Despite all the claims by leftists like Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, et. al., the Restoring Honor rally was the most peacful and good-mannered that D.C. has seen since, well, has ever seen period.
There was no hate. And the claims of it being an all-white crowd were quashed with the presence of a large number of African-Americans and their families, including Harry R. Jackson. (I know Rev. Jackson was there because I saw him in a video of the event, a video that Keith Olbermann either never knew existed or, more likely, deliberately chose to ignore.)
Anyway, James Freeman of the Wall Street Journal has a fantastic summary of what he saw and heard at the rally.
From his column:
|This army of well-mannered folks that marched into Washington seemed comprised mainly of people who had once marched in the U.S. Army or other military branch, or at least had a family member who had. Perhaps that’s not surprising, given that the event was a fund-raiser for the Special Operations Warrior Foundation, which provides scholarships to the children of elite troops killed in the performance of their duty. The day was largely devoted to expressions of gratitude for the sacrifices of U.S. soldiers, for great men of American history like the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., and for God.
But it didn’t end there. Dave Roever, a Vietnam veteran, offered a closing prayer in which he thanked the Lord for the president and for the Congress. Despite the unpopularity of the latter two, no booing or catcalls could be heard.
Perhaps feeling defensive about how they would be portrayed in media reports, various attendees wore t-shirts noting that they were “Not violent” or “Non-violent.” For other participants, there was no need for an explicit message. Relaxed young parents felt comfortable enough to push toddlers in strollers through the crowded areas along the memorial’s reflecting pool.
If Olbermann, Matthews and the other members of the hate-filled left would actually take the time see reality, they might not look so foolish when they make their outlandish claims.
One aspect of the event made it undeniably superior to other rallies of comparable size: the area was cleaner when they were done than it was before they started.
|Not only was the rally akin to a “huge church picnic” (in one Journal reporter’s description), but one had to wonder if the over-achievers in this crowd actually left the area in better shape than they found it.
After the event, walking from the Lincoln Memorial’s reflecting pool through Constitution Gardens, this reporter scanned 360 degrees and could not see a scrap of trash anywhere. Participants and volunteers had collected all their refuse and left it piled neatly in bags around the public garbage cans. Near Constitution Avenue, I did encounter one stray piece of paper—but too old and faded to have been left that day.
Contrast that with how Obama supporters left the mall after they were done so rudely singing “Na-na-na-na. Hey! Hey! Goodbye!” to George W. Bush:
Here is a video showing how the participants of the Restoring Honor cleaned up in a way that Obama’s supporters didn’t even dream of doing:
And although Glenn Beck himself claimed to disagree with the final two paragraphs, they are relevent:
|The conservative Mr. Beck’s ability to draw this many people to Washington may suggest enormous gains for Republicans come the fall. But the GOP shouldn’t expect voters to simply hand them a congressional majority without making them earn it. If pregame chatter and off-season optimism translated into victory, the New York Jets and the Washington Redskins would meet in the Super Bowl every year.
Between Saturday’s crowd in Washington and the tea partiers agitating for limited government, we may be witnessing the rebuilding of the Reagan coalition, the “fusion” of religious and economic conservatives that political theorist Frank Meyer once endorsed. Reagan always believed that the Republican Party was the natural home for this movement, but GOP leaders in Washington need to prove they are worthy of it.
Yes, they do.
You can access the complete article on-line here:
Glenn Beck’s ‘Happy Warriors’
Wall Street Journal
August 31, 2010
Filed under: 9-12 Project, Constitution, Elections, Government, Mass Media, Politics, Social Issues, Tea Party | Tagged: 8/28, Chris Matthews, Glenn Beck, Harry Jackson, Keith Olbermann, litter, mall, Obama, rally, Restoring Honor | 1 Comment »
No, that’s not sour grapes in the title. It’s the bare truth. Essentially, Susan Bolton is saying that Arizona cannot enforce Federal Law and that the Feds do not have to enforce their own laws.
