Here We Go AGAIN: Governor McAuliffe Says: Can’t Lose the Squirrels/Need New Stadium! Taxpayers WATCH OUT!

I heard this on the radio (I listen to John Fredericks almost every AM on my way to work) and I realized:  Taxpayers watch out!

Gov. McAuliffe makes pitch to keep the Flying Squirrels in Richmond

Here is the WRIC report and the summary is:  Some sort of new stadium deal is in the works AGAIN!

“We need a new ballpark,” he [Governor McAuliffe] said. “We’re Richmond. We cannot lose the Squirrels. How do you lose a ball team? Is that a good message?”

Well, the leaders of the Commonwealth won’t ask me to attend but let me say:  I hope we can keep the Squirrels, too.  But at what cost to the taxpayers?  It sounds like the bike race nonsense all over again.  I would rather lose the Squirrels than end up with a bad deal for the next 30 years or so.

If the Squirrels are serious about staying in town and want a new stadium – newsflash:  Let THEM finance the stadium!  Now there can be some help from others who might use the stadium – concerts, VCU and UR baseball, special events.  Maybe even a special tax on the tickets.  BUT none of the bike race stuff – do not let the taxpayers finance the stadium (we’ll pay double what it is worth) and make the Squirrels put some skin in the game – or nuts if you prefer – because we could build the stadium and we could still lose the Squirrels.

But no taxpayer-funded stadium in Richmond!  That’s my final answer…and it should be yours, too.  Tell your local leaders and make it count.


Article written by: Elwood "Sandy" Sanders

The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher’s Council Results

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-fjmYWFGjRLQ/VBZKcuHxAUI/AAAAAAAAi1w/5WIOcOHaH2s/s1600/confederacy.png

The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast, and the results are in for this week’s Watcher’s Council match up.

“I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.” – President James Madison

“A republic, if you can keep it” – Benjamin Franklin

“Man’s capacity for justice makes democracy possible, but man’s inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary.” – Reinhold Neibuhr

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-1ndmEdQX3AM/Tv04FWJ3kTI/AAAAAAAAAzg/P-WNaJRST6Q/s400/Bookworm%2B3.jpg

This week we had tie in the Council category between Bookworm Room’s The single most important election issue in 2016: The Constitution!
and Joshuapundit’s The Clinton E-Mail Scandal And How It Will End .

As Watcher, I get paid the big bucks to break ties like this.

My piece detailed exactly how Mrs. Clinton broke the law, endangered national security and discussed where the current FBI investigation is as well as my prediction for how this all will end, which may startle some people!

Andrea’s articulate and well written article explored in great detail her belief that the real issue in the coming election is strengthening our Constitution. Not only did I vote for it myself, but she definitely wins the honors this week as far as I’m concerned! Here’s a slice:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
— Presidential Oath of Office

In 1992, James Carville famously hung a sign in Bill Clinton’s Little Rock campaign headquarters pointing campaign workers to Clinton’s most powerful campaign message: “The economy, stupid!” Today, in the run-up to the 2016 election, conservatives need to keep hammering their most powerful campaign message: “The Constitution!” After eight years of Obama’s savage disregard for the Constitution, the 2016 election is America’s last chance to return our Constitution to its rightful, and central, place in American politics.

In this essay, I hope to establish three things:

I. That the Constitution is a unique document that empowers individuals over government, making it the bedrock of American exceptionalism;

II. That Barack Obama has significantly damaged the Constitution’s preeminent position in American government, creating a dangerous imbalance in favor of an unlimited executive backed by a powerful, all-encompassing bureaucracy; and

III. That we must choose our next president very carefully in order to redress this imbalance lest we wake up one morning to find ourselves living under a permanent de facto dictatorship.

Part I

After winning the Revolution, America’s Founding Fathers had the unique opportunity to build a government from the ground up. Being educated men, they had several models from which to choose. They could replicate the British model, with its monarch, hereditary aristocracy, and House of Commons. They could attempt a commune of the type that the Pilgrims tried in 1620. Although that attempt almost killed the Pilgrims, the utopian impulse towards communism has continued to tempt revolutionaries ever since. They could try to put Plato’s Republic into effect and appoint themselves as the ideal Platonic ruling elite. They could even try the Judges approach from the Old Testament. They rejected all of those models.

