A Utopia for Conservatives?

Have you ever said to yourself that you wished you lived someplace where liberals didn't?  Or maybe you wished you lived in a place where you and your family would be safe in the event the excrement made physical contact with a hydro-electric powered oscillating air current distribution device.  Thanks to the patriots at The Citadel, you can now have both. 

The Citadel is proposing to build a planned community in northern Idaho that will house 3,500-7,000 American families.  According to their website, patriotic American families will voluntarily live together in accordance with Thomas Jefferson's ideal of Rightful Liberty.  What is Rightful Liberty you ask?  It basically means that neighbors keep their noses out of other neighbors business, that neighbors live and let live.  Marxists, Socialists, Liberals and RINO's need not apply.

The good folks at the Citadel plan to purchase up to 3,000 acres for the planned community, which will be protected with walls and towers.  The Citadel has already purchased about 20 acres (the beach head) where they intend to build a modern firearms company (III Arms) to help fund the project.  Every able-bodied resident of the Citadel will be required to own and maintain an AR-15, five magazines and 1,000 rounds of ammo.  I know many of you are thinking this must be a Utopian dream and I would concur.

Once the mainstream liberal media catches wind of this project, I'm certain they will try to make comparisons to 'right-wing' anti-government wackos or some racist cult in a compound.  Nothing could be farther from the truth.  But of course the Matt Lauer types of the MSM never let the truth get in the way of a good story.  The Citadel prohibits extremists and all prejudicial philosophies.  In fact, they don't even care what race you or your ancestors originate and they have no religious barriers.  Patriots are not defined by race or religion.  I myself might take issue with the religious barriers issue.  There are those that view government as a religion....but then again... they fall into the Marxist/Socialist/Liberal/Progressive camp, so I have no worries.

 

If you and your family are interested in such a wonderful concept, I would encourage you to check them out.  At the very least, you can purchase one of their AR-15's or 1911's before Obama and the liberals makes them illegal.  Let me know what you think.            

Sphere: Related Content

Obama Cannot Create Laws Through Executive Order

Vice President Biden has said Obama may well impose new gun control laws with the stroke of a pen, thus avoiding a heated fight with Congress.  President Obama is not the first president to invoke Executive Orders and he won’t be the last.  U.S. Presidents have issued Executive Orders since the 1780’s and usually they were issued to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage the operations within the federal government itself. 

There is no Constitutional provision or statute per se that unequivocally permits executive orders, however, there is a vague grant of "executive power" given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution.  There were no rules governing the use of Executive Orders until 1952.  In 1952 the Supreme Court ruled in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952) that Executive Order 10340 from President Harry S. Truman placing all steel mills in the country under federal control was invalid because it ATTEMPTED TO MAKE LAW, RATHER THAN CLARIFY OR ACT TO FURTHER A LAW PUT FORTH BY THE CONGRESS OR THE CONSTITUTION.

Before the Youngstown v. Sawyer Supreme Court ruling, some Presidents used EO’s with impunity.  FDR used an Executive Order (EO 9066) to grant authority to the military to forcibly intern Japanese-Americans for the duration of WWII.  Article 1, Section 1 of the Constitution is a vesting clause, granting all the federal government's legislative authority to Congress.  The Vesting Clause establishes the principle of separation of powers by specifically giving to each branch of the federal government only those powers it can exercise and no others.  This means that no branch may exercise powers that properly belong to another (e.g., since the legislative power is only vested in Congress, the executive and judiciary may not enact laws).

Article 1, Sec 1 should legally prevent President Obama from making new gun-control laws through Executive Order because the Constitution gives that authority to Congress.  The Tenth Amendment should also prevent the Obama regime from being able to force their new gun laws down the throats of the 50 states.  The Mack-Printz v. United States ruling in 1997 declared that the states or their political subdivisions “are not subject to federal direction.” The issue of federal authority is defined even further in this most powerful Tenth Amendment decision. 

Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack and Montana Sheriff Jay Printz sued the Clinton administration because of the unconstitutionality of certain interim provisions of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act.  The opinion of the majority of the Supreme Court in the Mack/Printz decision reestablished states rights granted to them by the Tenth Amendment.  Justice Scalia opined for the majority stating, “…the Constitution’s conferral upon Congress of not all governmental powers, but only discreet, enumerated ones.”  Scalia went on to state, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution…are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” 

To clarify this point, we need to understand that the powers and jurisdiction granted to the federal government are few, precise, and expressly defined. The feds have their assignments within constitutional boundaries and the states have theirs, as well. Scalia also mentions this, “It is incontestable that the Constitution established a system of dual sovereignty” and that the states retained “a residuary and inviolable sovereignty.”

Scalia even goes so far as to detail who is responsible to keep the federal government in their proper place, if or when they decide to go beyond their allotted authority. In doing so he quotes James Madison, considered to be the father of our Constitution, “The local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority [federal government] than the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere.” (The Federalist # 39).

