Last Night’s Politburo Vote in the House

October 17, 2013 in America's Collapse, America's Heritage, Amnesty, Anarchy, Budget, Constitutional, Debt Crisis, Debt Limit, DICTATORSHIP, Economic Deception, Hope and Change, Intimidation, Liberty in Jeopardy, ObamaCare, Obamanation, Patriotism, Police State, Political Deception, President Obama, Progressivism, Socialism, Tea Party, The Stakes for the 2014 Election, United States Constitution

 
The following Roll Call vote took place in spite of the fact that House members were not provided copies to peruse before the vote, even if they requested it. 87  Republican Traitors voted Yea! The means by which this legislation was moved and passed gives new meaning to the word “Treachery”.  The House voted to give Republican Mitch McConnell his $2 Billion Earmark and  voted a  stipend of $174K of our treasure was to  Millionairess Senator Frank  Lautenberg of NJ’s  widow in this purported “Clean CR”. Now that it has passed  we will have a  chance in the weeks aheadto review the entire bill and we will surely find other treacheries like a trick-provision that was added that will require a 2/3 vote  to stop the next Debt Limit increase.This morning the Wall Street Journal in an article by Laura Meckler, Business Voices Frustration With GOP, writes that “In interviews with representatives of companies large and small executives predicted a change in how business would approach politics. They didn’t foresee a new alignment with Democrats but forecast backing challengers to tea-party conservatives in GOP primaries…”

This is just the beginning of a planned blitz creed against Tea Party   Conservatives by the Establishment and their Progressive allies.  We are now joined in a battle,  not only a fight for Conservative values, but for the Survival of our Constitutional Democracy.

As Jeff Kuhner of WRKO in Boston recently stated, America has now become a functional “Dictatorship” under the tutelage  of our “Dear Leader” Barrack Hussein Obama.

And

Lastly, the Wall Street journal today had another front page headline, More Illegal Immigrants As for Asylum, thereby joining   next skirmish in our battle to save our American Way of Life.

Had enough yet?

 

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 113th Congress – 1st Session

 

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 550
(Republicans in roman; Democrats in italic; Independents underlined)

H R 2775      YEA-AND-NAY      16-Oct-2013      10:18 PM
QUESTION:  On Motion to Concur in the Senate Amendments
BILL TITLE: To condition the provision of premium and cost-sharing subsidies under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act upon a certification that a program to verify household income and other qualifications for such subsidies is operational, and for other purposes 

YEAS NAYS PRES NV
REPUBLICAN 87 144 1
DEMOCRATIC 198 2
INDEPENDENT
TOTALS 285 144   3

—- YEAS    285 —

Andrews
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barrow (GA)
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Benishek
Bera (CA)
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boehner
Bonamici
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brooks (IN)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Bustos
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cárdenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Conyers
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Cotton
Courtney
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Daines
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Dent
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Fortenberry
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibson
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guthrie
Gutiérrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Holt
Honda
Horsford
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Joyce
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Kuster
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Luján, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Meng
Michaud
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Nolan
Nunes
O’Rourke
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pittenger
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reichert
Ribble
Richmond
Rigell
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stivers
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Upton
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velázquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Webster (FL)
Welch
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (IN)

—- NAYS    144 —

Aderholt
Amash
Amodei
Bachmann
Barr
Barton
Bentivolio
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Brady (TX)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Broun (GA)
Bucshon
Burgess
Campbell
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Culberson
Denham
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith (VA)
Hall
Harris
Hartzler
Hensarling
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
King (IA)
Kingston
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lankford
Latta
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCaul
McClintock
Meadows
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Pearce
Perry
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Radel
Reed
Renacci
Rice (SC)
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ross
Rothfus
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Smith (MO)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stewart
Stockman
Stutzman
Thornberry
Turner
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Weber (TX)
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho

—- NOT VOTING    3 —

McCarthy (NY) Rush Young (FL)

Tonight’s Politburo Vote in the Senate

October 16, 2013 in Abuse of Power, Accountability, Constitutional, DICTATORSHIP, Fiscal Cliff, Hope and Change, Integrity, Liberty in Jeopardy, Obama-Nomics, Obama's America 2016, ObamaCare, Police State, Political Class, Political Deception, Political Incompetence, President Obama, Treason

The following Roll Call vote took place in spite of the fact that Senators were not provided copies to peruse before the vote, even if they requested it. 18 Patriots voted Nay! The means by which this legislation was moved and passed gives new meaning to the word “Treachery”.  Republican Mitch McConnell got his $2 Billion Earmark and a stipend of $174K of our treasure was slipped to  Millionairess Senator Frank  Lautenberg of NJ’s  widow in this purported “Clean CR”. When we have a chance to review the entire bill we will surely find other treacheries like a trick-provision that was added that will require a 2/3 vote  to stop the Debt Limit increase.

Had enough yet?

