~ Featuring ~
Legalizing the Constitution
by Deana Chadwell 
Iran’s Facebook operation 
shows that it never restrained its hackers 
{ } ~ Facebook on Tuesday dismantled an expansive, covert Iranian influence operation aimed at American, British, Latin American, and Middle Eastern audiences... Posing as independent news and civil society organizations, state-sponsored actors created hundreds of fake Facebook  pages and Twitter accounts, which were also suspended  on Tuesday, and Iranian state media created dozens of counterfeit YouTube channels. The operation, dating back to as early as 2011, tricked hundreds of thousands of people into following bogus accounts. Deploying the  expertise in social engineering they have developed  through their many spear phishing campaigns, Iranian cyber operators manipulated Americans and others into possibly sharing content and attending real-world events hosted by fake personas. The influence campaign is one of the first reported cases of Iranian operatives  exploiting U.S. social media to target audiences outside  Iran, according to cybersecurity firm FireEye which tipped off the tech giants to the suspicious activity. The exposure of this multi-year cyber campaign should dispel the myth that Tehran put a tight leash on its hackers during and after negotiating the nuclear deal known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Yet even the Trump administration has downplayed the Iranian cyber threat, despite pulling out of the JCPOA in response to Iranian provocations ranging from missile launches to ongoing support for terrorists...
Radicalized dummycrats-Democrats: 
Destroying the Country and Their Own Party
by Jake Hoffman

{ } ~ From the wee hours of the morning on November 9, 2016, as they grappled with the sting of President-Elect Donald Trump triumphing over the anointed Queen of the Swamp, dummycrats-Democrats have been radicalizing by the minute... Objective Americans have witnessed the transformation of JFK-style classical liberals into Marxist protégés even the namesake himself would be proud to call his pupils, not to mention the hostile takeover of the  dummycrats-Democratic Party by the "three home-owning multi-millionaire," commie-Bernie Sanders, and "I'm not an expert on American-Israeli policy, but let me comment on it anyway" commie-Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The dummycrats-Democratic Party is soon to be more aptly referenced as the dummycrats-Democratic Socialist Party. And it's not as if the  dummycrats-Democrats don't have the resolve to combat such a monumental shift to the left. They've certainly been known to fight when something has truly mattered to them – like the times when they fought tooth and nail to unanimously oppose the 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution, giving citizenship to freed slaves and an equal right to vote for all, respectively.  Or the time when they overwhelmingly opposed abolishing slavery by fighting to kill the 13th Amendment. If dummycrats-Democrats really opposed the radicalization of their own party, they would fight it, but the quiet truth is that they welcome it...
A secret mission to Iran 
{ } ~ Arutz Sheva has discovered that Russian Chief Rabbi Berel Lazar recently visited Iran on a secret diplomatic mission... He was sent by Russian President Vladimir Putin. All official sources have refused to confirm details such as the purpose of the visit and the exact dates. It is possible that Rabbi Lazar's visit to Iran is connected to Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's attempts to prevent Iran from establishing itself in Syria. Earlier this week, the foreign ministers of both Iran and Syria signed an agreement to tighten military and security cooperation between their countries.
dummycrats-Democrats losing
 their minds over Trump, Limbaugh says
{ } ~ A dummycrats-Democrat who served in the liar-Bill Clinton administration and now teaches at the University of California at Berkeley has concluded that impeaching President Trump is not a good idea... Not because the evidence of wrongdoing isn’t there. Not because there aren’t enough votes in the House and Senate. Not because of anything like that. It’s because it wouldn’t reverse President Trump’s actions in totality. It wouldn’t erase him from the roster of presidents. It wouldn’t undo the laws he’s signed, the appointments he’s made and the executive orders he’s issued. Talk radio star Rush Limbaugh was flabbergasted. “He’s losing his mind! They all are! It’s hilarious.” The demand for the unprecedented and extra-constitutional “annulment” comes from liar-Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich. Now a professor at Berkeley, he wrote in Newsweek: “The only way I see the end of Trump is if there’s overwhelming evidence he rigged the 2016 election. In which case impeachment isn’t an adequate remedy. His presidency should be annulled.”...
Monkeying Flack: Media Ignored 
scumbag/liar-nObama’s Use Of Anti-Semitic Trigger Words
by Jeff Dunetz
{ } ~ The MSM has to stop monkeyingaround. They continue to promote the theme as every Republican is a racist and that it is impossible for a dummycrats-Democrat to hate anyone... Only hours after he won the Republican primary for the race for Florida Governor, the media has risen as one to smear Ron DeSantis as a “racist.” Aaaaannnnd the media smear campaign begins right on time. They attacked Ron DeSantis by spinning his words into a different meaning but that same mainstream media never attacked scumbag/liar-nObama’s anti-Semitic bigotry that needed no spin to understand. On Wednesday morning, DeSantis was warning Florida not to fall for his dummycrats-Democrat opponent’s socialist agenda, but his choice of an ages old saying to describe the folly of voting for failed socialist policies was the perfect avenue for the lying media to smear DeSantis as a “racist.” Latest: Monkeying Flack: Media Ignored scumbag/liar-nObama's Use Of Anti-Semitic Trigger Words In a Monday appearance on Fox News, DeSantis warned Florida not to “monkey up” the state by voting for socialism. “Let’s build off the success we’ve had on Gov. Scott. The last thing we need to do is to monkey this up by trying to embrace a socialist agenda with huge tax increases bankrupting the state. That is not going to work,” DeSantis said on Fox...
Legalizing the Constitution
by Deana Chadwell
{ } ~ I once had a bumper sticker that read, "Legalize the Constitution." Occasionally, I would find myself having to explain it and often to defend it. Really? Not only is the Bill of Rights no longer understood or venerated, but confusion reigns.

