Tea Party Express, Michelle Bachmann’s response to the State of the Union Address


From: Tea Party Express

Michelle Bachmann’s response to the President’s State of the Union Address. It is 7:01 minutes long and worth viewing!

http://www.teapartyexpress.org/

As a bonus, watch the AutoBamaCare video too!

http://www.teapartyhd.com/

Petition—right to work


From: http://www.righttoworkcommittee.org/

“They snickered when I said I came to the U.S. Senate to change Congress.

But their laughter stopped when I sponsored the National Right to Work Act to free U.S. workers from forced unionization and break Big Labor’s multi-billion dollar political machine forever.

President Barack Obama and Big Labor allies in the Senate are now feverishly scheming to bury the National Right to Work Act without a vote.

So I have a question for you ….

Will you be my sledgehammer?

Your signature on the petition to your Congressman and Senators is what is needed to bust through the opposition and force a vote on the National Right to Work Act.

This is an opportunity you and I cannot afford to miss.

As you know, the right to decide freely whether or not to join a union was taken away from American workers by Congress almost 75 years ago.

A result of back-room deals between union bosses and their tax-and-spend Congressional puppets, compulsory unionism provisions in federal law currently empower union officials to:

1) Force nearly 11 million Americans to pay tribute to a union boss to get or keep a job ...

2) Brazenly loot union treasuries to fund the election of their hand-picked political puppet candidates like Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid ...

3) Terrorize workers and communities with violent strikes—where they get away with beatings, arson—even murder.

The National Right to Work Act strikes at the foundations of the union bosses’ power.

And here’s the thing—the National Right to Work Act is wildly popular with American voters.

In fact, for years polls have shown nearly 80% of Americans think it should be against the law to force workers to pay money to union bosses just to get or keep a job. (My first experience with forced unionization was while I was in college. Caterpillar Tractor Company—located in East Peoria, Illinois—had a program where the children of company employees could work for the company during the summer months. I did for two summers. I was forced to join and pay dues to the UAW (United Auto Workers) before I could work for the company.

The Democratic Party loves to talk about “CHOICE” when it comes to MURDERING unborn babies. However, when it come to working, choice is not an option! Workers had no choice! They had to join the union or they could NOT work! My, how democratic!—my addition)

All you and I have to do is force an up-or-down roll call vote on the National Right to Work Act ... And the American people will do the rest.

Many Democrats and more than a few Republicans elected with Big Labor’s over $1 billion in forced-dues political cash cower in fear of casting a vote against the National Right to Work Act.

What will they do when forced to vote?

It’s a win-win situation—either they pass the National Right to Work Act and free American workers or they pay in 2012.

It will be a marathon battle.

But I will not flinch in the face of opposition and insider attacks.

I believe, with your help, this is a fight we will win.

And I know it’s a fight worth fighting.

You see, the union bosses fear a vote on the National Right to Work Act more than just about anything else.

They know it’s a losing proposition for them whether the bill passes or not.

The fact is for decades union officials have schemed to seize billions of dollars from their ‘members’ and then used it to elect their candidates to protect these privileges.

This is how Washington—from Jimmy Carter to Ted Kennedy to Bill Clinton to Nancy Pelosi to Barack Obama—got to be what it is today. (In part, this is true. Union bosses are not the only force behind the Democratic Party but they are significant. They have lost some influence in the party starting, particularly, when a large number of blue-collar Democrats voted for Ronald Reagan instead of Jimmy Carter in 1980—my addition.)

The National Right to Work Act will turn this entrenched, corrupt Washington order on its head.

Every year Big Labor siphons over $8 BILLION from workers’ paychecks; mostly from workers who, if they refused to pay, would be fired from their jobs.

Union bosses take this eye-popping heap of dough to feed a lifestyle of limousines, penthouses and raw political power.

And, my friend, Big Labor’s political corruption costs all of us:

1) Hundreds of billions of dollars in bailouts and bloated government spending suck the life out of our economy, rewarding failed businesses like GM and letting union-boss featherbedding and rigged contracts rocket the cost of schools, hospitals and roads through the roof.

2) Millions more good-paying jobs destroyed or driven overseas as union czars cripple America’s bedrock industries with wasteful work rules, hate-the-boss propaganda and violent strikes.

3) You and all Americans robbed of your wealth as the economy stays in recession and the price of cars, gasoline and groceries climbs upwards.

4) Small businesses strangled with red tape and bureaucracy designed by greedy union flunkies to kill companies too small for so-called union ‘organizing.’

(Will this change—change you can believe in—end our economic problems? No! However, it should help!—my addition)

That’s why it’s crucial you sign the petition today

http://righttoworkcommittee.org/rprtwah_petition.aspx?pid=rph1

and, if possible, make a generous contribution to the National Right to Work Committee.

It’s clear that if the Committee is to rally the 80% of Americans who support this bill they will need your financial support.

The National Right to Work Committee isn’t some Johnny-come-lately organization. They’ve been on the front lines opposing Big Labor for over fifty years.

The National Right to Work Committee is spearheading the effort to rally the American people, just as I am leading the fight here in the Senate.

Without your support for the National Right to Work Committee, we have little chance against Big Labor’s money and power in Congress.

That’s why I ask you to submit your signed petition

http://righttoworkcommittee.org/rprtwah_petition.aspx?pid=rph1,

along with the most generous contribution you can afford to the National Right to Work Committee.

In order to pass the National Right to Work Act, the National Right to Work Committee has drawn up an aggressive plan of action:

1) Mobilize up to 14 million Americans to stand up for freedom by signing petitions like the one I link to in this email. Only when politicians feel the heat of the people, will they see the light of truth. That’s what I meant when I asked you to be my sledgehammer.

2) Place full-page newspaper ads and launch intense internet campaigns coast to coast, reminding the American people what Big Labor’s power costs all of us in out-of-control government spending, sky-high taxes, a seemingly endless recession, lost jobs and rising prices.

3) Inform favorable columnists, talk show hosts and editorial writers nationwide to help mobilize public opinion.

4) Run TV and radio ads targeting, if funding permits, wavering Congressmen and Senators in the days leading up to key committee and floor votes.

Without your financial support, this program will not be possible.

And without this program Big Labor will stop the National Right to Work Act in Congress.

It’s that simple.

Every dollar the National Right to Work Committee receives comes from Americans like you—working folks, shopkeepers, business owners, retirees, farmers, engineers, delivery drivers, homemakers, grandmothers and grandfathers. Not one penny of their funding comes from government.

Some friends have already given as much as $1000 or $500 to help this campaign get going. A special few have given even more.

Many others have sacrificially given $100, $50 or even just $25—whatever they could afford.

I do not know what you can afford to give today, but this is too important not to ask ... and I hope too important for you not to contribute.

After you sign your petition

http://righttoworkcommittee.org/rprtwah_petition.aspx?pid=rph1,

will you please chip in with a generous contribution of $25, $50, $100 or even $500 or more to the National Right to Work Committee?

I know we can never hope to match Big Labor dollar-for-dollar. But we don’t need to.

The American people overwhelmingly stand with you and me.

But the National Right to Work Committee must have the finances to reach out to the people and mobilize them in support of the National Right to Work Act. That’s what it will take to beat Big Labor.

Your contribution of $50, $100 or $500 (or at least $25 or $35) along with your signed petition

http://righttoworkcommittee.org/rprtwah_petition.aspx?pid=rph1

are key to our campaign.

Please do not delay signing the petition

http://righttoworkcommittee.org/rprtwah_petition.aspx?pid=rph1

or think someone else will carry the load. I count on your support.

Sincerely,

Rand Paul, M.D.
U.S. Senator

P.S. Tea Party revolts and the election of real outsiders ready to shake up Congress means you and I have an historic opportunity to break the cycle of tax-and-spend, political corruption and out of control budgets caused by Big Labor’s compulsory union power.

But we must strike now to make Congressmen and Senators choose between standing with the 80% of Americans who oppose forced unionism and Big Labor’s multi-billion dollar political machine. It will be an epic, historic battle and your support is critical.

Please sign the petition to your Congressman and Senators

http://righttoworkcommittee.org/rprtwah_petition.aspx?pid=rph1

and make your most generous contribution of $500 or $100—or at least $50 or $25—whatever you can afford today.”

(I’m NOT opposed to unions. I am opposed to being forced by law to join a union! When I taught, I was a member of the teachers’ association. It was my choice! Today, I would not join the local association because, to belong to the local, one must also belong to the State and national associations. The national association supports things I do not—the MURDER of unborn babies, so called homosexual “rights,” the Democratic Party—and, therefore, I would not contribute my money to the national association—my addition.)