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 113th Congress – 1st Session

 

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

 

Vote Summary

 

Question: On Passage of the Bill (H.R. 2775 As Amended )
Vote Number: 219 Vote Date: October 16, 2013, 07:56 PM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Bill Passed
Measure Number: H.R. 2775 (No Subsidies Without Verification Act )
Measure Title: An act making continuing appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2014, and for other purposes.
Vote Counts: YEAs 81
NAYs 18
Not Voting 1
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State

 

Alphabetical by Senator Name

Alexander (R-TN), Yea
Ayotte (R-NH), Yea
Baldwin (D-WI), Yea
Barrasso (R-WY), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Begich (D-AK), Yea
Bennet (D-CO), Yea
Blumenthal (D-CT), Yea
Blunt (R-MO), Yea
Boozman (R-AR), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Yea
Brown (D-OH), Yea
Burr (R-NC), Yea
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Cardin (D-MD), Yea
Carper (D-DE), Yea
Casey (D-PA), Yea
Chambliss (R-GA), Yea
Chiesa (R-NJ), Yea
Coats (R-IN), Yea
Coburn (R-OK), Nay
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Coons (D-DE), Yea
Corker (R-TN), Yea
Cornyn (R-TX), Nay
Crapo (R-ID), Nay
Cruz (R-TX), Nay
Donnelly (D-IN), Yea
Durbin (D-IL), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Fischer (R-NE), Yea
Flake (R-AZ), Yea
Franken (D-MN), Yea
Gillibrand (D-NY), Yea
Graham (R-SC), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Nay
Hagan (D-NC), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Yea
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Heinrich (D-NM), Yea
Heitkamp (D-ND), Yea
Heller (R-NV), Nay
Hirono (D-HI), Yea
Hoeven (R-ND), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Not Voting
Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Johanns (R-NE), Yea
Johnson (D-SD), Yea
Johnson (R-WI), Nay
Kaine (D-VA), Yea
King (I-ME), Yea
Kirk (R-IL), Yea
Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Leahy (D-VT), Yea
Lee (R-UT), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Yea
Manchin (D-WV), Yea
Markey (D-MA), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McCaskill (D-MO), Yea
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Menendez (D-NJ), Yea
Merkley (D-OR), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Yea
Moran (R-KS), Yea
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murphy (D-CT), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Paul (R-KY), Nay
Portman (R-OH), Yea
Pryor (D-AR), Yea
Reed (D-RI), Yea
Reid (D-NV), Yea
Risch (R-ID), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Nay
Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Rubio (R-FL), Nay
Sanders (I-VT), Yea
Schatz (D-HI), Yea
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Scott (R-SC), Nay
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shaheen (D-NH), Yea
Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Stabenow (D-MI), Yea
Tester (D-MT), Yea
Thune (R-SD), Yea
Toomey (R-PA), Nay
Udall (D-CO), Yea
Udall (D-NM), Yea
Vitter (R-LA), Nay
Warner (D-VA), Yea
Warren (D-MA), Yea
Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea
Wicker (R-MS), Yea
Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State

 

Grouped By Vote Position

YEAs —81
Alexander (R-TN)
Ayotte (R-NH)
Baldwin (D-WI)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Burr (R-NC)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Chiesa (R-NJ)
Coats (R-IN)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Coons (D-DE)
Corker (R-TN)
Donnelly (D-IN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Fischer (R-NE)
Flake (R-AZ)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Graham (R-SC)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Heinrich (D-NM)
Heitkamp (D-ND)
Hirono (D-HI)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kaine (D-VA)
King (I-ME)
Kirk (R-IL)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Manchin (D-WV)
Markey (D-MA)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
McConnell (R-KY)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Moran (R-KS)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murphy (D-CT)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Portman (R-OH)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Thune (R-SD)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wicker (R-MS)
Wyden (D-OR)
NAYs —18
Coburn (R-OK)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
Cruz (R-TX)
Enzi (R-WY)
Grassley (R-IA)
Heller (R-NV)
Johnson (R-WI)
Lee (R-UT)
Paul (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rubio (R-FL)
Scott (R-SC)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Toomey (R-PA)
Vitter (R-LA)
Not Voting – 1
Inhofe (R-OK)
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State

 

