Friday Noon ~ thefrontpagecover

~ Featuring ~  
New Zealand's Knee-Jerk Response 
Threatens Liberty
Thomas Gallatin
Abolishing the Electoral College Is 
Unconstitutional and Wrong
3oTSlaLe-4dFG57oLULc15sRi5sTjlpUwwwaGghM_4A2hYKLMJWGOR7WnwbrVhszR-QnV0-4XBcCbvS_cpMXgz9hghIelxL4npDELY4YsWpaFeQdNDg=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710xby Michael Busler
{} ~ Recently, Elizabeth dinky-Warren and a number of other Democratic candidates for president have suggested that the Electoral College be abolished... Right now, a candidate for president must win a majority of Electoral College votes regardless of the outcome of the national popular vote. President Donald Trump in 2016 and President George W. Bush in 2000, did not win the popular vote, but they did win a majority in the Electoral College. The Dems claim that this is not fair and that the president should be elected by popular vote. In fact, a number of states are trying to change their Electoral College votes based on the national popular vote rather than the vote within their state. In theory, a democracy or a constitutional republic makes major decisions based on the desires of the majority of the people. Indeed, it was rule by a generally elite minority, rather than the majority, that was the basis for the founding of our country. However, our forefathers also recognized that the United States of America, while honoring rule by the majority, also realized that individual states must have basic rights and a should have a voice in presidential elections. Why did our forefathers establish two chambers of Congress? When Congress was formed there were two bodies created: the House of Representatives and the Senate. Realizing that it would be impossible to have a direct democracy where each citizen voted on each issue, a representative democracy was established. In theory, voters elect representatives who will vote in Congress on issues in a manner that reflects the views of their constituents...
Socialism: Be Careful What You Wish For
o4oF3rigG3kYd5P8gWuCwETZMWkexbpZB1GfV-5qrp4-LfLZDwnqFhcgLFM4B8Y-2OJUcqmmvlP5nqEt6M5TDDaEjw=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710xby Philip Carl Salzman
{} ~ For so long, it appeared that socialism had definitively failed in practice and had lost its appeal as an economic ideology... The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) had crashed; its Eastern European satellites had escaped in the 1990s; China had transitioned from socialism to state capitalism beginning with the economic reforms of 1978 and has carried on energetically ever since; communist Cuba had declined to an offshore holiday resort for Canadians and Europeans, and  socialist Venezuela totally collapsed. In a 1989 essay entitled "The End of History?", Francis Fukuyama argued that, in the events mentioned above, we were witnessing "an unabashed victory of economic and political liberalism." Socialist parties have, of course, been present in many European countries throughout the 20th and 21st centuries, and at some time and in some countries, have been dominant. But they have tended to be "pink" rather than "red," and have generally favoured welfare state policies rather than the takeover of the means of production; at the moment, most European countries are currently struggling to stay on life-support. The British Labour Party, for instance, abandoned state ownership of the means of production in a 1993 revision of Clause IV of its constitution. Socialism, however, has recently taken off in the American political scene, and continues to be the foundational principle of Canada's New Democratic Party. In the U.S., "Attitudes toward socialism among Democrats have not changed materially since 2010, with 57% today having a positive view. The major change among Democrats has been a less upbeat attitude toward capitalism, dropping to 47% positive this year." Furthermore, all "Americans aged 18 to 29 are even more positive about socialism (51%) as they are about capitalism (45%).". Socialist leanings of young people should not be a surprise to anyone familiar with our educational system, from primary school through university, which has evidently been captured by Marxists, with their familiar cries of a world supposedly divided into oppressors and the oppressed...
‘Highly Profitable Scam’: Southern Poverty Law Center ‘Ripping Off Donors,’ Former Staffer Says  
by Peter Hasson
{} ~ The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is a “highly profitable scam” that “never lived up to the values it espoused,”... according to former SPLC staffer Bob Moser. The New Yorker on Thursday published a scathing essay from Moser, now a Rolling Stone reporter, accusing the left-wing non-profit of “ripping off donors” while turning a blind eye to sexual harassment and racial discrimination within its own ranks.The SPLC fired co-founder Morris Dees on March 13 over unspecified conduct issues. The SPLC announced Dees’ firing after roughly two dozen SPLC employees previously signed a letter to the organization’s leadership expressing their alarm at “allegations of mistreatment, sexual harassment, gender discrimination, and racism,” The Los Angeles Times reported.“The firing of Dees has flushed up all the uncomfortable questions again. Were we complicit, by taking our paychecks and staying silent, in ripping off donors on behalf of an organization that never lived up to the values it espoused? Did we enable racial discrimination and sexual harassment by failing to speak out?” Moser asked in his article. One of Moser’s former colleagues answered in the affirmative...
The Supreme Court Is Not 
The Final Say On The Constitution  
by Benjamin R. Dierker  
{} ~ Several 2020 candidates are determined to mainstream the perverse idea of expanding the Supreme Court to achieve policy victories... Such court-packing defies the intent, function, and ideals of the American judiciary. Americans have been told a lie about the constitutional balance of power. Despite activist assertions to the contrary, the Supreme Court is not a supreme constitutional council with the sole and final say on legal matters. We have accepted a larger than life picture of the judiciary, and it is slowly destroying individual liberty and the constitutional order laid down by the founders. The Constitution outlines the role of the courts, but for some time they have been operating beyond their proper function. We must change how we see them, understand their appropriate role, and stop allowing the growth of power. Each new interpretation of plain text that widens the judiciary’s authority is a dangerous violation of the separation of powers. If executive overreach concerns you, judicial overreach doubly should. To correct a few common misconceptions, the judiciary’s rulings are not the supreme law of the land, even rulings from the Supreme Court. The judiciary is not the only or even final arbiter on the Constitution. And the judiciary is not a truly co-equal branch of government. Article VI of the Constitution describes what qualifies as the law of the land. This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land…
MSNBC’s Katy Tur Claims dirty cop-Mueller Has Already Found ‘Quite A Bit’ On Trump  
by Mike Brest
{} ~ MSNBC’s Katy Tur dismissed the upcoming results of dirty cop-Robert Mueller’s investigation during her Thursday show because, according to her... the special counsel has already found “quite a bit” of incriminating evidence against President Donald Trump. Tur made the comment during a panel on her show with Washington Post White House reporter Ashley Parker and senior Politico White House reporter Darren Samuelsohn. “There were moments all through the investigation when they actually were nervous and they were panicked. When for instance, Michael Cohen that news broke. But right now they’re not super nervous, and there is a sense that it is going to be a bit of a nothing burger,” Parker stated, when asked if the Trump administrations reaction could provide insight into the results of the investigation. “Again, I am not saying that’s what it will be, but that is the sense in the president orbit. And if that’s the case, they do think they can use it as a political cudgel to show Democratic overreach.” “Let’s just put up on the screen everybody who’s already been found guilty or indicted in the dirty cop-Mueller investigation. Lots of faces, lots of pleas, and lots of indictments,” Tur stated, as a graphic of individuals connected to Trump who have been indicted appeared including Michael Flynn, Michael Cohen and Paul Manafort. “They’ve already come up with quite a bit, regardless of whether there or not there is direct collusion or conspiracy found between Donald Trump or his campaign and the Russians,” she added... Tur has no idea what the hell she is talking about.
New Zealand's Knee-Jerk Response 
Threatens Liberty
Thomas Gallatin:  Less than a week after New Zealand suffered one of the worst crimes in its history, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern declared that she would act to ban “virtually all” types of semiautomatic rifles. Ardern sought to justify her knee-jerk decision by stating, “To owners who have legitimate uses for their guns, I want to reiterate that the actions being announced today are not because of you and are not directed at you. Our actions, on behalf of all New Zealanders, are directed at making sure this never happens again.”

