|
|
This is what happens when an uninformed and uninvolved electorate votes for irresponsible representatives and senators who are more concerned about political games then they are concerned about performing their constitutional functions. Congress is responsible to hold hearings and then pass budgets for the federal government. Congress has completely ignored this responsibility over the last ten to twelve years and allowed our national debt to climb to $22.3 trillion dollars and growing. This puts the United States in the same position as many third world countries where the national debt exceeds the Gross National Product of the country.
When our debt reaches a certain level our law states that the United States cannot borrow any more money until the limit is raised by congress. We have again reached that level. It is estimated that the inherent crisis this causes will be able to be avoided until late summer or early fall. Of course, that time will pass quickly. Congress will be out of session, as is their typical pattern, for much of that time. Currently, the leadership of congress is either not aware of the impending crisis, does not care, is afraid to address a real issue, or is just more concerned with hurling insults and playing political games. Congress has not addressed this matter and it is safe to assume that the reason it has not addressed the matter is because of all the reasons listed above. What will happen Is shortly before the crisis reaches a drop-dead date, the irresponsible leadership will blame the other party for the crisis. At the last minute some sort of massive bill will be brought before the congress with all sorts of irrelevant matters hidden in the bill and a vote will take place. The overwhelming majority of the representatives and senators will not have read the bill, will not know what is in the bill, probably will not even care what is in the bill, but will pontificate on how responsible their party is and how irresponsible the other party is and then vote along party lines. The loser will again be the American public. The truth is that the American public will be the ultimate loser, but the hard truth is that the American public will get exactly what it deserves. Our country was designed and still to some degree operates on the basis that the people are sovereign. This means that the people are ultimately responsible for what occurs within the respective chambers of congress. We are responsible for the people we send to represent us. The overwhelming majority of Americans have no idea what the core beliefs of the individuals for whom they are voting are. This is why an individual like Mitt Romney can be elected in a conservative state of Utah. Romney said he was a conservative, that he believed in limited government, and that he believed in fiscal responsibility and was subsequently elected to the senate. Romney’s record proves that what he said and what he placed on bumper stickers and thirty second ads was a total fabrication of his core beliefs. Romney has supported big government and big spending throughout his political career. This is typical of many situations in both the house and the senate. Romney and many like him will vote to raise the debt ceiling and continue to spend money we do not have. They will continue to vote to give our borrowed money to other countries, to support giveaway programs for non-citizens, and to continue to support the Marxist doctrine of giving borrowed money for entitlements they will refer to as rights. We, the American public, will once again chastise these people as irresponsible and call for term limits, but when the next election comes, we will vote these same irresponsible people into the same position. All the ills of our nation, our out of control debt, our Marxist polices that have destroyed the family through our socialist welfare and safety net policies and mentality, our accepting and encouraging the murder of the unborn child, our encouragement of illegal immigration and then rewarding this unlawful act, our acceptance of and rewarding immorality, and all the other social and political ills encouraged and rewarded, are totally and only because of we the American people. We have become an uninformed, uninvolved, and foolish electorate who rationalize our irresponsible actions by chastising the very individuals we elected. Nothing will change unless and until a tireless minority understands that we must accept and understand that we have nobody to blame but ourselves. We must then understand that only we can change the situation by becoming determined to change the course of our nation and become warriors setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of our fellow citizens.
0 Comments
The European Union is showing its pro Muslim bias and Jewish hatred. Their open borders policy has brought about more and more anti-European Union sentiment in many of the nation states. The European Union election is just around the corner. Their latest action could certainly help the anti-globalist movement. We can hope can't we.
EU TO COVER PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY SALARIES AND PENSIONS FOR MONTH OF APRIL The Palestinian Authority cut salaries of public employees by 50 percent to continue to fund terrorists and their families after Israel began withholding tax revenues earlier this year. So, the European Union leadership stepped in to save the day. The European Union has pledged to give the Palestinian Authority 15 million euros to cover the salaries of public employees—salaries that leader Mahmoud Abbas cut to keep up the P.A.’s payments to imprisoned and released terrorists, wounded terrorists and the families of dead terrorists. The payments made to these families are the result of terrorist attacks against mostly Jews. The attacks and killings are mostly random. It is in the name of the continued goal of the Islamic Jihadists and Palestinians of killing every Jew in the world and eliminating the state of Israel. And now the European Union is directly aiding that movement. The Palestinian Authority is also supported by not only No, the first amendment does not say church and state must be separated. No where in the first amendment does it say that God can not be recognized and worshipped in our state institutions.
