Tuesday, April 29, 2014

Verne Strickland -- 'Wounded Warrior' fights with words in NC political trenches

'Wounded Warrior' fights with words in NC political trenches. 

Thom Tillis
thom tillis

By Verne Strickland, Wilmington NC
April 29, 2014

This political season, though exciting and always challenging, has called for a different strategy from me. I've had to go from hand-to-hand fighting to sniper. But I've managed.

The previous campaigns I was in focused on Ilario Pantano's battle to wrest the NC seventh district congressional seat from wily long-term incumbent Mike McIntyre.

That was trench warfare at its best. Two great candidates and their field troops slugging it out in a match-up that never went slack. Back then I had everything going for me. At the top of my game. Mind agile and keen. Endurance aplenty, driven by a commitment to pull out a victory. I could go night and day, travel where I was needed, network with Ilario's talented political troops in the field, and keep the pressure on Congressman McIntyre and his Democratic team.

We fought hard, but suffered a loss that was hard to take. I say "we", though I had no official role in those campaigns. I participated as an independent commentator and conservative critic. Still, I felt confident I had given my all, and so had a modicum of pride in spite in the outcome.

For me personally, though, this time, covering Thom Tillis, there was a huge difference in what I had to fight with. I had suffered health problems over the last few  years -- the most serious being a full-fledged assault from multiple myeloma -- bone cancer -- which sapped my strength, brain power, creative skills, and roving ability.

This time I could hardly walk.

Travel was almost out of the question. I needed lots of rest. I was prevented from attending meetings, strategy sessions, news conferences -- anywhere players in the campaign gathered. I was pretty much grounded.

The only way I could cope and stay in touch was by corresponding, chatting, interviewing, researching, using my own devices, and hunting from a distance when I was going after vital news, changing trends, and the like.

I became a sniper -- stationary, but lethal nonetheless.

When I was assembling a piece on Thom Tillis, which I did numerous times, I depended on my interviewing skills, gained by years in professional broadcasting, to get information. Interviews -- rather than being face-to-face, were always done remotely -- via telephone hook-up or the Internet. Trusted sources were more useful than ever, as I was virtually nailed down at my home office on Castle Street in Wilmington.

You miss the feel of a gathering when it's like this. You are denied the use of your hand-held microphone, from  a close-up vantage point that offered expressions -- nervousness, brash cockiness, or an air of confidence, from the person on the hot seat.

I always enjoyed being right in the ring, where I could get the full feel of the setting and its dynamics. I didn't have that this time. I let my imagination go hunting, pictured the scenes in my mind, and used action vocabulary to paint the picture in words. I received enough generous compliments to know I wasn't failing.

Most of that action was during Thom Tillis' drive to win the primary. He's strong, honorable, confident, with great leadership qualities, so the interviews were substantive and effective, I thought, even though recorded via telephone or transcriptions captured via television and cable.

At this time in late April, Thom appears to have the GOP intramural scrap in his possession, though this is certainly not assured at this point. That is very gratifying to me. I feel vindicated. I'm an old war horse who manages to cope despite handicaps. I'm 77, and may be used, but I ain't used up.

My support of Thom was never limited to presenting his positions amidst the vagaries of an intense political battle. He avoided negative approaches. I was obliged, though, to divulge deliberate and false claims from liberals -- distortions and prevarications that found their way into the gritty verbal battles. There are instances of each of these tactics in any contest -- on the field of battle between armies, or in a tense political campaign.

While I was not linked to Thom Tillis in any official capacity, I worked as hard and as effectively as I could under the circumstances. I believed in his honor, his character, and his strength of leadership. I believe I may have contributed in a positive way to the campaigns. And I am grateful to God for the opportunity to take part.

I did it for the Republican Party, Christians and conservatives, the State of North Carolina, and the United States. From the sidelines I gave what I had to give, and loved it. This is my passion. While walking is a struggle, I stayed at my post. In a way, I pride myself as being a Wounded Warrior.

This primary will not be settled at least until May 6. In the event of a run-off, it will go beyond that.

Then, it is my hope, prayer and anticipation that Thom Tillis, will do North Carolina the honor of becoming the new U.S. Senator from our great State. We are overdue for a change.


Sunday, April 27, 2014

VERNE'S 'ONE THING MORE' A CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY

(Written about four years ago. Published in 'About.com  Christian Testimony')
Re-posted USA DOT COM April 28, 2014

Verne's One Thing More

Christian Testimony of Salvation

Verne is in his early seventies. He's been blessed with a wonderful wife of nearly 50 years, three sons and a grandson. He's happy with the good things in his long life, but there's one thing more that means everything to Verne, and that's why he's sharing his story. He wants you to experience the same assurance he has come to know through everlasting life in Jesus Christ.
Verne's story is one of many uniquely featured testimonies from you, the members and visitors of this site. Each story reveals a life transformed by Christian faith. If your relationship with God has made a significant difference in your life, we would like to hear about it. Submit your testimony by filling out this Submission Form. To receive weekly messages of hope and encouragement from real-life stories of changed lives, sign up for eTestimonies.