From: http://righttoworkcommittee.org/rprtwah_petition.aspx?pid=rph1

“Dear Concerned American,

You and I have an historic opportunity to break the cycle of tax-and-spend, political corruption and out of control budgets caused by Big Labor’s compulsory union power.

But we must strike now to make Congressmen and Senators choose between standing with the 80% of Americans who oppose forced unionism and Big Labor’s multi-billion dollar political machine.

It will be an epic, historic battle and your support is critical.

Sincerely,

Rand Paul
U.S. Senator, (R-KY)

National Right to Work Act Petition to:

My U.S. Senators and Congressman

Whereas: Federal law permits Big Labor to confiscate $8 billion from American workers’ paychecks every year just to get or keep a job;

Whereas: This forced unionism breeds violent strikes and a hate-the-boss mentality which drive good jobs overseas, jack up prices and risk re-igniting inflation:

Whereas: Union bosses use this forced-dues fortune to corrupt our political system with over a billion dollars every election cycle;

Whereas: Union-puppet politicians routinely vote for higher taxes, bailouts, job-killing bureaucracy and even more porkbarrel spending keeping our nation locked in recession;

Therefore: I urge you in the strongest possible terms to strike a blow for freedom and American prosperity by co-sponsoring and casting your every vote in favor the National Right to Work Act.”

State of the Union Speech—Wall Street Journal poll


I’ve had computer problems the last three days and could not post. Going through my e-mails last night, I came across the following. It seems that the poll is now closed but the results and the power of that e-mail are worth posting about. Of course, the poll is not scientific and does not necessarily represent the true opinion of the voting public. Then, again, neither are most of the polls published by the mass media!!! The e-mail:

From: the 9/12 Project

“Please Help Restore Accuracy To WSJ’s (Wall Street Journal) 2011 SotU (State of the Union—my addition) Poll (GRADE OBAMA)!

Posted by Jared Law on January 27, 2011 at 11:16am in Activism/Events

The Wall Street Journal did an online poll

http://online.wsj.com/community/groups/question-day-229/topics/grade-would-you-give-president

and it appears to be open still; I voted, and it appeared to count my vote. It seems to have been inflated by Obama supporters; there’s no way that many WSJ-reading Americans thought Barack Hussein Obama deserved an ‘A’ for that pathetic speech. Let’s help restore some accuracy to the poll by everybody voting and let’s see if we can help the poll more accurately reflect America’s true feelings about the bait & switch White House Occupant!

Here’s a screenshot of the results, so we can track our influence:

(I could not copy the actual screenshot. Instead the numbers are given below—my addition.)

Grade of; percentage; actual votes

A: 33.3% —2009 votes
B: 14.5%—878 votes
C: 14.4%—872 votes
D: 18%—1085 votes
F: 19.8%—1196 votes

Now go to The Wall Street Journal’s OBAMA 2011 SotU POLL

http://online.wsj.com/community/groups/question-day-229/topics/grade-would-you-give-president

and let’s help them out! :) [As of 5am this morning, it seems that this poll has closed. However, the results have changed. At 5am, more people are giving the speech an F over an A.

The totals as listed are:

Grade of; percentage; actual votes

A: 27.2% —2054 votes
B: 12.0%—904 votes
C: 12.6%—947 votes
D: 19.0%—1433 votes
F: 29.2%—2206 votes

Much more realistic! Ah, the power of the conservative movement and the internet to spread the word! Over 1000 addition F votes after the e-mail went out!—my addition]

UPDATE: We’re having a measurable effect; about three hours later, well over seven hundred of our members appear to have chosen to accurately rate Barack Hussein Obama’s SotU speech performance, with about five hundred more rating his speech an ‘F,’ and a couple hundred more giving BHO (Barack Hussein Obama—my addition) a ‘D;’ the percentages are now on their way to being realistic! From just 19.8% giving BHO an ‘F’ to over 25% giving BHO an ‘F,’ we’re making a difference! The ‘A’ and ‘B’ votes combined now lose to the ‘D’ and ‘F’ vote combination ...

Obviously, since we understand the Constitution, and the threat posed to it by Barack Hussein Obama, his Regime, and the rest of the progressive infrastructure (much of it funded by George Soros), most of us agree that BHO deserves an ‘F,’ just like his performance in office deserves an ‘F,’ as in FELON, FAILURE, and FRAUD! This may sound like less-than-civil ‘rhetoric,’ but the fact is that BHO and Soros and their ilk are destroying my beloved country; excuse me if I resort to less-than-diplomatic language!”

Petition to amend the Constitution and to NOT raise the debt ceiling


From: Senate Conservatives Fund

On my post of December 27, 2010 entitled “Christmas present to the nation and a petition,” at the end of the post I included a petition from Michelle Bachmann to not raise the debt limit. (If you have not signed that petition, please go to the post, follow the link, and sign it.) Today, a similar petition from the Senate Conservatives Fund to amend the Constitution and also not to raise the debt ceiling.

From: Senate Conservatives Fund

“Dear Fellow Conservative:

The first major test for Republicans this year will be on how we address our nation’s exploding debt. We are quickly approaching the statutory debt limit of $14.3 trillion so this issue will come to a head very soon.

President Obama wants Congress to raise our nation’s debt ceiling again without doing anything serious to cut spending and balance the budget. His economic advisor, Austan Goolsbee, recently argued that the sky would fall unless we keep borrowing. But the truth is the sky is already falling BECAUSE we keep borrowing.

We must stop the debt and balance the budget, and that’s why I’m writing to ask for your help today.

There are senators on both sides of the aisle who hope their constituents won’t be paying attention when the Senate considers the debt limit in February. They want to quietly vote for more debt without paying a political price.

We can’t let that happen.

Please join me in doing two things right now.

First, visit http://stopthedebtpledge.com/ and sign our ‘Stop the Debt’ pledge. It states, ‘I hereby pledge to support only those candidates who demand that Congress stop the debt and pass a Balanced Budget Amendment.’

In the last 10 years, Congress has raised the debt ceiling 10 times, but it has not voted a single time to pass a Balanced Budget Amendment. The only way to keep Congress from creating more debt is to pass a Constitutional Amendment that forces it to balance the budget without raising taxes.

Second, call your senators and tell them to ‘stop the debt and balance the budget’. Urge them to do everything it takes, including a filibuster, to block the debt limit increase and pass the Balanced Budget Amendment. Click here to contact your senators.

http://senateconservatives.com/site/callsheet?c=EY4D33564800866

(One reason I’m posting this petition is because of this page of the website. It gives the name, party, and telephone number for each Senator and a link for e-mail contact for almost all Senators. Save it and use it!—my addition)

The Balanced Budget Amendment will:

1) Require Congress to balance the federal budget each year
2) Prevent Congress from spending more than 20 percent of GDP
3) Require a 2/3 super-majority vote to raise taxes

[Before actually supporting such an amendment, I’ll have to know the exact wording of the amendment. If I remember correctly (and I didn’t look it up), the U.S. spent more than 20 percent of GDP (Gross Domestic Product—an economic measurement) during World War II. Would an exemption(s) be made under certain circumstances?—my addition]

Every state except for Vermont has a requirement to balance its budget and so should Congress. This is a commonsense reform that is overwhelmingly supported by the American people. There is no reason why the Senate cannot pass the Balanced Budget Amendment.

(The question is: will they obey the Amendment? The State of Illinois does not obey its Constitution in this regard and the federal government does not always follow its own Constitution. It’s up to the people to insure that it is followed. WE need to be always vigilant!!!—my addition)

The last time the Senate voted on the Balanced Budget Amendment was in 1997 when it was just one vote shy of the 67 votes needed for adoption.

We can win this policy battle if we’re willing to fight for our principles. All 47 Republicans voted in November to make the Balanced Budget Amendment the policy of the Senate Republican Conference, and there are 23 Democrats up for re-election in 2012 who won’t want to vote against it. (See the list of the 23 Democratic members of the Senate up for reelection in 2012 on my post of November 9, 2010 entitled “Democratic Senators up for reelection in 2012.” Two of the 23 have already said they will not seek reelection!—my addition)

The President may attack conservatives who filibuster the debt limit and accuse us of putting the nation at risk, but the President and the politicians in Congress who refuse to balance the budget are the ones hurting our country. The time has come for Americans to draw a line in the sand and say ‘enough is enough’. (We need to STOP our out-of-control spending!—my addition)

Please sign the ‘Stop the Debt’ pledge

http://senateconservatives.com/stopthedebt/?c=EY4D33564800866,

forward it to your friends and family, and call your senators

http://senateconservatives.com/site/callsheet?c=EY4D33564800866

to urge them to stop the debt and pass the Balanced Budget Amendment.