Think I’m kidding? Here is what Investor’s Business Daily notes:
|Bolton blocked the main provisions of Arizona’s law requiring state lawmen to ask people they come into legitimate contact with to show documentation if there’s reasonable suspicion they’re here illegally.
So now a van driver arrested by a state trooper for driving 120 miles per hour with 30 people stuffed under his floorboards will still get a speeding ticket, but the officer can’t ask about his immigration status. Nothing to see here; move along.
Bolton also blocked provisions requiring foreigners to carry papers at all times (as federal law already requires), as well as a section prohibiting public solicitation of work. Likewise, a section allowing warrantless arrests on probable cause was tossed.
Investor’s Business Daily
July 28, 2010
In essence, by tossing the Arizona law, Bolton also tossed Federal Law.
Now, we have nothing to contain the tide of illegals, drugs and other contraband that is coming across the Mexican border. Barack Obama has gotten his wish, as he expressed to Senator Kyl of Arizona:
Obama Won’t Secure Border Until Lawmakers Move on Immigration Package
June 21, 2010
So, what we have here is a situation where the Federal Government is refusing to carry out its responsibility to protect the citizens of the United States and it is prohibiting the citizens from protecting themselves. That is a volatile combination, one that will either have mildly serious consequences or majorly serious consequences down the road.
I don’t know who, but someone once said: “When the government fails in its responsibility to protect its citizens, it is the duty of the citizen to take up that responsibility for himself.” That is going to come into play here very soon. It will come in two phases.
First, the November elections are coming up fast. The mood across the United States is clear. The Obama Administration is in the toilet and this ruling against a state law that enjoyed broad support across the United States is only going to make that worse. There were several Democrat Governors visiting the White House who expressed their concern that the actions against Arizona are “toxic” to the election and re-election hopes of Democrats.
Governors Voice Grave Concerns On Immigration
New York Times
July 11, 2010
After the November elections, if the Federal Government doesn’t get the message from the American people, then the people will begin taking matters into their own hands. A nation that is truly free must have laws and those laws must be enforced by the government entrusted to enforce them. If the government decided to pick and choose which laws it will enforce and which laws it will ignore, it will destroy the confidence of the people and the people will respond accordingly.
We may very likely begin seeing a violent backlash against illegals in the country with a concurrent attempt by the government to stem this backlash. But that will only fuel the fire. People will see a government cracking down on its own citizens while ignoring the threat coming across the border. That will, in turn, result in more violence.
Think that’s exaggerating? Consider this:
|Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer put on a brave face, saying the battle was “far from over” and her state would fight all the way to the Supreme Court. But this will take decades, giving Mexico’s murderous cartels many years of people-smuggling profits.
So the delay itself amounts to a victory for the law’s foes. In addition to paying for the expensive litigation, Arizona can look forward to a growing bill for housing, schooling, jailing and providing “free” health care for the illegals who will now flow into the state.
And it can’t say no. Isn’t that taxation without representation?
Some 15,000 Arizona state officers could be helping the federal government enforce the laws it isn’t enforcing now. Now, they’ll do other things instead. By the logic of Bolton’s ruling, the state trooper who arrested Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh on a speeding violation in 1995 would now be prohibited from arresting him for the federal crime of the bombing, too.
If it wasn’t clear before, it is now: The federal government has no intent of enforcing the laws against rampant and brazen illegal immigration. Indeed, it will punish those states that try, leaving them at the mercy of the kidnappers, terrorists, gangsters, drug dealers and human traffickers that now freely cross our southern border.
Once that level has been achieved, the Federal government will have no way of controlling it. Think law enforcement agencies will be able to handle what is coming? No, it will be too big. Think using the military will work? No, most members of the military will refuse to take action against American citizens and will openly question why the illegal invasion was allowed to go unchecked in the first place.
Susan Bolton may very well have written the modern day Uncle Tom’s Cabin that will spark a modern civil war, a war that the Federal Government will not be able to win this time.
