WASHINGTON – When John Boehner reconvenes the House of Representatives next month, he’s going to have some mail.

So will every other Republican member.

Boehner won’t like his.

How the other Republican members respond to the tens of thousands of letters they get will determine whether Boehner will remain as speaker.

The Dump Boehner Campaign, a project designed by Joseph Farah, founder of WND.com, is off to a blazing start. Within minutes of its announcement Monday evening, thousands of letters calling on Republican House members to find another leader were already being generated.

In less than 24 hours, orders for nearly 200,000 letters to Republican members of the House were placed, rivaling the launch of the historic “pink slips” campaign of 2010.

“The response has been unprecedented, amazing and gratifying,” said Farah. “I’ve never seen anything quite like this since our historic ‘Pink Slip Campaign’ that ultimately generated more than 9 and a half million letters in 2010. Americans are angry about Boehner’s betrayal of the voters who gave him a bigger majority in the House and Republicans control of the Senate. This could prove to be Boehner’s undoing.”

That depends, of course, on how 246 House Republicans react to the outpouring of letters generated by the campaign – letters individually addressed to each member and personalized with the sender’s name and delivered to congressional offices by FedEx.

“We saw the same thing in 2010,” recalled Farah. “People were angry then. They may be angrier now. It is as if elections have no consequences when Republicans vote.”

A sampling of just how upset people are has been posted online, with abundant promises of “I’m in,” and “Do it.”

The plan had been announced only a day before, with Farah writing that the most effective method of reaching out to Congress is individual letters to members.

His plan facilitates that.

“And when you send one, you send it to every Republican member of the House – including John Boehner!” he wrote.

His program allows people to send all those letters, with their own names and addresses, all for the one price of $29.95 via FedEx.

He added, “From previous campaigns we know this approach prompts members to talk about the boxes of letters that are coming into their offices each day. And that’s exactly what we want to do with the DUMP BOEHNER CAMPAIGN – a grass-roots lobbying effort that can channel your outrage into effective and meaningful action.”

He said what can be guaranteed is that members “will see, hear and feel your participation in it.”


You can order your letters sent today, and they will be ready for delivery when the new Congress reconvenes in January. It would be great to see thousands or, better yet, tens of thousands flooding in that first week. That will make an impression that cannot be ignored by Republican members of the House,” he explained.

“I’m excited. Now it’s up to you. I’ve already ordered my letters. I’ve even secured the domain names DumpBoehnerCampaign.com and DumpBoehnerNow.com for social media dissemination. Tell your friends,” he wrote.

The letter explains to members of the U.S. House that two issues have “prompted Americans to turn in droves to the Republican Party in November 2014 – Barack Obama’s blatantly unconstitutional executive action to provide amnesty to millions of illegal aliens, and the deliberately deceptive restructuring of America’s health-care system through Obamacare, which threatens to unravel the greatest health delivery system in the world.”

Pointing out that Republicans before the election “solemnly vowed to STOP this lame-duck president,” the letter continues, “Now you have the power, right and duty to stop him.”

“But it won’t happen with John Boehner leading you. You know this to be true. The trillion-dollar budget deal is just the latest proof that Boehner is not capable of leading the House to victory during this critical period.”

It calls on members to replace him.

The campaign notes that the political state in America is worse than any time since the Civil War, with a broken economy, piled up national debt, abuse of executive power, the judiciary out of control and the moral framework under attack.

But, the campaign explains, “the American people have demonstrated twice in four years that they realize something has gone awry – overwhelmingly voting for the Republican Party in two midterm elections because it clearly campaigned on returning to first principles.”

Only to be betrayed by Republican leaders.

The campaign is, it explains, the way to get hard-copy letters to every Republican in the House of Representatives.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/12/unprecedented-americans-race-to-dump-boehner/#XB6x2HmAA3pmt3oB.99


Dear Rep. _____,

Two huge issues, more than any others, prompted Americans to turn in droves to the Republican Party in November 2014 – Barack Obama’s blatantly unconstitutional executive action to provide amnesty to millions of illegal aliens, and the deliberately deceptive restructuring of America’s health-care system through Obamacare, which threatens to completely unravel the greatest health delivery system in the world.