Respectfully,

Jim DeMint
United States Senator
Chairman, Senate Conservatives Fund

http://senateconservatives.com/stopthedebt/?c=EY4D33564800866”

Turkish Ambassador skewered


I was planning on posting about the darkest day in United States history—the day an obscene Supreme Court declared it was legal for a mother to MURDER her unborn child. That immoral decision occurred 38 years ago today.

However, I received the following yesterday and because of some concern that it may be removed from the youtube site, I am posting it today. I also received a petition I probably will post Monday. Then, I hope to do a short series on the continuing obscenity of MURDERING our own children.

The e-mail received with the link to the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRmgI_WXff0&feature=youtube_gdata_player

“Subject: You are urged to watch this link before they block it.

It seems the snowball is rolling down the slope, smashing everything in its way, it started by the Dutch PM who said it loud and clear that Islam is a sick ideology, then the Norwegian PM sent $200 million back to Saudi Arabia telling them that if they need to build mosques in his country, start by building churches in Saudi Arabia.

Now, the Austrian PM is accusing the Turkish regime of being a bunch of criminals, and asking the Turkish ambassador to take his sick ideology and return to his country. When Salman Rushdy said it a few years back, no one believed him, and the Islamic world put a price on his head. Now, they are realizing that he spoke the truth ...

You are urged to watch this link before they try to block it.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRmgI_WXff0&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Petition to the News Media—Stop the Nonsense


I’ve had this for a week which is longer than I usually keep a petition. Therefore, another petition:

From: Our Country Deserves Better PAC

From the petition website

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/shameonthemedia/

“Shame On The Media for Accusing the Tea Party of Being Responsible for the Tucson Massacre

We, the undersigned, protest the news media’s shameful efforts to try and smear the Tea Party movement and conservative leaders by suggesting that the Arizona shooting was somehow the fault of the Tea Party movement.

This young man is responsible for his own actions, which represent in NO WAY the values and principles of the Tea Party movement.

We in the Tea Party movement deserve to be treated more fairly than this by the news media and they owe all of us an apology for their shameful conduct during this American tragedy.

Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims of this attack and their families.”

Vote totals for repealing Obamacare in the House of Representatives


The first major step in repealing nationalized healthcare occurred yesterday. The repeal vote was taken in the House of Representatives. The votes, as cast, are given below. Keep a record of how your Representative voted. Use it in the 2012 election. HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE FOR EVERY SINGLE VOTE!!! Every Republican voted for repeal along with three Democrats, who are identified as Democrats in this post.

This is the start. Now, we must pressure the Senate to hold hearings, debate the issue, and take a vote. If no vote is taken, HOLD EVERY SINGLE DEMOCRAT ACCOUNTABLE FOR NOT ALLOWING A VOTE.

We the people have a right to know how every member of the Senate would vote on this issue. If no vote is taken, it’s the failure of the majority party in the Senate—that’s the Democratic Party. HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE!!! Shine a light on their voting record!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IHJWPOdtr0

From: U.S. House http://clerk.house.gov/legislative/legvotes.html

Final vote results for roll call 14

H R 2 RECORDED VOTE 19-Jan-2011 5:53 PM
QUESTION: On Passage
BILL TITLE: Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act

Republican

Ayes: 242
Noes: 000
Not voting: 0

Democratic

Ayes: 003
Noes: 189
Not voting: 1

Ayes: 245

Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Amash
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren (Democrat)
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (NY)
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre (Democrat)
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR) (Democrat)
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

Noes: 189 (All Democrats)

Ackerman
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kissell
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Luján
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velázquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth

Not voting

Giffords (Democrat)

American civics test—how would you do?


I’m posting this quiz today, in part, because of my post yesterday discussing the Obama Administration’s lack of knowledge about the Constitution and/or its disdain for that important document. You can take the quiz yourself at the website and have your answer sheet scored on site.

From: http://www.americancivicliteracy.org/resources/quiz.aspx (Intercollegiate Studies Institute)

“Civics Quiz

Are you more knowledgeable than the average citizen? The average score for all 2,508 Americans taking the following test was 49%; college educators scored 55%. (According to the source that e-mailed me information about this quiz, government officials scored lower than average citizens—my addition.) Can you do better? Questions were drawn from past ISI surveys, as well as other nationally recognized exams. (Read the questions carefully. I missed one question because I misread the question. The results, at least for January, are better which is understandable since it is not a random sample at the site. Don‘t cheat!—my addition)

The following questions were taken from the 2008 Civic Literacy exam.

A printable version of the quiz, along with the answers, is available for download for those who register.

Note: This quiz does not support WebTV.

1) Which of the following are the inalienable rights referred to in the Declaration of Independence?

A. life, liberty, and property
B. honor, liberty, and peace
C. liberty, health, and community
D. life, respect, and equal protection
E. life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness

2) In 1933 Franklin Delano Roosevelt proposed a series of government programs that became known as:

A. the Great Society
B. the Square Deal
C. the New Deal
D. the New Frontier
E. supply-side economics

3) What are the three branches of government?

A. executive, legislative, judicial
B. executive, legislative, military
C. bureaucratic, military, industry
D. federal, state, local

4) What was the main issue in the debates between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A. Douglas in 1858?

A. Is slavery morally wrong?
B. Would slavery be allowed to expand to new territories?
C. Do Southern states have the constitutional right to leave the union?
D. Are free African Americans citizens of the United States?

5) The United States Electoral College:

A. trains those aspiring for higher political office
B. was established to supervise the first televised presidential debates
C. is otherwise known as the U.S. Congress
D. is a constitutionally mandated assembly that elects the president
E. was ruled undemocratic by the Supreme Court

6) The Bill of Rights explicitly prohibits:

A. prayer in public school
B. discrimination based on race, sex, or religion
C. the ownership of guns by private individuals
D. establishing an official religion for the United States
E. the president from vetoing a line item in a spending bill

7) What was the source of the following phrase: ‘Government of the people, by the people, for the people'?

A. the speech ‘I Have a Dream’
B. Declaration of Independence
C. U.S. Constitution
D. Gettysburg Address

8) In 1935 and 1936 the Supreme Court declared that important parts of the New Deal were unconstitutional. President Roosevelt responded by threatening to:

A. impeach several Supreme Court justices
B. eliminate the Supreme Court
C. appoint additional Supreme Court justices who shared his views
D. override the Supreme Court’s decisions by gaining three-quarter majorities in both houses of Congress

9) Under Our Constitution, some powers belong to the federal government. What is one power of the federal government?

A. Make treaties
B. Make zoning laws
C. Maintain prisons
D. Establish standards for doctors and lawyers

10) Name one right or freedom guaranteed by the first amendment.

A. Right to bear arms
B. Due process
C. Religion
D. Right to counsel

11) What impact did the Anti-Federalists have on the United States Constitution?

A. their arguments helped lead to the adoption of the Bill of Rights
B. their arguments helped lead to the abolition of the slave trade
C. their influence ensured that the federal government would maintain a standing army
D. their influence ensured that the federal government would have the power to tax

12) Which of the following statements is true about abortion?

A. it was legal in most states in the 1960s
B. the Supreme Court struck down most legal restrictions on it in Roe v. Wade
C. the Supreme Court ruled in Plessy v. Ferguson that underage women must notify their parents of an
impending abortion
D. the National Organization for Women has lobbied for legal restrictions on it
E. it is currently legal only in cases of rape or incest, or to protect the life of the mother

13) Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and Aquinas would concur that:

A. all moral and political truth is relative to one’s time and place
B. moral ideas are best explained as material accidents or byproducts of evolution
C. values originating in one’s conscience cannot be judged by others
D. Christianity is the only true religion and should rule the state
E. certain permanent moral and political truths are accessible to human reason

14) The Puritans:

A. opposed all wars on moral grounds
B. stressed the sinfulness of all humanity
C. believed in complete religious freedom
D. colonized Utah under the leadership of Brigham Young
E. were Catholic missionaries escaping religious persecution

15) The phrase that in America there should be a ‘wall of separation’ between church and state appears in:

A. George Washington’s Farewell Address
B. the Mayflower Compact
C. the Constitution
D. the Declaration of Independence
E. Thomas Jefferson’s letters

16) In his ‘I Have a Dream’ speech, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.:

A. argued for the abolition of slavery
B. advocated black separatism
C. morally defended affirmative action
D. expressed his hopes for racial justice and brotherhood
E. proposed that several of America’s founding ideas were discriminatory

17) Sputnik was the name given to the first:

A. telecommunications system
B. animal to travel to space
C. hydrogen bomb
D. manmade satellite

18) Susan B. Anthony was a leader of the movement to

A. guarantee women the right to vote in national elections
B. guarantee former slaves the right to vote
C. ensure that harsher laws against criminals were passed
D. reduce the authority of the Constitution of the United States

19) The Scopes ‘Monkey Trial’ was about:

A. freedom of the press
B. teaching evolution in the schools
C. prayer in the schools
D. education in private schools

20) Who is the commander in chief of the U.S. military?