I don’t want to predict what Obama will do through Executive Order, but if he tries to make new gun control laws with the stroke of a pen, we have precedent on our side to prevent it.  Of course that precedent doesn’t mean a thing unless we have some real patriots that are willing to take on the mighty Obama regime.    

Sphere: Related Content

Election Results. Obama-50.3% (303) Romney-48.1% (206)

2012 MAP

                                              

Obama/Biden 50.3% (303)   Romney/Ryan 48.1% (206)Refresh

7:00PM ET	Obama	Romney			Obama	Romney
Georgia (16) 45.4 53.4 (100%)				Indiana (11) 43.8 54.3 (100%)
Kentucky (8) 37.8 60.5 (100%)				South Carolina (9) 43.7 54.9 (100%)
Vermont (3) 67.0 31.2 (97%)				Virginia (13) 50.7 47.8 (100%)
7:30PM ET	Obama	Romney			Obama	Romney
North Carolina (15) 48.4 50.6 (100%)				Ohio (18) 50.1 48.2 (100%)
West Virginia (5) 35.5 62.3 (100%)
8:00PM ET	Obama	Romney			Obama	Romney
Alabama (9) 38.4 60.7 (100%)				Connecticut (7) 57.9 40.9 (91%)
Delaware (3) 58.6 40.0 (100%)				DC (3) 91.4 7.1 (100%)
Florida (29) 49.8 49.3 (100%)				Illinois (20) 57.3 41.1 (100%)
Maine (4) 56.4 40.3 (78%)				Maryland (10) 61.2 37.0 (98%)
Massachusetts (11) 60.9 37.5 (98%)				Mississippi (6) 43.7 55.4 (99%)
Missouri (10) 44.3 53.9 (100%)				New Hampshire (4) 52.2 46.4 (95%)
New Jersey (14) 57.9 41.0 (99%)				Oklahoma (7) 33.2 66.8 (100%)
Pennsylvania (20) 51.9 46.8 (99%)				Rhode Island (4) 63.1 35.2 (97%)
Tennessee (11) 39.0 59.5 (99%)
8:30PM ET	Obama	Romney			Obama	Romney
Arkansas (6) 36.9 60.5 (97%)
9:00PM ET	Obama	Romney			Obama	Romney
Arizona (11) 43.4 55.0 (100%)				Colorado (9) 51.2 46.5 (81%)
Kansas (6) 37.9 59.9 (99%)				Louisiana (8) 39.8 58.5 (100%)
Michigan (16) 53.7 45.4 (95%)				Minnesota (10) 52.8 45.2 (100%)
Nebraska (5) 37.8 60.5 (100%)				New Mexico (5) 52.9 43.0 (100%)
New York (29) 62.7 35.9 (98%)				North Dakota (3) 38.9 58.7 (100%)
South Dakota (3) 39.9 57.9 (100%)				Texas (38) 41.4 57.2 (100%)
Wisconsin (10) 52.7 46.2 (100%)				Wyoming (3) 28.0 69.3 (100%)
10:00PM ET	Obama	Romney			Obama	Romney
Iowa (6) 52.1 46.5 (100%)				Montana (3) 42.1 55.0 (85%)
Nevada (6) 52.3 45.7 (99%)				Utah (6) 24.9 72.7 (100%)
11:00PM ET	Obama	Romney			Obama	Romney
California (55) 59.2 38.5 (98%)				Hawaii (4) 70.6 27.8 (100%)
Idaho (4) 32.6 64.6 (98%)				Oregon (7) 53.4 43.9 (77%)
Washington (12) 55.2 42.8 (52%)
1:00AM ET	Obama	Romney			Obama	Romney
Alaska (3) 41.5 55.0 (99%)

Sphere: Related Content

New weapon is Holy Grail of electronic warfare

The holy grail of electronic warfare has made it's debut.  Boeing’s Phantom Works demonstrated its Counter-electronics High-powered Microwave Advanced Missile (CHAMP) last month over the Utah Test and Training Range.  The advanced missile successfully defeated electronic targets with little to no collateral damage when tested on an unoccupied building in the Utah desert.  The CHAMP weapon discharged a burst of High Power Microwaves onto the unoccupied test building and brought down the the entire spectrum of electronic systems; disabling the camera recording the test in the process.

This new missile is an important development and it adds a powerful punch to the U.S. weapons arsenal.  The missile renders enemy radar inoperable and permanently destroys electronic equipment.  It is said that CHAMP can penetrate underground bunkers, disable fighter planes, tanks, ships, and missile systems.  It's similar to a miniature electromagnetic pulse (EMP) bomb, except CHAMP can be used to take out the electronic systems we want to render useless.  EMP's will affect a wide area, depending on altitude of explosion, energy yield and gamma ray output.  CHAMP uses a selective high-frequency radio wave to target enemy electronics.