Before the election, you and virtually every Republican running for Congress solemnly vowed to STOP this lame-duck president who is so determined to do whatever he wants, the Constitution be damned – while essentially daring Congress to “Try and stop me.”

NOW YOU HAVE THE POWER, RIGHT AND DUTY TO STOP HIM. But it won’t happen with John Boehner leading you. You know this to be true. The trillion-dollar budget deal is just the latest proof that Boehner is not capable of leading the House to victory during this critical period. He must be replaced.

Please act as if your country depends on what you do right now – because it truly does.

Thank you – the nation is watching.

From _______________________

Categories: RTPP monthly meeting | Leave a comment

Is NC Thinking About Raising the Gas Tax?

Falling gas prices have been like an early, unexpected Christmas present for millions of motorists and working families.

With average pump prices about 60 cents lower than they were a year ago and a dollar lower than they were this summer, many families might find they’re able to put a few more presents under the tree this year.

But don’t get too excited.

Politicians in some states are already devising plans to play Scrooge and snatch the savings before they can even be fully realized.

Seeing the falling fuel prices as an opportunity, legislators and governors in several states are eyeing their state gas taxes as ripe for an increase.

As the theory goes, it’s better to raise the gas tax when prices at the pump are low, even if it’s just a temporary blip, so consumers won’t notice what has been done to them.

Republican governors in Michigan, Georgia, New Jersey, Utah and South Carolina are all pondering hikes in their states’ gas tax, while Democrat governors in Delaware, Vermont and Kentucky are also considering increases.

The federal gas tax hasn’t gone up in 21 years, many of them complain, so they will have to raise the money themselves through state taxes if they are going to fix “crumbling roads and infrastructure.”

American drivers on average use 60 gallons a month in gas; the average household consumes 97 gallons, Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst at the Oil Price Information Service, told the Detroit Free Press.

He said falling gas prices could make it a “no-brainer” for states to increase taxes at the pump to fix aging infrastructure despite politicians considering gas prices to be a third rail for consumers.

Of all the plans on the board, Michigan’s, proposed by Republican Gov. Rick Snyder, may be the most aggressive. It would more than double the state’s 19-cent gas tax over the next four years to 44 cents on the gallon.

But Joel Griffith, research associate at the Heritage Foundation, says not so fast, Michigan. He writes in a recent article in the Daily Signal that while the state’s roads are in poor condition and in need of improvement, Michigan residents would be better served if Snyder would look at the spending side of the ledger instead of the revenue side.

Griffith says Michigan, like a lot of states, has not spent its existing highway dollars wisely, opting to pump money into unnecessary administrative costs and under-used public transportation systems.

One problem in states like Michigan and New Jersey is that many road projects require union wage rates that inflate costs. Get rid of those inflated salaries and more roads can be built with fewer dollars, according to Griffith, who writes:

“Even worse is the money that Michigan has wasted and continues to waste on urban transit systems, such as the notorious People Mover in Detroit, with few riders and spectacular operating costs and subsidies. If existing gas tax dollars went to roads, not white elephants, the crisis would be largely alleviated without higher costs. Also, Michigan would have a better grasp on what funding level is actually needed to maintain and repair its roads and bridges.

“In the end, Michigan spends more than $200,000 per mile each year for each mile of state-controlled highway—more than thirty other states without much to show for it. It’s time to rein in the spending first—not hike taxes on the working man without a second thought.”

Tom DeWeese, president of the American Policy Center and author of hundreds of articles on the pitfalls of the sustainable development agenda, agrees that Republican governors advocating for higher gas taxes are trying to con taxpayers into coughing up more at the pump.

“They’ve overspent for years, their budgets are out of whack and now they’re rushing in to take advantage of something,” DeWeese told WND.

