Dozens of Christian Leaders will not Cross that Line if Marriage Re-defined

This coming week is the week the U.S. Supreme Court will review two crucial decision on marriage. Hopefully the High Court will beat back attacks on the federal Defense of Marriage Act and restore the vote of 7 million California voters upholding the Proposition 8 marriage amendment — only to have one biased, homosexual judge over-ride their votes. Dozens of Christian leaders have signed the following letter to demonstrate that even if the Court foolishly redefines marriage against the majority of Americans who believe marriage is the union of one man one woman they will not cross that line. Read their letter below:

We stand together as Christians in defense of marriage and the family and society founded upon them. While we come from a variety of communities and hold differing faith perspectives, we are united in our common faith in Jesus Christ.

We acknowledge that differences exist between us on important matters of religious doctrine and practice. But, on the matter of marriage, we stand in solidarity. As a nation, we have lost our moral compass. As a result, we are losing true freedom. We affirm together that there is a moral basis to a free society. Though we live in a secular society, together we reject relativism and secularism.

We affirm that marriage and family have been inscribed by the Divine Architect into the order of creation. Marriage is ontologically between one man and one woman, ordered toward the union of the spouses, open to children and formative of family. Family is the first vital cell of society; the first church, first school, first hospital, first economy, first government and first mediating institution of our social order. The future of a free and healthy society passes through marriage and the family.

Marriage as existing solely between one man and one woman was not an idea manufactured by the Christian Church. It precedes Christianity. Though affirmed, fulfilled, and elevated by Christian teaching, the truth that marriage can exist only between one man and one woman is not based on religion or revelation alone, but on the Natural Moral Law, written on the human heart and discernible through the exercise of reason.

This claim of the existence of such a Natural Moral Law is the ground upon which every great civilization has been built. It is the source of every authentic human and civil rights movement. This Natural Moral Law gives us the norms we need to build truly human and humane societies and govern ourselves. It should also inform our positive law or we will become lawless and devolve into anarchy.

Marriage is the preeminent and the most fundamental of all human social institutions. Civil institutions do not create marriage nor can they manufacture a right to marry for those who are incapable of marriage. In the words of the first book of the Bible, we read: “it is not good for man to be alone.” (Genesis 2:18) Society begins with marriage and the family.

Like many other concerned Americans, we await the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States on two cases which open up the possibility that the 0institution of marriage will be further undermined by a judicial opinion. We pledge to stand together to defend marriage as what it is, a bond between one man and one woman, intended for life, and open to the gift of children.

The institutions of civil government should defend marriage and not seek to undermine it. Government has long regulated marriage for the true common good. Examples, such as the age of consent, demonstrate such a proper regulation to ensure the free and voluntary basis of the marriage bond. Redefining the very institution of marriage is improper and outside the authority of the State. The Supreme Court has no authority to redefine marriage.

If the Supreme Court becomes the tool by which marriage is redefined in the positive law of this nation, the precedent established will leave no room for any limitation on what can constitute such a redefined notion of marriage. Conferring a moral and legal equivalency to same-sex couples by legislative or judicial fiat also sends the message that children do not need a mother and a father. It undermines their fundamental rights and threatens their security, stability, and future.

As Christian citizens united together, we will not stand by while the destruction of the institution of marriage unfolds in this nation we love. The Sacred Scriptures and unbroken teaching of the Church confirm that marriage is between one man and one woman. We stand together in solidarity to defend marriage and the family and society founded upon them. The effort to redefine marriage threatens the proper mediating role of the Church in society.

Experience and history have shown us that if the government redefines marriage to grant a legal equivalency to same-sex couples, that same government will then enforce such an action with the police power of the State. This will bring about an inevitable collision with religious freedom and conscience rights. We cannot and will not allow this to occur on our watch. Religious freedom is the first freedom in the American experiment for good reason.

Finally, the Supreme Court has no authority to redefine marriage and thereby weaken both the family and society. Unlike the Legislative Branch that has the power of the purse and the Executive Branch which has the figurative power of the sword, the Judicial Branch has neither. It must depend upon the Executive Branch for the enforcement of its decisions.

As the Supreme Court acknowledged in the 1992 decision of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, its power rests solely upon the legitimacy of its decisions in the eyes of the people. If the Supreme Court were to issue a decision that redefined marriage or provided a precedent on which to build
an argument to redefine marriage, the Supreme Court will thereby undermine its legitimacy. The Court will significantly decrease its credibility and impair the role it has assumed for itself as a moral authority. It will be acting beyond its proper constitutional role and contrary to the Natural Moral Law which transcends religions, culture, and time.

As Christians united together in defense of marriage, we pray that this will not happen. But, make no mistake about our resolve. While there are many things we can endure, redefining marriage is so fundamental to the natural order and the true common good that this is the line we must draw and one we cannot and will not cross.

Mathew Staver
Chairman
Liberty Counsel Action
Co-drafter
Deacon Keith Fournier
Common Good Alliance
Catholic Online
Co-drafter
Rev. Samuel Rodriguez
National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference
Fr. Paul CB Schenck, MA, EdD
National Representative
Catholics United for Life
Hon. Kenneth Blackwell
Constitutional Congress
Fmr. U.S. Ambassador to United
Nations on Human Rights
Anita Staver
President
Liberty Counsel
James Robison
LIFE Outreach International
Fr. Randolph W. Sly
Common Good Foundation
Fr. Frank Pavone
National Director, Priests for Life
President, National Pro-Life Religious Council
Rev. Johannes L. Jacobse
American Orthodox Institute
Benjamin S. Carson, M.D.
World-renowned pediatric neurosurgeon
Tony Perkins, President
Family Research Council
James C. Dobson, Ph.D., President and Founder
Family Talk Action
William G Boykin, LTG(R) US Army
President, Kingdom Warriors Ministries
Dr. Erwin Lutzer
Moody Church – Chicago, IL
Colin A Hanna, President
Let Freedom Ring
Dr. Ché Ahn
Senior Pastor, HROCK Church, Pasadena, CA
President, Harvest International Ministry
International Chancellor, Wagner Leadership Institute
Carlos Campo, Ph. D., President
Regent University
Dr. Richard Land, President
Southern Evangelical Seminary
Dr. Paige Patterson, President
Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary
Governor Mike Huckabee
National TV & Radio Host
Ron Luce, Founder
Teen Mania
Bill Donohue, President
Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights
Betty Robison,Co-Host
LIFE Today Television
Dr. Jack W. Hayford, Chancellor The King’s University—Dallas/Los Angeles
Rick Joyner, President
The Oak Initiative
Rick Scarborough, President
Vision America Action
Dr. Carl Herbster, President
Advance USA
Dr. Alveda C. King, President
Alveda King Ministries
Star Parker, President
CURE