Verne's One Thing More

So, God doesn't speak to you? Think again, friend. He will and he does.
I write this as I sit in my little home office looking down on a brick paved street in the North Carolina coastal community of Wilmington. If I live a few more weeks, I will celebrate my seventy second birthday next month.
I think I will, but God tells us not to boast of the future, but to appreciate the present. I abide by that. I have been blessed with a wonderful wife to whom I have been married for 49 years. Further, I'm blessed by three wonderful sons and a lovely grandson as well. And I live free in America. I can walk and my eyes can see.
Is that enough? Well, there’s one thing more, but I'll get to that later.
First, to the question, does God speak to us? What shall we expect—that the Creator and the Lord of us all will reach out to each and every one of us individually?
Well, he does have a message—correct that, many messages—for each of his children. And those messages stream to us throughout our lives.
But can we be content with a spiritual e-mail blast that is free for the asking and no less personal?
When we pass an outdoor advertising sign on the interstate, is it less meaningful to us because others see it as well? I don’t think so.
You need to know that when you plug in to the Almighty, you've got a private line! He’s got your number, and he will hear you and respond.
So dial into God! Be assured that he knows who you are, what you experience, what you need, what you feel. Why not? He created you.

A Personal Word for You

The Holy Bible—his Word—is there for you, personally: “For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you a hope and a future." (Jeremiah 29:11, KJV) Ah, that’s so beautiful. It knocks me out.
God's Word. Find it, friend. Read it. I have and I think it’s wonderful. God tells me he loves me, personally. He envisioned and formed me. He chose me. He beckoned me. He has saved me through the precious blood of His Son, Jesus Christ.
But I am not favored over any other, and I don’t need or expect that. We are all his children, if we profess our faith in our Redeemer and Advocate, Jesus, bless him.
You can have the same blessed assurance that I have. There is no greater gift, believe me. Rather, believe God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost.
And now I've returned to the "one thing more" that I mentioned earlier—a blessing so profound that I pray I can have some understanding of it—everlasting life through the forgiveness of Jesus Christ, through his death and atoning resurrection.
I am not worthy. Nothing I have ever done or will ever do will make me worthy. But God the Father gave us his son Jesus, and we are kept safe in Christ until the Lord returns and delivers us whole and redeemed to the Father.
What?
Yes, it’s true. “I have chosen you out of the world,” God says in the John 15:19. Chosen you? Yes, to be his own, and to share his glory in the hereafter.

A Promise

Finally, listen to this promise: “Let not your heart be troubled. Ye believe in God, believe also in me. In my father’s house are many mansions. If it were not so I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself, that where I am, there ye may be also.” (John 14:1-3 KJV) It touches and warms my heart to write these things to you. It’s always wonderful to praise God and pronounce him Lord of all.
Friend, I am a sinner, but forgiven of all transgressions past, present and future. I know it. I believe it. And you have the same promise and blessing if you profess and receive Christ as your Savior, mediator and advocate.
Just one thing more, I pray you will receive him.

Saturday, April 26, 2014

The Holocaust of World War II will always be news.


I started down this track tonight after seeing a piece somewhere about the "holocaust" -- not an entirely new subject for a writer with 50 years of news coverage under my belt. The subject has always riveted my attention.

It is the quintessential example of "man's inhumanity to man" -- so audacious, horrid and cruel as to be even be doubted -- even though there is massive evidence of its existence. The first photos I saw of the holocaust came from World War II "Life" magazine coverage. My father was subscriber to a number of news, human events, geography and nature publications, all of which I devoured. I'm certain this exposure to the leading news journals of the day directed my path into writing, photography, broadcasting and journalism. And so came the holocaust into my world.