For the states run by Democrats, it’s more about promoting a green agenda and cutting back on carbon emissions in automobiles and coal-fired power plants, which are seen as evil.

“Promoting all of these wind and solar power projects raises the cost,” DeWeese said. “They want to do sustainable development, cutting everything back on fossil fuels and this is how they intend to do it. But this is their worst nightmare right now, that they can’t control the free market.”

DeWeese said the shale-oil boom in the Dakotas and other parts of the country has had a positive effect on the oil market and Saudi Arabia is trying to flex what muscle it has left by upping its oil production, resulting in oversupply on the world market.

“The free market has finally found a way around all the rules and regulations and it’s starting to bring prices down, and they’re getting upset,” he said.

The electric cars are not selling and the investments in green energy are tanking.

And the average working American, after suffering through years of stagnating income, is finally starting to see a little disposable income in his pocket.

“It usually has been costing me $50 to fill up and put 14 gallons in my car,” DeWeese said.

Now that’s down to about $35.

“And very shortly it will cost me $25,” he said.

If you fill up once a week, that’s like getting a $25-a-week raise in one’s pay check.

For a wealthy person, that’s no big deal. But for a working family living on say $800 or $1,200 a week, that’s huge.

“Suddenly I can take my family out to eat or maybe afford a couple of those expensive movie tickets,” DeWeese said.

But the “money grubbing wimps” in the state Houses and the governors’ mansions can’t stand this, he said.

“It’s an outrage. This is about control,” DeWeese said. “What people have to understand is that sustainable development and all the policies around it – whether it be mass-transit or urban high-rises and bike paths – are not about the environment but about reorganizing human civilization under a model of top-down control with a centrally planned economy.

“Think about it. If people are scattered all over the country and driving cars, it’s so much more difficult to keep tabs on you and track your movements.”

But most people don’t want to live in small apartments in the city, he said. They will only do so if they are forced to because they can no longer afford a suburban or rural lifestyle.

“People all over the world want to move to the suburbs and out of cities,” DeWeese said. “They use the term ‘urban sprawl’ as if it’s some sort of evil thing. But that evil urban sprawl is somebody’s home. They have a place for their kids to play, they can breathe, they have some space and they have the freedom of movement that only the car can offer them.”

And that’s why higher gas taxes are only popular with wealthy urban types and those in the cubicles of progressive think tanks and in academia, he said.

A Winthrop University poll conducted in South Carolina, one of the states where a gas tax hike is being considered, shows that 52 percent of the state’s people oppose any hike in the state’s now friendly rate of 16.8 cent per gallon.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/12/pump-you-up-states-sneak-gas-tax-hikes-as-prices-fall/#oHe0026C2Gk1xzWz.99

Categories: RTPP monthly meeting | Leave a comment

Congressman: Speaker Boehner Lied to Me

Joel Gehrke – Stutzman’s Star Role in the Cromnibus. http://tiny.iavian.net/3094

Joel Gehrke – Stutzman’s Star Role in the Cromnibus

For a member of Congress to accuse his party leaders of lying to him, and for their aides to return the favor, is about as rare as the drama that surrounded last week’s procedural vote — a vote that led to the passage of the $1.1 trillion spending bill.

Advertisement That’s the situation Representative Marlin Stutzman (R., Ind.) found himself in last week after he lent his support to the spending package at a moment when it seemed unlikely to ever receive a final vote. Stutzman initially voted no on what is known as “the rule” — the procedural step that allows House leadership to bring the bill to the floor for debate. When he and one other member switched their no votes to yes, they set the stage for the ultimate success of the spending package.

The episode only heightens the distrust between leadership and conservative grassroots activists, who usually expect establishment Republicans to betray them. That suspicion has empowered junior lawmakers to override the will of more-senior Republicans.

Once in the limelight, Stutzman reacted by sending mixed messages and then falling as silent as the Republican leaders. He elevated the controversy Thursday night, when he claimed that his support for the rule was obtained under false pretenses.