Ruth Graham, President
Ruth Graham Ministries
Tim Clinton, President
American Association of Christian Counselors
Dr. Keith Wiebe, President
American Association of Christian Schools
Bill Johnson, President
American Decency Association
Don Wildmon, Founder/Chairman Emeritus American Family Association
Tim Wildmon, President American Family Association
Nancy Schulze, Co-Founder
American Prayer Initiative
Gary L. Bauer, President
American Values
Tom Hoefling, Chairman
America’s Party
Dr. Kenneth Hutcherson, Senior Pastor
Antioch Bible Church
Andrew Wommack
Andrew Wommack Ministries, Inc.
Dr. Sergio Navarrete, Superintendent
A/G – Southern Pacific District
Eleazar Rodriguez, Jr
A/G – Texas Louisiana Hispanic District
Pastor Juan Eliel Garcia
Auditorio de la Fe – La Nueva FM 88.3FM
Al Kresta, President and CEO
Ave Maria Radio
Sue Ek, Executive Director
BOMA-USA
Stanley Jeter, Sr. Producer, CBN News
President, ComunicadoresUSA
Rev. Dan E. Collis, Pastor Bell Shoals Baptist Church – Apollo Beach
John Martin, Senior Adult Pastor
Bell Shoals Baptist Church – Apollo Beach
Dr. Jeffrey Meyer, Exec. Pastor
Bell Shoals Baptist Church
Dr. Stephen Rummage, Sr. Pastor
Bell Shoals Baptist Church
George & Sandra Thomasson, Pastor Bell Shoals Baptist Church – Apollo Beach
Dr. Mike Spaulding
Calvary Chapel of Lima, OH
Steve Strang, Founder & CEO
Charisma Media
Matt Smith, President
Catholic Advocate
Sue Trombino, Founder
Women Impacting the Nation
Bishop Harry R. Jackson, Jr., President
High Impact Leadership Coalition
Daniel Hite, Pastor
Christian Family Fellowship
Carlos S. Morán, Ed.D.
Dir.of Hispanic Ministries Church of God International, Cleveland, TN
Bishop Juan A. Garcia, Admin. Bishop
Church of God Northeast Spanish Region
Michael A. Montelongo, Former Mayor
City of Sanger, CA
Michael L. Brown, Ph.D., Director
Coalition of Conscience
Terry Kemple, President
Community Issues Council
Penny Nance, CEO and President
Concerned Women for America

Robert Gittelson,
President Conservatives for Comprehensive Immigration Reform
Rick Ryan, Director
Convoy of Hope Nathan Blackwell, Senior Pastor
Cornerstone Family Church – St. Cloud, FL
The Most Reverend Rene Henry Gracida, Bishop Emeritus
Corpus Christi – Corpus Christi, Texas
Dr. Tom Mullins, Founding Pastor
Christ Fellowship
Amelia Den Hartog, MS., PLMHP
Christ for the City International
Marcus Lamb
Daystar Television Network
Rev. Rick Stevens, Pastor
Diplomat Wesleyan Church
Cape Coral, FL
Shannon M. Jones, President
CatechismClass.com
M. Daniel Carroll R. (Rodas), PhD
Distinguished Professor of Old Testament
Denver Seminary
Jay. W. Richards, PhD, Senior Fellow
Discovery Institute
George and Terri Pearsons, Pastors
Eagle Mountain International Church
Andrew Haines, Editor
Ethika Politika
Gary Marx, E. D.
Faith and Freedom Coalition
Ralph Reed, Chairman
Faith and Freedom Coalition
Stephen Broden
Sr. Pastor, Fair Park Bible Fellowship
Pres., Constitutional Defenders of Texas
Rev. Louise Yakubisin, Assoc. Pastor
Faith Christian Fellowship Church
Newton, Ohio
Rev. Gary Cristofaro, Senior Pastor
First Assembly of God, Melbourne FL
Dr. Robert Jeffress, Pastor
First Baptist Church Dallas, TX
Dr. Richard Lee, Founding Pastor
First Redeemer Church – Alpharetta, GA
Pat Andrews, President Florida Eagle Forum
John Stemberger, President
Florida Family Policy Council
Norman Blanton, Pastor
Foursquare Church
Colonel (AL) John Eidsmoe
Senior Counsel and Resident Scholar Foundation for Moral Law
Patrick Lee
Director of Institute of Bioethics
Franciscan University of Steubeniville
Dr. Lloyd Stilley, Senior Pastor
First Baptist Church Gulf Shores, AL
John Meador, Senior Pastor
First Baptist Church Euless, TX
Don Worden
Pastor of Church Administration and Missions
First Baptist Church of Pompano Beach Florida
Steve Dulin, Elder
Gateway Church
Robert Morris, Senior Pastor
Gateway Church
Bill Gattis, retired Vice Pres.
Exxon Mobil
Dr. Cindy & Mike Jacobs, Co-Founders
Generals International

Michael Cordeiro, Deacon Grace and Truth Family Baptist Church
Nathaniel & Veronica Dixon, Pastors
Grandview Church – Dunnellon, FL
Dr. Robert W. Roach, Pastor
Haven of Hope of St. Lucie County
Mark Andrews, President Heartland Research Corporation
Ronald L. Drumm, Pastor Henderson Blvd Church of Christ
Dr. Carl Herbster, President
Center to Advance the USA
Patricia Sullivan
Women Impacting the Nation
Dr. Travis Smith, Sr. Pastor
Hillsdale Baptist Church
Jesse Rincones, Executive Director
Hispanic Baptist Convention of Texas
Michael P. Donnelly, HSLDA Attorney
Home School Legal Defense Association
Rev. Nilo Ayala, Senior Pastor
Iglesia De Dios De Auburn
Rev. Carlos Quintero Iglesia Harvest Rock Hispana Unidad Los Angeles
David E. Smith, Executive Director
Illinois Family Institute
Pasqual Urrabazo Jr., Associate Pastor
International Church of Las Vegas
Frank Lopez, Sr. Pastor
Jesus Worship Center
Phillip L. Jauregui, President
Judicial Action Group
Eugene J. Zurlo
KCHS Radio
John Kirkwood, Pastor Grace Gospel Fellowship
Kenneth and Gloria Copeland
Founder and Co-Founder,
Kenneth Copeland Ministries
Rev. Jesten F. Peters, President/Minister
Keys of Authority Ministries, Inc.
Steve Smothermon, Pastor Legacy Church – Albuquerque,NM
Dean Shawn Akers
Liberty University
Helms School of Government
Yuri Mantilla, Ph.D., Dir. of Global Initiatives
Liberty University School of Law
Judith Gelernter Reisman, Ph.D.
Visiting Professor of Law
Liberty University School of Law
Dr. Johnny M. Hunter, DD, National Director
Life Education and Resource Networks
Gene Mills, President
Louisiana Family Forum
Dr. María M. Hermida, President
Magda Hermida Ministries
Rev. Yolandita Colon, Exec.Justice Pastor
Maranatha Minneapolis Church
Minnesota Chapter Director of NHCLC
Jimmy Evans, Founder and CEO
MarriageToday
Linda Harvey, Host Mission America
Patrick A. Trueman, President, CEO
Morality in Media
Steven Frakes, Pastor
Mount Zion Bible Church – Pensacola, FL
Jeff Pollard, Pastor
Mount Zion Bible Church – Pensacola, FL