This is what the 1st amendment states about religion: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” I am not sure why this is so difficult to understand. We must remember that many of the 13 colonies had a state sponsored religion. The state sponsored churches were the Anglican Church and the Congregationalists. The different colonies declared these as official religions. Other religions were practiced but many times with restrictions or persecution. The 1st amendment clearly states that this was no longer permissible; that is the government could not declare a religion was the state sponsored religion and could not restrict the practice of a religion or persecute those who practiced a different religion. The 1st amendment was to protect the freedom of religion and not the prohibition of religion. The Suprme Court will be hearing another case under the false premise that the 1st amendment calls for separation of church and state. That is a total misrepresentation of the 1st amendment. Again, the first amendment calls to protect the freedom and practice of religion free from government limitations and persecutions. The right to place the cross is what is protected by the 1st amendment. Separation of church-state The court is again tasked with taking up a case over the separation of church and state, this time over a state commission’s care-taking of a large cross as part of a memorial for veterans. The American Legion had built 40-foot tall cross in a memorial park for World War I veterans in Maryland, and the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission eventually took over responsibility for the park, including caring for the cross. But non-Christian residents took up issues with the cross over its Christian symbolism, and argued that the government’s care of the cross is in violation of the Constitution’s separation of church and state. During oral arguments in the case in February, the justices suggested they would allow the cross to stay. 5/12/2019 MARXISTS/PROGRESSIVES (DEMOCRATS) FOLLOW THE CONSTITUTION IF YOU WANT GUN CONTROLRead Now,We keep hearing from the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) they want to protect the public by placing controls on the citizens rights to own arms. They can do it, but they must follow the constitution.
The 2nd amendment says, “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.” Infringed is to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another. The amendment says right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) you cannot infringe or limit the right of people to own arms. If you do you are violating the United States Constitution. I know you do not really care what the Constitution says, but for sake of argument let us assume you really do want to adhere to the Constitution. If you want to infringe on the people's rights, you can change the 2nd amendment. The only way you can do that is to amend the 2nd amendment. There are four ways. (1) Both houses propose an amendment with a two-thirds vote, and three-fourths of the state legislatures approve. Twenty-six of the 27 amendments were approved in this manner. (2) Both houses propose an amendment with a two-thirds vote, and three-fourths of the states approve the amendment via ratifying conventions. Only the 21st Amendment, which repealed Prohibition, was passed in this manner. (3) Two-thirds of the state legislatures call on Congress to hold a constitutional convention, and three-fourths of the state legislatures approve the amendment. (4) Two-thirds of the state legislatures call on Congress to hold a constitutional convention, and three-fourths of the states approve the amendment via ratifying conventions. There you are. This is how you amend the Constitution. Get to it if you want to infringe the right of the people to own arms. You do not work as hard and long as Obama and Kerry did and not know exactly what you are doing and why you are doing it. This headline is wrong. It was the goal of the Obama regime to enable Iran to not only continue but augment their terrorist activity and aid. Obama has, by his actions, proven he is anti-Semitic just as he proved by his actions, he is pro Marxism and anti-capitalism. Please, let us be honest in our assessments. Political Correctness is damaging to freedom and independence from the curse of collectivism (Marxism, communism, socialism, progressives, and Democrats – all virtually the same) and those who advocate for Sharia and a caliphate. Comrade Obama has proven he supports both, as apparently does the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party.