“Earlier today, I supported the rule because I was informed by leadership that the cromnibus was dead and a short-term CR would take its place,” Stutzman said in a Thursday-evening statement after National Review Online reported on the apparent deal. “I was very surprised and even more disappointed to see the cromnibus back on the floor.”

Republican leadership passed the bill Thursday evening after President Obama and House Democratic whip Steny Hoyer (D., Md.) convinced dozens of Democrats who had tried to kill the cromnibus on the procedural vote to nonetheless support the final package.

GOP leaders denied reneging on a promise to Stutzman: “Speaker Boehner did not talk with Representative Stutzman yesterday, and we don’t know what he is talking about,” one senior GOP leadership aide tells NRO. A senior aide to House leader Kevin McCarthy (R., Calif.) was even more definitive: “At no time was that communicated by the leadership team or the whip team.”

It makes sense that it’s Stutzman at the center of such a controversy. Throughout his four years in Congress, the tea-party congressman has been the backbencher with some of the closest ties to GOP leadership. But he’s also prone to bucking the party line when it violates his conservative principles.

Stutzman worked with Senator Ted Cruz (R., Texas) last October in an attempt to defund Obamacare by attaching the proposal to a must-pass spending bill that funded the rest of government, despite leadership’s initial hesitance to pick a fight over defunding Obamacare.

Categories: RTPP monthly meeting | Leave a comment

Kennesaw Georgia City Council Caves in to Muslim Threats and Reverses Previous Decision: Mosque Approved by 5-0 Vote

Originally posted on sharia unveiled:

Kennesaw Georgia Mosque Ban 3

Freedom set aside in place of Islamic appeasement

by, Leo Hohmann | WND  | h/t Jessica Watchman

KENNESAW, Ga. – The Kennesaw City Council approved a land-use permit for a new mosque less than two weeks after it had denied the permit, citing traffic and parking concerns.

The council voted 4-1 to deny the permit Dec. 3, but after legal threats from the Suffa Dawat Center, the council reversed its earlier decision with a 5-0 vote Monday. The vote was taken without discussion as six police officers lined the walls of the council chambers and another contingent of officers patrolled outside where about 25 protesters from Overpasses for America and the Georgia Security Force militia held American flags and signs saying “No Mosque!” and “Ban Islam!”

Kennesaw Mayor Mark Mathews told WSB-TV in Atlanta that the council changed its vote due to “legal advice from our own city attorney, not…

View original 1,564 more words

Categories: RTPP monthly meeting | Leave a comment


President limited ‘to recommending laws he thinks wise and vetoing laws he thinks bad’

A federal judge in Pennsylvania has released an opinion in a case of a deported illegal alien who returned to the U.S. that appears to torpedo the amnesty plan President Obama announced Nov. 20 and implemented through memos to government officials, ruling it unconstitutional.

“President Obama’s unilateral legislative action violates the separation of powers provided for in the United States Constitution as well as the Take Care Clause, and therefore, is unconstitutional,” said U.S. District Judge Arthur J. Schwab.

The judge noted Obama “contended that although legislation is the most appropriate course of action to solve the immigration debate, his executive action was necessary because of Congress’s failure to pass legislation, acceptable to him, in this regard.”

“This proposition is arbitrary and does not negate the requirement that the November 20, 2014, executive action be lawfully within the president’s executive authority,” the judge wrote. “It is not.”

Quoting from a previous precedent, the just said that in the “framework of our Constitution, the president’s power to see that the laws are faithfully executed refutes the idea that he is to be a lawmaker.”

“The Constitution limits his functions in the lawmaking process to the recommending of laws he thinks wise and the vetoing of laws he thinks bad,” Schwab said.

The judge said Obama’s contention that Congress had not worked in his time frame was largely irrelevant.

“Would it be permissible for a president, who was dissatisfied with a high tax rate on long term capital gains (as limiting economic growth), to instruct the IRS to only collect taxes at a rate of 15 percent rather than the legislative prescribed 20 percent rate, or defer prosecution of any taxpayer who pays at least 15 percent but not the full 20 percent, unless Congress ‘pass a bill’ lowering the rate within a specified time period? Both this IRS scenario and the executive action at issue in this case violate the separation of powers.”