Ted Baehr
Movie Guide
Rev. Lydia Gonzalez-D’Ross
Oklahoma City Chapter Director
National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference
Rev. Eve Nunez, V.P. of Networking
National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference
Steve Noble, Host
Called2Action Today
Pastor Carlos Ortiz, V.P. Southeast Region
National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference
Gene Pierce, Executive Director
Ohio Faith & Freedom Coalition
Dr. Steve Kern, Senior Pastor
Olivet Baptist Church – Oklahoma City, OK
Candidate Oklahoma Senate District 40
Jacob Aranza, Senior Pastor
Our Savior’s Church-Broussard, LA
Jim Garlow, Founding Director
Pastors Rapid Response Team
Bud Hansen, Jr.,Secretary
Papal Foundation
Janet Parshall
Nationally Syndicated Talk Show Host
Joy Allen, Advisory Board
Pennsylvania Catholics Network
Deal W. Hudson, President
Pennsylvania Catholics Network
Ted Meehan, Executive Director
Pennsylvania Catholics Network
John & Patsy Radcliffe
Advisory Board
Pennsylvania Catholics Network
Raymond Rivera Martinez, Presidente
La Iglesia de Dios Pentecostal MI a nivel mundial
Daniel A. Rodriguez, PhD
Professor of Religion and Hispanic Studies
Pepperdine University, Malibu, CA
Sonja Corbitt, Founder
PursuingtheSummit.com
Dr. Moses Mercedes, President
Radio Amor and NHCLC Board Member
Rev. Paul Blair
Reclaiming America for Christ
Barbara B.Henkels, Co-Founder
Regina Academies, Philadelphia
William J. Murray, Chairman
Religious Freedom Coalition
Matt C. Abbott
RenewAmerica.com
Stephen Stone, President
RenewAmerica
Rev. Paul Blair
Renewing America for Christ
Richard Wilson, Pastor Revival Outreach Center
Rev. Dale M. Glading, President
Risk Takers for Christ, Inc.
Dave Roever, Vietnam veteran,
Founder & President
Roever Foundation
Tony Calatayud, National Director Salem Espanol
Dran Reese
Salt and Light Council
Jose L. González, President
Semilla

Chris J. Montelongo, Administrator
Tabernacle of Praise Christian Center
Board of Directors, National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference
Daniel de Leon, Senior Pastor
Templo Calvario Church
Erwin Guevara, Pastor
Victory Christian Center – Boca Raton
Dave Welch, Exec. Dir.
TX Pastor Council
Dr. Gary M. Benedict, President
The Christian and Missionary Alliance
Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt, PhD, Founder, The Pray In Jesus Name Project
Rev. Andrew S. Doan, Sr. Pastor
The Solid Rock Church – Winter Haven, FL
Timothy F. Johnson, Ph.D., Founder/ President
The Frederick Douglass Foundation
Fmr Vice Chairman, NC Republican Party
Steven W. Fitschen, President
The National Legal Foundation
Velasquez Group Productions
Rev. Michael and Rev. Jennifer Derrick The River of WNY
Dr. Tony Evans
The Urban Alternative
Morton Blackwell, Chairman
The Weyrich Lunch
Father James F. Kauffmann, Pastor
Saint Benedict Parish
Andrea Lafferty, President Traditional Values Coalition
Rev. Abraham Hernandez
V. P. Northeast Region
National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference
Mike Valerio
Helen and Mike Valerio Charitable Trust
Harold Velasquez, President/CEO
Velasquez Group Productions
Dr. G. Antonio Smart, Pastor
Victory Baptist Church of Tampa
Rev Louis P. Sheldon, Founder and Chairman
Traditional Values Coalition
C. Preston Noell III, President Tradition, Family, Property, Inc.
Tom Peterson, President and Founder
VirtueMedia, Inc.
Robert R. Reilly, Former President
Voice of America
Rev. Nicholas Woodbury, Director Latin America Mission
Bradlee Dean, President
You Can Run But You Can Not Hide International/The Sons of Liberty Radio
Dr. Tony Serna, ND & Master Trainer
Wellness Center
Joseph Farah, Chief Executive Officer
World Net Daily and World Net Daily Books
Susan Carleson, Chairman/CEO
American Civil Rights Union
Robert Knight, Senior Fellow
American Civil Rights Union and
Drafter of the Defense of Marriage Act
Micah Clark, Executive Director
American Family Association of Indiana
Gary Glenn, President
American Family Association of Michigan
9
Diane Gramley, President
American Family Association of Pennsylvania
Peter LaBarbera, President
Americans For Truth About Homosexuality
Donna Rogers, Founder of Angel of Love and Light Ministries
Janice Shaw Crouse, Ph.D., Senior Fellow Beverly LaHaye Institute
Concerned Women for America
Richard Viguerie, Chairman ConservativeHQ.com
Janet L. Porter, President
Faith2ACTION
Ken Klukowski, Director
Center for Religious Liberty
Family Research Council
Robert Fischer, President
Fischer Furniture, Inc
Sandy Rios, Vice President
Family PAC Federal, AFR Talk
Paul Caprio, Director
Family PAC Federal
Dr. Warren Guy, DDS, PhD
Pediatric Dentist
Matt Barber, Vice President
Liberty Counsel Action
Lucinda Hodges
LifeCare SouthShore
Center Manager
Rep. Sally Kern
Oklahoma, House District 84
Gregory Quinlan, President
Pro-Family Network
Ann Quest, Founder
Unity Quest
Dr. Randy Rebold
National Director
Pastors & Patriots Initiative
Rev. Rob Schenck, President
Faith and Action
Andrew M. Greenwell
Common Good Legal Defense Fund
Clint Cline, President Design4 Marketing Conservative Vanguard Project

Congressman Demands “More Balanced” Campaign against Terrorism

Folder2 104John Semmens: Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

Representative Jim McDermott (D-Wash) directed pointed criticism at the FBI’s focus on Islamic terrorists. His criticism was sparked by a bus ad that featured photos of 16 suspected terrorists that the agency is trying to apprehend. McDermott’s beef is that all 16 of the suspects featured in the ad are Islamic.