Filed under: Constitution, Government, Justice and Courts, Politics, Polls, Social Issues, Taxes, Terrorism | Tagged: Arizona, border, illegal immigration, illegals, Obama administration, ruling, Susan Bolton | 1 Comment »
This is basically an extension of my post from yesterday:
Democrats Change The Rules, Set To Trash The Constitution
March 15, 2010
Not only is Pelosi & Company set to usurp the Constitution in order to ram a Socialized Health Care bill that a majority of Americans do not want down our collective throats, but they were also “friends of the court” in a case back in 2005 when they challenged a piece of GOP legislation that focused on raising the debt limit.
From Mark Tapscott at the Washington Examiner:
|Dial the date selector back to 2005 when the Republican majority in Congress approved a national debt limit increase using a self-executing rule similar to the Slaughter Solution.
Guess who went to Federal court to challenge the constitutionality of the move? The Ralph Nader-backed Public Citizen legal activists.
And their argument went thus:
|“Article I of the United States Constitution requires that before proposed legislation may “become a Law,” U.S. CONST. art. I, § 7, cl. 2, “(1) a bill containing its exact text [must be] approved by a majority of the Members of the House of Representatives; (2) the Senate [must] approve precisely the same text; and (3) that text [must be] signed into law by the President,” Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417, 448, 118 S.Ct. 2091, 141 L.Ed.2d 393 (1998).
“Public Citizen, a not-for-profit consumer advocacy organization, filed suit in District Court claiming that the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, Pub.L. No. 109-171, 120 Stat. 4 (2006) (“DRA” or “Act”), is invalid because the bill that was presented to the President did not first pass both chambers of Congress in the exact same form. In particular, Public Citizen contends that the statute’s enactment did not comport with the bicameral passage requirement of Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution, because the version of the legislation that was presented to the House contained a clerk’s error with respect to one term, so the House and Senate voted on slightly different versions of the bill and the President signed the version passed by the Senate.
“Public Citizen asserts that it is irrelevant that the Speaker of the House and the President pro tempore of the Senate both signed a version of the proposed legislation identical to the version signed by the President. Nor does it matter, Public Citizen argues, that the congressional leaders’ signatures attest that indistinguishable legislative text passed both houses.”
Note the words in italics. That is the issue here. According to the above argument, it is not constitutional for the House and Senate to pass two different versions of the same legislation and then just arbitrarily choose which version shall become law.
Oh, and who also filed amicus briefs on this case? Read on:
- Nancy Pelosi
- Henry Waxman
- Louise Slaughter
Also note that the Dems were against raising the debt limit 5 years ago while today they are spending our great-grand-children’s future.
Democrat, thy name is Chutzpuh!
You can access the complete story on-line here:
Pelosi, Slaughter Went To Court Against GOP’s Self-Executing Rule In 2005
March 16, 2010
Filed under: Constitution, Corruption, Culture of Corruption, Government, Health Care, Politics | Tagged: Constitution, Louise Slaughter, Pelosi, Ralph Nader, self-executing, Slaughter Solution, Socialized Health Care, socialized medicine | 2 Comments »
How many times did we Conservatives warn about this during the 2008 election cycle and how many times were we ignored? The Democrats are radicals who want to force the failure of European-style socialism on the United States.
The Dems are now going to try forcing Obamacare through the legislative process using a trick known as the Slaughter Solution that is clearly unconstitutional, but they don’t seem to care.
From U.S. House of Representatives Minority Leader John Boehner’s Blog:
|The Slaughter Solution is a plan by Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY), the Democratic chair of the powerful House Rules Committee and a key ally of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), to get the health care legislation through the House without an actual vote on the Senate-passed health care bill. You see, Democratic leaders currently lack the votes needed to pass the Senate health care bill through the House. Under Slaughter’s scheme, Democratic leaders will overcome this problem by simply “deeming” the Senate bill passed in the House – without an actual vote by members of the House.
This is referencing a Congress Daily story that states:
|House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter is prepping to help usher the healthcare overhaul through the House and potentially avoid a direct vote on the Senate overhaul bill, the chairwoman said Tuesday.