Grouped by Home State

Alabama: Sessions (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Alaska: Begich (D-AK), Yea Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Flake (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Boozman (R-AR), Yea Pryor (D-AR), Yea
California: Boxer (D-CA), Yea Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Colorado: Bennet (D-CO), Yea Udall (D-CO), Yea
Connecticut: Blumenthal (D-CT), Yea Murphy (D-CT), Yea
Delaware: Carper (D-DE), Yea Coons (D-DE), Yea
Florida: Nelson (D-FL), Yea Rubio (R-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Hirono (D-HI), Yea Schatz (D-HI), Yea
Idaho: Crapo (R-ID), Nay Risch (R-ID), Nay
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Yea Kirk (R-IL), Yea
Indiana: Coats (R-IN), Yea Donnelly (D-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Nay Harkin (D-IA), Yea
Kansas: Moran (R-KS), Yea Roberts (R-KS), Nay
Kentucky: McConnell (R-KY), Yea Paul (R-KY), Nay
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Nay
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea King (I-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Yea Mikulski (D-MD), Yea
Massachusetts: Markey (D-MA), Yea Warren (D-MA), Yea
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Yea Stabenow (D-MI), Yea
Minnesota: Franken (D-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Wicker (R-MS), Yea
Missouri: Blunt (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Yea
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Yea
Nebraska: Fischer (R-NE), Yea Johanns (R-NE), Yea
Nevada: Heller (R-NV), Nay Reid (D-NV), Yea
New Hampshire: Ayotte (R-NH), Yea Shaheen (D-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Chiesa (R-NJ), Yea Menendez (D-NJ), Yea
New Mexico: Heinrich (D-NM), Yea Udall (D-NM), Yea
New York: Gillibrand (D-NY), Yea Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Hagan (D-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Heitkamp (D-ND), Yea Hoeven (R-ND), Yea
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Yea Portman (R-OH), Yea
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Nay Inhofe (R-OK), Not Voting
Oregon: Merkley (D-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Yea Toomey (R-PA), Nay
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Yea Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea
South Carolina: Graham (R-SC), Yea Scott (R-SC), Nay
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Yea Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Nay Cruz (R-TX), Nay
Utah: Hatch (R-UT), Yea Lee (R-UT), Nay
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Yea Sanders (I-VT), Yea
Virginia: Kaine (D-VA), Yea Warner (D-VA), Yea
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Manchin (D-WV), Yea Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Wisconsin: Baldwin (D-WI), Yea Johnson (R-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Nay
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State

Author and Investigative Researcher Trevor Loudon Tours MA

October 14, 2013 in Congress, Constitutional, Elizabeth Warren, Freedom, Liberty, MA Political Machine, Our Dear Leader, President Obama, Progressivism, Socialism, Trevor Loudon, United States Sovereignty, Who Is Barack Hussein Obama?

Trevor Pic1You only have 3 more chances to listen to Trevor Loudon in the Boston Region, of whom Glenn said about his first book Barack OBAMA AND THE ENEMIES WITHIN,

“Trevor Loudon does the job that few in the media ever even attempt. This eye-opening book is proof that one person really can make a difference, especially when they have no agenda other than finding the truth”

Trevor’s just released sequel  THE ENEMIES WITHIN, sequel’s research   is even more explosive.

Have you been wondering who Barack Hussein Obama is? Who his mentors were? Who his political allies are? Who his advisers are? Would you like to hear insights into Obama’s secretive early childhood through College his career? Who the power brokers are behind his “Throne”.  Have you wondered about the relationships our Senators and some of our Congressmen have with Socialist  and  Socialist organizations?

Would you be surprised to learn that Barack Hussein Obama aka Barry Obama’s first mentor was an avowed Communist who was being kept under constant surveillance by the FBI, as a suspected spy?

Would you also shocked to learn that Barry surrounded himself with an extensive group of “radicals, marxists, communists, and Americans who have joined together in a coordinated effort to overthrow capitalism and the Republic of the United States of America.”

Would you like to hear the unedited, impartial, unbiased and unedited truth about Barry?

Then you need to attend one of Trevor Loudon’s MA Book Signing Tours’s where he will give a synopsis of research contained in his new book, “The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress”.

Trevor Loudon’s just released “The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress” is like no other book written on American politics.

The book is designed to expose, in layman’s terms, the comprehensive communist, socialist and extreme progressive infiltration of the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate. Of special interest to Massachusetts residents, “The Enemies Within” profiles Senators Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey as well as Representatives Mike Capuano, Jim McGovern and John Tierney.

“The Enemies Within” profiles fourteen Senators and more than fifty Representatives and Their ties to Communist Party USA, Democratic Socialists of America, Workers World Party, and The Institute for Policy Studies, Council for a Livable World and other radical anti-American organizations.

Ever wondered why the US Congress has moved further and further left over your lifetime, even while much of the electorate has become more and more conservative? Why government regulation and taxes have exponentially increased, even though most Americans still oppose Big Government?

“The Enemies Within” is designed to show American voters exactly how modern communism works and how it impacts on your life, every single day. Just how do the communists win big on things like Obamacare and immigration “reform,” which go completely against the wishes of the American people?

“The Enemies Within” names names and takes no prisoners. If you want to know exactly who is tearing your country down, this is a MUST READ.

“The Enemies Within” was officially released on August 20, 2013, at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.

Attendees at these events will be able to purchase copies of “The Enemies Within” and have them signed by Mr. Loudon. All events are free and open to the public, however seating is limited

Trevor is an activist and political researcher from Christchurch New Zealand. He believes in freedom with responsibility, not freedom from responsibility. His ideal society is one in which government is confined to protecting its citizens from criminals and external enemies and he believes in working with all those who are moving in broadly the same direction. Trevor is also the founder and editor of KeyWiki.org, a rapidly growing website with the goal of unlocking the covert side of U.S. and Global politics.

