA. If his plan actually pans out, its champions claim it will increase the PA's GDP by a mind-numbing 50 percent in three years and drop Palestinian unemployment from 21 to 8 percent.

Standing before world and regional leaders on May 26, Kerry said plaintively, "This will help build the future. Is this a fantasy? I don't think so."

Abbas and his underlings wasted no time, however, in demonstrating that indeed, Kerry's plan is fantasy. Abbas appointed Rami Hamdallah, a Fatah apparatchik with perfect English, to replace America's favorite moderate Palestinian, Salam Fayyad, as PA prime minister.

As The Jerusalem Post's Khaled Abu Toameh has pointedly explained, Hamdallah was appointed for two reasons. First, to facilitate Fatah's absconding with hundreds of millions of dollars in donor aid to the PA and to Palestinian development projects precisely of the type that Kerry hopes to finance with his $4b. grant. The second reason Abbas appointed Hamdallah the English professor from Nablus was because his language skills will enable him to make American and European donors feel comfortable as his colleagues in Fatah pick their taxpayer- funded pockets.

Aside from mooning Kerry in the middle of his speech in Jordan, Abbas couldn't have thought of a more graphic way to show his contempt for Kerry and the Obama administration.

But that wasn't the only thing the Palestinians did. Again, as Abu Toameh has reported, the popular Palestinian response to last week's World Economic Forum in Jordan, where Abbas and Kerry rubbed elbows with President Shimon Peres and Justice Minister Tzipi Livni, was to attack the businessmen who accompanied Abbas to the conference. Their crime was meeting with Israeli businessmen who came to the conference in Peres's entourage. Led by Fatah activists, Palestinian writers, unions and others also went after Palestinian businessmen from Jenin who went to Haifa to meet with Israeli businesspeople at the invitation of Haifa's Chamber of Commerce. The "anti-normalization" crowd is calling for Palestinians to boycott Palestinian businesses that do business with Israelis.

And again, that isn't all. At the PLO's birthday celebrations this week, Abbas said that the group's 1964 charter reflects the will of the Palestinian people. That charter calls for the destruction of Israel. It was written three years before Israel took control of Judea, Samaria and northern, southern and eastern Jerusalem.

But wait, there's more. The Palestinian leadership attacked Kerry personally and his plan as an attempt to bribe them. They promised that while they will happily take the money, $4b. measly dollars won't convince them to moderate one iota. They still demand that Israel release all Palestinian terrorists from its jails, agree to its demographic destruction through the so-called "right of return," or unfettered immigration of millions of foreign Arabs to Israel, and the surrender of all of Judea, Samaria and northern, southern and eastern Jerusalem to the PLO as a precondition to beginning negotiations.

And for all that, Kerry responded by applauding Hamdallah's appointment and announcing he will return here next week and is planning to roll out his own comprehensive peace plan very soon.

Israeli leaders for the most part have reacted to Kerry's constant harping by rolling their eyes. He seems like a complete lunatic. Obviously he will fail and the best thing we can do is smile and nod, like you do when you are dealing with a crazy person.

Even when Kerry claimed that the reason Israelis aren't interested in peace is that we have too much money to care, we didn't take offense. Because really, why take anything he says seriously? And aside from that, they ask, what can the Obama administration do to us, at this point? Every single day it becomes more mired in scandal.

The Guardian's revelation Wednesday that the US government has been confiscating the phone records of tens of millions of Americans who use the Verizon business network since April is just the latest serious, normal-presidency destroying scandal to be exposed in the past month. And every single scandal - the IRS's unlawful harassment and discrimination of conservative organizations and individuals, the Justice Department's spying on AP journalists and attempt to criminalize the normal practice of journalism through its investigation of Fox News correspondent James Rosen - makes it more difficult for President Barack Obama to advance his agenda.

As for foreign policy, the whistle-blower testimony that exposed Obama's cover-up of the September 11, 2012, al-Qaida attack on the US Consulate and CIA annex in Benghazi has caused massive damage to Obama's credibility in foreign affairs and to the basic logic of his foreign policy.

Ambassador Chris Stevens was tortured and murdered by al-Qaida terrorists who owed their freedom of operation to the Obama administration. If it hadn't been for Obama's decision to bring down the regime of Muammar Gaddafi, who had been largely harmless to the US since he gave up his illicit nuclear weapons program in 2004, those al-Qaida forces probably wouldn't have be capable of waging an eight-hour assault on US installations and personnel in Benghazi.