Slaughter is weighing preparing a rule that would consider the Senate bill passed once the House approves a corrections bill that would make changes to the Senate version.
Essentially, The Dems want to “bundle” the Senate bill in with the corrections bill. No debate on the Senate bill will take place in the House at all.
This is the most brazen usurpation of our Constitution in the history of the United States. We Conservatives knew the Democrats were more than capable of pulling tricks like this, but few, if any, seemed to listen to us.
Is anyone listening now?
You can access the complete article on-line here:
Democrats Prepare “Slaughter Solution” To Ram Unpopular Health Care Takeover Through Congress Without A Vote
Rep. John Boehner’s Blog
March 10, 2010’s
Filed under: Constitution, Corruption, Culture of Corruption, Europe, Government, Health Care, Politics | Tagged: Government run health care, John Boehner, Louise Slaughter, Nationalized Health Care, Obamacare, Slaughter Solution, Socialized Health Care, socialized medicine | Leave a comment »
Most of us have known that the voter-fraud organization known as ACORN is among the most corrupt entities being given access to Capitol Hill by the Democrats. Now, a new report coming out of Congress shows that the corruption runs deeper than we first thought.
From Fox News:
|[T]he report offers the first detailed account of the allegations that have dogged the organization in recent months.
The executive summary of the report says ACORN provided contributions of financial and personnel resources to indicted former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown and candidate Obama, among others, in what the report calls a scheme to use taxpayer money to support a partisan political agenda, which would be a clear violation of numerous tax and election laws.
“Both structurally and operationally, ACORN hides behind a paper wall of nonprofit corporate protections to conceal a criminal conspiracy on the part of its directors, to launder federal money in order to pursue a partisan agenda and to manipulate the American electorate,” an executive summary of the report reads.
Of course, ACORN is denying all charges. But they cannot deny the facts in the case:
|The report accuses ACORN, after receiving more than $53 million in federal funds since 1994, of blurring the legal distinctions among 361 tax-exempt and non-exempt entities to divert that money into partisan political activities.
Evidence found in the report relies in part on documents provided by former ACORN employees.
“Operationally, ACORN is a shell game played in 120 cities, 43 states and the District of Columbia through a complex structure designed to conceal illegal activities, to use taxpayer and tax-exempt dollars for partisan political purposes, and to distract investigators,” the report read.
“Structurally, ACORN is a chess game in which senior management is shielded from accountability by multiple layers of volunteers and compensated employees who serve as pawns to take the fall for every bad act.”
These are very serious findings that we Americans should take note of and demand accountability from our elected representatives.
|It would be up to the chairman of the oversight panel to hold hearings on the ACORN report and up to the Justice Department to pursue a criminal investigation. Likewise, the census director will determine whether ACORN remains a partner with the U.S. Census Bureau to assist with the recruitment of the 1.4 million temporary workers needed to go door-to-door to count every person in the United States.|
Do we want an organization that actively engages in voter fraud and other corrupt activities to be involved in something so important as a Constitutionally mandated census?
No. We do not. ACORN should be dissolved and their leaders arrested and frog-marched to prison.
You can access the complete article on-line here:
GOP Congressional Report Accuses ACORN Of Political Corruption, Widespread Fraud
July 22, 2009
From the Tenth Amendment Center:
|State Senator Carey Baker (R-Eustis) has introduced a memorial in the Florida Senate reaffirming the principles of the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The memorial, awaiting an official Senate number, urges “Congress to honor the provisions of the Constitution of the United States and United States Supreme Court case law which limit the scope and exercise of federal power.”
“Now more than ever, state governments must exercise their Constitutional right to say no to the expansion of the federal government’s reckless deficit spending and abuse of power,” Senator Baker said. “With this resolution, our Legislature can send a message to Washington that our state’s rights must be respected.”
Those who ignore or dismiss such proceedings do so at the peril of the Union.
You can access the complete story on-line here:
Florida Senate To Consider State Sovereignty
The Tenth Amendment Center
July 16, 2009