The MA Venues and Dates are as Folows:

Tuesday October 15

Time: 7:00 pm – Whatever
Plymouth Rock Cape and The Islands TP
Olivieras Restaurant
300 Center St Pembroke, MA 02359
Olivieras TEL: 781-294-4700
Contact: Louis Carpenito
lcarpenito@mrinfosecurity.com
781.828.7557 M

Thursday October 17

Mass Tea Party
6:30 pm – Whatever
Park Restaurant & Spirits
257 Park Avenue
Worcester, MA 01609
Park Tel # (508) 756-7995
Contact: Rich Howell
rjh1023@yahoo.com
413.539.3812 M

Friday October 18

Pioneer Valley TP
6:30 – whatever
Anchor House (Formally Abruzzo’s)
2589 Boston Rd
Wilbraham MA 01095
413.596.3055
Contact: Rich Howell
rjh1023@yahoo.com
413.539.3812 M

Saturday October 19

Upper Cape Tea Party
6:30 – Whatever
Falmouth Library (Hermann Meeting Room)
300 Main Street
Falmouth MA 02540
Contact: Mark Alliegro
uppercapetp@yahoo.com
985.788.3413

Barack Hussein Obama’s Obsession with Providing Enemy Combatants with Constitutional Rights is Irrational

March 7, 2013 in "Bill of Rights", Abuse of Power, Constitution, Constitutional, Liberty, National Security, President Obama, United State Military

Enemy CombatantsAs a former practicing Constitutional Lawyer and Professor, Barrack Hussein Obama is not only demonstrating irrational behavior, but also unconstitutional behavior that is setting a dangerous precedent. Forget that his decision will prevent us from obtaining important or crucial intelligence about our enemies.  His behavior is Irrational in that it took a filibuster by  Senator Rand Paul to get him to state that American Citizens on American soil, not posing an immediate threat  are to be afforded their Constitutional rights and are not  to be treated as enemy combatants. Irrational because  he is providing enemy combatants  with Constitutional Rights reserved for American Citizens. The following Supreme Court Case is the precedent for the treatment for enemy combatants. Other cases reinforce this decision.

“Supreme court decision, “Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S.1 (1942), is a Supreme Court of the United States case that upheld the jurisdiction of a United States military tribunal over the trial of several Operation Pastorius German saboteurs in the United States. Quirin has been cited as a precedent for the trial by military commission of any unlawful combatant against the United States.

It was argued July 29 and July 30, 1942 and decided July 31, 1942 with an extended opinion filed October 29, 1942.

 …the law of war draws a distinction between the armed forces and the peaceful populations of belligerent nations and also between those who are lawful and unlawful combatants. Lawful combatants are subject to capture and detention as prisoners of war by opposing military forces. Unlawful combatants are likewise subject to capture and detention, but in addition they are subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals for acts which render their belligerency unlawful. The spy who secretly and without uniform passes the military lines of a belligerent in time of war, seeking to gather military information and communicate it to the enemy, or an enemy combatant who without uniform comes secretly through the lines for the purpose of waging war by destruction of life or property, are familiar examples of belligerents who are generally deemed not to be entitled to the status of prisoners of war, but to be offenders against the law of war subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals.”

What in the world could Barack Hussein Obama’s rationale be, for on the one hand attempting to deny Constitutional Rights to American Citizens, while on the other providing them to enemy combatants?

[subscribe2]

DHS built domestic surveillance tech into Predator drones

March 7, 2013 in "Bill of Rights", Abuse of Power, Constitutional, Homeland Security, Liberty in Jeopardy, Political Deception, President Obama, Senate

Senator Rand Paul has good reason to be concerned about Barack Hussein Obama and his CIA Nominee John Brennan’s potential use of drones to kill American Citizens on American Soil.


predator1_610x346You see, the DHS developed standards and built in domestic surveillance technology into the Predator drones! Since John Brennan  w
ould not unequivocally state, during his Senate nomination hearings,  that killing American citizens on Americans soil who are not imminent threats, with drones is unconstitutional. WE cannot allow the Senate consent to his nomination as CIA chief .  You need to call your Senators and tell them to Vote NO!

 

cnet by Declan McCullagh  

DHS built domestic surveillance tech into Predator drones

Homeland Security’s specifications say drones must be able to detect whether a civilian is armed. Also specified: “signals interception” and “direction finding” for electronic surveillance
Homeland Security required that this Predator drone, built by General Atomics, be capable of detecting whether a standing human at night is “armed or not.”

(Credit: U.S. Department of Homeland Security)

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has customized its Predator drones, originally built for overseas military operations, to carry out at-home surveillance tasks that have civil libertarians worried: identifying civilians carrying guns and tracking their cell phones, government documents show.

The documents provide more details about the surveillance capabilities of the department’s unmanned Predator B drones, which are primarily used to patrol the United States’ northern and southern borders but have been pressed into service on behalf of a growing number of law enforcement agencies including the FBI, the Secret Service, the Texas Rangers, and local police.