Obama Was Weak on Iran, Now CIA Chief Says Tehran Is Conducting Nuclear Blackmail Former CIA station chief Daniel Hoffman said that Iran is engaging in “nuclear blackmail” after Iranian president Hassan Rouhani said that Iran would begin collecting low enriched uranium and heavy water. “Starting today, Iran does not keep its enriched uranium and produced heavy water limited,” Rouhani announced Wednesday. Rouhani warned that Europe will face “further actions” if Iran is not compensated in the oil and banking sectors for the U.S. sanctions against Iran. “If the five countries came to the negotiating table and we reached an agreement, and if they could protect our interests in the oil and banking sectors, we will go back to square one,” Rouhani said in an address. Iran’s increased aggression and demands stem from former Comrade and Islamic Jihadist sympathizer Barack Obama’s disastrous nuclear deal. Obama’s terrible nuclear deal was meant to lift sanctions against Iran (which would give Iran billions in extra revenue) in exchange for 10 years of limited nuclear activity from Iran. There were several problems with the deal, including Iran’s ability to delay inspections of nuclear facilities and the temporary nature of the deal. Trump rejected the deal and re-imposed sanctions on Iran, but Obama’s bad policy spoiled the Iranian regime, which is now demanding more from other countries that signed the deal. Hoffman characterized Iran’s demands as “nuclear blackmail.” “It’s quite telling because our maximum sanctions have really taken effect and the Iranian economy is in freefall,” Hoffman said. “The government of Iran is looking for some redress and this is how they seek to get it.” The enabling of Iran to continue their Jihadist terrorist activities was intended to continue under the supposed Hillary Clinton regime as was the fundamental transformation of the United States from a free and independent nation to a Marxist totalitarian state. Donald Trump’s, and we can Thank God, legitimate election changed the course of both of those un-American and deranged plans. This is the reason for the un-American activities of the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) to overthrow the Constitution of the United States and our long tradition of “peaceful transfer of power.” We see the Marxist/Progressives become more and more unhinged and irrational as their plans to overthrow our Constitution and our individualist society become exposed. Yes, the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) have been caught with their hand in the cookie jar. They were however, not looking to swipe a cookie, but their intent was to take away our liberties. The real question is not what the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) were doing, but will the Republicans have the backbone to fully and completely expose the hoax the Marxist/Progressives were playing on the American people. We are in the midst of a crisis, and our liberty is at stake. 5/8/2019 THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU SUPPORT AN ISLAMIC TERRORIST COUNTRY OBAMA – BUT THEN YOU KNEW THAT WHEN YOU GAVE THEM THE CASHRead Now700 ROCKETS, 4 DEAD ISRAELIS
Over the course of the weekend, Hamas and Islamic Jihad launched nearly 700 rockets from Gaza at Israel, killing four people and injuring more than 200. With the current conflict between Israel and Hamas now into its second week, there’s much said about Hamas’s relationship with Iran. The issue that is the crucial one right now is the question of the rockets that Hamas and other groups in Gaza use against Israel. Now some of these rockets are clearly homemade, so to speak, but others apparently have been made in Iran. Hamas is an Islamic Muslim organization sort of an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, which in fact, is a leading Sunni Islamic group. But Iran clearly doesn’t make a distinction between Shiite and Sunni as long as each group is anti-American, anti-Israel. The question remains then, from where Iran got the money to fund these types of assaults. Islamic Jihadist and Muslim Brotherhood supporter Obama made that infamous special 2015 agreement with Iran that freed up $150 billion of Iranian assets that had been frozen under sanctions. The Congressional Research Service, the nonpartisan analytic arm of Congress, reviewed a special cash transfer from the Obama regime to Iran in a 2018 report. It found the Obama regime gave a total of $1.7 billion to Iran. Islamic Jihadist and Muslim Brotherhood supporter Obama had the United States send the money to Iran in euros, Swiss francs and other currencies. We know that Islamic Jihadist and Muslim Brotherhood supporter Obama is also an anti-Semite. When the Israeli people look up in the sky and see these rockets that are sent to kill them from Gaza, they should understand this was the intent of Islamic Jihadist and Muslim Brotherhood Supporter Obama when he saved the Iranian economy, allowed the Iranians to pursue nuclear weapons, and literally gave Iran cash to continue supporting terror against both Israel and the Untied States. Although Comrade Obama promised he would fundamentally transform the United States into a Marxist totalitarian state, the full transformation has not yet occurred. Hillary and Abrams are keeping their hopes alive, however. Both are losers not only in the fact that they lost their respective elections, but that they are like dictator of Turkey, Erdogan, claiming that although his candidate received the fewest votes, the people really wanted his candidate to win. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it.