The Founders’ genius lay in recognizing that all previous government models had a pyramidal structure, with power held only at the very top of the pyramid. This was certainly true of Britain which, beginning in 1066, had vested complete power in a hereditary monarchy. It took centuries for the aristocracy and landed gentry to chip away at the monarch’s authority, starting with the Magna Carta (1215) and finishing with the Glorious Revolution’s Bill of Rights (1689).

Ironically, thanks to the American Revolution, Parliament concluded that the British Bill of Rights, many parts of which the Founders incorporated wholesale into our Constitution, limited only the monarchy, but had no controlling effect on Parliament. In other words, Britain emerged from the American Revolution as pyramidal as before, only with Parliament at the top of the pyramid, not the King.

This same pyramidal pattern held true for all other governments the Founder’s studied. No matter the outcome of history’s wars and revolutions, government’s fundamental structure remained unchanged: Power resided at the top, with those citizens excluded from power enjoying limited freedoms and privileges — and those only at the whim of the ruling class. The Founders would therefore have been unsurprised to see that the 20th century’s communist revolutions, despite destroying the old ruling classes entirely, created governments no different from the ones they replaced – power was at the top, with the apparatchiks, and the people groaned in bloody servitude under what was just another self-appointed elite.

To prevent the tyranny of the elite – any elite – the Founders created an entirely new government structure, one never before tried: They broke governing authority into its constituent parts (legislative, executive, and judicial) and divvied that power amongst three different, but equal, branches of government. No government branch could act alone. The theory was that each branch would guard its power jealously, thereby keeping either of the other two branches from becoming dominant. These “checks and balances,” integral to our Founder’s design, were an elegant example of the old idea that it takes two thieves (or, in this case, three) to keep an honest bargain.

The Founders also went beyond creating a radically new government structure that diffused power throughout government to prevent the inevitable tyranny that flows from vesting all government power in one person or collective. In 1791, they enacted the Bill of Rights.

The philosophy underlying our Bill of Rights is not found in the Constitution itself, but in the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Throughout history, many have called themselves revolutionaries, but they are invariably just as power-hungry as the governments they’ve overthrown. The Founders, however, were true revolutionaries. Their new paradigm holds that a majority of citizens can voluntarily elect a legislature and abide by its laws; accept the executive’s enforcement of the laws (including punishments); and allow the judiciary to interpret the laws, if they have concluded that a particular set of political figures will best protect their life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. If, however, the majority of the people conclude that this same government no longer serves them well, they may reconstitute the government to make it more to their liking.

Being cautious men, and with Parliament’s gutting of the British Bill of Rights as a grim example of government overreach, the Founders did not feel that just a Declaration and Constitution were adequate protections for individuals. In 1791, the Founders enacted the Bill of Rights, explicitly spelling out the inviolate sphere of rights that each person possesses independent of government. Ironically, many of the rights are verbatim restatements of the same British Bill of Rights that Parliament had only recently nullified.

America’s Bill of Rights represents a complete inversion of the traditional power pyramid. In America, the governing power rests, not at the highest point of the pyramid, with kings and politicians, but in its base, which is comprised of individuals who possess inherent, unalienable rights. Because these individual rights are so important, they bear repeating here:

Amendment 1 – Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment 2 – Right to Bear Arms.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment 3 – Quartering of Soldiers.

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment 4 – Search and Seizure.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment 5 – Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment 6 – Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses.

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 defence.

Amendment 7 – Trial by Jury in Civil Cases.

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment 8 – Cruel and Unusual Punishment.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment 9 – Construction of Constitution.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment 10 – Powers of the States and People.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Much more at the link.

In our non-Council category, the winner was Doug Ibendahl at Republican News Watch withNational Review just handed Donald Trump the Election submitted by Puma By Design.