Homeland Security’s specifications for its drones, built by San Diego-based General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, say they “shall be capable of identifying a standing human being at night as likely armed or not,” meaning carrying a shotgun or rifle. They also specify “signals interception” technology that can capture communications in the frequency ranges used by mobile phones, and “direction finding” technology that can identify the locations of mobile devices or two-way radios.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center obtained a partially redacted copy of Homeland Security’s requirements for its drone fleet through the Freedom of Information Act and published it this week. CNET unearthed an unredacted copy of the requirements that provides additional information about the aircraft’s surveillance capabilities.

Homeland Security’s Predator B drone can stay aloft conducting surveillance for 20 hours.

Drone 2

Concern about domestic use of drones is growing, with federal legislation introduced last month that would establish legal safeguards, in addition to parallel efforts underway from state and local lawmakers. The Federal Aviation Administration recently said that it will “address privacy-related data collection” by drones.

The prospect of identifying armed Americans concerns Second Amendment advocates, who say that technology billed as securing the United States’ land and maritime borders should not be used domestically. Michael Kostelnik, the Homeland Security official who created the program, told Congress that the drone fleet would be available to “respond to emergency missions across the country,” and a Predator drone was dispatched to the tiny

(Credit: U.S. Department of Homeland Security)

town of Lakota, N.D., to aid local police in a dispute that began with reimbursement for feeding six cows. The defendant, arrested with the help of Predator surveillance, lost a preliminary bid to dismiss the charges.

“I am very concerned that this technology will be used against law-abiding American firearms owners,” says Alan Gottlieb, founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation. “This could violate Fourth Amendment rights as well as Second Amendment rights.”

Homeland Security’s Customs and Border Protection agency declined to answer questions about whether direction-finding technology is currently in use on its drone fleet. A representative provided CNET with a statement about the agency’s unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) that said signals interception capability is not currently used:

 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection is not deploying signals interception capabilities on its UAS fleet. Any potential deployment of such technology in the future would be implemented in full consideration of civil rights, civil liberties, and privacy interests and in a manner consistent with the law and long-standing law enforcement practices.

 

CBP’s UAS program is a vital border security asset. Equipped with state-of-the-art sensors and day-and-night cameras, the UAS provides real-time images to frontline agents to more effectively and efficiently secure the nation’s borders. As a force multiplier, the UAS operates for extended periods of time and allows CBP to safely conduct missions over tough-to-reach terrain. The UAS also provides agents on the ground with added situational awareness to more safely resolve dangerous situations.

 

During his appearance before the House Homeland Security committee, Kostelnik, a retired Air Force major general who recently left the agency, testified that the drones’ direction-finding ability is part of a set of “DOD capabilities that are being tested or adopted by CBP to enhance UAS performance for homeland security.” CBP currently has 10 Predator drones and is considering buying up to 14 more.

If the Predator drones were used only to identify smugglers or illegal immigrants crossing the Mexican and Canadian borders, or for disaster relief, they might not be especially controversial. But their use domestically by other government agencies has become routine enough — and expensive enough — that Homeland Security’s inspector general said (PDF) last year that CBP needs to sign agreements “for reimbursement of expenses incurred fulfilling mission requests.”

“The documents clearly evidence that the Department of Homeland Security is developing drones with signals interception technology and the capability to identify people on the ground,” says Ginger McCall, director of the Open Government Project at the Electronic Privacy Information Center. “This allows for invasive surveillance, including potential communications surveillance, that could run afoul of federal privacy laws.”

A Homeland Security official, who did not want to be identified by name, said the drones are able to identify whether movement on the ground comes from a human or an animal, but that they do not perform facial recognition. The official also said that because the unarmed drones have a long anticipated life span, the department tries to plan ahead for future uses to support its border security mission, and that aerial surveillance would comply with the Electronic Communications Privacy Act and other applicable federal laws.

The documents show that CBP specified that the “tracking accuracy should be sufficient to allow target designation,” and the agency notes on its Web site that its Predator B series is capable of “targeting and weapons delivery” (the military version carries multiple 100-pound Hellfire missiles). CBP says, however, that its Predator aircraft are unarmed.

Gene Hoffman, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur who’s the chairman of the Calguns Foundation, said CBP “needs to be very careful with attempts to identify armed individuals in the border area” when aerial surveillance touches on a constitutional right.

“In the border area of California and Arizona, it may be actively dangerous for the law-abiding to not carry firearms precisely due to the illegal flow of drugs and immigrants across the border in those areas,” Hoffman says.

CBP’s specifications say that signals interception and direction-finding technology must work from 30MHz to 3GHz in the radio spectrum. That sweeps in the GSM and CDMA frequencies used by mobile phones, which are in the 300MHz to 2.7GHz range, as well as many two-way radios.

The specifications say: “The system shall provide automatic and manual DF of multiple signals simultaneously. Automatic DF should be able to separate out individual communication links.” Automated direction-finding for cell phones has become an off-the-shelf technology: one company sells a unit that its literature says is “capable of taking the bearing of every mobile phone active in a channel.”

Although CBP’s unmanned Predator aircraft are commonly called drones, they’re remotely piloted by FAA-licensed operators on the ground. They can fly for up to 20 hours and carry a payload of about 500 lbs.