A. Secretary of the army
B. Secretary of state
C. President
D. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs

21) Name two countries that were our enemies during World War II.

A. Canada and Mexico
B. Germany and Japan
C. England and Spain
D. China and Russia

22) What part of the government has the power to declare war?

A. Congress
B. the president
C. the Supreme Court
D. the Joint Chiefs of Staff

23) In October 1962 the United States and the Soviet Union came close to war over the issue of Soviet:

A. control of East Berlin
B. missiles in Cuba
C. support of the Ho Chi Minh regime in Viet Nam
D. military support of the Marxist regime in Afghanistan

24) In the area of United States foreign policy, Congress shares power with the:

A. president
B. Supreme Court
C. state governments
D. United Nations

25) Free enterprise or capitalism exists insofar as:

A. experts managing the nation’s commerce are appointed by elected officials
B. individual citizens create, exchange, and control goods and resources
C. charity, philanthropy, and volunteering decrease
D. demand and supply are decided through majority vote
E. government implements policies that favor businesses over consumers

26) Business profit is:

A. cost minus revenue
B. assets minus liabilities
C. revenue minus expenses
D. selling price of a stock minus its purchase price
E. earnings minus assets

27) Free markets typically secure more economic prosperity than government’s centralized planning because:

A. the price system utilizes more local knowledge of means and ends
B. markets rely upon coercion, whereas government relies upon voluntary compliance with the law
C. more tax revenue can be generated from free enterprise
D. property rights and contracts are best enforced by the market system
E. government planners are too cautious in spending taxpayers’ money

28) A progressive tax:

A. encourages more investment from those with higher incomes
B. is illustrated by a 6% sales tax
C. requires those with higher incomes to pay a higher ratio of taxes to income
D. requires every income class to pay the same ratio of taxes to income E. earmarks revenues for poverty reduction

29) A flood-control levee (or National Defense) is considered a public good because:

A. citizens value it as much as bread and medicine
B. a resident can benefit from it without directly paying for it
C. government construction contracts increase employment
D. insurance companies cannot afford to replace all houses after a flood
E. government pays for its construction, not citizens

30) Which of the following fiscal policy combinations would a government most likely follow to stimulate economic activity when the economy is in a severe recession?

A. increasing both taxes and spending
B. increasing taxes and decreasing spending
C. decreasing taxes and increasing spending
D. decreasing both taxes and spending

31) International trade and specialization most often lead to which of the following?

A. an increase in a nation’s productivity
B. a decrease in a nation’s economic growth in the long term
C. an increase in a nation’s import tariffs
D. a decrease in a nation’s standard of living

32) Which of the following is a policy tool of the Federal Reserve?

A. raising or lowering income taxes
B. increasing or decreasing unemployment benefits
C. buying or selling government securities
D. increasing or decreasing government spending

33) If taxes equal government spending, then:

A. government debt is zero
B. printing money no longer causes inflation
C. government is not helping anybody
D. tax per person equals government spending per person
E. tax loopholes and special-interest spending are absent”

“You answered 32 out of 33 correctly—96.97 %
Average score for this quiz during January: 74.8%”

President Barack Hussein Obama’s Administration and the Constitution


I did not plan to write the following post today. However, if true, this issue is part of the fundamental problems of the Obama Administration. I heard on the radio early Monday morning that the Obama Administration was planning to try the alleged shooter of Gabrielle Giffords in California—probably in San Diego. The reason given was that, since an Arizona federal judge was murdered, no Arizona federal judge could be involved in the case.

From: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2011/01/17/2011-01-17_report_trial_of_accused_arizona_shooter_jared_loughner_may_get_moved_to_californ.html

“Report: Trial of accused Arizona shooter Jared Loughner may get moved to California

By Michael Sheridan
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Monday, January 17th 2011, 8:55 AM
The trial of accused Tucson shooter Jared Loughner may be moved from Arizona to southern California

The trial of alleged Tucson shooter Jared Loughner may get moved out of Arizona.

Federal authorities might be looking to change the venue to San Diego, fearing the 22-year-old’s right to a fair trial could be compromised because of the pretrial publicity, The Washington Post reported on Sunday.

‘It’s going to happen,’ a law enforcement official told the newspaper. ‘It’s just a matter of time.’”

My first thought was: These people DO NOT know the Constitution of the United States! Either that or, they just don’t care what the Constitution says. Just to be sure, I did what the Obama Administration obviously does not do. I read the appropriate section of the Constitution.

Here it is for all those lawyers in the Obama Administration:

“Amendment VI

Section 1. Right to a Speedy Trial

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.”

Did you catch the appropriate phrase? “… By an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed.” Can the federal government try the alleged shooter in California? Absolutely NOT! NOT according to the Constitution! The trial MUST be held in the STATE and the DISTRICT where the crime was committed!

Barack Hussein Obama and all his cohorts should read the Constitution and then follow it. Remember, the House of Representatives just had the Constitution read within its chamber. Obviously, the lawyers in the Obama Administration were not listening! Bring in a federal judge from another State if they must. However, the trial itself MUST be held within the State of Arizona—not California or any other State. Period! Constitutionally!

Senate Conservative Victory in 2012—an opportunity in Texas


From Senate Conservatives Fund

“Dear Fellow Conservative:

I have some very important news to share. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) announced yesterday that she will not seek a fourth term in 2012.

This is a major development because it opens up a Senate seat in a strong Republican state, giving us another opportunity to elect a principled conservative.

The Republican primary election for this seat won’t take place until March 6, 2012 but I expect several candidates to enter the race very soon.

The Senate Conservatives Fund will thoroughly evaluate each of these candidates to see if a clear standout emerges.

As you know, we don’t endorse liberal or wishy-washy Republicans (also known as RINOS—my addition). Our mission is to elect strong conservative leaders who have the courage to stand up and defend the principles of freedom that make America great.

In order to win the SCF endorsement, candidates have to demonstrate a deep commitment to conservative principles as well as a willingness to stand up to their own party when it’s wrong.

They also have to show they can build and run an effective campaign. Texas is a very large state and a winning candidate will need a strong statewide grassroots organization and the ability to raise money to get their message out.

Based on media reports following Senator Hutchison’s announcement, the Washington establishment appears to be lining up behind Lt. Governor David Dewhurst (R).

However, the two candidates we hear about most from conservatives are Texas Railroad Commissioner Michael Williams (R) and former Solicitor General Ted Cruz (R).

As you may remember, SCF encouraged Texas Governor Rick Perry to appoint Michael Williams to Senator Hutchison’s seat when she was expected to resign in the middle of her term. Michael is an outstanding conservative leader and he will be at the very top of our list as we consider candidates for an endorsement in the 2012 election.

We will keep you updated as this race develops. If you have information about the candidates or if you want to make a recommendation, please email us.

http://senateconservatives.com/site/contact?c=HN4D2F7023EC958

You can also help us identify and elect the strongest candidate in the field by making a contribution

https://senateconservatives.com/site/contribute?c=HN4D2F7023EC958

to the Senate Conservatives Fund. The more support we can raise now, the more we will be able to do for conservative candidates next year.

Thank you for being a member of this community. SCF was able to elect strong conservatives to the Senate in 2010. With your help, we can do it again in 2012!

Respectfully,

Jim DeMint

United States Senator

Chairman, Senate Conservatives Fund

Senate Conservatives Fund is a political action committee dedicated to electing true conservatives to the United States Senate. SCF seeks to bring bold conservative leadership to Washington by supporting only the most rock-solid, conservative Senate candidates nationwide.”

To contribute on-line:

https://senateconservatives.com/site/contribute?c=HN4D2F7023EC958

To contribute by mail:

http://senateconservatives.com/media/scf_contribution_form.pdf

A form is provided to download, fill out, and mail in along with the contribution.

