Thursday, July 10, 2014

Democrats illustrate disregard for US Constitution

During my morning reading of various news sources I came across an article on Yahoo! titled Dems Strike Back on Hobby Lobby Case With 'Not My Boss's Business Act' (http://news.yahoo.com/dems-strike-back-hobby-lobby-case-not-bosss-182210871--abc-news-politics.html) In the article, Democratic Sen. Patty Murray is quoted, "We are here to ensure that no CEO or corporation can come between people and their guaranteed access to healthcare. I hope Republicans will join us to revoke this court-issued license to discriminate and return the right of Ameircans to make their own decision about their own health care and their own bodies."

Sen. Murray, healthcare is not a right afforded Americans under the United States Constitution. The decision by the Supreme Court to uphold  the owners of Hobby Lobby's US Constitutional Right to be able to exercise their religious views is a Right guaranteed all Americans. While I understand the attempt of this legislation is to score political points; rather than to observe the restrictions our Constitution places on Congress, the President and the Judicial branch.

Nothing in the Hobby Lobby cases is preventing any American to ability to make their own decisions on their own health care or bodies. Ironically, the Affordable Care Act does as it mandates all Americans to have health care coverage or face additional taxation for not. Thus taking away the option for any American to self-insure.

Another point getting lost in the conversation is healthcare, at least until the ACA, is a benefit offered by an employer to attract and retain employees. Benefits offered to employees by employers are not a right of employment thus can be changed at anytime. No one denies people the right to pursue their own happiness and success; rather people need to understand that when you trade your services for money and benefits you give up some of your rights afforded you under the US Constitution while performing the duties of said job. Prime example is the three paragraphs every computer displays when one has to sign into a work station that essentially states that by hitting ok you, as the employee, are giving up your right to illegal search and seizure protection is so far as the use of the computer.

Sen. Boxer (D-CA) quips in the article, "The court's majority has decided that corporations are entitled to more rights than individual Americans." Again a chirp to score quick political points rather than actually reading the application of the decision. Why does Sen. Boxer think it is okay for Congress to pass a law and the President of the United States to sign said law that curtails one ability to practice their religious beliefs without fear of retribution from the Government?

Yes, Hobby Lobby is a closely held corporation. A reason people will incorporate their business is to limit their liability and protect their personal assets. By doing that, does an American give up their Rights afforded to them by the US Constitution?

Marcia D. Greenberger, Co-President of the National Women's Law Center, is quoted at the end of the article, "Bosses should stick to what they know best: the boardroom and the bottom line. Stay out of the bedroom and the exam room." Now, I did read the opinions rendered in the Hobby Lobby decision, all sides, and I don't recall a single sentence that  authorized a boss to dictate to employee what they are to or not to do in the bedroom or the exam room. I wonder too if Marcia Greenberger understands that when, at least prior to the ACA, employer offered healthcare as a benefit of employment it never translated to a right guaranteed by the US Constitution.

Now, if real change wants to occur the Senators need to look to the US Constitution to make that change otherwise they can waste taxpayer money debating a law that is already Unconstitutional. The only reason why ACA is allowed to remain in effect is that Congress has the power to tax.

Friday, July 4, 2014

Happy 4th of July

Every year the United States celebrate the 4th of July as the birth of our great nation with fireworks, family gatherings, concerts and other events. In recent years, I wonder if Americans understand the great sacrifice that 56 men made when they signed the Declaration of Independence putting in motion a form of government that would grant freedoms to citizens never observed prior. Unfortunately, from the dawn of the United States people have attempted to expand government in exchange for freedom and perceived security.

Take time today to re-read, or for many read for the first time, the Declaration of Independence as it established the framework of our free society enjoyed today.



When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Sunday, June 15, 2014

Happy Fathers Day!

Today, many of us will spend the day with our fathers, sons, daughters, and other family members in celebration of Fathers Day. While is a great day to honor our Fathers, shouldn't we really be honoring our Dads! Any yard bird with the capability to produce semen has the chance to become a Father, but it takes work, dedication, and physically being involved in our children lives that makes us a Dad and worthy of such a day.

For this reason, we ought to rename it Dad's day because far too many baby momma's exist in the world today. We need more Father's to become Dad's. A Dad nurtures, disciplines, molds, listens, loves, interacts, offer a shoulder to cry on, allows the child to fail, helps the child learn from their mistakes, allows them to make life's tough choices even when they are not ready to do it and most importantly - a Dad is there providing a safe haven no matter what life event takes place in their son or daughter life.

So to all the Dads - Happy Dads Day! Because you are the real men in the family.

Thursday, May 22, 2014

Cuban Speaks the Truth!

The NBA is still dealing with the fallout of Donald Sterling's private comments to his bi-racial girlfriend and will soon have a hearing to decide if Sterling violated the NBA Constitution by comments made.

One of those owners that will vote on the future of Sterling is Mark Cuban the owner of the Dallas Mavericks. Cuban is no stranger to fines by the NBA and brash or controversial statements. In an interview with Inc. Magazine Cuban stated, "I mean, we're all prejudiced in one way or another. If I see a black kid in a hoodie and it's late at night, I'm walking to the other side of the street. And if on that side of the street, there's a guy that has tattoos all over his face - white guy, bald head, tattoos everywhere - I'm walking back to the other side of the street."

What does the media take from that statement? Cuban is a racist because he moves across the street way from the black kid in a hoodie. Totally ignore the fact that he just said he cross back to the other side if he saw a bald headed, tattoo white guy. Cuban went on to explain further, "And the list goes on of stereotypes that we all live up to and are fearful of. So in my businesses, I try not to be hypocritical. I know that I'm not perfect. I know that I live in a glass house, and it's not appropriate for me to throw stones."