The judge said Obama has stated that his orders no longer will be necessary when Congress passes a bill meeting his requirements.

However, the judge ruled, “presidential action may not serve as a stop-gap or a bargaining chip to be used against the legislative branch.”

“While ‘the power of executing the laws necessarily includes both authority and responsibility to resolve some questions left open by Congress that arise during the law’s administration,’ it does not include unilateral implementation of legislative policies,” he said.

And Obama’s own “belief” about his power also is not relevant.

“Obama’s belief that this executive action is within his executive authority is not dispositive because ‘the separation of powers does not depend on the views of individual presidents, nor on whether the encroached-upon branch approves the encroachment,’” said the judge.

Obama has claimed his move falls under “prosecutorial discretion,” but the judge batted down the argument.

“The executive action establishes threshold eligibility criteria before undocumented immigrants can apply for deferred action status. … The Office of Legal Counsel acknowledged that this class-based program and threshold criteria was problematic, but concluded that the program does not ‘in and of itself’ cross the line between executing the law and ‘rewriting it,’” the judge wrote.

But, he said, “such formulaic application of criteria, especially given the wide breadth of the program, in essence, substantively changes the statutory removal system ‘rather than simply adapting its application to individual circumstances.’”

Further, he noted, while the earlier deferred action program has a provision that it can be terminated at any point, Obama’s new order does not allow termination.


In the case before him, regarding the return to the U.S. of the illegal alien, Elionardo Juarez-Escobar, the judge said the defendant pleaded guilty to the felony of re-entry of a removed alien. But he said the facts of the case are complicated.

So he ordered that by Jan. 6, 2015, the defendant must file a motion and brief seeking to withdraw his guilty plea, continue to sentencing Jan. 22 to time served with the plan that he could pursue his rights, if any, under Obama’s order, or continue to sentencing, with instruction to the Marshal Service to deliver him to ICE.

Commentator Jonathan Adler wrote at the legal blog Volokh Conspiracy that this it “the first judicial opinion to address Obama’s decision to expand deferred action for some individuals unlawfully present in the United States.”

The opinion also notes that it reviews the law and actions as it applies to the particular case.

“This isn’t the only case challenging the lawfulness of the Obama’s immigration actions. Some two-dozen states have filed suit challenging Obama’s recent immigration policy reforms. Led by Texas, these states claim that the president as exceeded the scope of executive authority in this area,” Adler wrote. ” As I’ve noted before, I’m skeptical of these arguments on the merits (as is Ilya), and wonder whether the states will be able to satisfy the requirements of Article III standing to bring their claims. Yet as this case shows, even if the states don’t have standing, the legality of the president’s actions could nonetheless be decided in federal court.”

Adler noted that it is unusual for a district court to “reach this sort of constitutional issue in this sort of case. Indeed, Judge Schwab appears to have reached out quite aggressively to engage the lawfulness of the president’s actions. Based upon the procedural history recounted in the opinion, it appears the court requested briefing on the applicability of the new immigration policies on its own order. That is, the issue was not initially raised by the defendant in his own defense. As a result of the court’s decision, however, the defendant now has the option of withdrawing his guilty plea and potentially seeking deferral of his deportation under the new policy.”

Adler said he didn’t agree with the judge’s conclusion that congressional action is not subject to presidential supervision.

The Justice Department said the ruling was “unfounded” and the judge didn’t have the authority to make such a decision.

Read more at http://mobile.wnd.com/2014/12/federal-judge-obamas-amnesty-unconstitutional/#wDXj0pU321E5uXXi.99

Categories: RTPP monthly meeting | Leave a comment

Top Russian Banker and Putin Confidante Threatens US with ‘War’

Originally posted on :

A top Russian banker and close personal confidante to President Vladimir Putin has sent a strong message to the West.