Maximum contribution per year per person is $5,000.

“Contributions to Senate Conservatives Fund are not deductible as charitable contributions. Not paid for at taxpayer expense. Contributions from corporations or foreign nationals lacking permanent resident status are not permitted. Federal law requires Senate Conservatives Fund to report the name, mailing address, occupation and employer for each individual whose contributions aggregate in excess of $200 in a calendar year.”

Now is the time to make contributions, find outstanding candidates, build a working organization, and plan for 2012. We had phenomenal success in 2010 doing much without the time frame necessary to properly plan and prepare. If we start immediately, plan, pray, and work hard; we can achieve even more in 2012 with GOD’S help.

We have responsibilities—to GOD, to ourselves, to the church, to our families, to our communities, to our nation, to the world, to GOD. Let’s do it. Let’s Take Back the Nation!

Gabrielle Giffords and her murder attempt, part 5


When Gabrielle Giffords got shot, I was upstairs working on the computer and listening to the radio. A top of the hour news story reported her being shot and killed, as the early reports erroneously stated. My sister and brother-in-law were downstairs in the living room. I went down and told them what I had heard. He stated it must have been a leftist extremist, a rightist extremist, or someone with mental problems.

Of course, as we know, the leftists almost immediately tried to pin the attempted murder on the Tea Party, Sarah Palin, talk radio, or anyone else on the right that they thought they could blame. Surprisingly, I did not hear or read of anyone blaming George W. Bush. It probably slipped their minds that George W. Bush is the blame for all things perceived wrong with America, from the leftist viewpoint. As we learned more about the alleged shooter, it seems he is a liberal leftist, who had a vendetta against Gabrielle Giffords, and seemingly has mental problems.

As I heard more about the specific details of the attempted murder, I was certain, for several reasons, that the right, and more specifically the Tea Party movement, was not involved. First, a majority of the Tea Party movement tend to identify themselves as Christian. The following is from the Public Religion Research Institute dealing with members of the Tea Party movement. “Results of the 2010 Americans Values Survey are based on telephone interviews conducted among a national random sample of 3,013 adults (age 18 and older) between September 1 and September 14, 2010.”

1) “Nearly half (47%) also say they are part of the religious right or conservative Christian movement. Among the more than 8-in-10 (81%) who identify as Christian within the Tea Party movement, 57% also consider themselves part of the Christian conservative movement.”

2) “They are mostly social conservatives, not libertarians on social issues. Nearly two-thirds (63%) say abortion should be illegal in all or most cases, and less than 1-in-5 (18%) support allowing gay (homosexual—my addition) and lesbian couples to marry.”

Not only do Christians NOT attempt to murder those they oppose, they would NOT deliberately murder innocent bystanders.

Second, most Tea Party members support gun rights and are savvy about the use of weapons. There is a difference between a realistic assassination attempt and walking up to an intended victim and shooting that victim with a handgun. As I wrote in my book,

“The Sword had taught that the further away you are from the enemy for the kill, the better it was. It allowed for more maneuverability and lessened your chances of being killed during return fire. Of course, by the very essence of guerilla warfare, we usually had to be fairly close to the enemy. That was not necessary for an assassination. To execute one individual, a scoped rifle shot was perfect. The shooter would be removed from the target and yet could almost guarantee a positive outcome with a correctly located bullet.” (“The Black Sword: the Secret U.S. Army in Vietnam,” page 72, © 2008)

That the alleged shooter come in close using a handgun and shot and killed and wounded others demonstrates that he was not just a want-to-be assassin. He lessened, not increased, his probability of achieving his supposed objective and he almost assured his capture or himself being killed. This was the act of an individual seeking at least three objectives: the murder of Gabrielle Giffords, the murder of others, and his fifteen minutes of “fame” even if notorious in nature. True assassins have at least two objectives—successfully killing their intended target and escaping to live another day. This guy was an amateur seeking notoriety through his objective rather than the success of the objective.

Finally, the Tea Party had stunning success during the 2010 election and is on track for even more success in 2012. Why would any rational Tea Party member jeopardize that success by trying to murder a three term, minor member of the House of Representatives who, in the next election, would be running in a newly redrawn Congressional District? From what I have seen, Arizona is going to get at least one additional Congressional seat in 2012. The Republicans control the Arizona General Assembly and the Governor’s office. Why would any Tea Party member want to assassinate any one, let only Gabrielle Giffords? It would be as illogical as it is illogical for the left to blame the Tea Party or anyone else on the right for this attack.

The Tea Party movement and conservatives, in general, support the U. S. Constitution. The Constitution provides a very relevant and reliable method for removing Representatives from office—elections. In 2010 in Arizona, two Democrats of five total were removed from office and two, including Representative Giffords, were almost defeated. Why would anyone on the right want to assassinate any of the three remaining?

During and after a crisis situation, people often realize that they have received a second opportunity that is not always afforded to others. Representative Giffords has been willfully disobedient to GOD’S will—supporting the MURDER of unborn babies and supporting homosexual behavior, among other things. As I’ve said before, I’m praying for her full recovery and for her full repentance and her turning to GOD, JESUS, the HOLY SPIRIT as her only true savior.

I have a C-SPAN book that lists her religion as Jewish. There was another Jewish individual, about two thousand years ago, who was given a second opportunity and took advantage of it. That individual was the Apostle Paul who described himself as the worst of sinners. “Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the worst.” I Timothy 1: 15 (NIV) Just before, he wrote: “I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who has given me strength, that he considered me faithful, appointing me to his service. Even though I was once a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent man, I was shown mercy because I acted in ignorance and unbelief. The grace of our Lord was poured out on me abundantly, along with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus.” I Timothy 1: 12-14 (NIV)

The grace of our LORD has been poured out to Gabrielle Giffords and to the alleged shooter too. I pray she and he accept that grace and repent—turning to HIM for salvation, since salvation is ONLY through CHRIST JESUS. If Paul, who at one time persecuted and supported the MURDER of Christians, can repent; so can Gabrielle Giffords. If Paul, who at one time persecuted and supported the MURDER of Christians, can repent; so can the alleged shooter. If Paul, who at one time persecuted and supported the MURDER of Christians, can repent; so can any leftist. I pray they do!

Gabrielle Giffords and her murder attempt, part 4


From: Tea Party Nation

“Spreading the big lie.
Posted by Judson Phillips on January 9, 2011 at 7:14pm in Tea Party Nation Forum

Immediately after Congressman Gabrielle Giffords was shot, the left wing went into over drive to try and blame the Tea Party for the shooting. There was one minor problem.

There was no evidence.

In fact, in the hours after the shooting, the evidence began to pile up that Jared Loughner was in fact a liberal. Former classmates tweeted about his beliefs. He was a pot head who was kicked out of community college because he was such a disturbed individual. After twenty-four hours of ripping the Internet apart, the liberals are beside themselves with anger because the cannot tie Loughner to the Tea Party movement.

But have no fear, when the liberals really need help, they can count on the Department of Homeland Security.

DHS has magically come up with a report that says he has ‘ties’ to an anti Semitic, anti-government group that has ads for tea party groups on its front page.

WOW!

There is a legal term for this kind of stuff. It is MSU. That stands for makin’ stuff up!

The leftist Politico.com reported that the Department of Homeland Security had a memo that said Loughner is ‘possibly linked’ to a group called American Renaissance.

This is the same Department of Homeland Security that issued the infamous report on April 14, 2009, a day before the great Tax Day tea parties, warning of an upswing in ‘right wing extremism.’ This is the same Department of Homeland Security, who’s Secretary Janet Napolitano, claimed the border is secure and the system worked, after the underwear bomber tried to blow up a flight on Christmas day, 2009.

The group, American Renaissance, says they have no record of Loughner ever being associated or involved with them.

The obvious question that should be asked is, how about at least some evidence?

All that is there is some, at best, speculation. Of course, the liberal media and the blogosphere are quite happy to run with the story that fits their story line.

The liberal hate group, the Southern Poverty Law Center went through convolutions to try and claim that Jared Loughner was some kind of conservative. The Huffington Post ate that up and immediately posted the story online.

This is liberal thought and liberal journalism at its best. Facts and the truth are ignored in favor of speculation that supports the story they want to believe.

When this nightmare first began, Tea Party Nation decided to get out early and fight because we knew this is what would happen. Regardless of the facts, the left would try to tie this to the Tea Party movement. We are pushing back now and we need everyone in this movement to help us fight the smear the liberals are trying to put out.