Resource: Wikipedia

The Holocaust is generally regarded as the systematic, state-sponsored persecution and slaughter of approximately 6 million Jews u0097 two thirds of the total European Jewish population, and two-fifths of the Jews in the entire world u0097 but also millions of other victims, by the Nazi regime and its collaborators under Adolf Hitler.
While the Jews were the primary target, there were many other ethnic, secular, religious, and national groups that suffered during the Holocaust, including Poles, Czechs, Greeks, Gypsies, Serbs, Ukranians, and Russians, as well as homosexuals, mentally and physically handicapped persons, trade unionists, prisoners of war, Jehovah's Witnesses, and uncounted others. All were targeted because of their perceived "racial inferiority."
The roots of Hitler's hatred
Disagreements persist about the precise origins of Hitler's anti-semitism. His hatred of the Jews was so unrelenting that the political testament he signed on April 29, 1945 u0097 just one day before his suicide and fewer than 10 days before German surrender u0097 ended by ordering "the government and the people to uphold the race laws ... and to resist mercilessly the poisoner of all nations, international Jewry." As early as 1919, in his first definite anti-Jewish writing, Hitler stated that "rational anti-semitism must lead to a systematic legal opposition and elimination of the special privileges which Jews hold... Its final objective must unswervingly be the removal of the Jews altogether."
Modern anti-semitism in Germany was boosted in the 1880s when an influential nationalist historian, Heinrich von Trietschke, published a series of articles in which he wrote, "The Jews are our misfortune." That slogan would later be written on banners at Nazi rallies. Another anti-Jewish German writer, Wilhelm Marr, coined the term anti-semitism.
Anti-semitism was not unique to Germany. Hitler was only exploiting anti-semitic feelings that had been endemic in Europe for centuries. Germany was in terrible shape economically after World War I, and Hitler and his ideals made it easy for the German people to lay the blame on one particular group. Hitler led many to believe that the Jews had been the source of defeat during the war, as well as for the economic depression during the 1930s.
At the heart of Hitler's political creed stood the ideal of racial purity. Above all else, German, or "Aryan," blood must be kept vital and strong. Neither Hitler nor any of his contemporaries was the first to practice what has sometimes been called "the longest hatred." Hitler was born into a world, and into an environment, in which anti-semitism was already present. His time spent in Vienna, Austria, as a young man, fueled his notions of racial superiority.
Hitler joined, and soon became the leader of, a small right-wing political group that called itself the National Socialist German Workers Party (Nazi). The Nazis attempted to take over the German government in November 1923, but were unsuccessful, and Hitler received a five-year prison sentence for his involvement in the uprising. He served nine months of his sentence in a suite of rooms at the prison, during which time he wrote Mein Kampf (My Struggle), which declared that some races create civilization and others corrupt it. By 1945, his book had sold more than 6,000,000 copies.
The Nazis gained in popularity as Hitler promised a better life for the German people. By 1932 the Nazis were the largest political party in Germany. They soon gained total control, and called their state the Third Reich. Hitler's speeches u0097 typically delivered from rough notes and sometimes lasting two hours u0097 drew crowds that often numbered in the tens of thousands.
Hell on Earth
In 1933, the Jewish population of Europe was more than 9 million. Most European Jews lived in countries that the Third Reich would occupy, or at least influence, during World War II. By 1945, close to two out of every three European Jews had been killed as part of the "Final Solution," or the policy to slay all the Jews of Europe.
The Holocaust had essentially been underway since the enactment of the 1935 Nuremberg Race Laws, which proclaimed Jews to be second-class citizens and excluded German Jews from Reich citizenship, as well as prohibited them from marrying or having sexual relations with persons of "German or related blood." German Jewish athletes were not allowed to participate in the 1936 Olympics.
Juden patch
As soon as Hitler became chancellor of Germany in 1933, he implemented his scheme to conclude the struggle between the "master race" and the "inferior races." Anything in the media that opposed the Nazi Party was censored and removed. All forms of communication, whether newspapers, magazines, books, art, music, or radio, were controlled by the Nazis.
Soon, laws were instituted against Jews that forced them out of public life u0097 civil service jobs, university positions, and numerous others. Jewish businesses were boycotted, and all Jews were compelled to label their exterior clothing with a yellow Star of David with the word "Juden" (Jew).
Eventually, Jews were more and more segregated, until finally, they couldn't go to public schools, theaters, or resorts, and were even banned from walking in certain parts of Germany.
When World War II erupted on September 1, 1939 and Germany gained victory over Poland, the Nazis began to enslave the Poles and destroy their culture. The first step was to eliminate the leaders and intelligensia. Many university professors, politicians, writers, and Catholic priests were murdered. Polish people were dislocated to make room for the "superior" Germans.
Following the German invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941, Einsatzgruppen, or mobile killing units, carried out mass-murder operations. On September 29 and 30, 1941, for example, more than half of the 60,000 Jews living in the Ukrainian capital of Kiev were marched into a ravine and shot.
More than 1.3 million men, women, and children were murdered in such outdoor massacres. Hitler also authorized an order to exterminate institutionalized, handicapped patients deemed incurable. The practice went on throughout the war.
Jews being forced to ghettos
During the war, the Nazis created ghettos, or city districts (often enclosed), in which the Germans forced the Jewish population to live under miserable conditions. More than 400 ghettos were established, the largest of which was the one in Warsaw, Poland, where approximately 450,000 Jews were crowded into an area of 1.3 square miles.
By the middle of 1941, 4-5,000 Warsaw Jews perished every month from hunger and disease brought on by malnutrition. Between 1942 and 1944, Germans decided to eliminate the ghettos and deport their populations to "extermination camps," or killing centers equipped with gassing facilities, in Poland. That was known as the "Final Solution to the Jewish Question" u0097 implemented after a meeting with senior Nazi officials in January 1942.