 
Declan McCullagh is the chief political correspondent for CNET. Declan previously was a reporter for Time and the Washington bureau chief for Wired and wrote the Taking Liberties section and Other People’s Money column for CBS News’ Web site.
see more at:   http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57572207-38/dhs-built-domestic-surveillance-tech-into-predator-drones/
[subscribe2]

Don’t Allow Colorado’s Blatantly Unconstitutional Gun Laws to Become a Harbinger for MA

March 5, 2013 in "Bill of Rights", 2nd Amendment, Abuse of Power, Constitutional, Deval Patrick, Founding Principles, Freedom, Generational Theft, Liberty, Liberty in Jeopardy, MA, Obamanation, Political Deception, Political Incompetence, President Obama, United States Constitution, US Sovereignty

Judge NapolitanoOUR Declaration of Independence states that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

Unalienable: incapable of being alienated, that is, sold and transferred.” Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1523:

Consequently, one  can not surrender, sell or transfer unalienable rights. They are a gift from the creator to the individual and can not under any circumstances be surrendered or taken.  All individual’s have unalienable rights.

Our Second Amendment states: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

There are today, people in our country,  who are attempting to infringe upon our right to keep and bear arms and would thereby place our personal safety, our family’s safety  and our country’s safety in jeopardy of being overrun by criminality and anarchists.  However, our forefathers understood that our right to bear arms is  so basic and intrinsic a right that not even Government can not eradicate it.  Consequently, we have  an obligation to future generations to guard this right jealously from Federal encroachment by Barack Hussein Obama and State encroachment by Deval Patrick and his minions in our Legislature.

The following are but a few of the multitude of writings by our forefathers regarding this subject:

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms… disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. …Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.–Thomas Jefferson, quoting with approval a noted criminologist of his day.

“Americans have the right and advantage of being armed – unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.” (James Madison, The Federalist Papers #46 at 243-244)

“…to disarm the people – that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” (George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380) 

Today Megan Kelly talked to Judge Andrew Napolitano about Colorado’s blatantly unconstitutional gun law proposals:

Megan Kelly:  Colorado is becoming a hot spot in the fight over second Amendment Rights today after a legislative committee approves a controversial bill that would make weapons manufacturers and sellers liable for crimes committed with their guns.

This legislation would become one of the most dramatic gun laws in the country and is polarizing the state. The lawmakers in Colorado believe that they have the votes. And what they are trying to do is impose criminal liability or civil liability?

Judge Andrew Napolitano:  Civil liability for the manufacturer or the re-seller if the gun is used to commit a crime .

Megan Kelly:  So  if I have I’m in a gun shop business  and  I got a gun shop and I sell someone a gun and they use it and kill somebody, I could  potentially get sued as the gun shop owner?

Judge Andrew Napolitano:  Yes, as is could the manufacturer from whom you bought the gun.  And if the person to whom you sold it sells it to another person, then the person to whom you sold it could be liable for the criminal behavior of the ultimate user. That’s why you heard in one of the clips you just ran, police saying, police testifying at this hearing; this is un- enforceable. You can’t possibly impose a burden on on-d the third person down the line.

Megan Kelly:  How far down the line can you go?

Judge Andrew Napolitano:  Think about it. Can we , we hold General Motors liable because an automobile kills someone even if its used recklessly, even if it’s used criminally? Of course not! We just don’t do that in America. This transference of liability is basically wrong and unfair.

[subscribe2]

 

 

 

 

 

Obama’s Support for UN Gun Treaty Could Fundamentally Change American Gun Laws and Threaten our Second Amendment Rights

March 3, 2013 in 2nd Amendment, Abuse of Power, America's Heritage, Constitutional, Freedom, Liberty in Jeopardy, Obamanation, President Obama, President Ronald Reagan, Treason, Treaties, United Nations

2nd Amendment The nine  most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the  government and I’m here to help.’

Ronald Reagan Quote on American Government’s Bureaucracy
40th president of US 

 

The nine most reassuring words in the English language are,  I’m from the UN and I’m here to help.

Barack Hussein Obama’s Conviction on Global Government’s Paternity
44th president of US

Obama continues his propaganda Blitzkrieg against America, American values and our Constitution’s Bill of Rights. Whether it’s his lies about  Sequestration, about Fast and Furious, about Benghazi or about UN Treaties. Whether it’s his pitting of men against women, young against old,  poor against rich, or  one race against another,  his narcissist arrogance isn’t phased in the least.

“I mean the fact is the UN doesn’t protect people it doesn’t save the innocent . I mean you can stack to the ceiling the bodies of the innocent [a] thousand times over that the UN has failed to protect.  The dead people don’t get to vote on this UN treaty and Americans don’t want to be added to that pile of dead people that have been left defenseless by the UN policies.”

Wayne LaPierre                                                                                                                                                           Executive Vice-President and chief Executive Officer                                                                                                     National Rifle Association

Leaving nothing to chance, Obama is pursuing a multi-pronged Blitzkrieg against our 2nd Amendment. “While many states are taking steps to expand gun rights, the Federal Government is moving the other way.  President Obama is even using the nation’s premier public health agency to further the agenda.”


