Good Morning,

I had an amazing weekend as my eldest son vowed before God to ‘love, honor, and respect’ his new bride. Many things go through your mind when your children get married I am sure, but what was in the forefront of my mind was that ‘if we are not anchored to our values – it’s easy to drift off course’. The kids wrote their own vows – they were filled with Conservative values that we each share – their course is straight – thanks be to God.

This brings me to the question – is our course straight? I find, especially lately, that our course is veering. We, the Conservative Republicans, are making excuses; we are righting wrongs for fear of ‘a Dem getting in’; we are willing to take less than we deserve out of fear. This all equates to our course drifting – our anchor lifting – our America falling to the wayside.

I always seem to come back to the word ‘principled’. IF we stuck to our principles, our values, America would not be in the weakened state she is in. When our children move off course – get in trouble – do the wrong thing – hang with the wrong crowd, do we make excuses? Do we look  - away and ignore it and just ‘hope for the best’? Do we write them off? or do we deal with them from the ‘tough love stance’ in order to correct their path – to keep them anchored.

If we are not anchored to our values – it’s easy to drift off course.

Do we really think our representatives are any different? Or that this does not apply to them? Don’t kid yourselves –it applies or rather it SHOULD apply but it takes a constant hand/interaction/guidance to ensure that we collectively stay on course.

We cannot move forward from anger – anger is a distraction – we MUST stand/speak/think/act/react from the factual side of everything. We must stay the course (Jennie Maney’s favorite line) and work for/towards a principled representation for our beloved America before it really is too late. As you read on you will get a picture of our anchor adrift….

Did any of you catch the report about the Muslim gas station owner refusing to sell gas to an American soldier in uniform in Bogalusa, Louisiana? No? Google that one.

Where are our values? Are they adrift somewhere in the name of PC or fear?

Give this little gem a read (if you haven’t already) A New Study from Arizona State University researchers – ‘there’s nothing to fear from radical islam’.

http://politicaloutcast.com/2012/07/study-theres-nothing-to-fear-from-radical-islam-really/

On a side note this is a picture of the Activists of Jamaat-e-Islami march during an anti-US and NATO rally in Karachi, Pakistan. Islamabad agreed to reopen overland routes to NATO convoys last week after a seven-month blockade sparked by a US air raid on a border post that killed Pakistani soldiers.

And then there’s this one – Condoleezza Rice is being considered as Romney’s VP pick. Many of you have written that’s she would be an awesome choice. I have stated ‘not so fast’. Musically talented, smart, a great speaker, but what does she really believe? The following article should grab your attention. “The picture I can’t get out of my mind is Rice swearing in homosexual physician Mark Dybul as the United States Global AIDS coordinator at a ceremony on October 10, 2007 with his “partner” and Laura Bush in attendance. ‘There is a battle raging today over the role religion plays in public and political life. To hear secularists tell it, religion is the problem and reason is the solution. Fundamentalists of all types are being singled out as the inhibitors of progress and the instigators of terror. Christian fundamentalists are no different from Islamic fundamentalists, according to liberal politicians, scholars, …”

http://politicaloutcast.com/2012/07/condoleezza-rice-and-americas-secularism-problem/

‘If we are not anchored to our values – it’s easy to drift off course’.

Barack Obama’s campaign has been quick to rip Mitt Romney for his association with Bain Capital, which outsourced certain jobs during restructuring of companies. There’s only one problem: many of the very executives who were running Bain Capital during the 1999–2002 period now under media scrutiny donated to Obama’s presidential campaign. And Obama was more than happy to cash the checks. The Dem’s fail to ‘see’ the game their captain is playing –  http://weaselzippers.us/2012/07/15/obama-campaign-took-cash-from-bain-outsourcing-execs/

‘If we are not anchored to our values – it’s easy to drift off course’.