Between September 1939, when Nazi troops invaded Poland, and Germany's surrender in May 1945, Hitler and his army essentially waged two wars. One was against Allied forces on three continents and the other was against the Jews and other unfortunate civilians.
Extermination
Deportations of Jews from the ghettos commenced from west to east. Jews by the trainloads arrived in Poland from Germany, Holland, and Belgium. A lucky few managed to jump from the "death trains." People were deposited directly into the death camps, and one ghetto after another was destroyed. By the beginning of 1945, Jewish communities, in continuous existence for nearly a thousand years, ceased to exist.
Six "killing centers," or extermination camps, were organized in Poland: Belzec, Chelmno, Majdanek, Sobibor, Treblinka, and the most infamous, Auschwitz. The camps were chosen according to their proximity to rail lines, which was essential for transporting the victims.
Railroad freight cars and passenger trains brought in the victims. Upon arrival, men and women were immediately separated. Prisoners were stripped of their clothing and valuables, then they were divided into two groups. Those too weak for work were forced naked into the gas chambers, disguised as showers, where carbon monoxide or hydrogen cyanide asphyxiated them.
The bodies were then stripped of hair (used for rugs, socks, and mattresses), gold fillings, and teeth, and burned in crematoriums or buried in mass graves. Those who were allowed to live were chosen for medical experiments or slave labor.
Corpses in concentration camp
Camp living conditions were wretched. Inmates were crammed into windowless, non-insulated barracks u0097 up to 55 in one building. There were no bathrooms available u0097 a bucket served as the only waste control. Food was scarce, malnutrition made prisoners easy targets of disease and dehydration.
Besides the "extermination camps", whose sole purpose was to annihilate the Jewish population and all other enemies of the Nazis, there also were "concentration camps" established throughout Germany, where inmates were placed under harsh working conditions and starvation.
An end to the nightmare
In late 1944, the tide of war had turned and Allied forces moved across Europe in a series of offensives on Germany. The Nazis decided to evacuate outlying concentration camps. In the final months of the war, SS guards forced inmates on death marches in an attempt to prevent the Allied liberation of large numbers of prisoners.
Those death marches passed directly through many towns, and many died literally at the front doors of townspeople. Many died from starvation, disease, exhaustion, and cold, and thousands more were shot along the way. It is estimated that 250,000 concentration camp prisoners were murdered or died in the forced death marches that were conducted during the last 10 months of World War II.
Allied forces began to encounter and liberate concentration camp prisoners in the late spring and early summer of 1945. Many of the freed prisoners were so weak that they couldn't eat or digest the food they were given and died shortly after liberation.
The Third Reich collapsed in May 1945. SS guards fled and many of the concentration camps were turned into displaced person camps. Between 1948 and 1951, nearly 700,000 Jews emigrated to the new state of Israel. Approximately 140,000 Holocaust survivors came to America after 1948, most settling in New York.
Many Nazis were put on trial at Nuremberg, and found guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Nazi medical doctors were accused of involvement in the horrors of human experimentation. One such doctor was Karl Brandt, Hitler's personal physician. He was sentenced to death, along with dozens of other Nazi leaders.
Current estimates, based on Nazi war records and official government documents from various countries, place the death toll of the Holocaust at anywhere from 10 million (a conservative figure) to 26 million people.
The sobering fact about the Holocaust is how close the Nazis came to total victory. In such countries as Poland, which, before World War II, still included parts of the Ukraine and Belarus, the Jewish death toll surpassed 90 percent.
It is important to note, however, when looking at this atrocious event in world history, that the Jews were by no means the only victims of the Holocaust. Other ethnic groups suffered heavy losses. For instance, there were nearly as many non-Jewish Poles killed (approximately 3 million) as there were Jewish Poles.
Many survivors have expressed disgust that the Holocaust happened in full public view, and reached its awful results because people were content to be bystanders and look the other way. Although the full extent of what was happening in German-controlled areas was not known until after the war, there were many rumors and eye-witness accounts throughout Europe that indicated that a great number of Jews were being killed.
The German Rail Company, which was used to transport prisoners to various concentration camps, had more than 1 million employees, and had to be fully aware of the reality of life in the camps. British historian Ian Kershaw has written: "The road to Auschwitz was built by hate, and paved by indifference."
Adolf Eichmann on trial
Some also have questioned why the prisoners didn't revolt, since the inmates vastly outnumbered the soldiers stationed at the camps. There were uprisings, but one has to remember that the prisoners, for the most part, lacked any kind of organizational or military experience. They came from various European countries and therefore spoke different languages. Most importantly, they were extremely weak because of their living conditions.
The 1961 trial in Jerusalem of Adolf Eichmann, the coordinator of the Final Solution, set off an angry debate about Jewish honor and resistance. Why didn't victims put up more of a fight? The real mystery is not why the Jews failed to resist, but how anyone managed to survive at all.
- - - Books You May Like Include: ----
FDR by Jean Edward Smith.
One of todayu0092s premier biographers has written a modern, comprehensive, indeed ultimate book on the epic life of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. In this su...
The Conquerors: Roosevelt, Truman & the Destruction of Hitler's Germany 1941-45 by Michael R. Beschloss.
Long before an Allied victory was assured during World War II, the Big Three--Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin--began discussing how to prevent German...
IBM and the Holocaust by Edwin Black.
IBM and the Holocaust is the stunning story of IBM's strategic alliance with Nazi Germany--beginning in 1933 in the first weeks that Hitler came to po...

