Warzone Hacks Cheats Buy Undetected Aimbot ESP Wallhack 2022
Fortnite Hacks Cheats Aimbot esp Wallhack 2022
Rust Hacks Cheats Buy Undetected Aimbot ESP Wallhack
Apex Legends Hacks Cheats Aimbot ESP 2022
Valorant Hacks Cheats Buy Undetected Aimbot ESP Wallhack
R6 Rainbow Six Siege Hacks Cheats Buy Undetected Aimbot ESP Wallhack

Senator Sylvia Allen: Just Say No To Obama’s Intrusive Federal Mandates!

Senator Sylvia Allen

Senator Sylvia Allen

By Arizona State Senator Sylvia Allen

“The uncontested absurdities of today are the accepted slogans of tomorrow. They come to be accepted by degrees, by dint of constant pressure on one side and constant retreat on the other – until one day when they are suddenly declared to be the country’s official ideology.” – Ayn Rand

President Obama’s recent directive requiring schools to comply with gender neutral bathrooms and locker rooms with the threat of losing federal funding has caused schools unnecessary stress and turmoil and is another example of how out of touch progressive liberal Democrats really are.

You have got to be kidding!   Who uses which bathroom is the most important issue for the President of the United States to get involved in?  You would think that terrorism and the rising national debt would be enough to keep President Obama busy.

Obama LGBT DecreePresident Obama and his administration have once again injected the federal government into what is a state’s responsibility. With a stroke of a pen, President Obama thinks that the Justice Department can override commonsense. He does not have the authority to change hundreds of years of social civility by overriding and redefining natural biology. Again, President Obama is throwing our schools into an unnecessary conflict with the federal government and attacking our parents and families.  I’d like to remind the President of the other two branches of government and the 10th amendment, which he too often forgets.

I, along with other legislators, have been receiving emails from constituents troubled by this overreach of President Obama.  I signed on to a letter authored by Representative Robert Thorpe which was sent to Governor Doug Ducey, Superintendent of Schools Diane Douglas and Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, stating our concern and asking them to make a constitutional finding concerning this and to help our state stand against this abuse of federal power.

Quoting from that letter Dated May 20, 2016:

“Article I, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution makes it perfectly clear that Congress has the sole Federal legislative authority. Due to our nation’s long established separation of powers, legislative authority cannot be exercised by the Executive, including the President, the Attorney General or any other member of the Executive branch. There are no Federal laws stating that schools must provide these accommodations for transgender students, and there have been no court rulings upholding the Obama administration’s current “opinion” concerning this matter.”

“Please understand that this is not a moral issue, it is a legal state’s rights issue, and as a sovereign state, Arizona is protected by the 10th Amendment and thus is under no legal obligation to provide these accommodations merely based upon the suggestion, or coercion, of the Obama administration.”

“Under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, for example, for a law to be enacted requiring public schools within the states to provide these accommodations for transgender students, both Houses of Congress must first pass a constitutional law that is in pursuance of the

U.S. Constitution and does not exceed the limited enumerated powers of Congress, the President must sign it, and it must withstand legal challenges and judicial review.”

The answer is for the states to stand up and say NO!   Sorry, but you cannot tell us to make this change.  Our children have a right to their privacy, their safety and their normal modest sensibilities. I applaud recent actions of Superintendent Douglas and Attorney General Brnovich to join the lawsuit to fight back against the unconstitutional mandates from an ever growing and intrusive federal government!


Senator Sylvia Tenney Allen represents Arizona’s 6th Legislative District and serves as President Pro Tempore in the Arizona Senate.

Maricopa GOP Chair Rallies LD Censures

To all Arizona County and LD Republican Committee Chairmen –
Below is the front page article of the July 15 Arizona Capitol Times. I want to express my appreciation to those courageous and principled County and LD Republican Committees who have already conducted votes of “censure” and/or “no confidence.”
Jan Brewer, the legislators and their crony capitalist friends that support ObamaCare and Medicaid expansion have betrayed Americans, Arizona Republicans and the Republican Party Platform.  Their lack of ethics, integrity and egregious acts are motivated by only two things – greed and the lust for power – at the expense of hard working tax paying Americans.
The law was expected to cost $898 billion over the first decade when the bill was first passed, but this year the Congressional Budget Office revised that estimate to $1.85 trillion.  Money that will have to be borrowed from the Chinese or printed in the backroom of the Federal Reserve.  Latest polls indicate a majority of Americans are opposed to ObamaCare and Medicaid expansion with an overwhelming majority of Republicans in opposition.
During the past six months, we did everything we could to make a solid argument against ObamaCare and Medicaid expansion, we tried to reason with these people and even tried to make them see the light.  Unfortunately, our lobbying efforts fell on deaf ears and without success.
During one of Ronald Reagan’s difficult political battles he said,
               “When you can’t make them see the light, make them feel the heat.”
I’m asking all the County and LD Republican Committees to make these people feel the heat by passing public censures for their actions.  They are elitists who think what they have done should be forgiven. They are mistaken.  We are not going to be able to defeat all of them, but we can defeat a majority of them in the 2014 Primary Election.
You can go to “MCRC Briefs” and get examples of public censures that have already been passed.  http://briefs.maricopagop.org/  Just type “censure” in the search field on the left.
Warmest regards,
 A. J. LaFaro
Chairman, Maricopa County Republican Committee
P.S.  Please encourage all of your PCs to keep up their daily efforts in getting petition signatures for www.urapc.org  Getting ObamaCare and Medicaid expansion on the November 2014 ballot will be historic for Arizona’s grassroots conservatives.