Mr. Ibendahl, a Chicago attorney was former General Counsel of the Illinois Republican Party. His contention is the the National Review,Weekly Standard and various movement conservatives HQ’d in New York City and Washington who just gratuitously attacked Donald Trump did him a huge favor by emphasizing his bona fides as an independent outsider unconnected to the GOP establishment. Based on the polls, he may very well be right.

Here are this week’s full results. The Noisy Room was unable to vote this week, but was not subject to the usual 2/3 vote penalty for not voting:

Council Winners

Non-Council Winners

See you next week!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. and every Tuesday morning, when we reveal the weeks’ nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher’s Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y’know?

Continue reading: 

The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher’s Council Results


Article written by: Tom White

The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher’s Council Results

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-fjmYWFGjRLQ/VBZKcuHxAUI/AAAAAAAAi1w/5WIOcOHaH2s/s1600/confederacy.png

The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast, and the results are in for this week’s Watcher’s Council match up.

“I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.” – President James Madison

“A republic, if you can keep it” – Benjamin Franklin

“Man’s capacity for justice makes democracy possible, but man’s inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary.” – Reinhold Neibuhr

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-1ndmEdQX3AM/Tv04FWJ3kTI/AAAAAAAAAzg/P-WNaJRST6Q/s400/Bookworm%2B3.jpg

This week we had tie in the Council category between Bookworm Room’s The single most important election issue in 2016: The Constitution!
and Joshuapundit’s The Clinton E-Mail Scandal And How It Will End .

As Watcher, I get paid the big bucks to break ties like this.

My piece detailed exactly how Mrs. Clinton broke the law, endangered national security and discussed where the current FBI investigation is as well as my prediction for how this all will end, which may startle some people!

Andrea’s articulate and well written article explored in great detail her belief that the real issue in the coming election is strengthening our Constitution. Not only did I vote for it myself, but she definitely wins the honors this week as far as I’m concerned! Here’s a slice:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
— Presidential Oath of Office

In 1992, James Carville famously hung a sign in Bill Clinton’s Little Rock campaign headquarters pointing campaign workers to Clinton’s most powerful campaign message: “The economy, stupid!” Today, in the run-up to the 2016 election, conservatives need to keep hammering their most powerful campaign message: “The Constitution!” After eight years of Obama’s savage disregard for the Constitution, the 2016 election is America’s last chance to return our Constitution to its rightful, and central, place in American politics.

In this essay, I hope to establish three things:

I. That the Constitution is a unique document that empowers individuals over government, making it the bedrock of American exceptionalism;

II. That Barack Obama has significantly damaged the Constitution’s preeminent position in American government, creating a dangerous imbalance in favor of an unlimited executive backed by a powerful, all-encompassing bureaucracy; and

III. That we must choose our next president very carefully in order to redress this imbalance lest we wake up one morning to find ourselves living under a permanent de facto dictatorship.

Part I

After winning the Revolution, America’s Founding Fathers had the unique opportunity to build a government from the ground up. Being educated men, they had several models from which to choose. They could replicate the British model, with its monarch, hereditary aristocracy, and House of Commons. They could attempt a commune of the type that the Pilgrims tried in 1620. Although that attempt almost killed the Pilgrims, the utopian impulse towards communism has continued to tempt revolutionaries ever since. They could try to put Plato’s Republic into effect and appoint themselves as the ideal Platonic ruling elite. They could even try the Judges approach from the Old Testament. They rejected all of those models.

The Founders’ genius lay in recognizing that all previous government models had a pyramidal structure, with power held only at the very top of the pyramid. This was certainly true of Britain which, beginning in 1066, had vested complete power in a hereditary monarchy. It took centuries for the aristocracy and landed gentry to chip away at the monarch’s authority, starting with the Magna Carta (1215) and finishing with the Glorious Revolution’s Bill of Rights (1689).

Ironically, thanks to the American Revolution, Parliament concluded that the British Bill of Rights, many parts of which the Founders incorporated wholesale into our Constitution, limited only the monarchy, but had no controlling effect on Parliament. In other words, Britain emerged from the American Revolution as pyramidal as before, only with Parliament at the top of the pyramid, not the King.