We need to remind everyone, the shooter was a liberal lunatic.”

Comments

"Reply by Verwayne XXXXXXXX (Name removed by me for security purposes—my addition.) on January 9, 2011 at 7:25pm

When the left brings up this lie, remind them of some truths ... such as ...

Remember Chris Matthews fantasizing on air about seeing Rush Limbaugh shot in the head?

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/10/13/video-matthews-muses-on-killi...

The Craig Kilborn Show superimposing the words ‘Snipers Wanted’ over the face of President George W. Bush.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/crime/kilborn-cbs-target-bush-0

Nobel ‘Peace Prize’ winner Betty Williams publicly stating her desire to murder President George W. Bush.

http://hotair.com/archives/2006/07/25/give-murder-a-chance/

http://tv.breitbart.com/nobel-winner-audio-i-could-kill-george-bush/

British film makers Gabriel Range and Simon Finch making a 2006 movie fantasizing about assassinating President George W. Bush.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0853096/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojWOWyHWj6M

Alec Baldwin urging the murder of Henry Hyde, his family, and ALL Congressional Republicans and their families on national television .....

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/5991332/alec_baldwin_for_c...

David Guy McKay and Bradley Neil Crowder, two America-hating left-wing terrorists, were arrested by the FBI after conspiring to firebomb Republicans at the 2008 GOP Convention in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The American Media refused to report the story.

http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-194812.html

NPR commentator and ABC News reporter Nina Totenberg wishes death by AIDS on Senator Jesse Helms and/or his grandchildren.

http://www.mrc.org/notablequotables/dishonor1999/welcomeaward6.asp

Julianne Malveaux publicly wishes death on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

http://www.holeinthehull.com/2010/07/julianne-malveaux-wishes-clare...”

From: Tea Party Nation

“Changing messages and hypocrisy
Posted by Judson Phillips on January 10, 2011 at 12:36pm in Tea Party Nation Forum

The message has now changed. Jared Loughner is almost forgotten in the spin.

Congressman Giffords is not, as she is now the face of this tragedy, but the other victims are nothing but an afterthought to the left. All that matters to them now is getting the spin out that this terrible crime was caused by the ‘extreme vitriol’ from the conservative side.

The left is desperate to change the subject because their initial hopes, that the killer was a card-carrying member of the Tea Party have been dashed.

Moveon has launched a campaign to have congress to drop any references for violence from their political discussions. Moveon can count on their willing accomplices in the drive by media for not calling them on their hypocrisy.

Conveniently, Moveon forgets that one of its members assaulted a Tea Party member last year in Congressman Giffords’ own district during the election. It also forgets all of the political ads it has run, from comparing George Bush to Hitler, to the General ‘Betray Us’ ad.

How about the vitriol from Paul Krugman? Moveon and the drive by media seem to forget that. Remember what he said within a couple of hours of the shooting? ‘We don’t have proof yet that this was political, but the odds are that it was.’ Oops, it wasn’t.

The left likes to remind us that Krugman won the Nobel Prize. We should remind the left that these days, the Nobel Prize has all the prestige of a prize pulled from a box of cracker-jacks. (Prime examples being the tortured granting of the peace prize to Al Gore [are you serious!] and Barack Hussein Obama [Now we known they are Not serious!]!—my addition)

Markos Moulitsas of the Daily Kos posted within minutes of the shooting, ‘Mission accomplished, Sarah Palin.’ Yet those who are now whining about the ‘vitriol’ and the rhetoric conveniently forget that.

There is a simple truth we conservatives need to learn here. We knew what the left was going to do when this tragedy hit. They were going to use it for their political advantage. They expected us to sit back and do nothing. Instead, we conservatives refused to allow the hard left to define this incident or to define us.

Now we hear from them, in the plaintive voice of Rodney King, ‘can’t we all just get along?’ (No! No compromising with EVIL!—my addition)

No, we can’t.

First, you liberals want to destroy liberty and freedom in this country. We in the Tea Party movement are not going to let that happen.

Second, you started this fight. We could have all taken a moment to decently mourn the murder of six Americans and the attempted assassination of a United States Congressman. As many of us were told as children, ‘you do not start a fight, but you finish a fight.’ The left started this fight and we will finish it.

Something interesting happened in politics in the last 48 hours. The left thought they could pin this on the Tea Party movement and destroy it. Their plan has backfired. Now they are the one’s who want to change this debate and ignore their role in it. They only want to fix an undeserved blame on conservatives.

We are not going to let that happen.”

From: Tea Party Nation

“The award for the dumbest media comment goes to ….
Posted by Judson Phillips on January 12, 2011 at 3:50pm in Tea Party Nation Forum

In the last few days, mainstream media idiocy has hit new record levels. When you read or listen to what some of them are saying you have to ask yourself, are they writing for a comedy show, are they trying to make a parody of the news or have they gone off their medications.

The winner of the dumbest comment of the week goes to Michael Falcone and Amy Walker of ABC news.

On their blog, they wrote: ‘Sarah Palin, once again, has found a way to become part of the story.’

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/01/the-note-obama-palin-and-arizona-a-tale-of-two-speeches.html

Did these two go to journalism school? Did they get their journalism degrees at Wal-Mart? Did they just sleep through the last four days?

Within minutes of the Tucson shootings, the hard left was out on social media and their first target was Sarah Palin. Markos Moulitsas, founder of the DailyKos, immediately tweeted ‘Mission accomplished, Sarah Palin.’ The graphic from Sarah PAC with targeted districts was featured on liberal social media. Liberals blamed Palin for the shooting.

Liberals complained she had not taken that graphic off her website. When she did, liberals complained that she did. Others complained she took the graphic down before she issued condolences, then complained that she offered condolences. All the way, the left wing media was in the tank, accusing Sarah Palin of being as responsible for the shooting as if she had pulled the trigger personally.

Today, Sarah Palin put out a video statement. In that statement, she said,

‘Especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.’

There is nothing Sarah Palin could do that would satisfy the liberal media. She could go to Washington DC, apologize for everything and commit ritual Japanese suicide and the left would not be satisfied.

One of the great debates going on in politics today is whether Sarah Palin has what it takes to be President. Does she have the fortitude for the most powerful job in the world?

Whether she does or does not is a debate for another day. One thing is certain, in the last few days; she has shown greater class and greater leadership than the clowns on the left who have been denouncing her.

Perhaps the debate should be why we have a virtual liberal monopoly on the major media. Perhaps there should be a debate on why there is not one single major conservative media outlet. Why is there a liberal cartel that controls ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, Time, Newsweek, The New York Times and the Washington Post?

Perhaps the debate we should have is why all of those aforementioned media outlets are all hard left outlets. None of them is conservative. Perhaps we could break this liberal monopoly and move some conservatives into these organizations. Perhaps then, we might have some accurate reporting.”

The following was generated by a question about recalling Clarence Dupnik:

“Comments:

‘Reply by J 1 hour ago

Article I, Section 8

http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/const/8/1.p1.htm

of the Arizona state constitution:

Officers Subject to Recall; Petitioners

Every public officer in the state of Arizona, holding an elective office, either by election or appointment, is subject to recall from such office by the qualified electors of the electoral district from which candidates are elected to such office. Such electoral district may include the whole state. Such number of said electors as shall equal twenty-five per centum of the number of votes cast at the last preceding general election for all of the candidates for the office held by such officer, may by petition, which shall be known as a recall petition, demand his recall.

363,909 total votes were cast

[2008 election results for Sheriff of Pima County:

DUPNIK, CLARENCE W 64.60%
SHAW, HARRY 35.21%
Write-in Votes 0.19%

Pima County and Tucson, its major city, are Democratic. Even with his obvious partisan nonsense, it may be very difficult to recall him. The libertines in Tucson will no doubt support him. He is one of their own!

I think it would be a mistake to try to recall him unless those involved are certain the recall will be successful. That to me is doubtful. According to reports, he is 76 and, of course, the next election for sheriff is 2012. Being 77-78 by then, he might just retire. Remember, he is one of their own!—my addition]

for sheriff in 2008, meaning that 90,978 residents of Pima County would have to sign a recall petition to force a recall election of Sheriff Clarence Dupnik. (Dupnik’s Republican opponent received 128,146 votes.) The petition would have to contain a general statement of 200 words or fewer outlining the case for recall.

Dupnik would have five days to resign his position following the filing of a successful recall petition. If he failed to do so, a recall election would be scheduled as provided by law. The Pima County Board of Supervisors would be required to call for a recall election within 15 days, to be scheduled for the first available election day—provided it is more 90 days away from the announcement. Pima County holds elections in March, May, and November—so May would be the first plausible date.