This new weapon would allow our air-force to penetrate the airspace of our enemies at will and grant unimpeded access to our bombers to destroy targets at will.  If the United States fails to confront the Iranians in their quest for nuclear weapons, and instead places that burden on the Israelis, then the next President of the United States must offer this weapon to the Israeli military.  If the Israelis had the CHAMP weapon system and some advanced bunker-busting bombs, they could defend themselves much easier than they can at present.      

Sphere: Related Content

CIA operators were denied request for help during Benghazi attack

BREAKING NEWS FROM FOX NEWS***
Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. Consulate and subsequent attack several hours later was denied by U.S. officials -- who also told the CIA operators twice to "stand down" rather than help the ambassador's team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/26/cia-operators-were-denied-request-for-help-during-benghazi-attack-sources-say/#ixzz2AQG4N7Zm

Sphere: Related Content

Colin Powell questions a Romney foreign policy?

Former Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell endorsed President Barack Obama for a second term Thursday, telling “CBS This Morning” that he voted for Obama in 2008 but this time was going further and publicly backing him.  One of the reasons Mr. Powell endorsed President Obama is because he has concerns with a Romney foreign policy.  "I'm not quite sure which Governor Romney we would be getting with respect to foreign policy," Powell stated. “One day he has a certain strong view about staying in Afghanistan but then on Monday night he agrees with the withdrawal — same thing in Iraq.”

Former Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell has concerns with a Romney foreign policy?
I guess he likes the way Obama conducts his foreign policy.  People don't remember that Colin Powell shared some responsibility for the deaths of Americans in Mogadishu during Clinton's term.   A Senate report into a disastrous 1993 Army raid in Somalia portrays Gen. Colin Powell bending to pressure to keep U.S. involvement to a minimum when field commanders sought greater firepower. The report quotes Gen. Wayne Downing, head of the United States Special Forces, as saying "we were under incredible pressure" from the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  "I advised that I would like to have the AC-130s," he said. "Gen. Powell advised that we needed to keep the numbers down."  Powell was rightly criticized for refusing to send AC-130 gunships along with Task Force Ranger, a force of 460 Army troops to reinforce the troops that were trying to capture the Somali warlord.

In the end, 18 America soldiers were killed and many more injured.  I guess Colin Powell had a case of amnesia, because he later said he didn't recall that his officers on the ground requested the reinforcements...even though he was the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  Judging by Powell's past decisions, I can see why he would prefer Obama's weak foreign policy over one of strength.          

Sphere: Related Content

Is Benghazi Obama's Mogadishu?

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Monday attempted to take one for Team Obama. While in Lima Peru, Secretary Clinton stated, "I take responsibility, I'm in charge of the State Department's 60,000-plus people all over the world, 275 posts. The president and the vice president wouldn't be knowledgeable about specific decisions that are made by security professionals. They're the ones who weigh all of the threats and the risks and the needs and make a considered decision."

Is Hillary Clinton the new Les Aspin?  In 1994, then Secretary of Defense Les Aspin, was ousted from the Clinton administration in large part because of the failed raid in Mogadishu Somalia (Blackhawk Down) and his decision not to send tanks.  According to a Senate Armed Services Committee report on the deaths of 18 U.S. service members, Defense Secretary Les Aspin and his deputies rejected sending needed tanks and armored vehicles to Somalia because they feared a political backlash would undermine their pro-United Nations policy.

Fast forward to 2012. The late Ambassador Stevens and the diplomatic mission in Libya made multiple security related requests that were turned down by Washington based officials.  Ambassador Stevens even wrote in his diary that he feared for his safety shortly before he and three other Americans were murdered by terrorists.  Lt. Col. Andrew Wood has stated that U.S. Ambassador Stevens wanted a Security Support Team, made up of 16 special operations soldiers, to stay with him in Libya after their deployment was scheduled to end in August. The embassy staff’s first choice was for us to stay and "that would have been the choice of the embassy people in Tripoli” Lt. Col. Andrew's continued.

Why would the Obama administration deny adequate security to our diplomatic team in Libya?  Especially during the 11th anniversary of 9/11 and in a country rife with anti-American Islamists.   Liberals have this unfounded view that if the United States keeps a low profile and doesn't project power, then somehow our enemies will like us and not try to kill us.  President Obama has spent the better part of four years apologizing to Muslim extremists; projecting weakness in the process.

Benghazi is Obama's Mogadishu, the only difference is 18 Army Rangers died in Somalia and four diplomats died in Libya.  Defense Secretary Les Aspin took the blame for Bill Clinton's failed foreign policy in 1994 and Hillary Clinton is attempting to take the blame for Obama's failed foreign policy today.  

I find it ironic that a 2008 Hillary Clinton campaign ad featured a telephone ringing at 3 a.m. It strongly suggested that Barack Obama was not prepared to take that phone call at that critical hour. Somewhere a crisis would mount, and she wanted primary voters to understand that the inexperienced Illinois senator was not ready to tackle it.  That 3 a.m. phone did in fact ring..and Obama didn't answer, Hillary did, and they both failed miserably.  

Senate Report on Somalia 

Sphere: Related Content