This same pyramidal pattern held true for all other governments the Founder’s studied. No matter the outcome of history’s wars and revolutions, government’s fundamental structure remained unchanged: Power resided at the top, with those citizens excluded from power enjoying limited freedoms and privileges — and those only at the whim of the ruling class. The Founders would therefore have been unsurprised to see that the 20th century’s communist revolutions, despite destroying the old ruling classes entirely, created governments no different from the ones they replaced – power was at the top, with the apparatchiks, and the people groaned in bloody servitude under what was just another self-appointed elite.

To prevent the tyranny of the elite – any elite – the Founders created an entirely new government structure, one never before tried: They broke governing authority into its constituent parts (legislative, executive, and judicial) and divvied that power amongst three different, but equal, branches of government. No government branch could act alone. The theory was that each branch would guard its power jealously, thereby keeping either of the other two branches from becoming dominant. These “checks and balances,” integral to our Founder’s design, were an elegant example of the old idea that it takes two thieves (or, in this case, three) to keep an honest bargain.

The Founders also went beyond creating a radically new government structure that diffused power throughout government to prevent the inevitable tyranny that flows from vesting all government power in one person or collective. In 1791, they enacted the Bill of Rights.

The philosophy underlying our Bill of Rights is not found in the Constitution itself, but in the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Throughout history, many have called themselves revolutionaries, but they are invariably just as power-hungry as the governments they’ve overthrown. The Founders, however, were true revolutionaries. Their new paradigm holds that a majority of citizens can voluntarily elect a legislature and abide by its laws; accept the executive’s enforcement of the laws (including punishments); and allow the judiciary to interpret the laws, if they have concluded that a particular set of political figures will best protect their life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. If, however, the majority of the people conclude that this same government no longer serves them well, they may reconstitute the government to make it more to their liking.

Being cautious men, and with Parliament’s gutting of the British Bill of Rights as a grim example of government overreach, the Founders did not feel that just a Declaration and Constitution were adequate protections for individuals. In 1791, the Founders enacted the Bill of Rights, explicitly spelling out the inviolate sphere of rights that each person possesses independent of government. Ironically, many of the rights are verbatim restatements of the same British Bill of Rights that Parliament had only recently nullified.

America’s Bill of Rights represents a complete inversion of the traditional power pyramid. In America, the governing power rests, not at the highest point of the pyramid, with kings and politicians, but in its base, which is comprised of individuals who possess inherent, unalienable rights. Because these individual rights are so important, they bear repeating here:

Amendment 1 – Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment 2 – Right to Bear Arms.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment 3 – Quartering of Soldiers.

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment 4 – Search and Seizure.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment 5 – Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment 6 – Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses.

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 defence.

Amendment 7 – Trial by Jury in Civil Cases.

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment 8 – Cruel and Unusual Punishment.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment 9 – Construction of Constitution.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment 10 – Powers of the States and People.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Much more at the link.

In our non-Council category, the winner was Doug Ibendahl at Republican News Watch withNational Review just handed Donald Trump the Election submitted by Puma By Design.

Mr. Ibendahl, a Chicago attorney was former General Counsel of the Illinois Republican Party. His contention is the the National Review,Weekly Standard and various movement conservatives HQ’d in New York City and Washington who just gratuitously attacked Donald Trump did him a huge favor by emphasizing his bona fides as an independent outsider unconnected to the GOP establishment. Based on the polls, he may very well be right.

Here are this week’s full results. The Noisy Room was unable to vote this week, but was not subject to the usual 2/3 vote penalty for not voting:

Council Winners

Non-Council Winners

See you next week!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. and every  Tuesday morning, when we reveal the weeks’ nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher’s Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y’know?

Champion Material Part II: My Endorsement of Ted Cruz by Craig Johnson

By Craig Johnson

“Moreover, thou shalt choose able men, such as fear God, Men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them.” – Exodus 18:21

My last article, TRUMP, CARSON, CRUZ: CHAMPION MATERIAL? , was a character analysis of the top three outsider Presidential Candidates. It was also an explanation of why, during our “Crisis” eras, Americans turn to men with the qualities that each one of them possesses. We have arrived here again.