Still think you can trust the government, police and military....better think again!

DEMOCIDE: Socialism, Tyranny, Guns And Freedom

depicts what could happen to a disarmed America!
This will scare the hell out of you!!

Warning Viewer Discretion advised for the following graphic video!

[subscribe2]

WHY IS Our GOVERNMENT STOCKPILING GUNS, AMMO?

February 4, 2013 in Abuse of Power, Constitutional, dictator, DICTATORSHIP, Freedom, Government, National Security, Obama's America 2016, President Obama

Hollow Point AmmoLou Dobbs Video update added today February 9, 2013

On May 16 2012, we posted  a  story  Michael Savage: Why DHS needs 450 Million rounds of ammunition? . In this post we explained that the millions of  rounds of hollow point ammunition being purchased cannot be used by our military outside of the United States, because by International Law, it is prohibited. If used by a country, it subjects them to “War Crimes”.  It appears that Joseph Farah editor of  World Net Daily, has now also reached a  conclusion similar to Michael Savage.. Folks its time to be alarmed. Recently we reported that as part of a new loyalty Litmus test, Barack Hussein Obama

 has Asked his  Military Leaders If They Will “Fire On US Citizens”

Lou Dobb’s Video update February 9, 2013

 

BETWEEN THE LINES

WHY IS GOVERNMENT STOCKPILING GUNS, AMMO?

Exclusive: Joseph Farah examines Obama’s plan for ‘civilian national security force’

by JOSEPH FARAH

 

Joseph Farah is founder, editor and CEO of WND and a nationally syndicated columnist with Creators Syndicate. He is the author or co-author of 13 books, including his latest, “The Tea Party Manifesto,” and his classic, “Taking America Back,” now in its third edition and 14th printing. Farah is the former editor of the legendary Sacramento

Union and other major-market dailies.

 

 

Is the U.S. government getting ready for a war we don’t know about?

And, if that’s why Washington is stockpiling massive amounts of ammunition (hollow points, by the way), why is Homeland Security doing the buying instead of the Defense Department?

I have some theories.

Many of you will remember a story I broke a long time ago – about presidential candidate Barack Obama’s little-noticed announcement that, if elected in 2008, he wanted to create a “civilian national security force” as big, as strong and as well-funded as the Defense Department.

Here’s what he actually said at a campaign stop in Colorado July 2, 2008: “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

Want to make sure you and your family are fully protected? Check out our self-defense section in WND’s Superstore.

Could what we see happening now in the Department of Homeland Security be the beginning of Obama’s dream and our constitutional nightmare?

We’ve learned more about Obama’s vision since then. Maybe it’s time for a review:

  • He made the campaign promise to build this $439 billion domestic army, but all references to the initiative were inexplicably deleted from the copy of his speech posted on his website while others mysteriously disappeared from transcripts of the speech distributed by the campaign. That was strange – and ominous.
  • At the time, I had never heard anyone use the phrase “civilian national security force” before. But I did a little homework and found out where it originated. It was first proposed by then Bush administration Defense Secretary Robert Gates. On that basis alone, I accurately predicted that, if elected, Obama would name Gates as his own defense secretary. Needless to say, when that appointment came to pass, no media outlet bothered to interview me about my foresight.
  • Still during the campaign of 2008, I suggested that what Obama had in mind might be something very sinister indeed – perhaps “some kind of domestic Big Brother program.”

We never heard another mention of Obama’s “civilian national security force” again. Not in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 or 2012.

But that brings us up to 2013 and the highly unusual stockpiling of firearms and ammo by Homeland Security – firearms and ammo that Obama would like to deny to ordinary citizens who are not members of his domestic army.

Well, I hate to say it, but I may have predicted this, too.

In a Halloween column last fall, I stated that, if re-elected, Obama would “declare a full-scale war on his domestic opposition.”

I wasn’t joking. I was deadly serious – so serious, in fact, that I did something I pledged I would never do: Vote for Mitt Romney. It was a matter of self-defense and self-preservation. I said then that a second term of Obama might mean we would never see another free and fair election in America. (I’m not even sure we saw one in 2012.) I suggested due process would go the way of the horse and buggy. I said I expected Obama would move to shut down or destroy all independent media. I even speculated that his biggest critics would eventually be rounded up in the name of national security.

Think about it.

Why does the civilian Department of Homeland Security need billions of rounds of ammunition?

This is the agency that is responsible for policing the border. But it doesn’t.

This is the agency that is responsible for catching terrorists. But it doesn’t.

So why does Homeland Security need so many weapons and enough hollow-point rounds to plug every American six times?

Maybe this is the “civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the Defense Department.

These words – “civilian national security force” – have haunted me ever since I first read them.

Obama has never explained what he meant.

He’s never been called to account for that remark.

Doesn’t this sound like police-state talk to you?

The U.S. Army alone has nearly 500,000 troops. That doesn’t count reserves or National Guard. In 2007, the U.S. defense budget was $439 billion. No one knows what the budget is today because Congress stopped passing budgets when Obama took office.