Thursday, April 17, 2014

Brannon plagiarizes near-direct copies of text from conservative scholars for his "on the issues" campaign material on abortion, healthcare, Obamacare, environment, national defense, government regulations, and agriculture.

Verne Strickland / USA DOT COM / April 17, 2014

Republican Senate Candidate’s Positions, Posts Plagiarized From Several Sources

A Facebook post of Dr. Greg Brannon’s seems to be a near-direct copy of an article by a Cato Institute scholar. posted on
Brannon (left) with Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah. Via Facebook: 
Dr. Greg Brannon, a Republican who is vying for the party’s Senate nomination in North Carolina appears to have plagiarized several of his campaign “on the issues” pages from Republican Michigan Rep. Justin Amash. A Facebook post of Brannon’s also seems to be a near-direct copy of an article by a Cato Institute scholar. Another issues post appears to be copied from the Coalition for Jobs.
Brannon, a former Tea Party activist, has a history of making controversial statements. Brannon called U.S. property taxes “American central planning,” and referenced the Holocaust and Soviet Union as other examples of central planning. He also once alleged that the United Nations is a scam to control life and ran a now-defunct organization called “Founder’s Truth” that posted conspiracy theories like claims that there is fluoridate in the water and that the Boston bombing was a false flag.

His website then mysteriously disappeared from the Web Archive.
Brannon, who is a viable candidate for the Republican nomination according to some polls, led incumbent Democratic Sen. Kay Hagan 42-40 in a April Public Policy Polling poll.

On abortion:


Here’s Brannon on abortion:
Government is responsible for protecting our individual rights to life, liberty, and property. I believe that life begins at conception, and it is unconscionable that government sanctions the taking of the lives of the helpless and innocent.
As a Senator, I will always vote against government funding of abortion and will fight to protect life at all stages. I will always vote for any and all legislation that would end abortion or lead us in the direction of ending abortion.
And here’s Justin Amash:
The proper function of government is to protect individual rights—life, liberty, and property. I believe that life begins at conception, and it is unconscionable that government would sanction the taking of the helpless and innocent. I always will vote against government funding of abortion and will fight to protect life at all stages.

On farming:


North Carolina has a rich and diverse agricultural economy, with some 50,000 farms producing everything from wheat and sweet potatoes, to pork and poultry, and even Christmas trees and trout. Our state’s farmers represent the best in innovation, entrepreneurship, and stewardship.
The future success of North Carolina farmers is endangered, however, when the government seeks to take over farm production with needless, uninformed, and often overly burdensome regulations. North Carolina’s farmers are good at what they do, and they’re successful when they’re allowed to get on with the business of running their farms, as many of them and their families have for generations.
The government’s most important role in agriculture is to protect the private property rights of farmers and their rights to make decisions about the most productive use of all their assets including their principal one—the land. Without the protection of private property there is no liberty.
As a Senator, I will consistently vote to protect private property rights and leave decisions about how to run farms to farmers instead of out-of-touch bureaucrats in Washington.
And here’s Justin Amash:
Michigan has one of the most diverse agricultural economies in the country. Our state’s farmers represent the best in innovation, entrepreneurship, and stewardship. The future success of Michigan farmers is endangered, however, when the government seeks to take over farm production with needless, uninformed, and often overly burdensome regulations.
Similarly, the government must respect the private property rights of farmers and empower them to make decisions about the most productive use of their principal asset—the land. As a Member of Congress, I consistently vote to protect private property rights and leave decisions about how to run farms to farmers.