The harshness of the times makes all of the Establishment Candidates look like “Low-Fat Republicans.”

While Dr. Carson is not a member of the “Low-Fat” gang, his inability to sufficiently project his strength in a manner demanded by the times, has caused most of his many, many, admirers, to seek a candidate with similar traits of high moral character, but with more bite; more attitude.

That leaves Trump and Cruz. An honest analysis – personal likes and dislikes aside – reveals much when the yardstick is taken from the above quoted, ancient words of Jethro, to his son-in-law, Moses.  (Exodus 18:21)

  • Are they able?
  • Do they fear God?
  • Are they men of truth?
  • Do they hate covetousness?

Both men obviously have abilities. Trump grew his multi-million dollar inheritance to between $3B

(Bloomberg’s estimate), and $10B (Trump’s assertion). Various finance experts say an unmanaged S&P 500 Index Fund would have yielded between 8 and 20 Billion Dollars. As for Trump’s branding ability, he is so able, that one must consider him to be a master. Where Trump’s gambling and hotels have been average; his airline, vodka, and apparel have failed; but his “reality TV” shows have been hugely successful. His ability to manipulate the media (playing out again as I write, with Trump “saying” he will skip the Iowa Debate); has him atop most polls.

Cruz, was said by Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, to be “the smartest student I ever taught.” Cruz’s nine appearances before the Supreme Court are more than anyone in Texas history, and more than any current member of Congress.

Those appearances resulted in Ted Cruz protecting:

  • US. sovereignty against the UN and the World Court in Medellin v. Texas;
  • Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms;
  • constitutionality of the Texas Ten Commandments monument
  • constitutionality of the words “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance;
  • constitutionality of the Texas Sexually Violent Predator Civil Commitment law; and
  • the Texas congressional redistricting plan.

Cruz is also able to articulate to the grass roots, as well as to new Conservatives, the meaning and significance of conservative values, which is tougher than apologizing and capitulating the way the “Grand Old Republicans” seem to prefer. As for being “able,” and the relative value of the abilities of each man — advantage: Cruz.

Are They God Fearing?

As for fearing God, it seems that, as off the chart brilliant that Cruz is, he still humbles himself before the Almighty. With Trump’s declaration, “I don’t need to ask God for forgiveness,” this one is less close than the question of being able. Furthermore, Cruz is so much loved by Christians, that Trump’s statement that Cruz engenders hatred, would be laughable if it were not such a pernicious lie.

The only people who hate Cruz are those who benefit from overgrown and unnecessary government. Not just the recipients, but the implementers – contractors, grant recipients, and unnecessary bureaucrats. Cruz represents the type of necessary pruning that will restore fiscal sanity and end the gravy train. Cruz’s support for life, marriage, school choice, religious freedom, no cronyism, and the entire faith community agenda is almost the polar opposite of Trump.

Men of Truth?

Are they men of truth? Cruz has been the exact type of Senator that he promised he would be. This gives his followers faith that finally, finally, we will have real follow-through on campaign promises.

Trump has been on both sides of every major issue.

Even his boast of being an “outsider,” and not being “in politics” is untrue. The very reason that citizens distrust politicians to do the right thing, is that they believe the politicians are more likely to do the will of big donors, rather than little voters. Then obviously, the “big donors,” who give the money, and the “politicians,” who receive the money are both “in politics.” Trump has donated to all of the major players, with an edge to the Democrats. Trump is not new to the game. He’s an old, experienced player. He’s just on the opposite side of the table for a change. He’s eliminating the middleman.

Do They Hate Covetousness?

Lastly, do they hate covetousness? There is a reason that the Tenth Commandment states: “Thou shalt not covet.” One who covets another’s spouse, may fall into the temptation of adultery.  One who covets another’s property may be inclined to commit theft; or may donate money to a “politician” and have him or her commit the theft via eminent domain or some other pernicious government scheme.

Cruz demonstrates his hatred of covetousness and his knowledge of how to lessen it by his steadfast desire to prune the government leviathan. When asked why he robbed banks; Willie Sutton said,   “Because that’s where the money is.” Similarly, crony capitalists, like Trump, love bigger and bigger government for the very same reason. Advantage: Cruz.