Meanwhile, authorities in New Zealand have been busy  arresting several individualsfor sharing a 17-minute video the perpetrator live-streamed as he engaged in his massacre. New Zealand’s Chief Censor — yes, you read that right — David Shanks justified the arrests on “hate speech” grounds, stating, “It is a record of a terrorist atrocity, specifically produced for the purpose of promoting a hateful terrorist agenda.” One of the individuals arrested has been charged with two counts of distributing objectionable material, with each offense carrying a possible 14-year prison sentence should he be found guilty.

The irony here is simply dumbfounding, and it should make all Americans thankful for our Constitution and Bill of Rights. First off, following the massacre, Ardern publicly vowed that she would not name the perpetrator so as to deny him notoriety and instead “give him nothing.” Her desire not to give this criminal notoriety is certainly commendable, but the true irony lies in the fact that she has actually given in to his stated objective. She has acted to revoke the individual rights of innocent Kiwis by acting to ban semiautomatic rifles. In so doing, she unwittingly accepts and implements the murderer’s goals, written down in his trolling manifesto. So much for not naming him.

Among the myriad of motives the perpetrator lists were attacks against individual rights and specifically America’s Second Amendment. Speaking like a true neo-Nazi, he advocated for race-based collectivism over and against individual liberty.

The sad reality is that the New Zealand government’s knee-jerk reactions to this horrific crime only further the impact of that crime. Officials have caved to the will of a madman by robbing the entire population of New Zealand of their individual rights, all in the name of providing the impossible — “safety” from evil. What will result is not greater safety, but rather a greater authoritarian governance where the rights and dignity of the individual will be regularly sacrificed for the desires of the political overlords.

And it comes as no surprise that the Leftmedia in our nation celebrates Ardern’s Liberty-crushing actions. The Washington Post’s editorial board sanctimoniously lectures, “New Zealand is showing America how to respond to mass shootings.” Wrong. New Zealand is showing America how life and Liberty would suffer with no constitutional protections.  

~The Patriot Post  
E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center


  • bonnie 

    sure thing


This reply was deleted.