The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) have made the same claim along with Hillary. President Trump received substantially more Electoral College votes than did Hillary. In the United States, since George Washington won the first presidential election, the candidate with the most Electoral College votes is the winner. This is how it is done because that is the way the United States Constitution says it should be done. The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) and Hillary believe that it does not matter that she lost the election based on the way the United State Constitution dictates, because she is Hillary and a Marxist/Progressive, she should have won regardless of the Electoral College results. The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) and Hillary believe apparently that the fundamental transformation called for by Comrade Obama has been completed and therefore they can do what is happening in Turkey. Turkey’s top election authority voided the Istanbul mayoral election won by an opposition to Erdogan, dictator of Turkey, candidate and ordered a do-over, ruling Monday in favor of a request by Erdogan’s party to throw out the vote it narrowly lost. Opposition leaders said the Supreme Electoral Board’s decision to invalidate the results from Istanbul’s election raises concerns about President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s grip on power and Turkish democracy in general. A top aide for Erdogan told The Associated Press that the voiding of the mayoral election in Turkey’s biggest city amounts to “a victory for Turkish democracy” by ensuring the results reflect the voters’ choice. Does that not sound like something the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) are alleging? Despite the actual vote count, what we the Marxist,Progressives want is what the people want. Ekrem Imamoglu of the opposition Republican People’s Party placed first by a slim margin in the Istanbul March 31 mayoral election, defeating the ruling party candidate, former Prime Minister Binali Yildirim. Erdogan’s Islamic-based Justice and Development Party then charged that a series of election irregularities made the results illegitimate. What happens if Erdogan does not get the results he wants in the next election? Perhaps he will institute what the California Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) have instituted and allow for “ballot harvesting” or ballot creating until you have enough votes to declare the collectivist (Marxist, communist, socialist, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) candidate the winner. After all, is that not what the people want???? House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler is making what he calls a final “counter offer” to Attorney General William Barr’s refusal to grant immediate access to the underlying evidence in special counsel Robert Mueller’s report.
Nadler’s new offer comes as the Justice Department said earlier this week it would not comply with Nadler’s subpoena for the unredacted Mueller report and all of the underlying evidence and grand jury information. In a letter to Nadler, Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd said Congress is not entitled to the information, adding that the request is “not legitimate oversight.” A vote by congress to hold AG Barr in contempt will bring about another potential long drawn out court fight with the final answer to be determined by the Supreme Court. The DOJ has redacted information that the law requires it redact and has made this less redacted report available to congress. As of the last report we saw, no congressperson has viewed this report. The other question is does oversight entitle congress to have all the investigative material or the report. Much of the investigative material would be just that investigative and the Special Prosecutor deemed it to be irrelevant and of no meaning to the outcome of the case. A contempt of congress charge would end with the end of congress. The case would still be in the court system. It would become irrelevant and the Supreme Court would probably not hear it because it no longer had any basis. Here’s what that means, and what could happen next: What is contempt of Congress? It means someone has obstructed the work of either Congress or a congressional committee. House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler has threatened to hold Barr in contempt of Congress — not because he skipped the hearing, but over a subpoena to obtain the unredacted version of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on Russian interference in the 2016 election. While there are many ways someone can be in contempt of Congress, these days it usually happens when someone doesn’t comply with a congressional subpoena, the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service said. Sometimes that disobedience means refusing to appear before a committee to testify, and sometimes that means refusing to pony up requested documents. What’s the point of holding someone in contempt of Congress? “Contempt may be used either to coerce compliance, to punish the contemnor, and/or to remove the obstruction,” the Congressional Research Service said. There are several ways members of Congress can do this: 1) They can tell the House or Senate sergeant at arms to detain or imprison the person in contempt until he or she honors congressional demands. This is called “inherent contempt.” But it’s super rare and hasn’t happened in modern times. 2) Congress can certify a contempt citation to the executive branch — headed by the President — to try to get the person criminally prosecuted. 