With the Benghazi scandal hounding him, the Syrian civil war and, for the past week, the anti-government protests in Turkey all exposing his incompetence on a daily basis, these Israeli leaders take heart, no doubt in the belief that Obama's freedom to attack us has vastly diminished.

Although this interpretation of events is attractive, and on its face seems reasonable, it is wrong.

And it would be a devastating mistake for Israeli leaders to believe it.

Since he entered office, Obama has responded to every defeat by doubling down and radicalizing.

When in 2009 public sentiment against his plan to nationalize the US healthcare industry was so high that Republican Scott Brown was elected senator from Massachusetts for the sole purpose of blocking Obamacare's passage in the US Senate, Obama did not accept the public's verdict.

Instead he used a technicality to ram the hated legislation through without giving Brown and the Senate the chance to vote it down.

And now, as his Middle East strategy of appeasing Islamists lies in the ruins of the US Consulate in Benghazi and in the cemeteries interning the Syrians murdered in sarin gas attacks as Obama shrugged his shoulders, Obama is again doubling down. On Wednesday he announced that he is elevating the two architects of his policy to senior leadership roles in his administration.

Obama's appointments of UN Ambassador Susan Rice to serve as his national security adviser, and of former National Security Council member Samantha Power to serve as ambassador to the UN, are a finger in the eye to his critics. These women rose to national prominence through their breathless insistence that the US use force to overthrow Gaddafi in spite of clear evidence that al-Qaida was a major force in his opposition.

Power is reportedly the author of Obama's policy of apologizing to foreign countries for the actions of past administrations. Certainly she shares Obama's hostility toward Israel. And she has been outspoken in expressing her negative opinions.

In a nutshell, Power's vision for US foreign policy is a noxious brew of equal parts self-righteousness, ignorance and prejudice. And now she will be responsible for defending Israel (or not) at the most hostile international arena in the world, where Israel's very right to exist is subject to assault on a daily basis.

Obama's decision to appoint Rice and Power in the face of the mounting scandals surrounding his presidency generally and his foreign policy particularly is not the only reason Israeli leaders should not expect for his weakened political position to diminish Obama's plan to put the screws on Israel in the coming years. There is also the disturbing pattern of the abuse of power that the scandals expose.

To date, all administration officials questioned have denied that Obama was in any way involved in directing the IRS to use the tax code to intimidate with the aim of discrediting and destroying conservative organizations and donors. Likewise, they say he played no role in the Justice Department's espionage operations against American journalists, or in the intentional cover-up of the al-Qaida assault on US installations and personnel in Benghazi. But mounting circumstantial evidence indicates that this is not true. 

White House visitor records show that IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman visited Obama's White House 157 times. His predecessor Mark Everson who served under president George W. Bush only visited the White House once.

So, too, as Andrew McCarthy reported last month in National Review, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney admitted that Obama spoke with then secretary of state Hillary Clinton at 10 p.m. on September 11, 2012, during the al- Qaida assault in Benghazi.

It was after that phone conversation that the administration changed its talking points about the nature of the assault, purging details on the identity of the perpetrators and blaming an unrelated Internet movie trailer for inciting the attack.

The one thing all the scandals share is a single-minded willingness to pursue radical goals to the bitter end. The IRS's targeting of conservatives was an appalling abuse of executive power, unlike anything we have seen in recent history. The passage of Obamacare in the face massive public opposition was another means to the end of destroying his opponents. 

The cover-up of the Benghazi attack was a bid to hide the failure of a policy in order to double down on it - despite its failure. The only reason you would want to double down on an already failed policy is if you are ideologically committed to a larger goal that the failed policy advances.

The similarities of the pattern of behavior in all of these actions, as well as the circumstantial evidence already unearthed, indicate strongly that despite the denials, Obama was in fact involved and may have directed the actions of all of his underlings in all of the scandals now unfolding.

What this means for Israel is we cannot be lured into complacency by Kerry's buffoonery or Obama's apparent political weakness. This is a man who is most dangerous when attacked. And this is a man who is absolutely committed to his ideological agenda. We had better be ready, because if we are not, we won't know what has hit us.

Originally published in the Jerusalem Post.