For quite some time now I have said that we have 2 parties that are working towards the same goal ie they are the same.Regardless if you believe that or not – give this a read:

Census Bureau data reveals that most US families headed by illegal immigrants use taxpayer funded welfare programs on behalf of their American born anchor babies. Even before the recession, immigrant households with children used welfare programs at consistently higher rates than natives, according to the extensive census data collected and analyzed by a nonpartisan Washington DC group dedicated to researching legal and illegal immigration in the US. The results, published this month in a lengthy report are hardly surprising:

http://cowboybyte.com/10096/surprise-majority-of-illegal-immigrant-households-collecting-welfare/ 

Now read this: J.P. Morgan makes billions in profits from food stamps every year. Coincidence?

http://www.examiner.com/article/j-p-morgan-makes-billions-profits-from-food-stamps-every-year

‘If we are not anchored to our values – it’s easy to drift off course’.

WASHINGTON — Republican governors Rick Scott of Florida and Terry Branstad ofIowa on Sunday attacked President Barack Obama’s decision to grant states increased flexibility on the work requirement for welfare.

While conservatives traditionally support state waivers for federal laws, the Republican governors blasted the administration’s plan to allow such waivers for the work requirements stipulated in the 1996 federal welfare reform law negotiated between congressional Republicans and President Bill Clinton.

“This is a huge step in the wrong direction,” Branstad told Brit Hume on “Fox News Sunday,” adding that he believed the law had been very effective “and now we see this administration trying to gut it. I think it is illegal.”

Branstad suggested the president was overstepping his executive powers, while Scott said residents of his state seeking benefits would still have to look for work.

“People need to be going out and looking for a job,” said Scott. “We believe in personal responsibility, and we’re going to have that in our state.”

The remarks come after the Department of Health and Human Services announced in a memo Thursday that states may be allowed to grant waivers for the welfare program’s strict work requirements, arguing the move would spur state-level welfare innovation and provide the enforcement flexibility states need.

Since then, presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney has joined other Republicans in accusing Obama of attempting to gut welfare reform and overhaul one of the landmark bipartisan achievements in recent decades.

“The president’s action is completely misdirected,” Romney said in a statement. “Work is a dignified endeavor, and the linkage of work and welfare is essential to prevent welfare from becoming a way of life.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/15/rick-scott_n_1674459.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003

‘If we are not anchored to our values – it’s easy to drift off course’.

“I believe that if we’re successful in this election,” President Obama told campaign donors in Minnesota last month, “that the fever may break, because there’s a tradition in the Republican Party of more common sense than that.” Apparently Obama believes that if he wins this November, Republicans on Capitol Hill will all begin to act like Chief Justice John Roberts by betraying their conservative beliefs and signing on to Obama’s unprecedented expansion of the federal welfare state. But what would America look like if the Republican “fever” did break? The Washington Examiner writes: We already know. It would look a lot like the state of California, where no non-cyborg Republican has been governor since 1996. Democrats have also enjoyed complete control of the state legislature since 1997. And they have governed exactly the way you’d expect Democrats to govern.

Spending has more than doubled, from $45.4 billion in 1996 to more than $92.5 billion today. Income, sales and car taxes have all been hiked. As a result, California has the most progressive income tax system in the nation, with seven income tax brackets, and the second-highest top marginal rate.

Even with all those tax hikes, California’s 2012 budget is still $15.7 billion in the red. So what does Gov. Jerry Brown want to do? Raise taxes again, of course. He has proposed a ballot initiative that would: 1) raise sales taxes on everyone and 2) raise incomes taxes on those making more than $250,000 a year (like Obama has proposed to do nationally). But even this $8.5 billion tax hike would still leave the state $7.5 billion short. Where will California get that money? Who knows?

And that is not the only spending binge California Democrats haven’t paid for. Just this month, the state legislature approved a $2.6 billion bond sale in order to fund construction on a scaled-back $68.4 billion high-speed rail project that will supposedly connect San Francisco and Los Angeles.

If California begins construction on the train before this December 31 (a big if), Obama has agreed to give the state $3.5 billion in federalmoney to help. But that still leaves a $62.3 billion hole. Where does California plan to get that money? Who knows?

With all of this unfunded government spending, Keynesian-Democratic thinking would predict that California’s economy should be booming.

It isn’t.