3) Congress can ask the judicial branch to enforce a congressional subpoena. In other words, Congress can seek a federal court’s civil judgment saying the person is legally obligated to comply with the subpoena. What are the challenges of holding someone in contempt of Congress? If an official refuses to disclose information after the President says it’s protected under executive privilege, “past practice suggests that the Department of Justice (DOJ) will not pursue a prosecution for criminal contempt,” the Congressional Research Service said. It can also be hard to get the executive branch to help. If the person in contempt is an executive branch official, efforts to punish him or her for not complying with a subpoena fail in many cases, the research center said. So why don’t members of Congress just use “inherent contempt” and tell their sergeant at arms to arrest the offender? “Although the contemnor can be incarcerated until he agrees to comply with the subpoena, imprisonment may not extend beyond the end of the current session of Congress,” the Congressional Research Service said. “Moreover, inherent contempt has been described as ‘unseemly,’ cumbersome, time-consuming, and relatively ineffective, especially for a modern Congress with a heavy legislative workload that would be interrupted by a trial at the bar.” We hear from the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party the absolute collectivist (Marxist, communist, socialist, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) philosophy of “Hope and Change.” This was the campaign slogan, a slogan used by many collectivists throughout history, used by Comrade Obama in 2008. It was in 2008 that Comrade Obama told the American people that indeed it is the goal of his party, the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party, to fundamentally transform the United States into a Marxist Totalitarian state. Marx had previously told the world that nations would become Marxist nations through two methods; revolution or transformation.
The Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party is the party that follows the Marxist dictate of sharing the wealth; taking from those who have achieved and redistribute to others the party determines is in need. AOC has now documented this by submitting the “New Green Deal” as a bill before the legislative branch. In this bill she states that all should have a minimum wage even if they simply do not want to work. Somehow this is “fair and just.” The overwhelming majority of Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party presidential candidates have endorsed this bill although they did not have the courage of their convictions when they did not cast a yea vote in the senate. Elizabeth Warren has proposed that it is not only “fair and just” to confiscate individuals’ incomes, but now it is “fair and just” to confiscate the wealth of the individual based on value on some random date each year. If the values of land and stocks are high one year, the tax is on the inflated value. If the value decreases, the individual would not receive a refund. These funds would be used to reduce the debt students have accumulated because the government under Comrade Obama imposed a monopoly on loans for students and used the Marxist criteria for granting the loans; just apply, ability to repay and credit history are not considered because they are discriminatory. Now Spartacus AKA Corey Booker is directly quoting from Marx in how this system is supposed to work. Spartacus said in an interview when pressed on the fact that most Marxist/Progressives (Democrats), including Spartacus, were pushing policies that would require tax increases. “What’s the counterargument?” he was asked. “We live in a nation with far more patriotism than people are expressing,” Booker replied, going on to argue that patriotism and consideration for fellow citizens would lead Americans to see past their own personal economics to understand that they should be glad for the opportunity to invest in each other. “This is a moment where across this country, farm towns, factory towns, cities to suburbs, we have so much common pain where Americans are seeing, from the cost of prescription drugs, cost of college, we’re all hurting because we have not designed an economy that invests in each other,” he concluded. This is the same argument used by Marx when Marx was asked why people would perform at their optimum when his philosophy of “from each according to their ability to each according to their needs” was employed. Marx replied that out of the sense of peoples' goodness, duty, and understanding their effort was contributing to the good of the community, all would perform at their optimum. History reveals the facts, people do not perform at their optimum and many stop performing. This is just one of many reasons that collectivism always fails. The Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party is a DANGER TO AND AN ENEMY TO THE UNITED STATES. They claim patriotism, rule of law, the Constitution, and the American way while they advance an agenda totally contrary to the very principles upon which our nation was founded. The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) despise these very principles of rule of law, limited government, divided government, sovereignty of the people, and individualism. They instead embrace all that is collectivism (Marxism, communism, socialism, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) which has brought social decay, financial collapse and tyranny every place it has been tried. I strongly urge every Freedom Loving American to learn and understand the evil that is collectivism (Marxism, communism, socialism, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) and you will identity the suggestions made every day by Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) to further advance the United States down “The Road to Tyranny.” The AP-NORC poll finds that discontent with the government system is closely tied with policy concerns. It asked Americans how they think the government is performing on a series of issues as well as whether it has a role in handling those issues at all. Those who are most critical of the way government handles issues they think it should be dealing with are most likely to want changes, with 65% saying they desire major changes and 18% seeking a completely different system of government.