Dupnik would appear on the ballot un-nominated, along with any other candidates duly nominated according to Arizona election procedures. A two hundred word or fewer explanation of Dupnik’s course of office would also appear on the ballot. Whichever candidate achieves a simple plurality would be elected to fill the remainder of Dupnik’s term.”

I’m praying for Gabrielle Giffords, her family, and for her complete recovery. I am also praying that she and the shooter repent and turn to GOD, JESUS, the HOLY SPIRIT (the three in one GOD of the universe) the only SAVIOR for her personally, for the shooter personally, for me personally, for each of us personally.

Gabrielle Giffords and her murder attempt, part 3


I originally planned to end this series today. Then, I began reading previously unopened e-mails. I liked this one because it captures part of the essence of the direction some want to lead this nation. However, it doesn’t deal to a great extent with the evil involved.

But always remember this, ANYTHING that is contrary to the will of GOD is, by definition, EVIL!!! Do you think some on these evil people will take the last sentence out of context and quote me as writing: “GOD is, by definition, EVIL!!!” These people have made an art form out of perverting what is said and what is meant. That too is EVIL!!!

From: Tea Party Nation

“Shooting Exposes Paternalism of the Left
Posted by Ron Miller on January 10, 2011 at 8:01am

One of the valuable lessons I’ve learned in my 50-plus years of living is not to respond to an emotional event on the spur of the moment, but to give reason and thought the opportunity to take hold and better inform one’s actions.

Regrettably, that lesson was ignored by far too many people this weekend.

I was somewhat isolated from the news for a good part of Saturday morning and afternoon, so when I returned home, prepared for an afternoon of playoff football, I didn’t know about the massacre in Tucson, Arizona that gravely wounded Representative Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), killed six, including a 9-year old girl and a federal judge, and injured 14 others.

As stunned as I was by this senseless act of violence, I was equally sickened by the shameless exploitation of this tragedy by the liberal elite and the sycophants who parrot them, for the purposes of smearing their political opponents.

Their grasping at straws would be pathetic if it wasn’t for the fact so many of them reside in the mainstream media, and therefore have the power and passion to flood the public arena with their scurrilous accusations.

As the recently censored Mark Twain once said, ‘The most outrageous lies that can be invented will find believers if a man only tells them with all his might.’ (And continuously repeats them as truth—the concept of the Big Lie!—my addition)

At best, if they truly believe the drivel they are spouting, they are horribly out of touch with their neighbors and fellow Americans, delusional, or some combination of the two.

At worst, if they’re simply doing it out of desperation as they see their ideas rejected, their narrative discredited, and their opportunity for power spiraling down the drain, they are unscrupulous.

Their reaction to this specific incident, however, should also be viewed in the context of how modern liberals view human beings.

To them, people are largely ignorant, impulsive and malleable, and not only require guidance from more enlightened souls—namely, themselves—but must also be shielded from circumstances, people or points of view that the enlightened ones have deemed dangerous or unworthy. All of this, of course, is done for the benefit of the less fortunate.

This elitist perspective toward people is cloaked in benevolence but is in fact condescending and authoritarian in tone and practice. What they are saying, in effect, is that we are incapable of taking responsibility for ourselves, or being held accountable for our actions, and therefore they must take the reins.

The same mindset that declares a deranged shooter the ‘victim’ of a toxic political climate believes that classic literature should be censored to protect us from insensitive language, talk radio ought to be regulated to ensure ‘fairness’ (by their definition of fairness, only!—my addition), people of faith should be banned from the airwaves for ‘hate’ speech, and illegal aliens ought to be called ‘undocumented workers’ instead because the truth is too harsh. (And too accurate!—my addition)

You can almost hear your mother or father lecturing you, saying ‘It’s for your own good.’

I call it the infantilization of America.

Infants aren’t capable of reason or thought, but instead react based on instinct, feelings and desires. Infants are self-absorbed (and have loads of self-esteem!—my addition) and unpredictable. Infants can’t fend for themselves.

In short, infants can’t be trusted with liberty or self-governance. (Or much of anything else unless it’s to the benefit of the controllers!—my addition)

As an example, in my book SELLOUT: Musings from Uncle Tom’s Porch,

http://teamronmiller.com/sellout.php

I write, ‘I see in liberals a condescending paternalism toward blacks as if we are incapable of surviving and thriving on our own.’ The policies and politics they’ve foisted on black Americans for nearly half a century have done irreparable harm, especially to young black men, who have been emasculated and robbed of their self-sufficiency and dignity.

Moreover, like overindulgent parents, the liberal elite seek to shield us from pain or hardship, even of our own making. This is particularly dangerous because not only are we deprived of the lessons and character development that come from confronting and overcoming adversity, we are encouraged to be reckless and irresponsible because we know we’re going to be bailed out or excused for our behavior. (Or as the Bible declares in James 1: 12 [NIV] “Blessed is the man who perseveres under trial, because when he has stood the test, he will receive the crown of life that God has promised to those who love him.” Doing all for someone, denies him the possibility of persevering! Thus, denying the opportunity to withstand the test!—my addition)

Liberty isn’t freedom from adversity, as author Mark Steyn points out:

‘Freedom is messy. In free societies, people will fall through the cracks—drink too much, eat too much, buy unaffordable homes, fail to make prudent provision for health care, and much else. But the price of being relieved of all those tiresome choices by a benign paternal government is far too high ... It’s a liberty issue. I’d rather be free to choose, even if I make the wrong choices.’ (And free to pay the price for my bad choices! GOD requires it anyway. Best to learn to live with it and be held accountable. Because in the end, we are HELD accountable by GOD!—my addition)

The infantilization of America is what gives liberals the authority to tell us how much money we should make, what car we should drive, what health care we should use (and receive—my addition), what we should or shouldn’t eat, and what moral beliefs are acceptable.

It’s also what sanctions them to blame others for the poor life decisions people make, rather than compelling them to stand on their own two feet and take personal responsibility for their actions. (Even though in the end, we all will be personally responsible for our actions, lack of action, beliefs, or lack of belief. We will be held accountable and responsible!—my addition)

The paternalism that undergirds liberal thinking has always been there, but the ongoing rebellion of liberty-loving Americans against their coercive utopianism, to use Dr. Mark Cooray’s term, has stripped away their compassionate veneer and revealed the true arrogance and ugliness underneath.

That is what we are witnessing in these shrill accusations they are hurling at Sarah Palin, the Tea Party movement, and other political opponents. Somehow, it wasn’t a mentally disturbed young man, whose obsession with Representative Giffords apparently preceded the emergence of any of the people or institutions they are attacking, that pulled the trigger that sunny Saturday in Tucson.

It was you and me.

As sure as liberty is our God-given right, however, Jared Loughner is the master of his thoughts and actions, however twisted they may be. Ownership of this evil act is his and his alone.

I trust the American people to discern the liberals’ true motives in transferring blame from the actor to the environment—to suppress dissent and revive their flagging political fortunes.

Please continue to pray for the dead and wounded, and their families and loved ones. Don’t succumb to the temptation to wallow in the mud alongside the liberal elites and their minions. One day they will understand that we are not their children to be hushed into silence on command, although that might be a juvenile assumption on my part.

Ron Miller is a conservative writer and commentator, author of the book, ‘SELLOUT: Musings from Uncle Tom’s Porch,’

http://teamronmiller.com/sellout.php

and the president of Regular Folks United, a non-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of individual liberty, free markets and our nation’s founding principles. The nine-year plus veteran of the U.S. Air Force and married father of three writes columns for several online sites and print publications, and his own website, TeamRonMiller.com. Join him on Facebook and Twitter at @TeamRonMiller.”

I’m praying for Gabrielle Giffords, her family, and for her complete recovery. I am also praying that she and the shooter repent and turn to GOD, JESUS, the HOLY SPIRIT (the three in one GOD of the universe) the only SAVIOR for her personally, for the shooter personally, for me personally, for each of us personally.

Gabrielle Giffords and her murder attempt, part 2


From: 9/12 Project Network

“Shooters mother works for Pima county—Sheriff Dupnik knew this.

Posted by Deborah X XXXXX (Name removed by me for security purposes—my addition.) on January 11, 2011 at 9:04am in News, Issues, & Politics

.. Sheriff Dupnik’s Culpability
by Bill Hennessy on January 10, 2011 .... According to an internal Department of Homeland Security memo, Jarod Lee Loughner’s mother ‘works for Pima County Board of Supervisors.’