The most important, the First Amendment, seems most prone to misuse. It reads:

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.

Seems simple, yet we find ourselves at a point in our history where its import is ignored, repudiated, or twisted all out of proportion.

The First Amendment starts with the phrase "Congress shall make no law." So this limits the activities of Congress – not of states, or individuals, or schools, or any other group. Just Congress. A community can pass a law against obscene language in public if it wants to. A teacher can limit the amount of speech and its contents in her class – she isn't Congress. A pastor should be able to say anything from the pulpit that his congregation will tolerate.

Secondly, it keeps Congress out of the business of setting up a national religion – common at the time of writing. It keeps Congress – not anyone else – out of regulating religious practice. Nothing in this statute prohibits states, or cities, from doing so. I suspect that if Michigan continues its march toward Islam, at least some of its cities will take advantage of that freedom.

Thirdly, Congress is forbidden to make any law that abridges freedom of speech. This is where we are up against a hard wall. There can be, in this country, no national law enforcing political correctness. This means that federal law enforcement cannot arrest, incarcerate, try, or convict anyone for an utterance just because it is offensive to someone. If I fail to utilize the correct nongendered pronoun, I could be imprisoned in Canada, but the First Amendment prohibits that here.

So does that mean that a company can't fire a person because he was overheard badmouthing the boss? Or propositioning a female employee? Or calling someone the N-word? No. The business belongs to those who own it, and since private ownership of property is another of our cherished rights, the business can hire and fire whom it will. There are social and financial consequences, and the Bill of Rights doesn't protect us from those. If Facebook and Twitter keep offending conservatives, we'll just leave – life without them is possible – but the government has to stay out of it.

Does it mean that the president can't remove the top-secret security clearance from some ex-bureaucrat? No. A security clearance gives a person the right to know, not the right to speak about what he knows. That's why the word "secret" is involved.

Fourthly, "freedom of speech" just means that no federal legal action can be taken against you for something you say. That is not an absolute – threatening to kill or harm someone is illegal. Inciting to riot is as well. Shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater will land you in some trouble. Lying under oath can cost you. Common sense prevails.

"Freedom of speech" does not protect you from the negative social consequences of being linguistically obnoxious. It does not abrogate laws against slander and libel. It merely means that the federal government can't grab you out of your bed in the middle of the night and throw you in a dungeon for complaining about the powers that be.

I like a Jordan Peterson quote I recently ran across: "Free speech isn't merely the right to criticize those in power, and it's also not only the right to say what you think. It's actually the right to think."  I would add that it is also the responsibility to think – before you speak. Every right has a concurrent duty, and the more important the right, the more onerous the obligation. It is horrifying to hear elected officials and other limelight individuals saying in public that our president should be killed. If they don't like Trump's policies, then argue against them, but don't advocate his death.