At 10.8 percent, California has the third-highest unemployment rate in the country. There are fewer private-sector jobs in the state today, 11.9 million, then there were in 2000, 12.2 million.

And thanks to liberal welfare requirements, a third of all the nation’s welfare recipients live in California despite the state only containing one-eighth of the national population.

Contrast those numbers with Republican-controlled Texas, where private-sector jobs have grown from 7.8 million in 2000 to 9 million today.

Long before it became the nation’s 31st state in 1850, California had been a target destination for Americans looking for a better life. Not anymore.

According to the last census, for the first time ever, the number of Californians born in other states actually decreased, falling from 7.6 million in 2000 to 6.6 million in 2010. And where did all those Californians flee? Many of them ended up in Texas, where the number of residents born in other states grew by almost 1 million.

The California dream is dead. Democrats killed it. Middle-class families can’t escape the state fast enough. Conservatives must fight Obama and his agenda at every turn so that Californians still have other states to flee to.

Indeed.

Give RS’s piece a read today ‘Does the president think the government got him where he is today’ – you will REALLY see the need for the byline ‘If we are not anchored to our values – it’s easy to drift off course’ today: http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/07/16/does-the-president-think-the-government-got-him-where-he-is-today/

Below are the top stories you will hear about today via TV/Radio today:

1. WHY REPEALING HEALTH CARE LAW WON’T BE EASY

If Romney wins the White House and his GOP allies retake the Senate, he could shred most of Obama’s health care law without having to overpower a Democratic filibuster. But it won’t be easy and it won’t be quick.

2. ECONOMISTS LAY OUT GLOOMY FORECAST

Sales and profit gains of early 2012 are disappearing and financial pros say Europe’s crisis, the possible expiration of the Bush tax cuts in December, and the prospect of major cuts in federal spending are also weighing on their minds.

3. ANNAN MEETS WITH KEY SYRIAN ALLY

The U.N. special envoy consults with top Russian officials, who are adamantly opposed to international military intervention. But in light of rising violence, Russia is under increasing pressure to get tougher on Assad.

4. MICROSOFT AND MSNBC END ONLINE ALLIANCE

The tech giant is pulling out of the joint venture that owned MSNBC.com, freeing the world’s largest software maker to build its own online news service and NBC News to do the same.

5. WHAT CLINTON IS DISCUSSING IN ISRAEL

The secretary of state is meeting with Israeli and Palestinian leaders and the violence in Syria and Iran’s nuclear program are on the table.

6. WHERE VIEWERS ARE INCREASINGLY GETTING THEIR NEWS

A new study finds that YouTube is emerging as a major platform for news, one to which viewers increasingly turn for eyewitness videos in times of major events and natural disasters. (Be sure to check out our Must See Video’s today – as we post You Tube News daily).

7. RHETORIC HEATS UP ON CAMPAIGN TRAIL

At 12:30 p.m. in Cincinnati, Obama will hold a town hall where he is expected to be critical of GOP rival Romney’s tax proposals and tout his own 2009 bailout of the auto industry.

8. Romney has decided on a running mate and may announce as soon as this week. The NYTimes hints it may be Tim Pawlenty.

‘If we are not anchored to our values – it’s easy to drift off course’

We close today with this piece from the American Thinker – ‘Do Obama’s Executive Orders Reveal a Pattern?

President Barack Hussein “kill list” Obama has offered over 900 Executive Orders (EO), and he is not even through his first term.  He is creating a wonderland of government controls covering everything imaginable, including a list of “Emergency Powers” and martial law EOs.  And while Obama is busy issuing EOs to control everything inside the US, he has been issuing EOs to force us to submit to international regulations instead of our US Constitution.

And comments by North Carolina governor Beverly Perdue and former OMB director Peter Orszag only contribute to this pattern.

Is it now time to start connecting the dots?  Obama signed EO 13603 on March 22, 2012.  Then he signed EO 13617 on June 25, 2012, declaring a national emergency.  Then he signed EO 13618 on July 6, 2012.