So, there it is.  Cruz by a mile.  But, I would be remiss if I didn’t mention one other factor with this “Bible-based” endorsement.  Many preachers across the land, some more prominent than others, and most with far more biblical knowledge than I; have endorsed Trump. It’s understandable how nominal Christians can be taken in by this showman.  But, alleged “watchmen on the wall” should really be ashamed of themselves.  This is not even close.  A first year Christian, or a high school student could look at Exodus 18:21, or many other biblical commands on how to choose leaders with Godly characteristics and get this one right.

A man who cannot quote a single Bible verse and miss states the one verse that was written down and given to him( “Two” Corinthians ), and who viciously lied on Evangelist Bob Vander Platts, should not be endorsed by men in Christian leadership.

If you are like me, and many others who make up the Christian, Conservative, Constitutional, Coalition; and you want integrity and consistency in leadership, then Ted Cruz is your man.

Craig Johnson is a news analyst and commentator, speaker, and president of The First Amendment, Inc., (www.thefirstamendmentinc.com). He is also host of The REALLY, Real, Deal with Brother Craig the Hatchet Man, (www.blogtalkradio.com/the-hatchet-man, returning soon to 820AM WNTW (www.820theanswer.com), and School Choice Advocate & Board Member for the Virginia Christian Alliance. For interviews and speaking engagements contact Kimberly@agencyforthearts.com.  


Article written by: Tom White

I Don’t Support Marco Rubio but he NAILED One Debate Question!

I am not endorsing Marco Rubio; I am sticking with Governor Gilmore but I turned the debate on (I watched most of the undercard and thought Gilmore did best with Huckabee a close second) and Senator Rubio got a question that alluded to him as the “savior” of something – the Republican Party I think and he nailed it when he opened up with this (A paraphrase):

“There was a Savior and it isn’t me – Jesus Christ is the Savior and He died for my sins.”

I was thinking (one time I helped an attorney on an appeal and I was called the “savior” and I felt convicted by the Lord that I better deal with that and I said something very similar to that legal assistant) what will Rubio say about that?  And he nailed it.

Rubio is a fabulous speaker and I do not understand why he has not done better.  Probably the association with NY Senator Schumer and the immigration mess has hurt him.  Maybe his polished skills are a detriment in this outsider year.  (Too bad Ron Paul is not ten years younger – he’d be right in the mix this election.)

But Rubio’s confession of Christ Jesus as Savior when he was called the “savior” of the GOP, is something I thought was right and wonderful!  Yes I know he wants the huge evangelical vote in Iowa and other places but it was the right thing to say.


Article written by: Elwood "Sandy" Sanders

Trump Focuses on the Big Things While Cruz is Stuck on Minutia

Stuck on roofImagine you lived in New Orleans when Hurricane Katrina struck and as the levies broke and allowed the flood waters to engulf your house, your only hope was to bust holes in your roof to keep from drowning.

And then imagine a rescue boat came by.

Would your first question be ‘Do you think Eminent Domain is a good thing?’

Or ‘Were you at any time pro abortion or say maybe we don’t need assault rifles?’

And if the response was ‘long ago, but not any more’ would you send the rescuers away?

Would you tell them that you will wait for someone who agrees with you on the minutia while you are in mortal danger?

Of course not. You would gladly hop in the boat knowing that you must deal with the real and immediate threats first. And maybe, when the waters recede and life returns to normal you will have the luxury of some day passing up a cab on Bourbon Street because the driver favors Eminent Domain or is Pro Choice.

But right now, perched on a roof surrounded by rising waters you have to take care of solving the most immediate and threatening problems.

Folks, this country is a sinking ship. We have waves of illegal immigrants flooding across the bow, ISIS is sending in terrorists to poke holes in the life boats, China is tossing heavy weights into the ship, our military is too weak and too spread out to help us, we have no jobs and the big banks are pushing the Captain into deeper and deeper waters.