Is Obama serious about creating some kind of domestic security force bigger and more expensive than that? Is this part of his second-term agenda?

He has also set up, as I have reported, a new homeland security bureaucracy to operate under his own direction.

I think it’s worth recalling here that just over a year ago both houses of Congress unwisely passed the defense reauthorization bill that killed the concept of habeas corpus – legislation that authorized the president to use the U.S. military to arrest and indefinitely detain American citizens without charge or trial.

That legislation would empower a lame-duck Obama to use all of the power of the federal government – constitutional and unconstitutional – to target his political enemies.

If any Republican, conservative, independent journalist, pro-life activist, returning veteran, gun-rights activist, constitutionalist, Bible believer or critic of Obama thinks they will be safe in a second term under this would-be despot, they had better think again – real fast.

The “civilian national security force” is not here to protect any of them. It’s here to destroy the opposition. It’s here to destroy liberty. It’s here to destroy the Constitution.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/why-is-government-stockpiling-guns-ammo/#xWQhfhuK0IzQxE2W.99

2nd Amendment Opponent Mayor Bloomberg’s Armed Security Accosts Journalist

January 29, 2013 in "Bill of Rights", 2nd Amendment, Abuse of Power, Anarchy, Constitutional, Founding Principles, Gun Control, Political Class, Political Deception

Our country has now evolved such that there are one set of rules for our new elite “Ruling Political Class” and another for us, the  new common “Serfs Class”.

Our Political Class has become a do as I say not as I do elite.  Rabid anti-gun Anti-2nd Amendment Mayor Michael Bloomberg surrounded by 5 hefty security guards , leaving a conference, is asked a gun control question by a reporter,  Jason Matter, who was also an attendee. Jason is immediately accosted by Bloomberg’s  guards  and then the guards  continue to harass and intimidate him even after he walks away down the street.

 

 

HUMAN EVENTS BLOG

GOOD NEWS: MAYOR BLOOMBERG’S JOURNALIST REPELLENT SYSTEM IS WORKING PERFECTLY

By:  John Haywood
1/28/2013 12:55 PM

My old friend Jason Mattera, now with the Andrea Tantaros show, participated in a stress test of New York mayor Michael Bloomberg’s journalist repellent systems, and I’m pleased to report that the system is functioning beautifully.  The Mayor is protected from a number of things he would prefer his citizens remain vulnerable to, including impertinent questions.  He doesn’t seem any more eager to declare his own personal “gun-free zone” than most other gun control zealots, but he’s strongly in favor of journalism-free zones:

You can tell Jason is mellowing out, because in his wild youth he would have done the interview with a Big Gulp in his hand.  If he gets a chance to conduct a follow-up interview, I’m hoping he’ll ask if Bloomberg has ever participated in Barack Obama’s “frequent skeet shoots,” which I believe look something like this:

It’s remarkable how reliably the “why won’t you disarm your bodyguards?” question discombobulates the anti-Second Amendment crowd.  They really don’t have a comfortable focus-group-friendly answer to it.  The coldly logical responses – “because I’m more important than you, so I need protection” – simply do not sit well with the public.  That includes people who might otherwise be content to ride in the gun-control bandwagon, until they hit this particular intellectual speed bump.

The question is not, “Why should you have a professional security detail while I must defend myself?”  If that were the issue at hand, it wouldn’t be tough to answer the question.  Instead, the ruling class finds it difficult to explain why they should enjoy armed protection while the rest of us are forbidden to defend ourselves at all, or must do so within an environment of complex restrictions that put us at a pronounced disadvantage against attackers.  This position might be easier to defend if the Little People faced no significant risk of criminal attack, but that’s obviously not the case.  It’s especially obvious if you know more about the recent history of law-abiding citizens defending themselves with firearms than the national media wants you to know.

Serious students of American liberty read the Second Amendment and see the right of individual citizens to defend themselves, and their families, against tyranny and barbarism.  It is increasingly offensive to hear people with armed security details lecture us on how it’s really more like a provisional license to shoot ducks and clay pigeons.

Update: You’ll have to make do with the artistic representation of Obama’s frequent skeet shooting sessions provided by Messrs. Brooks and Korman, because the White House refuses to provide photos of our gun-slinging President filling the sky with hot lead.

 

Read the entire post and comments here: http://www.humanevents.com/2013/01/28/good-news-mayor-bloombergs-journalist-repellent-system-is-working-perfectly/

[subscribe2]

” think the president’s program is false, misleading and to some extent Unconstitutional.”- Rudy Giuliani

January 20, 2013 in "Bill of Rights", 2nd Amendment, Abuse of Power, Constitutional, Freedom, Gun Control, Liberty in Jeopardy, Obamanation, President Obama, The Hope and The Change, Who Is Barack Hussein Obama?

clipFormer New York Mayor, Rudy Giuliani says, “Gun Control affects the ‘good guys”. The bad guys aren’t affected by gun control. You tell them they can’t have an assault weapon. They say go to hell. We’re going to have our Assault weapons.  You say the magazine should only be 7, they keep their 15.”