“I find it highly offensive that the FBI is concentrating on Muslims to the exclusion of other racial and religious groups,” McDermott said. “Our anti-terror campaign needs to be more balanced.”

Whether an anti-terror campaign could be more balanced is problematic. All but two of the FBI’s top 32 most wanted terrorism suspects are Muslims. An FBI spokesman explained that “the bus ad isn’t intended to be a comprehensive capsule of the Agency total efforts. It is just a snapshot aimed at informing citizens.”

McDermott wasn’t mollified by the FBI’s explanation, insisting that “they aren’t trying hard enough. Going after the guys who are setting bombs and hijacking airlines is obvious and easy. What about the more subtle threats posed by groups like the TEA Party that the IRS has ferreted out?”

The Congressman pledged “to work with my colleagues in the House to draft legislation that will end the discriminatory bias that has characterized our policy thus far. At the very least, there ought to be target quotas to produce a wider array of ethnic, racial, and religious terrorist suspects.”

NSA Calls Encrypted Data Threat to Nation’s Security

The National Security Agency’s widespread warrant-less snooping was justified by Director, General Keith Alexander, as “an essential component of our efforts to protect the Government from hostile adversaries.”

“The idea that we should obtain warrants before we gather vital intelligence is absurd,” Alexander asserted. “Should a soldier on the battlefield obtain a warrant before he pulls the trigger on his rifle?”

Alexander pointed to the large volume of encrypted data flowing through domestic Internet and phone lines as proof that the threat is real and imminent. “The fact that a person would send an encrypted email is, by itself, an indication that nefarious activities may be underway,” Alexander maintained. “I mean, if you’re not doing anything wrong why are you going to the extra trouble of encrypting your communications? Innocent people don’t behave this way.”

The idea that data might be encrypted in order to foil criminal attempts to steal it failed to impress the General. “It should be obvious that encrypting communications is exactly what a terrorist would do,” he said. “Honest people should avoid emulating this behavior. Acting in such a suspicious way in order to protect personal information selfishly places one’s own interests ahead of the national interest. Such misplaced priorities ought to raise a red flag. At the very least, those who do encrypt their communications can’t blame us for watching.”

Late Term Abortion Ban Assailed

The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act” (H.R. 1797) would ban would ban most third-trimester abortions. The legislation was introduced by Representative Trent Franks (R-Az) to prevent atrocities like those committed by Kermit Gosnell who was convicted of murdering babies that survived his attempt to abort them.

Representative Gwen Moore (D-Wisc) called the bill “an abomination that callously places a feigned concern for the pain and suffering of a fetus ahead of the rights and dignity of women. It is unconstitutional, cruel, and simply the wrong thing to do.”

Moore was not alone in her negative evaluation of the legislation. Several fellow Democrats were equally irate. Representative Charlie Dent (Pa) called it “stupid.” Representative Jerrold Nadler (NY) characterized it is “morally outrageous.” Representative Louise Slaughter (NY) saw it as “cowardly.” Representative Hakeem Jeffries (NY) argued that “these fetuses are not our constituents. We have no obligation to protect their interests. The women trying to abort them are the ones who vote us into office. This bill is reprehensible.”

Despite strenuous opposition, the bill passed the House by a vote of 229-196, mostly along Party lines. Representative Moore insisted that its enactment would “condemn millions of unwanted children to lives of poverty and neglect. If we force these pregnancies to go to term many of the women this law oppresses will abuse these children. Is avoiding the momentary pain of a 20-week-old fetus worth a lifetime of suffering?”

A Statement of Administration Policy (SAP) issued by the President’s senior advisers promised that the legislation would be vetoed should it reach the President’s desk. “No right is more fundamental than a woman’s right to terminate her own pregnancy,” the SAP read. “The President is determined that it will remain inviolate as long as he holds the office.”

In related news, former First Daughter Chelsea Clinton lamented the fact that her maternal grandmother was the unwanted child of teenaged parents who did not have access to Planned Parenthood services. “The suffering and humiliation that could’ve been averted had such services been available is incalculable,” Clinton declared.

No Time for Background Checks, Napolitano Says

While it took a “Freedom of Information Act” filing to learn that the Department of Homeland Security has ceased doing background checks on illegal aliens applying for “special status” under President Obama’s “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals” Executive Order, Secretary Janet Napolitano says “it’s no big deal.”

“Truthfully speaking, there just isn’t enough time for us to check the thousands of applications we have received,” Napolitano admitted. “With all the other stuff on our plate we had to figure out what to let slip through the cracks. It was our assessment that screening immigrants for criminal records was something we could afford to let go.”

The number of background checks foregone is bound to increase if the immigration reform bill making its way through Congress passes. The bill would put an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants on the path to citizenship. The prospect that there may be criminals among them didn’t faze Napolitano.

“Our Statue of Liberty invites the ‘wretched refuse’ of the world to come to America,” Napolitano pointed out. “In my mind, the most wretched of refuse would be criminals. The fact is, a lot of the early settlers in America were criminals given the choice of being hanged in England or emigrating to America. Clearly, criminals played a role in building this country. So, the notion that we ought to screen them out kind of flies in the face of a long history of open borders.”

IRS Awards Employees $70 Million in Bonuses

Despite the fact that the federal budget sequester does not provide funds for bonuses, acting IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel has agreed with the employees’ union to pay $70 million in bonuses.

“As you may know from reading the papers, many of the Agency’s employees went above and beyond the law to implement President Obama’s wishes regarding intensified scrutiny of dubious political groups,” Werfel said. “We feel that this kind of pro-active mindset is worthy of extra recognition and extra compensation as a way of motivating the desired work ethic among the Agency’s personnel.”