It is embarrassing to hear our fellow Americans screaming obscenities, which are neither thought nor speech. Taboo words and phrases are linguistically interesting in that they originate not the language center of the brain, but rather in the limbic system – they come boiling up out of the brain stem without a single cogent thought behind them.

What's more, actions are not the same as speech, though courts have disagreed with me. Burning flags, throwing rocks through windows, burning effigies are not discourse – they are temper tantrums. If a person can't articulate his grievances in actual language, then he hasn't thought, hasn't convinced anyone in power of the rightness of his cause, and it's likely he doesn't even know what his cause is.

The First Amendment keeps the government from denying us the right to gather in groups, carry placards, chant slogans, sing songs – yes, but the key word in the amendment is "peaceably." Demonstrations we are seeing in the streets these days are not peaceable. Nor are those assembling speaking in any coherent sense. In fact, lately, many such protests have been attempts to deny others their rights to freely assemble and to speak. 

The First Amendment does not protect us from hearing things we find objectionable. We have no right to go through life without being offended. We have no right to be shielded from those with whom we disagree. We have no right to coerce others to agree with us. I am a Christian, and as such, I have an obligation to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ with my fellow man. That is the "practice" of my religion. Yet many today think the expression of my gratitude for my free salvation is an effort to "force" my religion on them. "Force" involves violence, not speech.

Speaking of which, does "freedom of religion" apply to jihadi activity? Is Islam even a religion? One of these days, SCOTUS will have to figure that out. The First Amendment really doesn't protect us from anything but the federal government; however, the federal government does have the responsibility to protect its citizens from "all enemies, foreign and domestic." We'll have to wait and see.

How does the First Amendment affect education? It should not have limited what I as a teacher could say in my public-school classroom – my atheist colleagues could say what they thought, but these days, Christian teachers must be careful. Those who think there is any such thing as neutrality are mistaken. If we limit our children's view of the world by excluding God from the classroom, we have taught them, by default, that God isn't. Schools have hidden behind that sloppy thinking for generations.

We cannot protect the Constitution if we don't take the time to think it through, if we don't even know what it says. It is not a bludgeon with which to accost or silence our opponents. It is not an invitation to lie or manipulate. It is meant to defend honorable citizens from a government's tendency to become dishonorable. Our Constitution – the most astounding covenant outside of the Bible – deserves not only "legalization," but reverence, care, and protection.

Views: 38


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

Join Tea Party Command Center



Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson


Obama Lies Again: – Ignores That The Year After Signing The Stimulus More Than (4) Million Jobs Were Lost

Former President Obama, the only President in US history who had his FBI and other Intel agencies spy on the opposition party candidate, claims that he created the great economy that Americans are enjoying today. The only thing Obama created was debt and massive job losses with his horrible economic recovery.

Yesterday the former President tweeted an effort to take credit for President Trump’s successful economy:

Joe Hoft@joehoft

Of course another @BarackObama lie. He can’t open his mouth without lying. 11 years ago the US lost (4.3) million jobs over the next 12 months. Horrible liar. 

Barack Obama  @BarackObama

Eleven years ago today, near the bottom of the worst recession in generations, I signed the Recovery Act, paving the way for more than a decade of economic growth and the longest streak of job creation in American history.

President Obama’s policies were a disgrace and a failure. He doubled the national debt in spite of zero interest rates from the Fed. His recovery was the worst in US history.

Also, Obama’s assertion is just plain false. The ‘Stimulus’ was passed in February 2009 right after Obama took over the Presidency. He promised to not pass any bills for at least a week to allow for the bills to be read by the people but lied as soon as he was sworn in. The Stimulus was hundreds and hundreds of pages of government handouts to Democrat districts and it was close to $1 million. This was not what America needed and it led to the Tea Party.

Far-left Wikipedia has this to say about the Stimulus:

Note that in his infinite wisdom, NYT economist Paul Krugman is credited with arguing that “the stimulus was far smaller than the economic crisis warranted”. (He also said the markets would crash and burn if President Trump was elected President.)

The data shows that the 12 months after Obama’s stimulus, the US lost 4.3 million jobs:

In Obama’s first three years he netted a loss of 1.5 million jobs compared to President Trump who has added more than 6.7 million jobs.

When it comes to the economy, the billionaire schools the community organizer every time.

Tucker: Bloomberg is trying to buy the election

© 2020   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service