Smoky Mountains Sunrise

Wednesday, October 1, 2014

REMEMBER in NOVEMBER! Here Are the 46 Senators Who Voted to Turn Your Gun Rights Over to the UN. Now NOVEMBER it will be OUR Turn to VOTE!

From Tea Party Crusaders
 
United States Senators who were willing to sign over your 2nd amendment rights to the United Nations
The anti-gun senators are all Democrats or so-called Independents. Meet all 46! Write Down their names, and Share them with everyone you know.


Senate Bill 139 passed 53-46. 46 US Senators voted against this: “To uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.”

Wizbang reported:
Fortunately, the odious, anti-American treaty was again voted down by the full Senate, but 46 Senators voted in favor of handing over our Constitutional rights to the UN.

Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK) offered Amendment 139 that was passed with a 53 to 46 vote. His Amendment contained language to affirm that foreign treaties would not trump the U.S. Constitution.

“Mr. President,” Inhofe said on the floor of the Senate, “I want to make sure that everyone understands what the United Nations trade treaty is. The trade treaty is a treaty that cedes our authority to have trade agreements with our allies in terms of trading arms.”

He went on to say, “I want to very briefly read this so nobody over there or over here misunderstands what this amendment does. This is right out of the amendment. Uphold the Second Amendment rights, that is one thing. And secondly, prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations arms trade treaties.”

But many Democrats simply didn’t agree with Inhofe’s insistence that the U.S. Constitution trump the UN.

Forty-six Democrats-Independents favored ceding your Constitutional rights over to the United Nations.

Unreal.


Tuesday, September 30, 2014

Obama Has Spent More Time Playing Golf Than In Intel Briefings

According to The Daily Caller, first thug Barack Hussein Obama has spent more time golfing than he has spent listening to daily intelligence briefings.

The Daily Caller has calculated that he’s spent almost 700 hours in 875 “Presidential Daily Briefings” since 2009.  He has also spent roughly 800 hours on almost 200 golf trips since his first inauguration.  

Read more at The Daily Caller >>



Obama Will Pay a Price for Blaming Intelligence Services for ISIS Failures. The Only Question is How High It Will Be.

From American Thinker
By Thomas Lifson

President Obama’s 60 Minutes interview, taped last Friday and aired Sunday, is turning out to be a disaster for him, and may even be a tipping point of sorts. There are six dimensions to the disaster.

1.  By blaming the intelligence community for his failure to act on the ISIS threat, he ensured that a series of damaging leaks will be coming, and they are already starting.

Barack Obama, Outside Agitator


By Patrick J. Buchanan

In his U.N. address, President Obama listed a parade of horrors afflicting our world: “Russian aggression in Europe,” “terrorism in Syria and Iraq,” rapes and beheadings by ISIL, al-Qaida, Boko Haram.

And, of course, the Ferguson Police Department.

That’s right. The president could not speak of war, terrorism and genocide without dragging in the incident in a St. Louis suburb where a white cop shot and killed a black teenager:

“In a summer marked by instability in the Middle East and Eastern Europe, the world also took notice of the small American city of Ferguson, Missouri — where a young man was killed, and a community was divided.”

What, other than its racial aspect, can explain why Obama is so hung up on Ferguson? At the Congressional Black Caucus dinner Saturday, he was back stoking the embers.

Conservatives to Synod: Don’t Go Soft on Marriage

Boston College Prof. Mary Ann Glendon, former US ambassador to the Vatican, moderated a discussion with Princeton Prof. Robert George in 2009. Both have signed a letter to Catholic bishops urging them to uphold traditional marriage. (Paul Haring/CNS)

One sign that a summit is viewed as crucial is when a tug-of-war breaks out to shape its agenda and outcome. By that standard, the looming Oct. 5-19 Synod of Bishops on the family appears a very big deal indeed.

In the run-up to the synod, we’ve already seen cardinals publicly jousting over the contentious issue of whether the Church ought to relax its ban on divorced and remarried Catholics receiving Communion.

Activists and rank-and-file believers alike have entered the fray on all manner of issues related to the family, with the latest to-do involving a cross-section of 48 mostly conservative intellectuals and ministers, including not just Catholics but also Protestant luminaries such as Rick Warren, urging the synod to hold the line in defense of traditional marriage.

Their open letter to the synod, sent to Rome through diplomatic channels in late September and also posted on the Internet, does not engage any of the hot-button issues expected to surface at the meeting, such as gay marriage or the communion ban for divorced and remarried believers.

The implied message, however, seems clear: Now is the wrong time to go soft.

Traditional Christian teachings on marriage, the signatories say, “represent true love, not ‘exclusion’ or ‘prejudice’ or any of the other charges brought against marriage today.” The letter is entitled, “Commitment to Marriage,” and the full text can be read here.

Read more at Crux >>


Monday, September 29, 2014

Wake Up, Conservatives! Examining Conservative “Support” for Common Core

From The Center for Vision & Values, Grove City College
By R.B.A. Di Muccio

Most conservatives instinctively and correctly oppose Common Core. The issue becomes muddy when a few high-profile conservatives appear to be in favor of it. Such support provides a bottomless font of schadenfreude for Common Core’s mostly liberal supporters and gives them an effective wedge issue. Therefore, examining conservative “support” for national Common Core standards might be the single most important tactic in the fight against it.

Prima facie, this support is based on a simple premise: public education is failing, so we should establish minimal standards that all kids must meet. Bill Bennett, for example, has said, “we can all agree that there is a need for common standards of assessment in K-12 education. And we can all agree that there are common and shared truths.”

Okay, but the question that arises is: What are the “common and shared truths?” Let’s answer that in a moment.