Mark Cuban is not alone as no one person is perfect, no one person is free of prejudice. Prejudice is how our brains discern from friend or foe, safe or dangerous, right or wrong. People are naïve to believe that racist rants, racist comments, use of slurs are the monopoly of one class or race in society. Every race, class or group of society has their prejudices of other groups.

Trouble is no one wants to be honest about this topic. Instead we must bully those that make an off-colored comment, joke or assumption. And if you don't cowtail to the PC Police we will make life hell until you do....btw that is being a bully. We don't want bullying going on in school but we are all for it when dealing with people, companies or groups we disagree with.

Take a moment and do your own inventory of your prejudices. Everyone has them. Right or wrong there exist.

Wednesday, May 7, 2014

Now it begins

On Monday one of President Clinton's skeleton's came out of the closet. I know it is not really a skeleton since it was his famous line, "I did not have sexual intercourse" that lead to his impeachment trial. Granted his impeachment wasn't about his affair, as that was nothing new to the Clinton camp, but his lying to a grand jury. I love listening to the pundits speculate why Monica Lewinsky is coming forth after 10 years of silence. And to Vanity Fair of all rags.

It is a simple. There is no secret that President Clinton's infidelity irked First Lady Clinton but it was part of being with Bubba. Now that former Secretary of State Clinton is likely to hold the cards for the Democrat nomination for 2016 there are still a few small camps that don't like the Clinton's and that is why Monica is coming out.

Monica is coming out to help sully former Secretary of State Clinton's chances to be the Democrat nominee. While the Democrats would love nothing better than to check the box of nominating a female, far too many people in the Democrat party are tired of the Clinton's. Looks like another female will be the nominee in 2016; Elizabeth Warren?

Sunday, March 2, 2014

Embrace the news!

Last week President Obama announced that he is looking to reduce the military force troop levels to levels below those prior to World War I. Since that announcement I am shocked that real Conservatives don't see this as an opportunity to promote the US Constitution. Instead they are out there complaining that President Obama is going to hurt our readiness.

Stop, pause, take a breath! President Obama is handing real Conservatives a gift here. For decades our State National Guards have been at the mercy of the President. Remember we are a collection of States that have seen their Rights eroded since the ratification of the United States Constitution. The time is now to regain those Rights given the States in the 10th Amendment.

Governors, Senators and House of Representatives its time to pass legislation that brings back the control of the National Guard. Then it is time to exploit the 2nd Amendment by keeping readiness in the expansion of the National Guard and Militia's within our States. When a President comes calling for our National Guard or Militia we will then have the ability as a State to say - Yes or No.

Allow the President's Budget and the cuts to take place in exchange for giving the States back control of the deployment of the National Guard and Militias. Real Conservatives ought to pick up this mantra. By picking up this mantra, States will regain control of a Right they were given to start with and we gain more standing for the 2nd Amendment.

Thursday, February 27, 2014

Religious Dilemna

In the event you missed this week, Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed the controversial bill passed by the Arizona legislature that would have given businesses, and citizens, of Arizona the ability to run their businesses based on their religious beliefs. The bill was dubbed the "Anti-Gay" Bill by Progressives and backed up by "Moderate" Republicans as an affront to Civil Liberties of same-sex couples in Arizona. What I am curious is if anyone read the bill as I doubt those with the largest megaphones did.

Here is the Bill: http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/51leg/2r/bills/sb1062p.pdf

While the originals of the bill stem from recent business owners being sued over not photographing same-sex marriages, baking cakes for same-sex weddings and providing flowers for same-sex ceremonies. I am a small business owner. As a small business owner I wouldn't turn away anyone as long as the payment method for the services I render is done with legally obtain dollars.

Then again its my business and my choice as an owner to make that decision. If another business owner wants to alienate a segment of the population because of a moral, religious or any objection then so be it. If their business fails, its on that business owner. The florist that was sued in Washington over not providing flowers for a same-sex marriage because she didn't feel Jesus would approve then so be it. AGAIN it is her business.

SB 1062 in Arizona wasn't giving religious freedom to just Catholics, Lutherans, Methodist, or any other Christian sect. It was giving religious freedom to ALL religions. 86 large companies, along with the NFL, placed pressure on Gov. Brewer to veto the bill - ironic isn't that the Progressives can't stand Big Business contributing to political campaigns but have no problem when Big Business is backing their cause!

American Airlines CEO Doug Parker was reported to have written a letter to Gov. Brewer saying(http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/25/news/economy/arizona-anti-gay-bill/),"I can assure you that this proposed legislation is causing tremendous concerns for our employees, particularly those who live and work in Arizona." Really? Expanding religious freedom and protecting that religious freedom from lawsuits is creating a concern for employees? The Bill doesn't allow business or institutions from violating the religious freedom of the employee.

Progressives are there for religious freedom for the employee but don't want to give the Mom and Pop business owner the same religious freedom. By not allowing a business owner the ability to run their business aligned with their religious belief but imposes upon that business owner the religious beliefs of their employees and patrons is not equitable in a free society. We all have the Right to exercise our religion without fear of retribution by the government. The fact, as in the case on the above example from Washington, it was the Attorney General that brought suit. Combine that with the Affordable Care Act, religious freedoms of the business owner is being trampled upon.

I know I said this above but it needs repeating - Being a small business owner, I don't understand why anyone would turn away patrons/clients in so far as the money used to pay for services is obtained legally. Yet in a free society, that business owner has that choice just as everyone has the choice of not patronizing that business.