A research paper prepared by Andreas Madestam (Stockholm University), Daniel Shoag and David Yanagizawa-Drott (Harvard Kennedy School) confirmed Werfel’s assessment of the IRS’s effectiveness, concluding that “the difficulties faced by TEA Party activists may have sufficiently blunted their impact in the 2012 elections and could possibly have been large enough to have enabled the reelection of President Obama.”

The announcement of the bonuses didn’t sit well with Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), a senior Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over the IRS. “Given the IRS’s constant complaints about being short of resources I don’t see how they can go beyond the budget allocated to them under the sequester,” Grassley wondered.

Werfel agreed that “Senator Grassley is free to wonder all he wants, but we will do whatever we deem necessary to maintain the effectiveness and morale of the Agency.” Werfel hinted that should Grassley proceed to do more than wonder “the IRS has the tools to defend itself from unwanted interference.”

NY Attorney General Wants Cell Phone “Kill Switch”

Disturbed by courts upholding the right of citizens to use their cell phones to video tape the police in action, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman wants cell phone manufacturers and service providers to install “kill switches” that can be remotely activated by the police.

“The fear that they could be video taped without their knowledge is inhibiting law enforcement personnel in the conduct of their official duties,” Schneiderman contended. “It’s hard to do your job when someone is looking over your shoulder. It’s doubly hard if every misstep is going to be recorded and used against you.”

Schneiderman also argued that “unauthorized videos introduce an element of confusion to the narrative. Instead of having a single, clear picture of events there could be multiple conflicting versions. Our ability to convict apprehended suspects could be seriously hindered.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News

Please do us a favor. If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit, and do not change the context. Thank you.

Gilbert vs. Tucson: Slam Dunk for Conservative Principles

If there is a better argument in favor of conservative policies over so-called “progressive” policies, look no further than a comparison of the Arizona cities of Gilbert and Tucson! Let’s look at the factors most responsible for the huge discrepancies of social statistics between Arizona’s most conservative communities and one of its most liberal.

The Arizona Daily Star reports that Tucson’s city council voted 6-0 this week to allow sex-same couples to file contracts regarding inheritance rights, power of attorney, living wills and the ability to resolve disputes if couples breaks up.

The resolution supposedly adds more teeth to the city’s domestic-partner ordinance passed in 2003. Tucson Mayor Jonathan Rothschild says the enhanced ordinance will give same-sex couples some of the same rights that married, heterosexual couples enjoy. City Attorney Mike Rankin says as long as the city doesn’t offer rights reserved for married couples, the measure should not violate state law.

What the resolution doesn’t do is strengthen Tucson marriages and families. Which is a far greater need in any city than any ceremonial winks to homosexual pressure groups. That’s right: this is more about getting votes and campaign cash from wealthy people struggling with same-sex attraction. The city council members look “good” as they go with the leftist flow. They assure themselves of the “homosexual vote” come election time, but really don’t accomplish anything of note with this politically correct tap dance.

Cities are measured by the strength of their social fabric, marriages and families, unemployment and crime rates, among other factors. Tucson is mostly known for promoting socialism and radical, left-wing causes. And it shows in social statistics. Just 45 percent of Tucson’s citizens are married, and only 23 percent have a college or graduate degree. The unemployment rate is 6.3 percent.

Whereas in the Town of Gilbert, Arizona’s most conservative city, 67 percent of the residents are married and 36 percent have a college or graduate degree. Gilbert’s unemployment rate is 4.8 percent.

But in another much more glaring statistic, in a recent year Tucson residents were beleaguered by over 5,000 violent crimes. At the same time, Gilbert residents were the victims of just 215. Gilbert’s population is 216,000, and Tucson’s is 541,000. Tucson is a little over twice the size of Gilbert, but had 23 times as many violent crimes. AND Tucson has more gun control laws than Gilbert to boot!

Tucson, while your city leaders fiddle with politically correct window dressing, you’ve got some real serious issues that are NOT being addressed. Starting with real protection of your residents.

Join the Rallies against Medicaid Expansion Saturday!

The Kick-Off Rally for United Republican Alliance of Principled Conservatives is scheduled at 10 am., Saturday, June 22 on the State Capitol Lawn, 1700 W. Washington, in Phoenix. The rally will open the campaign to get enough signatures to place a referendum on the November ballot to stop Medicaid expansion. At 1 p.m., supporters of the effort will rally at two separate locations for the purpose of canvassing the districts containing the senator and representatives who supported Gov Jan Brewer’s Medicaid Expansion. They will regroup at:

LD 18 Canvass – (McComish – Dial – Robson) Join Frank Antenori and Christine Bauserman at: McDonald’s, 4750 E Warner Rd, NW corner Warner/48th St) Phoenix. 85044

LD15 Canvass (Heather Carter) – Join Ron Gould at the Deer Valley Airport, 702 W. Deer Valley Road, Phoenix, 85027

Legislative District 25 Republicans Censure Governor and 15 RINOs

Last night Gov. Jan Brewer and 15 Republican state lawmakers made history. They were censured by the leaders of Legislative District 25.

The resolution presented by LD25 Republican Precinct Committeeman To Censure The Governor And 15 Arizona State Legislators passed with just two dissenting votes. An smendment to add the hovernor’s name to the resolution passed unanimously. Read the resolution below:

·LD25 Resolution to Censure Gov. Jan Brewer and 15 legislators: Whereas, Governor Brewer and 15 Republican state legislators formed an alliance with Democratic elected officials for the express purpose of thwarting the will of the Republican majority in the legislature and violating Republican Party principles and the Republican Party Platform, including but not limited to the following:

o They implemented the passage of Medicaid expansion.
o They implemented government healthcare.
o They approved taxpayer funding for abortion and increased funding for abortion services.
o They expanded eligibility for welfare benefits, and invited 300,000+ new people into the welfare system.
o They raised taxes.
o They voted against tax relief & kept Arizona as the state with the 2nd highest tax rate in the nation.
o They voted against auditing the hospital bed tax.
o They increased property taxes.
o The only tax relief they offered was for special-interest industries who could afford to hire lobbyists.
o They rejected a balanced budget and voted for one with a structural debt of $400 million.
o They removed government oversight for special interests.
o They voted against verifying citizenship as a requirement for Medicaid benefits.
o They removed funding for English immersion for non-English-speaking students, thus ensuring the continuation of the failed, Democratic-Party-supported, bilingual programs.