In the memo, obtained by Fox News and posted on Greta Van Susteren’s blog, the DHS agent openly speculates about undue internal influence. That’s because Loughner’s arrests don’t all end with reasonable closure, if you will.

Here’s exactly what the DHS report says:

‘suspect’s mother works for the Pima County Board of Supervisors* the suspect has multiple arrests … But no criminal record? Intervention by someone?’

It’s not unreasonable to assume that that ‘someone’ is Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik.

On Saturday evening, Dupnik took to the airwaves to create a sensation. He accused the people of Arizona, talk radio, Sharon Angle, Sarah Palin, and the tea party of complicity in murder, effectively. The sheriff did so without evidence.

If Dupnik was involved in springing Loughner after one of the murderer’s many arrests, then Dupnik had strong motive to manufacture a bogeyman. If Dupnik helped keep Loughner stay out of the state psych system, then his motive doubles. There’s mounting evidence that Dupnik is guilty of both.

We already know that Dupnik refused to uphold Arizona’s SB1070 (which is Arizona‘s newly passed illegal immigration law which the Obama Administration is challenging in court—my addition). We already know that he holds the people of Arizona in the highest contempt. A law enforcement officer who despises the people he’s sworn to protect and who refuses to enforce the law he’s sworn to uphold is unfit for office.

If I were Arizona’s Attorney General, I’d be actively putting together a case for some warrants.

But, as Dennis Miller would say, that’s just my opinion; I could be wrong.”

From: http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=176947

“Gotcha Sheriff Clarence ‘XXXXXXX’ (Edited out by me—my addition.) Dupnik
Posted 2011-01-10 13:29
by Karl Denninger in Editorial

Oh, you better hope this is not true:

[From: http://thechollajumps.wordpress.com/2011/01/09/jared-loughner-is-a-product-of-sheriff-dupniks-office/

“The Cholla Jumps

Jared Loughner is a product of Sheriff Dupnik’s office
by James Kelley

This is the report that Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik has been dreading since the tragic event on Saturday January 8.

The sheriff has been editorializing and politicizing the event since he took the podium to report on the incident. His blaming of radio personalities and bloggers is a pre-emptive strike because Mr. Dupnik knows this tragedy lays at his feet and his office. Six people died on his watch and he could have prevented it. He needs to step up and start apologizing to the families of the victims instead of spinning this event to serve his own political agenda.

Jared Loughner, pronounced by the Sheriff as “Lock-ner,” saying it was the Polish pronunciation. Of course he meant Scott or Irish but that isn’t the point. The point is he and his office have had previous contact with the alleged assailant in the past and that is how he knows how to pronounce the name.

Jared Loughner has been making death threats by phone to many people in Pima County including staff of Pima Community College, radio personalities and local bloggers. When Pima County Sheriff’s Office was informed, his deputies assured the victims that he was being well managed by the mental health system. It was also suggested that further pressing of charges would be unnecessary and probably cause more problems than it solved as Jared Loughner has a family member that works for Pima County. Amy Loughner is a Natural Resource specialist for the Pima County Parks and Recreation. My sympathies and my heart goes out to her and the rest of Mr. Loughner’s family. This tragedy must be tearing them up inside wondering if they had done the right things in trying to manage Jared’s obvious mental instability.

Every victim of his threats previously must also be wondering if this tragedy could have been prevented if they had been more aggressive in pursuing charges against Mr. Loughner. Perhaps with a felony conviction he would never have been able to lawfully by the Glock 9mm Model 19 that he used to strike down the lives of six people and decimate 14 more.

This was not an act of politics. This was an act of a mentally disturbed young man XXXX (Edited out by me—my addition.) bent on getting his 15 minutes of infamy. The Pima County Sheriff’s Department was aware of his violent nature and they failed to act appropriately. This tragedy leads right back to Sherriff Dupnik and all the spin in the world is not going to change that fact.”]

‘The sheriff has been editorializing and politicizing the event since he took the podium to report on the incident. His blaming of radio personalities and bloggers is a pre-emptive strike because Mr. Dupnik knows this tragedy lays at his feet and his office. Six people died on his watch and he could have prevented it. He needs to step up and start apologizing to the families of the victims instead of spinning this event to serve his own political agenda.’

What have I been saying? That in point of fact the Sheriff had every opportunity to stop this assault by actually enforcing the law and didn’t do so.

Well now the truth is alleged to be this ..... It’s much worse, it appears, than anyone thought:

‘Jared Loughner has been making death threats by phone to many people in Pima County including staff of Pima Community College, radio personalities and local bloggers. When Pima County Sheriff’s Office was informed, his deputies assured the victims that he was being well managed by the mental health system. It was also suggested that further pressing of charges would be unnecessary and probably cause more problems than it solved as Jared Loughner has a family member that works for Pima County. Amy Loughner is a Natural Resource specialist for the Pima County Parks and Recreation.’

What’s your response to this Mr. Dupnik? A bit of truth comes out, eh? Exactly how many felonies did you decline to investigate and prosecute? Are you going to slink away from the white-hot light of truth or will you ‘man up’ and admit that your scurrilous allegations were disseminated simply to try to save your own hide from the entirely-appropriate wrath at the ballot box that is certain to ensue come next election?

The suspect didn’t just post one threat on an Internet forum and there wasn’t ‘just one’ incident—it’s alleged here that he made multiple death threats against the staff of the college he was ejected from, radio personalities and local bloggers.

Each and every one of those threats was an offense and had just one of them been prosecuted it would have resulted in the suspect being blacklisted in the NICS database—and thus he would not have been able to buy the gun he shot the people in Tucson with.

And before you go off on this guy and his blog being some sort of nut, here’s the credentials from his page:

‘James Kelley is a native of Tucson, born here in 1961. A Navy veteran, he graduated twice from the Defense Language Institute in Monterey CA majoring in Albanian and Persian-Farsi. He was a Balkan area, Middle East North Africa, Southwest Asia, and Gulf Area analyst for the Naval Security Group and the National Security Agency. He received his Bachelor of Science in Sociology from the University of the State of New York, Albany. Since leaving the service he has worked as a premium cruise line representative, telecommunications specialist, real estate broker, and as a substitute teacher in local school districts.

Presently, Mr. Kelley is a contributing columnist for the Arizona News-Telegraph and the Executive Director of SocialNetworkingWatchdog.Org, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization dedicated to educating youth and seniors on personal security while using social networking.’”

“Best-a-luck in the next election Sheriff.

You’re gonna need it.”

Clarence Dupnik is the longtime Sheriff for Pima County. I believe I read on one of the stories I have been following that he is 76. I don’t know when his next election is. He is also a longtime Democrat—Pima County and Tucson are Democratic areas. He is the antithesis of Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County where Phoenix is located.

The Tucson area tends to reelect their representatives at all levels unless the representative is involved in a scandal of some type. This may be the necessary scandal if he runs for reelection. Then again, it may not be. California and New York reelected the same old scoundrels in the 2010 election. The Tucson area also reelected Gabrielle Giffords and Raul Grijalva in 2010—both of whom deserved to be defeated based upon their voting records in Congress. Representative Grijalva even called for a boycott of Arizona because of the newly passed illegal immigration law.

One final note: The attempt to associate these murders with conservatives and the present political rhetoric seems to be failing, as it should.

From: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41014125?GT1=43001

“‘Political tone’

On Tuesday, CBS News released a nationwide telephone poll that found a majority of Americans reject the view that heated political rhetoric was a factor in the weekend shootings.

Since Saturday, various politicians and commentators have said a climate in which strong language and ideological polarization is common may have contributed to the attack. (May have? Some directly blamed talk radio, Sarah Palin, the Tea Party movement and anyone else they could think of who is conservative!—my addition)

But CBS said its poll found that, ‘57 percent of respondents said the harsh political tone had nothing to do with the shooting, compared to 32 percent who felt it did.’” (Which means that the 32 percent are either “true believers” or really naïve/gullible or both—my addition.)

The person responsible for these murders is the shooter. Plain and simple. We each are responsible for our own actions and beliefs. And so is the murderer of these innocent people.

Personal responsibility!!! Live with it!!! It is a fact of life!!!

I’m praying for Gabrielle Giffords, her family, and for her complete recovery. I am also praying that she and the shooter repent and turn to GOD, JESUS, the HOLY SPIRIT (the three in one GOD of the universe) the only SAVIOR for her personally, for the shooter personally, for me personally, for each of us personally.