In EO 13603, entitled, “National Defense Resources Preparedness,” Obama says (among other things) that [we must]:

be prepared, in the event of a potential threat to the security of the United States, to take actions necessary to ensure the availability of adequate resources and production capability, including services and critical technology, for national defense requirements;

Obama has the power, through this EO, to “nationalize” (not seize) private assets in order to protect national interests.  Further, the EO effectively states that he can:

1.   “identify” requirements for emergencies

2.   “assess” the capability of the country’s industrial and technological base

3.   “be prepared” to ensure the availability of critical resources in time of national threat

4.   “improve the efficiency” of the industrial base to support national defense

5.   “foster cooperation” between commercial and defense sectors

There are pundits that suggest that by signing  EO 13603, Obama has given himself power to declare martial law and suspend elections.

The main problem with EO 13603 is that the words/phrases in quotes can be interpreted in many ways, including ways that favor Obama and Democrats.  Wait, we can have our Supreme Court decide what they mean.  But that won’t work since we know four of them to be Democrat hacks, and one justice can be influenced by the MSM.

In EO 13617, entitled “Blocking Property of the Government of the Russian Federation Relating to the Disposition of Highly Enriched Uranium Extracted From Nuclear Weapons,” Obama says (among other things)that”

the risk of nuclear proliferation created by the accumulation of a large volume of weapons-usable fissile material in the territory of the Russian Federation continues to constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States, and hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat.

Obama, by signing this EO, actually declared a national emergency.  I guess that President Theodore Roosevelt’s famous saying, “Speak softly and carry a big stick,” can’t apply in this case because we don’t want to offend the Russians by having them honor treaties they signed (the “HEU” Agreement).  But what’s more important is that Obama can now “justify” any action he wants to take by citing EO 13617 since it declares a national emergency.

Then, in EO 13618, entitled, “Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions,” Obama states (among other things) that:

The Federal Government must have the ability to communicate at all times and under all circumstances to carry out its most critical and time sensitive missions. …  Such communications must be possible under all circumstances to ensure national security, effectively manage emergencies, and improve national resilience.

Obama cites “national security” in this EO.  I guess Obama sees ANY excuse for declaring a national security emergency will appear better than taking over the nation’s communications assets by force

Want more examples of what Obama is doing?

• EO 10990 allows the Government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.
• EO 10997 allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels, and minerals.
• EO 11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision
• EO 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons.
• EO 11003 allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.
• EO 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate and establish new locations for populations.
• EO 11005 allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways, and public storage facilities.

Are we beginning to see a pattern here?  We’re being prepared  for a national emergency.  Then there’s taking control.  I personally think that what Obama is doing goes way beyond being prepared.

North Carolina governor Beverly Perdue (Democrat), on September 28, 2011, suggested that perhaps elections should be suspended for two years by canceling, until the economy recovers, the 2012 elections. After that remark got the reception it deserved, Pardue’s staff tried to pass it off as a joke.

Former White House director of the Office of Management and Budget Peter Orszag, who, on September 14, 2011, in a The New Republic article entitled “Too Much of a Good Thing: Why we need less democracy,” said that we are that we are hampered by too much democracy, that the constitutional system (not really a democracy) is too slow to react, and the deliberations and negotiations are simply too cumbersome. Orszag suggests that the constitutional rules of limiting government offers impediments to autocratic, dictatorial actions, and are just too great.

That North Carolina governor Perdue would even joke (if it was a joke) about canceling an election is frightening enough, but that Orszag, a former official in Obama’s administration, believes that doing away with the US Constitution is a viable solution should cause every AT reader to quake.

I’m never comfortable with laws that give the government broad reaching powers in the event of a “national emergency,” especially when there is no clear, set, unchangeable definition of what actually constitutes a “national emergency.”

Circumvention of the US Constitution by any means possible is the ultimate goal of Democrats and the Obama administration because the 2012 election is shaping up to be a repeat of the 2010 election.

I am not a conspiracy theorist, but these three latest EOs and previous EOs Obama signed, coupled with Perdue’s and Orszag’s comments, suggest that something besides coincidence is going on.

Obama is anchored to his values and is not drifting off course. WE need to be able to say the same.

 

Keep Talking – Keep Thinking – have a great day!

Lisa