“Of course, there is a plan B [in the case of shutting Russia off from the SWIFT bank system], but in my personal opinion it would mean war—if this type of sanction will be introduced. America and Europe did that against Iran but with Iran at that time there were no diplomatic relations, only military containment… If Russian banks’ access to SWIFT will be prohibited, the US ambassador to Moscow should leave the same day. Diplomatic relations must be finished. Banking is the most vulnerable part of the Russian economy because the system is based so strongly on the dollar and the euro.”

More at the New York Observer

View original

Categories: RTPP monthly meeting | Leave a comment

Life in Post-Truth America

Life in Post-Truth America

Next month Americans will experience the fifteenth anniversary of the time that the President of the United States shook his finger at the country and informed it, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time; never.”

Bill Clinton was lying. But the lie was more significant than the thing that he was lying about.

When the lie came crashing down, Clinton and his defenders deconstructed the English language, questioning the meaning of every word in his sentence rather than admit that the lie was a lie.

Given a choice between telling the truth or challenging the definitions of such words as “sex” and “is”, they decided to burn their dictionary.

Clinton’s antics set the stage for a current administration which can never be caught in a lie because it’s lying all the time. Obama and his people don’t just lie, they lie about the lies and then they lie about those lies. Bringing them in to testify just clogs the filters with an extra layer of lies.

Invite Gruber to testify about the time that he admitted that the administration had been lying and the only thing that will happen is more lies being told by a man who is there only because he lied.

Like the old lady who explained her cosmology to Bertrand Russell as being “turtles all the way down”, with modern progressives it’s lies all the way down.

Lena Dunham served up a rape accusation against a conservative Republican named Barry only to hide behind the ambiguity of being an unreliable narrator. The unreliable narrator likewise takes the stage at the University of Virginia where a high profile case has dissolved into contradictory stories in which it becomes difficult to tell whether it was the reporter or her subject who was doing the lying.

The unreliable narrator has crossed over from a fictional device in novels to memoirs, journalism and into politics. Journalists repeatedly dismissed ObamaCare scandals by arguing that no one could have taken Obama’s claims at face value anyway. When Obama promised Americans that they could keep their doctors, the housewife in Topeka, the freelance programmer in San Francisco and the geologist in Tulsa were supposed to be as knowing as the Washington press corps and realize that he didn’t mean it.

Like Lena Dunham, Obama was an unreliable narrator. No one was ever supposed to expect the truth from him. The significance of Bill Clinton was not in his affairs, but in his cynicism. He got away with lying by dismissing the idea that anyone should have ever expected the truth from him. Obama expanded on his work by eliminating the base truth underneath the lies.

The device of the unreliable narrator puts truth out of reach. It says that there is no such thing as truth, only various perspectives on an event.

Lena Dunham doesn’t claim to be providing facts, only different versions of a story. The facts themselves cannot be retrieved because there are no facts. The man in question is no longer named Barry. Every descriptive detail about him might be equally false. The whole thing may never have happened, but it’s important to believe that it happened without ever expecting it to be true.

This is the Doublethink state of our progressive Oceania. We are expected to believe a lie while remembering that it’s a lie and therefore never really fooled us or caused anyone any harm.

We were supposed to believe Obama’s assurances about ObamaCare while knowing them not to be true. We are supposed to believe Lena Dunham and Jackie and Gruber while disbelieving them. “The essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty,” Orwell wrote.

The conscious deceptions of the modern Doublethinkers depend on them telling a lie in the service of the greater truth. That pursuit of a greater truth built out of lies is what motivated a Rolling Stone article about fraternity rapists that even Mike Nifong would have turned his nose up at or Gruber’s arrogant truths about lying. The greater truth gives them the firmness of purpose and the complete honesty.

Lena Dunham in BuzzFeed, the apologists for ObamaCare and the activist cheerleaders for Rolling Stone, insist that the facts are a technicality that is obstructing the greater truth. And the greater truth is a worldview that is out of the reach of facts and can never be disproven.