On the environment:


The best way to protect the environment is through enforcement of property rights and sound economic policy.
Wealthier nations have cleaner environments because their citizens can afford to pay for them and choose to do so. Consequently, the best environmental policy is a strong economy. Imposing federal environmental standards and government mandates is poor substitute because, no matter what the government requires, Americans can only buy clean technologies and follow environmental policies that they can afford.
Governments should punish businesses and individuals that pollute the land, water, or air of their neighbors – that’s protecting property rights. But government should not attempt to micromanage environmental protection through payouts, tax breaks, and subsidies, which discourage the very innovation that could bring about real environmental improvements.
And here’s Justin Amash:
The best way to protect the environment is through strong enforcement of property rights and pursuit of sound economic policy. Wealthier nations have cleaner environments because their citizens can afford to pay for it voluntarily. Imposing environmental standards through federal government mandate is not a practical substitute. No matter what the government requires, Americans can’t buy clean technologies or follow environmental policies they can’t afford.
Government should punish businesses and individuals that pollute the land, water, or air of their neighbors, but it should not micromanage environmental protection through payouts, tax breaks, or subsidies, which discourage innovation and mostly benefit the politically connected.

On regulations:


Today’s businesses are heavily burdened with thousands of pages of unnecessary and excessive government regulations.
Regulations function as a hidden tax on individuals in the form of higher prices and fewer goods and services available. The federal government’s own Small Business Administration even admits that this hidden tax is around $1.75 trillion per year.
And here’s the Coalition for Jobs:
Today’s businesses are heavily burdened with thousands of pages of unnecessary and excessive government regulations. The American people must realize that regulations function as a hidden tax on them in the form of higher prices and fewer goods and services available. The federal government’s own Small Business Administration even admits that this hidden tax is around $1.75 trillion per year.

On National defense:


National defense is the federal government’s most important function, according to the Constitution. The full force of our military should be used when our safety is threatened by active foreign aggression or invasion.
However, the power to declare war lies with Congress alone. Among other things, this means that we cannot allow executive reactions to imminent dangers to drag on indefinitely without the express authorization of Congress.
As a Senator, I will make sure that perceived threats actually endanger our life, liberty, or sovereignty before voting to risk the lives of American troops.
While we maintain national defense, we must also protect civil liberties. In the last eleven years, the Federal Government has expanded its power at an alarming rate, blatantly ignoring the Constitution. This is a very real threat to our liberty, as the federal government takes power that should rightly lie with states and citizens. Our founding fathers warned against just such a threat.
I strongly oppose big-government initiatives like the Patriot Act, SOPA, CISPA, and the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for FY 2012. The 2012 NDAA, for example, allows the President to indefinitely detain anyone on U.S. soil, including American citizens, without charge or trial on the mere accusation that they are “associated” with terrorists. Such sweeping power with such vague justification is a very real threat to our most basic liberties.
And here’s Justin Amash:
National defense is the most critical function of the federal government, as provided in the United States Constitution. The full force of our Armed Forces should be used when we are faced with genuine threats to our safety, such as active foreign aggression or invasion. The exclusive power of Congress to declare war must be respected, and executive reactions to imminent dangers must not be allowed to drag on without the express authorization of Congress. It is my duty to make sure that perceived threats are actually a danger to our life, liberty, or sovereignty before voting to send American troops into harm’s way.
Even as we maintain our national defense, we must protect our civil liberties. I have led the fight against big-government initiatives like the Patriot Act, SOPA, CISPA, and the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for FY 2012. The 2012 NDAA allows the President to indefinitely detain anyone on U.S. soil, including American citizens, without charge or trial on the mere accusation that they are “associated” with terrorists. Dystopian, police-state laws like the NDAA run contrary to everything our country stands for.

Healthcare


Here’s Brannon (who is a doctor):
As a doctor for more than twenty-five years, I have first-hand experience with the enormous problems facing American health care.
The government’s heavy-handed approach over decades has created a plethora of problems that need to be addressed through fundamental market reforms.
As a Senator, I would vote to defund and repeal the President’s Affordable Care Act, which is proving to be anything but affordable and forces families and individuals to purchase government-approved health insurance that often do not meet either their needs or their budgets.
All of this government regulation has created a hopelessly complicated medical system that works in the interests of insurance companies and lawyers, rather than patients. To add insult to injury leaders in Washington exempt themselves from the regulations they themselves have imposed on the rest of us.
Under Obamacare, patients and doctors are prevented from making reasonable choices, despite understanding far better than any bureaucrat what is most appropriate for those patients. The poorest end up paying more and receiving fewer benefits.
On top of this, small businesses are suffering, as they face higher premiums and less certainty about the future. This impacts their ability to provide jobs or insurance at all. We need reforms that will reduce the real costs of health care, not force participation in a government system that is raising those costs.
A sustainable health care system requires that patients and doctors consider the costs and benefits of each decision, and work together to choose the right treatment.
We can make real improvements by allowing insurance companies to sell health care policies free of government regulations and across state lines. This will increase the number of policies available, which ill in turn make it easier for patients to find a policy that works for them at a price they can afford. Free market solutions like these will improve care and reduce costs by aligning the interests of patients, doctors, and hospitals.
As Senator, I will work to ensure that real, free market solutions are applied to the problems facing health care, so that American health care will again be the best in the world.
And here’s Amash:
As a Member of Congress, I have voted to repeal the President’s plan to force families and individuals to purchase government-approved health insurance. Heavy-handed government regulation has created a hopelessly complicated medical system that benefits mostly insurance companies and lawyers. In this system, both patients and their doctors are disempowered and prevented from making reasonable choices about the matters they know best. Small businesses are suffering as they face higher premiums and less certainty about the future.
We need reforms that will reduce the real costs of health care, not force participation in a government system. A sustainable health care system requires that patients and doctors consider the costs and benefits of each decision, and work together to choose the right treatment. Insurance companies should face nationwide competition for customers. I support allowing insurance companies to sell health care policies across state lines and innovative programs, like health savings accounts, that improve care and reduce costs by aligning the incentives of patients, doctors, and hospitals.