•Whereas, they corrupted the legislative process by suspending the rules and depriving the public of the opportunity to scrutinize and comment on the proposed legislation.
•Whereas, they stymied the legislative process, dishonored American legislative traditions, stifled democratic notions of fairness and openness, and violated decorum by refusing to debate.
•Whereas, they violated the wishes of the vast majority of Republican precinct committeemen in the State of Arizona who had overwhelmingly opposed the passage of Medicaid Expansion, making their wishes known in formal resolutions.
•Whereas, they voted in favor of national health care, disregarding the will of the voters of Arizona who amended the Arizona Constitution via Proposition 106 in 2010 to oppose national health care.
•Whereas, they violated the separation of powers defined in the Arizona Constitution by voting for a budget amendment originated by the executive branch of government.
•Whereas, they violated the Arizona Constitution by surrendering the legislative authority to tax to an unelected bureaucrat in an executive branch agency, and made such taxes subject to approval of the federal government.
•Whereas, they forced passage of a tax increase by a mere majority vote instead of the constitutionally required 2/3 vote.
•Therefore be it resolved, that we, the precinct committeemen of Legislative District 25, do censure the following Arizona State legislators:

Governor Jan Brewer
LD1 Senator Steve Pierce (Legislative District 1 precinct committeemen also voted “no confidence” in Sen. Pierce)
LD16 Senator Rich Crandall
LD18 Senator John McComish
LD23 Senator Michele Reagan
LD 25 Senator Robert Worsley
LD28 Senator Adam Driggs
LD5 Rep. Doris Goodale
LD6 Rep. Thomas “T.J.” Shope
LD8 Rep. Frank Pratt
LD9 Rep. Ethan Orr
LD15 Rep. Heather Carter
LD16 Rep. Doug Coleman
LD18 Rep. Jeff Dial
LD18 Rep. Bob Robson
LD28 Rep. Kate Brophy McGee

Restoring Arizona Spokesman Insults ObamaCare Opponents as ‘Fringe Group’

A spokesman for Restoring Arizona, a group supporting the recently enacted and abortion-tainted Medicaid expansion/ObamaCare, has insulted opponents by labeling them a “fringe group.” The statement below was issued in an email today from Jaime Molera, a former appointed State Superintendent of Public Instruction:

“It is clear that the Arizona Constitution prohibits referral of laws that are ‘for the support and maintenance of the departments of the state government and state institutions.’ Consequently, the opponents of Medicaid expansion cannot invalidate (or stall) the appropriation of state funds covering expanded AHCCCS coverage.

“These fringe groups who have opposed this restoration effort from the start willfully intend to ignore the will of the Arizona voters who have twice voted to support Medicaid coverage for childless adults who earn less than 100% of the Federal Poverty level.”

The ink on Governor Brewer’s signature has barely dried. Yet Molera and Medicaid expansion/ObamaCare supporters are already paranoid about a citizen effort to roll back the big government plan through a ballot proposition.

When Gov. Brewer needed the vote of Arizona citizens to get re-elected, these people were good enough then. But now, for opposing Medicaid expansion/ObamaCare, they are rudely discounted as a “fringe group.”

This is a highly inflammatory and extremely poor choice of words. Sour grapes are usually reserved for sore losers. But in this case, those who won a political battle are guilty of sour grapes.

Two former duly elected state legislators — Ron Gould and Frank Antenori — are spearheading the ballot proposition amendment process. They already have written commitments of support from 500 Republican precinct committeemen to get the ballot proposal signatures needed to qualify for the election ballot. These are the same people who worked at the grassroots level for Brewer’s re-election — only to be insulted for opposing her now. The governor herself has openly ridiculed and mocked these hard-working people who work the neighborhoods in extreme heat to get people like her elected. It’s a good thing for her she’s a lame duck, because she just killed any chance she has to get elected to any office in Arizona in the future.

We urge you and as many of your family and friends as possible to sign the petitions and help circulate them throughout Arizona. Join in this effort now.

Gould and Antenori have formed a committee to make that happen. It’s called The United Republican Alliance of Principled Conservatives. For more information on how to help this alliance, call Christine Bauserman at (520) 235-2234. Thank you.

And be sure to let the governor and Molera know their sour grapes comments are highly inflammatory and insulting. Molera’s phone number is: (602) 279-9925. Hello, Jaime … about those disgusting, ill-tempered, and regrettable remarks …

Look at AZ Voter Law Decision again: We Won!

What did you hear in TV and radio reports on Monday? That Arizona’s Prop 200 was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court. But you didn’t hear the full story … not even on so-called conservative media in Arizona! The Left lost bigtime in that decision!

By J. Christian Adams, PJ Media: http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2013/06/17/left-loses-big-in-arizona-supreme-court-case/

June 17, 2013

Something perverse happened after the Supreme Court’s decision today invalidating citizenship-verification requirements in Arizona for registrants who use the federal voter registration form. The Left knows they lost most of the battle, but are still claiming victory. That’s what they do. Election-integrity proponents and the states are saying they lost, but don’t realize they really won.

The Left wins even when they lose, and conservatives are often bewildered and outfoxed in the election-process game.

Earlier today, I called the decision a nothingburger. After re-reading the case and reflecting a bit more, it’s clear that the decision was a disaster for the Left and their victory cackles are hollow — and they know it.

Worse, conservatives dooms-dayers who have never litigated a single National Voter Registration Act case have taken to the airwaves, describing the case as a disaster which invites illegal-alien voting.

In the last year, I’ve litigated five NVRA cases and worked on the preemption issues for years, and there is more to cheer in today’s opinion than there is to bemoan. Those complaining about the opinion don’t understand what the Left’s goal was in this case: total federal preemption. On that score, Justice Scalia foiled them; indeed, the decision today was a huge war won, even if the small Arizona battle was lost.

From my time in the Justice Department Voting Section, I can remember intimately the wars over some of the preemption issues decided today.

The Left essentially believes that anyone who fills out a federal Election Assistance Commission registration form should be allowed on the rolls, no questions asked. There were complex fights over the “citizen check-off box” issues, with the Left wanting the box rendered meaningless, and conservatives and election-integrity proponents believing a registration cannot be processed until a registrant affirms on the box that he or she is a citizen.

Before the decision today, here is what the Left wanted:

● Invalidation of Arizona’s requirement that those submitting a federal form provide proof of citizenship with their federal form. Mind you, the citizenship-proof requirement is NOT part of federal law and the Election Assistance Commission does NOT require it in the form they drafted.