Bill Clinton and his allies deconstructed the English language rather than admit a lie. Their successors deconstruct reality. They deny that objective truth exists or even matters. They didn’t lie because there is no such thing as truth. There are perspectives, some of which agree with Bill Clinton’s version of reality or Lena Dunham’s version of reality. And then there is Obama’s version of reality.

Obama is the nexus of Doublethink. He is the man whom reporters have denounced as the greatest enemy of press freedom in a generation and whom they compulsively defend with every possible lie. Why do journalists protect and serve the man who threatened them, bugged and even tried to lock them up? They too have long ago become unreliable narrators of their own profession.

In the absence of facts, there can be no reality. There is only ideology.

Obama doesn’t simply lie. He exists in a truth-free zone. He doesn’t stumble with any construction as clumsy as Kerry’s “I actually did vote for the $87 billion, before I voted against it.” He does not start with truthful facts. His starting point is in an imaginary territory. It ends in an imaginary territory. If the two imaginary territories are different, it scarcely matters because neither place was ever real.

When he came into office Obama insisted that we had to pivot to fighting Al Qaeda in Afghanistan even though it was no longer in Afghanistan. He went on claiming victory over an enemy that didn’t exist while dismissing ISIS as a jayvee team even when it was capturing entire cities in Iraq.

These weren’t mere lies. This was a foreign policy being conducted in an imaginary territory. It was Wag the Dog being played out in real life. But then again what is real around Obama anyway?

Bill Clinton lied. Obama tells stories. None of these stories have anything to do with reality. Lena Dunham’s biography is a peek into a disordered mind that is incapable of grasping the concept of truth. In her world there are no facts, only stories that elicit emotional reactions. Obama’s entire career rests on the same technique of telling stories for emotional effect without any regard for reality.

ObamaCare was an ugly collectivist bureaucratic dinosaur clothed in imaginary stories. The stories about it, about the economy, about the war are still being told. Added to it are new stories about racism. The stories are passionate, compelling and appealing. They are also completely unreal.

Progressives don’t only live in a post-American world; they live in a post-Truth world. A world without facts and without truth is one in which the America that was cannot exist.

America had prospered because of a firm belief in a discoverable and exploitable reality. That was the country that could build skyscrapers and fleets in a year. Post-Truth America has little interest in big buildings because it’s too busy enacting a psychodrama in which the earth is about to be destroyed. And fleets, like horses and bayonets and facts, are 19th century toys that are much less interesting than the manipulation of people through lies and deceit.

Lena Dunham’s Barry and Obama’s Barry are both imaginary creatures. They are the sophisticated products of disordered minds and a disordered civilization whose leading figures lie as instinctively and as shamelessly as any pre-rational culture that could not distinguish between lies and truth.

Categories: RTPP monthly meeting | Leave a comment

House, Senate GOP Leaders Gearing Up to Increase Foreign Workers



House, Senate GOP Leaders Gearing Up to Increase Guest-Worker Permits

Top Republican leaders in the House and Senate are gearing up to push legislation in the next Congress that would increase the number of foreign guest-workers even in industries that do not need them. They are hoping such legislation would “open the door” to a broader comprehensive immigration bill. 

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), who chairs the Senate Republican High-Tech Task Force, wants to push his Immigration Innovation Act (I-Squared) that would increase the number of high-tech visas, even though there is no evidence that there is a shortage of American high-tech workers. Tech industry lobbies, like Mark Zuckerberg’s FWD.us, have spent millions trying to secure massive increases in guest-worker visas that would give them an endless supply of cheap foreign labor even as companies like Microsoft are laying off 18,000 American workers.  

“If we can do I-Squared, I think it would open the door to real, decent, honorable immigration reform itself,” Hatch told Reuters.

As Reuters notes, “Hatch represents the tech-rich ‘Silicon Slopes’ state of Utah, and regularly talks to tech moguls.” He has met with Microsoft Chief Executive Satya Nadella and Apple CEO Tim Cook, and he recently tolda gathering at Overstock.com headquarters that “there is agreement on reforming the rules governing high-tech visas, known as H-1b visas” and it could “help pave the way for additional and more far reaching reforms.” 