By contrast, among those happiest with the government's performance on those issues, 48% say they want major changes and 8% want a total overhaul. Our government is not functioning properly. Our government is not functioning as it was designed to function. Our government MUST BE CHANGED AND IT MUST BEGIN TO AGAIN FUNCTION AS IT WAS DESIGNED. Our government was designed to be a limited government. The powers our federal government was to have are enumerated in the Constitution. Our government no longer adheres to its limitation. Our government has become exactly what it was never intended to become and that is a government that dictates and dominates the lives of its citizens. Our federal government was never intended to control our education system, or do control our health care industry or any industry, or to become a central planning force for our economy, or to protect those who break our laws by entering our country illegally, or to dictate outcomes and incomes of citizens, and yes our government is no longer a limited government. Article I of our Constitution clearly gives the legislative branch of our government the power to pass laws. No other branch has that power; not the executive branch or the judicial branch. Our legislative branch has abdicated their constitutional duty for the very reason they were the only branch given that power. The power to pass laws was given to the legislative branch because they were closest to the people. The people could then choose who they wished to have represent them based on how they voted for laws. Our legislators have become more interested in their power and financial success then in being the servant they were elected to be. Consequently, the legislative branch has abdicated their responsibilities of passing laws and budgeting so they can increase and perpetuate their own power and wealth. This is not the fault of the legislators, but it is the fault of the electorate. Our system was designed for a virtuous people electing virtuous representatives. We must once again become a virtuous people electing virtuous representatives. The executive branch was designed to be the administrative branch. That means they were to administer the laws the legislative branch passed. The executive was to be the civilian who was to be the head of the military or the Commander in Chief. Only congress could declare war. Over the years the executive has usurped powers that have been abdicated by the legislative branch. The constitution does not say that the executive has the power to act if congress does not do what they want congress to do. FDR extended the power of the executive way beyond the limits of the Constitution and executives ever since have taken on the role of an activist executive with Obama greatly expanding the power of the executive even taking power over immigration when he stated several dozen times that the executive does not have that power. The executive must again adhere to the Constitution and not pass, change, or abolish laws through regulations and executive orders. The branch of government that has gone far beyond its limitations as stated in the Constitution is the very branch that was most responsible for ensuring the Constitution was followed; the judicial branch. The courts no longer rule on law but make law from the bench. Courts today overrule both the legislative branch and the executive branch when they are constitutionally performing their duties because a small group of judges or a singular judge politically disagrees with the actions of the superior branch of government. The judicial branch does not have the power to make law but only give opinions. Because the Supreme Court issues a ruling does not make that ruling the law of the land. For example, abortion is not the law of the land but an opinion of the court. The judicial branch has usurped power it is not granted by the Constitution. The judicial branch was not designed as a political branch. The judicial branch must adhere to the Constitution. The biggest change we have seen in our government is we the people. Our type of government can only exist when those who vote are informed, involved, and knowledgeable. The vast majority of voters today are none of the above. They vote on bumper sticker ads. This has allowed unvirtuous people to remain in office for years. A dictatorship operates with and demands that the people are not informed, not involved, and not knowledgeable. A republic such as our demands the opposite. Yes, our government should be changed. We should change our government to operate according to the Constitution of the United States. But mostly, to remain a free and independent people, we must become a virtuous people who vote for virtuous people and we must again become an informed, involved and knowledgeable people. Our government operates the way we the people allow it to operate. When the government operates only as it wishes to operate, than it is to late for freedom and independence and we will have become a nation under the Dictatorship of the Proletariat as desired by the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats). |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
March 2023
Categories |
RSS Feed