● Invalidation of state citizenship-verification requirements when a state voter registration form is used (yes, such forms exist separate from the federal requirement) on the basis of federal preemption. They wanted the Arizona case to invalidate all state citizenship-verification requirements.

● Automatic registration if a registrant submits a completed federal EAC approved registration form, no questions asked.

● Federal preemption on the ability for states to have customized federal EAC-approved forms that differed from the default EAC form.

● Federal preemption over states, like Florida and Kansas, looking for independent information on citizenship to root out noncitizens from the voter rolls. Again, the Left wanted the federal EAC form to be the no-questions-asked ticket to the voter rolls.

So what is the score on these five goals after Justice Scalia’s opinion today? Election-integrity advocates are batting .800; left wing groups, .200. And the most insignificant issue of the five is the one issue the Left won. Justice Scalia foiled 4 of 5 of their goals, and the 4 biggest ones.

How does it work? The decision today uncorks state power. The Left wanted state power stripped and they lost.

First, Arizona can simply push the state forms in all state offices and online, and keep those federal forms in the back room gathering dust. When you submit a state form, you have to prove citizenship. Thanks to Justice Scalia, that option is perfectly acceptable. Loss for the Left. Victory for election integrity.

You might say, “That’s a small victory.” Nonsense. This was the whole ballgame to the groups pushing the Arizona lawsuit. They lost, period.

Next, when voters use a state, as opposed to a federal, form, they can still be required to prove citizenship. The federal form is irrelevant in that circumstance.

After the decision today, states have a green light to do double- and triple-checking even if a registrant uses the federal form. The Left wanted the submission of a federal form to mean automatic no-questions-asked registration. This is a big loss for the Left because now states can put suspect forms in limbo while they run checks against non-citizen databases and jury-response forms. Another significant victory in today’s decision. The Left wanted to strip them of that double-checking power.

The decision today is a great example of how conservatives can be distracted by squirrels running past. It is understandable and forgivable because they aren’t daily immersed in the long-term election-process agenda of the left-wing groups. Nor do they daily involve themselves with the details of election process. But having been in the “preemption wars” for nearly a decade, I can assure you this case is a big win, even if it doesn’t appear so at first glance.

Budget-Killing Reagan Serving Hard Time in Senate

By Ben Franklin, American Post-Gazette

Not every guilty person looks it. Take Michele Reagan R-Scottsdale) for example. She is a soft spoken, pleasant woman with a kind face, but a few years ago her vote in the Legislature nearly wrecked the Arizona state budget, and threatened to bankrupt us. If Reagan were Democrat, you might understand, even if grudgingly, but this vote for Janet Napolitano’s out of control spending plan was incomprehensible. Michele Reagan is a wrecking ball wrapped in velvet.

In the aftermath after Napolitano was called to Washington to serve the Obama regime, the Republican legislature struggled to repair that dreadful budget. Wrestling greased pythons might have been easier. The Democrat money spenders fought hard to keep the ex-governor’s wild programs in place at the same time our economy was in free fall due to ludicrous Federal policies. It did not have to be that way. One woman, single handedly, had cast the key vote that destroyed our fiscal responsibility and threatened Arizona’s economic stability for several years afterward. That woman was our own Michele Reagan.

When Governor Napolitano took office in 2003, she pushed the Arizona Legislature to increase the budget at an annual rate of 12 percent, much faster than the growth rate of the state’s private sector, which expands 7 to 8 percent per year when times are good. State government spending reached 7.01 percent of the state’s economy – the biggest proportion since 1980.

With expenditures increasing so fast, it was inevitable tax revenues would fall short and a gigantic deficit would be the result. That gap reached $2.2 billion, the biggest per capita state deficit in the country. Did that sink in? We had the biggest deficit per capita in the entire United States, and Michele Reagan voted for that disaster.

More recently she was at it again. When Governor Brewer signed on to bringing Obamacare into Arizona on the wings of the Medicare system, Reagan once again voted with the Democrats for an expense-heavy medical insurance expansion that would wreak havoc on the state economy. Critics have pointed out that after the first couple of years, state tax payers would be digging deep into their pockets to keep this burdensome monster alive. The monster will then eat us, or at least a large part of our hard earned money.

When Reagan was asked why she voted for the bill, she said she wanted to give the House of Representatives a chance to weigh in also. However, in a subsequent round of voting, Reagan voted against the disastrous legislation. Reagan claimed her switch was due to the elimination of a trigger that would cancel state participation when Federal funding falls below 80%. In other words, she voted for it, and then against it when her vote was no longer critical to passage. Reagan had found cover for switching.

What is wrong with sticking to conservative principals and giving the people responsible government? Surely that can’t be too much to ask from our elected officials! Every Democrat voted for this healthcare bill, and Reagan voted with the Democrats on two of the most critical issues of our times.

Now, Michele Reagan wants to become our Secretary of State, but her ultimate goal is to take command on the 9th floor – in the Governor’s office. You do not want this to happen! Perhaps the woman is in the wrong party and ought to be encouraged to make a change. Perhaps she should be encouraged to retire. It’s OK. She doesn’t need the job and will do just fine without her meager state salary. Just think how much better Arizona will be with her out of office.

FBI Says “All Options Are on the Table” for Bringing Leaker to Justice

John Semmens: Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

Folder2 104FBI director Robert Mueller promised that his agency “will be taking action against Edward Snowden for disclosing confidential government activities. There is no greater threat to the government than an unreliable insider. Mr. Snowden has shown himself to be that kind of threat.”

Snowden’s whereabouts are currently unknown. He is reputed to have gone into hiding out of fear for his life. Mueller vowed that “we will spare no effort to end the threat posed by this self-styled patriot. Snowden will be brought to justice. Hopefully, he will surrender himself peaceably. But he will be apprehended dead or alive.”

Bipartisan support for rigorous efforts to apprehend Snowden were voiced. House Speaker John Behner called Snowden “a traitor who is undermining President Obama’s efforts to protect this country from serious enemies.” across the aisle, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif) labeled Snowden’s leaks “an act of treason. He may think he’s pursuing a higher good by divulging the government’s invasion of privacy, but if it comes down to trusting him or President Obama, I’m siding with the man voters elected over this high school dropout.”

Former congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul dissented from fellow Republican Behner’s take, saying that “we should be thankful for individuals like Edward Snowden and Glenn Greenwald who see injustice being carried out by their own government and speak out, despite the risk.”

Representative Peter King (R-NY) came at the issue from a slightly different angle suggesting that “the reporter who broke the story is the one we should be going after. If it weren’t for people like Greenwald publicity hounds like Snowden would have nowhere to turn and the government’s secrets would be safe from prying eyes.”