On Facebook, a post of Brannon’s appears to be copied from Cato Institute scholar Doug Bandow.


Here’s Brannon:
It’s the Congress (We The People) that has the authority to declare war, not the President.
Article 1, Sec. 8 (11) states, “Congress shall have the power … to declare war.”
The president is commander-in-chief, but he must fulfill his responsibilities within the framework established by the Constitution and subject to the control of Congress.
Naturally, chief executives offer creative reasons to bypass the Constitution’s clear requirement. One claim is that the president has some unspecified, ill-defined “foreign affairs power” that reduces the explicit war powers clause to a nullity.
However, the framers consciously circumscribed the president’s foreign policy authority by vesting countervailing power in Congress, including the responsibility to declare war.
No one thinks that Congress should manage the ensuing war-that’s why the Constitution names the president commander-in-chief. But Congress must decide whether or not the president will have a war to run.
Today the favorite presidential excuse for claiming the right to unilaterally initiate war is simple: everyone else does it.
This President and future presidents are not absolved from having to follow the Constitution because past presidents violated it.
And here’s Bandow:
Article 1, Sec. 8 (11) states, “Congress shall have the power … to declare war.” The president is commander-in-chief, but he must fulfill his responsibilities within the framework established by the Constitution and subject to the control of Congress.
Naturally, chief executives offer creative reasons to short-circuit the Constitution’s clear requirement. One claim is that the president has some unspecified, ill-defined “foreign affairs power” that reduces the explicit war powers clause to a nullity. However, the framers consciously circumscribed the president’s foreign policy authority by vesting countervailing power in Congress, including the responsibility to declare war.
Yet no one thinks that 535 legislators should manage the ensuing war-that’s why the Constitution names the president commander-in-chief. But Congress must decide whether or not the president will have a war to run.
Today the favorite presidential excuse for claiming the right to unilaterally initiate war is simple: everyone else does it. Those lawyers favored by former President George H. W. Bush point to 200-plus military deployments without congressional approval.

Brannon’s campaign did not immediately return a request for comment.

Tuesday, April 15, 2014

Russian government refused to help with FBI requests for more information about Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev until after he launched his deadly attack, claims reports.

Verne Strickland / USA DOT COM / April 15, 2014 



 Los Angeles Times / New York Times

The Russian government refused to help with FBI requests for more information about Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev and only agreed to help after he launched his deadly attack, according to reports.
The New York Times cites an inspector general's report claiming that Russian officials had warned the FBI in 2011 that Tsarnaev  'was a follower of radical Islam and a strong believer' who had become more extreme in his behavior since 2010.

The Russians then blocked a number of requests from the FBI for additional information and only agreed to assist again after Tsarnaev's deadly attack at the finish line of the Boston marathon.
'They found that the Russians did not provide all the information that they had on him back then, and based on everything that was available the F.B.I. did all that it could,' a senior US official briefed on the new report told the Times.
Russia's unwillingness to hand over everything it knew about Tsarnaev's dangerous brand of Islam comes as it emerged he also tried to legally change his name to that of a well-known militant rebel.
Tsarnaev wanted to changed his name to 'Muaz,' a reference to Emir Muaz, who fought in Russian's Dagestan republic as well as a nickname rebels gave to Tsarnaev during a six-month visit to the region in 2012.
The Los Angeles Times reports his Jan. 23, 2013 application seeking a name change included an explanation that his decision was political.


Authorities said Tamerlan Tsarnaev's attempt to change his name reveals a more radicalized young man than previously suspected
Authorities said Tamerlan Tsarnaev's attempt to change his name reveals a more radicalized young man than previously suspected


'He said, 'The Russian people have been terrorizing my home country for all these years,'' an anonymous official told the Times. 'This is why he needed to come back to America and help.'