I care about government taking private property to give to developers. The Kelo decision allowing such action was a horrible decision. Killing the unborn rips my heart from my chest. I am not happy with anyone who gives money to Democrats, especially ones like Hillary Clinton that should be in jail in a just world.

But if we don’t address the big problems, if we allow the Democrat controlled press and the RINO establishment to continue giving away America and throwing open the doors to anyone and everyone because “that’s who we are”, then there will not be an America for much longer. And none of the ideological things will amount to a hill of beans.

We all know the ship is sinking. Most of the people who read this blog are Conservative and Christian and Patriots.

But the petty back and forth measuring of each other’s Conservatism and questioning the Conservativism-hood of others when we are faced with annihilation is absolute and complete rubbish.

I normally support the most Conservative candidate in any given election. And for pretty much any office except president, a Conservative is the best option. Such a person will be but one voice with very little power as an individual, but will serve to move the body in the right direction. Perhaps a nudge. And for as long as they remain uncompromised.

But these are not normal times. We have watched as our country has gone so deeply in debt we may not be able to climb out. Ever. We have so many people unemployed and we are stuck with insane leadership who are more worried about “climate change” than terrorism. They are more concerned with offending those who would kill us or take our jobs and pump our citizens full of drugs than with actually stopping the bleeding. We are no longer free to speak what we think unless it is Politically Correct.

We have a Congress led by Republicans who all pretend to be Conservative, but have never supported a Conservative piece of legislation in their lives that was not a show vote. They are owned and controlled by the choking reality of the cost of being elected again and again and naturally inclined to pocket the low hanging shiny fruit that comes from Wall Street, Big Banks and the US Chamber of Commerce with strings that demand a complete loss of free will. And the need for this money creates the circus atmosphere of show votes and permission to defect votes when they have enough votes to appease the big money masters.

Ted Cruz seems like a good enough Conservative. And if he were running for Senator, House or even Governor of Virginia, I would probably support him enthusiastically. Even over my choice for President, Donald Trump. I don’t believe Donald Trump would make a good Senator or Congressman. That is not his strength.

Nor is Ted Cruz strength in the Executive office. Not now when we are in so deep over our heads. Four years of pushing what is seen as a far right Conservative agenda and failing is what we have to look forward to with Cruz. He has been unable to get anything done in the Senate except shut down the government. A move I applauded. But then I am a Conservative too. And I loved his nasty smack-down of Mitch McConnell. I applauded that too. Good for getting out the Conservative message, but bad for actually accomplishing anything other than a Conservative thrill up and down their leg. (Yes, I got that thrill.)

But that will not fix the sinking ship. A president being against Eminent Domain will not stop one illegal from crossing the border or a single terror attack. A Cruz presidency will unite the GOPe and the Democrats against anything and everything he tries to do. We would set a record for the number of veto’s overridden by a united congress. United against the far right winger who loves to shut down the government the press will say.

And all the Cruz supporters will suddenly find a supreme distaste for Fox News Trump hater Megyn Kelly as she blasts Cruz from the rooftops for not getting along. Meanwhile, the borders will remain open, jobs will dwindle and America will sink. But Conservatives can take solace in the fact that we died with a “true Conservative” at the helm.

No, Cruz is good in the Senate. Throwing stink bombs and exposing the shenanigans of the GOPe makes my Conservative heart happy. But he has burned too many bridges with everyone in Washington to effectively fix the major problems we face. He wasn’t in favor of building a wall until Trump gained so much momentum with it.

Neither the Press, nor the Democrats and especially the GOPe has been able to stop Donald Trump. His masterful use of the media and instinct for striking the right note with Americans who are sick and tired of being told to sit down and shut up was not so much about knowing what to say, but in having the guts to say it.

So I am a Conservative. I believe in the exact same thing that each and every Cruz supporter does. I think Ted Cruz is a great Senator.

But I also appreciate the concept of Triage. You don’t put a band-aid on a boo-boo when an artery is spewing. I like band-aids on my boo-boos, but first things first.

We don’t need an archaeologist with a paint brush to gently remove layers of dust from a long dead dinosaur. We need King Kong with a wrecking ball to get the boulders off our chest before we all die. America is still alive but we need, as my Dad used to say, a bull in a china closet.