Hatch, whose “bill was first introduced last year with Republican Marco Rubio and Democrats Amy Klobuchar and Chris Coons” and ended up in the Senate’s “Gang of Eight” comprehensive amnesty bill, reportedly said, “I think virtually every Republican would vote for this, and I suspect that we’ll get a considerable number of Democrats too.”

In the House, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), the Judiciary Committee Chairman, told The Hill that House Republican leaders are looking at “legislation dealing with reforming our legal immigration programs, particularly for high-skilled workers and for agricultural workers.” He said, “I think that we are going to look at moving those early in a new Congress.”

Last year, Goodlatte hosted a Silicon Valley fundraiser in which donors gave between $10,000 and $40,000. One guest, venture capitalist Rob Conway, said that before he wrote his check to Goodlatte, he “wanted some assurances that Bob Goodlatte would be prepared to discuss immigration reform and what the timetable is for immigration reform, because we’re coming down the wire here with the [midterm] elections [approaching] and we need accountability.”

As Breitbart News has thoroughly documented, “despite evidence to the contrary, the tech industry has spent millions trying to get massive increases in the number of H-1b guest-worker visas, claiming that they ‘can’t find’ Americans to do various tech jobs” even though there is a proven surplus of America high-tech workers.

Even President Barack Obama, though he still supports massive increases in guest-worker permits, has said he is “skeptical” of claims from companies—like those in the high-tech industry—that they cannot find enough Americans to fill open jobs.

“I’m generally skeptical when you hear employers say, ‘oh we just can’t find any Americans to do the job,'” Obama said this week at an immigration event in Nashville. “A lot of times what they really mean is that it’s a lot cheaper to potentially hire somebody who has just come here before they know better…”

Categories: RTPP monthly meeting | Leave a comment

GOP Complicit in Stealing Your 2nd Amendment Rights

Boehner-Obama-Biden Team Slam Anti-gun Funding Bill Through the House

The anti-gun government funding bill, which passed late Thursday night (December 11), now goes to the Senate. 


As a matter of substance, the bill spends hundreds of millions of dollars to fund Barack Obama’s illegal executive actions on guns. 


Not only that, the bill fully funds the anti-gun ObamaCare law (which threatens the privacy of millions of gun owners) and the President’s illegal executive amnesty (which begins a process of legalizing millions of new anti-gun voters).


To defeat the bill in the Democrat-controlled Senate will presumably require only 41 votes because of the ability of Senators to filibuster. While, admittedly, it is a “hail Mary” pass, it is one worth throwing. 


Contact your Senators and ask them to vote against the anti-gun government funding bill, both on cloture and on final passage (which will probably consist of a vote on concurring with the House amendment). 

The Boehner-Pelosi ANTI-GUN Government-Funding Deal:

The $1.1 trillion deal between Boehner and Pelosi to fund the government until September 30, 2015, was supposed to be anointed by every member of the Republican caucus.

Boehner Joins Hands with Pelosi to Defeat Conservatives

House Speaker John Boehner is now faced with “snowballing opposition” to his plan of passing a ten-month carte blanche funding bill for the government — an abomination called the “Cromnibus,” which is a combination of the initials for “continuing resolution” (CR) and “omnibus.”  

Categories: RTPP monthly meeting | Leave a comment

The Greatest Christmas Present to America 2014

President Obama’s Executive Order (EO 12866) has allowed personally identifiable information to be collected, dispersed for research, and given to third party contractors by “unlocking” the Family Education Rights in Privacy Act, FERPA. Your state is no exception. This is the collection of information on your “whole child.” If your child is about 28 years or younger, they have a national ID and a federal dossier…….

Categories: RTPP monthly meeting | Leave a comment

Blog at WordPress.com. The Adventure Journal Theme.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 531 other followers