One year ago, Tsarnaev would set explosions in two backpacks that killed three people and injured more than 260 at the Boston Marathon.
The newly obtained name-changing request is one link in a growing chain of evidence portraying a more radical and organized Tsarnaev than once believed. 
Attorneys for younger brother, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, said that his older brother might have believed there was FBI pressure and attempts to recruit him as an informant, forcing his hand.
The FBI did meet once with him to discuss his trip to the Caucasus area, and agents interviewed him multiple times.

Tsarnaev was killed days after the bombing as U.S. agents attempted to bring him in.
Attorneys for his younger brother are expected to argue that Tamerlan was the mastermind behind the plot.
U.S. authorities believe he was likely radicalized during his visit to Dagestan in 2012.
They also claim he unsuccessfully attempted to join the rebels but was either directed to return home to carry out a terrorist attack or decided to do it himself.
'You've got to be pretty full into this to want to change your name and not be just a nobody named Tamerlan,' the Time's source said. 'Maybe he thought because he could not get accepted over there, maybe he could do something here.'
Attorneys may argue that Tsamaev was the mastermind behind the bombings and forced his younger brother to get involved


On his name-change application, Tamerlan printed his name onto a section advising him he would be required to take an oath of allegiance to the U.S., crossed his name out, then wrote down 'Muaz.'

A House Committee on Homeland Security report detailed how Tsarnaev returned to the U.S. in 2012 with a powerful desire to hurt the country and a habit of ranting in local mosques.
A YouTube account he maintained included Russian-language videos about Islam and a series of militant videos.


http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1711971.1394058378!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_1200/519048332.jpg


Dzhokhar Tsarnaev pled not guilty to using a weapon of mass destruction as well as a slew of federal charges. He faces a death sentence if convicted.
Attempting to prove to a jury that one only committed a crime because they were coerced can be a hard sell.
'In my view of the evidence in the Boston case, I find no indication that the younger man had a psychiatric disorder," said J. Reid Meloy, clinical professor of psychiatry at the UC San Diego School of Medicine.
However he noted: 'It now seems very clear that this may be the most viable and convenient defense for the younger Tsarnaev.'

Monday, April 14, 2014

Waco Siege vs Bundy Ranch: That Was Then, This Is Now!

Verne Strickland USA DOT COM

Waco Siege vs Bundy Ranch: That Was Then, This Is Now!

| April 14 2014
Rose LaFleur
Many of us are old enough to remember watching in horror as the US government, using US military equipment, surrounded a group of Americans in Waco, Texas, with SWAT teams, helicopters, armored vehicles, and even a tank. Then watching as that compound burned to the ground, knowing that there were innocent women and children losing their lives right before our eyes. Most of us desperately wanted to believe that their actions were justified, that there was some perfectly legitimate reason why those innocents died. Then the facts started to come out and the terrible truth was revealed.  That’s the day that so many of us came to the awful realization that these things can happen in America, and that our government is capable of such atrocities. And many vowed back then, Never Again. Never again would we sit back and do nothing while our own government surrounded and laid siege to American citizens.
Fast forward to the latest siege, this time the Bundy Ranch. Once again Americans were surrounded by their own government. Armed federal agents came pouring in to Nevada. But this time, their actions wouldn’t go unanswered. Americans responded by the hundreds, and traveled to Nevada to ensure the government force didn’t result in yet another government sanctioned massacre. The government did everything it could to keep the facts from getting out, even shutting down cell towers in the area, setting up an official “free speech” area, and attacking peaceful protestors.
And we won! Federal agents have left the area in defeat, surrendering to both the public outcry and the presence of fellow Americans standing watch over and recording their actions. UK’s Daily Mail Online has done amazing coverage of the entire siege, including many great photos of everyday Americans taking a stand. It will make you want to stand and cheer!
Take notice federal government! We’ve learned our lessons well. We’ve never forgotten the innocent blood that was needlessly shed in Waco, Texas. Now it’s time for you to learn your lesson.. Your days of unanswered armed aggression against US citizens are over.
0 comments
Livefyre
3 people listening
 

Tuesday, April 8, 2014

Liberal media didn't want you to see the real Kermit Gosnell story! So here it is.

Please watch this short video. This is why the Gosnell story must be told.

Everyone knows who Jodi Arias is and she only killed one person.

 No one knows who Kermit Gosnell is because the liberal media did everything they could to hide this story from the American people.
WATCH What Happens When the Media Censor a Story 

"
The media didn't want the truth to get out about the ugly underbelly of the abortion industry.

Help make sure this story is told by supporting this effort:
www.gosnellmovie.com

America needs to know what happened, so this kind of butchery never happens again.


Every dollar counts!
It’s the story the media tried to hide. Please help if you can.

Sincerely,

The MRC Action Team