So far, polls give an unclear view of where the general public stands on this issue. A Washington Post-Pew Research Center poll found that 56% saw government’s invasion of privacy to be “acceptable.” In contrast, in a Rueters poll the split was 31% saying Snowden is a patriot, 23% a traitor, and 46% undecided.

Agency Head Insists NSA Spying Is Very Effective

The current Director of the National Security Agency (NSA), General Keith B. Alexander, defended its program of widespread spying on Americans on the grounds that “numerous serious threats to the government have been thwarted as a result of the data accumulated by the Agency.”

Skeptics point out that there have been a number of jihad-style attacks on American soil since the NSA’s massive intrusion into Americans’ privacy got under way. Most notably, jihad terrorists detonated a bomb at the Boston Marathon. In 2009, a Muslim psychiatrist murdered 13 and wounded 31 unarmed soldiers at Fort Hood, Texas in what he calls “an act of war against the invaders of Afghanistan.”

Alexander insisted that these examples “unfairly blame the NSA. Obviously, a main plotting ground for these types of attacks are the radical mosques sprinkled around the country. What many people don’t know is that the President has blocked us from infiltrating these sites because it would violate Muslims’ freedom to practice their religion without undue invasions of their privacy.”

“Let’s not overlook the fact that ‘Evangelical Christians’ is the terrorist organization that appears on the top of our list of threats we must be on the lookout for,” Alexander reminded. “Keeping that in mind, I’d have to say that the NSA has proved very efficient in turning back several critical attempts to topple the government. In 2010 using information from our files we were successful in defending against insurgents who tried to oust Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid from his seat.”

“Then just last year the NSA’s data was instrumental in assisting the President in fending off a well-financed attempt to remove him from office,” Alexander added. “The jihad attacks we missed were relatively minor in their impact. Though there was some loss of life, these incidents never really exposed our government to risk. So, in retrospect, I’d have to say our focus is where it should be.”

President’s Africa Trip Has Hefty Price Tag

The First Family’s excursion to Africa is shaping up as the most expensive trip ever taken by an American president. As of now, the estimated cost is expected to range from $60 to $100 million. A big item of expense is the around-the-clock security. Not only will there be hundreds of Secret Service agents accompanying the First Family, there will also be a constant presence of military jets flying overhead. The bill easily dwarfs what it would’ve cost to provide extra security for the Libyan Ambassador who was killed by Islamic jihadis in Benghazi last September.

Press Secretary Jay Carney brushed aside criticism that the outlay is extravagant saying that “the extra precautions are the absolute minimum we feel is necessary. The President and his family are the most important people on the planet. It is our sacred obligation to make every effort deemed necessary to ensure their safety.”

Carney contended that “comparisons with the amounts not spent to protect Ambassador Stephens aren’t relevant. The Ambassador’s death, tragic as it was, barely caused a ripple in the context of global affairs. Events since last September have proved that—the President was reelected, his government still rules. The same certainly wouldn’t be the case if even the slightest harm were to befall President Obama or his family. The consequences would be catastrophic beyond measure.”

“On top of this, who would disagree that the malice directed toward the President has to be far greater than that which brought Ambassador Stephens down,” Carney continued. “Terrorists have had dozens of their friends and co-conspirators killed by order of President Obama. Is there any doubt that they would go to great lengths to get back at him in whatever way they could? We are confident that the American people are willing to pay whatever it costs to keep their President safe.”

Military Takes Stern Measures to Ensure Loyalty

Concerned that US troops may have conflicting loyalties, top brass is cracking down on “overt displays of behaviors conducive to a break down in discipline.”

By way of making an example, Master Sgt. Nathan Sommers, a 25-year Army veteran based at Fort Myer in Washington, D.C., is facing formal charges for “a litany of offensive behaviors.” The bad behavior includes his choice of reading material—conservative and critical of the Obama Administration—and his choice of menu—sandwiches from Chik-Fil-A—at a party he threw celebrating his promotion to Master Sergeant. Chik-Fil-A is the restaurant famous for its owners views on marriage.

“The Army must be 100% behind its Commander-in-Chief,” declared Army spokesman Major Hardin Saddler. “The President needs to be able to feel comfortable that the troops can be counted upon to carry out his orders without qualms or reservations. Sgt. Sommers has indicated that his reliability in this regard is subject to question. While we concede that it is likely Sommers is too far gone to be reclaimed, it is still possible that we can influence the behavior of other soldiers by how we handle his transgressions now.”

In a bid to provide some legal protection for freedom of conscience for US troops, Representative John Fleming (R-La) has introduced an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would bar the Army from retaliating against soldiers for “actions and speech that reflect the conscience, moral, principles or religious beliefs of the individual.”

The Obama Administration opposes Fleming’s amendment on the grounds that it would have a “significant adverse effect on good order, discipline, morale, and mission accomplishment. Allowing troops to exercise their own sense of conscience undermines the unquestioning obedience that is necessary for a well-disciplined army.”

State Department Whistle Blower Threatened

Since disclosing that high officials in the US State Department had covered up an Inspector General report outlining criminal acts involving State Department personnel, whistle blower Aurelia Fedenisn has been intimidated by State Department threats. The criminal acts include Hillary Clinton’s security detail who allegedly hired prostitutes, a U.S. ambassador accused of trolling public parks for paid sex with under-aged prostitutes, and a security official in Beirut committing sexual assaults on foreign nationals.

Secretary of State John Kerry defended the pressure tactics being used against Fedenisn as “normal efforts to preserve the image of the agency. The release of information revealing the criminal behaviors of Department personnel is extremely damaging. The publicity has caused far more harm than the alleged criminal offenses themselves. To begin with, paying for sex is a made-up crime and sexual assault is often a ‘he-said/she-said’ kind of thing. Rather than tar America’s reputation with such petty charges they were quite appropriately, in my opinion swept under the rug. We have bigger issues to deal with.”

Kerry gave no specifics on what “bigger issues” he might have in mind. Possibly, the bigger issue might entail the leak of another memo indicating that the State Department has hired numerous agents with criminal backgrounds.

A Spokesman for the Secretary discounted this possibility saying that “this Administration prides itself on rehabilitating felons and giving them a second chance. Many of those who’ve served time have valuable experience with firearms or other skills useful to the government.”

 

A Satirical Look at Recent News

Please do us a favor.  If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit, and do not change the context. Thank you.