And in this race, I see but one King Kong with a wrecking ball.

For this race, I put my conservative litmus paper and my ideological check list in my back pocket. My Conservative ideology is a luxury I can’s afford to indulge with this nation in such bad shape. I thought long and hard on how we can best get back to the America we inherited and no matter how many times I run the calculations, the answer is always Donald Trump.

 


Article written by: Tom White

Cruz Drops to 5th in New Hampshire in Brand New Emerson Poll

Ted Cruz seems to be losing steam everywhere.

In a brand new Emerson Poll in New Hampshire, Trump is still leading by a mile – a 17 point lead of the next contender at 35%, but that lead is over Jeb Bush surprisingly enough who received 18% of the responses followed by Kasich at 14% and Rubio at 9%.

The bad news for Ted Cruz is that he has fallen to 5th place with only 8%. Cruz has been on a seek and destroy mission against Donald Trump and has apparently ignored the rest of the field as they have made major gains.


Article written by: Tom White

Our Weasel Of The Week!!

Yes,it’s time to present this week’s Statuette of Shame, The Golden Weasel!!

Every Tuesday, the Council nominates some of the slimiest, most despicable characters in public life for some deed of evil, cowardice or corruption they’ve performed. Then we vote to single out one particular Weasel for special mention, to whom we award the statuette of shame, our special, 100% plastic Golden Weasel. This week’s nominees were all slimy and despicable, but the votes are in and we have our winner…the envelope please…


Morally Deficient Harris County, Texas DA Devon Anderson!

Nice Deb : I nominate the Houston Grand Jury for indicting the messengers instead of the actual offenders, in the Planned Parenthood investigation.


A Harris County grand jury investigating allegations that a Planned Parenthood clinic in Houston illegally sold the tissue of aborted fetuses has cleared the organization of wrongdoing and instead indicted two anti-abortion activists behind the undercover videos that sparked the probe.

Secret videographers David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt were both indicted on charges of tampering with a governmental record, a second-degree felony that carries a punishment of up to 20 years in prison. Daleiden received an additional misdemeanor indictment under the law prohibiting the purchase and sale of human organs.

Harris County District Attorney Devon Anderson announced the surprising indictments Monday after a two-month investigation.

Shocking, but maybe not too surprising considering Harris County’s reputation for political shenanigans. Former Texas Governor Rick Perry was also indicted by a Harris County grand jury, it so happens.

Talk about shooting the messengers! And as we all know from the videos, the whistle blowers didn’t actually buy baby parts, but merely made and filmed Planned Parenthood’s willingness to sell to them. And how exactly does that clear the local Planned Parenthood of wrongdoing?

The tampering with records charge is based on false IDs David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt presented to the Planned Parenthood officials.

Harris County consists of Houston and the surrounding areas. A fair potion of the city itself is Democrat, while the rest of it and the outlying areas are strongly Republican. If this Grand Jury was assembled in Houston, that could explain a great deal.

Another thing that explains a lot is the presence of one Lauren Reeder as a prominent prosecutor in the Harris County District Attorney’s criminal family law division. Reeder is listed as a non-compensated “Director” on the 990 Tax Form for 2014 filed by Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast and has been an active fundraiser for Planned Parenthood for years. She is also very close personally to DA Anderson.

Because of the appearance of a conflict of of interest, the Center for Medical Progress, the organization that took and released the videos has asked for a special prosecutor. Operation Rescue President Troy Newman, who also serves on the Board of the Center for Medical Progress is calling for a new investigation by an independent prosecutor, and others have pointed out the First Amendment implications.And they might just get what they want.

The State of Texas is still conducting active, additional investigations into Planned Parenthood’s baby parts trafficking. To quote Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, “The fact remains that the videos exposed the horrific nature of abortion and the shameful disregard for human life of the abortion industry.”

Well, there it is.

Check back next Tuesday to see who next week’s nominees for Weasel of the Week are!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum, and remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it…or any of the other fantabulous Watcher’s Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y’know?

Link to original:  

Our Weasel Of The Week!!


Article written by: Tom White