An Oklahoman’s Descent into National ID Hell



Arizona is not far behind Oklahoma.  the Arizona MVD is working on compliance with the 15th-18th REAL ID benchmarks, a far far cry from being out of the national ID program (sometimes called “REAL ID”, but it goes by many other names as well).   From a Christian patriot’s travails in Oklahoma.

I was shocked when the DMV clerk told me that I must submit to a finger scan.  Who doesn’t associate being fingerprinted with criminality?  I balked but was told no scan-no drivers license.  At the time I had a small child, my own business and countless tasks to accomplish every day that would be very difficult if not impossible to meet without a valid license so I grudgingly complied.  I had no idea that it wasn’t just my fingers that they were scanning.  The old cameras had been replaced with high resolution digital cameras that capture, map and digitize our facial features for use with facial recognition technology.


Drivers license photos compliant with International Civil Aviation Organization biometric data interchange formats?  CHECK

Drivers license require finger scans from applicants?  According to the American Association of Moter Vehicle Administrators, it is under consideration.

 I always knew that if it came down to it, I was not going to just roll over and comply.  I have a child and to just give up and leave her with the legacy of government control by cataloging and monitoring people through an international biometric ID is not an option for me.

Once the fight is finally over and the biometric identification plans are fully implemented those who refuse to be enrolled and will not carry a “government issued photo ID”, will essentially be viewed as invalid, non-persons, unregistered. 

Furthermore their invalidated status will be a red flag rendering such persons especially suspect by a government that demands its right to know all about everyone at all times.  Where did our government get such a right?  They got it from us.   Our complacence is compliance and as far as they are concerned that gives them permission and therefore the right to scan our body parts and use those measurements as a personal tracking number.

The ones that do comply won’t be much better off really.   Their government issued biometric ID will allow our government to keep tabs on their every transaction, their travel, their habits and more. This biometric identification system puts our ability to access our daily necessities at their pleasure.  Will such an all powerful government choose to be a benevolent father?  History does not give one much hope that it will.

From Revelations 13:

 7And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

 8And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

 9If any man have an ear, let him hear…….

 15And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.

 16And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

 17And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark,

Seems pretty clear from Revelation, that if you bear the mark, regardless of your self-perception of whether you are a saint or not, you serve the Beast of revelation.  The sure sign is (see P 16 above) that if you do NOT have the mark, you cannot engage in commerce.  If you do, you can.

It’s all right there in black and white.  I am so grateful to my Christian sister in Oklahoma who is showing good patriots and Christians the way to resist the beast.

Tips for Helping you Survive Your Government Grope

Feel Safer, America?

Thank you to John McCain and other Republicans for voting to create the TSA that has resulted in this situation.  While Napolitano has widened this outrage, this is what you get when our party strays from the constitution and from its roots.  Republicans have always opposed an internal national police force to “monitor” the law abiding ala the Ministry of Internal Affairs in the old Soviet Union.

You asked for it, you got it!  Those who trade liberty for security, will have neither.

Tips for helping you Survive Your Government Grope

NOTE:  Even if you choose to go through a scanner (which will produce a picture of you naked and subject you to radiation)* you still may get pulled out for an “Enhanced Pat Down Search.”

Before a TSA employee puts their hand on you – insist that they put on a clean gloves.  Here is a short list of parasites and infections that could be transferred from an earlier passenger to you:

E. Coli

The symptoms of usually appear after about a week of being infected with the bacteria. Abdominal cramps followed by watery diarrhea are the first symptoms this infection. The dehydration caused by the loss of fluids makes an individual feel sick and tired. Soon, it makes sores in the intestines and the stools become bloody. An individual also might suffer from mild fever and nausea or vomiting.

Staph Infection

Staph skin infections, including MRSA, generally start as small red bumps that resemble pimples, boils or spider bites. These can quickly turn into deep, painful abscesses that require surgical draining. Sometimes the bacteria remain confined to the skin. But they can also burrow deep into the body, causing potentially life-threatening infections in bones, joints, surgical wounds, the bloodstream, heart valves and lungs.

Pneumonia, Colds and Flu

Small droplets of fluid containing the virus can be wiped off the person before you and transferred to you.

Body Lice

Body lice are unable to burrow into the skin. Although a few body lice may be seen clinging to body hairs, most are on the clothing of an infected person. Body lice and their eggs are most abundant along the seams of clothes worn close to the body. Someone infested with body lice typically will have 10 or fewer active lice on their skin at any one time, but the clothing may contain many dozens or hundreds. Infestations of body lice are more common in the winter months, when destitute people tend to wear many layers of clothing for long periods and have more contact with the clothing of others who may be infested.

Bed Bugs

The reason why this invasion is spreading is bed bugs get in the clothing of people at hotels who help bring them to their new homes.

REMEMBER:  The Enhanced Pat Down searchers hands runs up and down the moist private crevices of other travelers body’s before he/she comes to you.  Unless you want their bodily secretions on you, then insist on a new pair of gloves.


Look at what TSA is touching

Ties: In 2004 University of Birmingham researchers studied the ties of 40 doctors and found that all had potentially dangerous levels of bacteria. 

Hair: That’s where lice and their eggs are.

Crotches:  At least one gram of E. Coli in this region

Inside Underwear

An ABC news employee reported a TSA Screener actually put her hands into her underwear.  The groping “felt like a gynecological exam.”

INSIST ON CLEAN GLOVES TODAY, Write your Congressman tomorrow.  Ask your elected officials to support Ron Paul’s American Travelers Dignity Act.  But your Congressman may not know about this, because they are given special treatment by TSA.

*Why Should You Object to the Scanner?

  1. Pilots and Flight Attendants Union both urged their members to opt for their own safety
  2. Manufacturers can’t be sued for faulty design under the 2002 Homeland Security Act
  3. It’s radiation.  Unlike a medical x-ray that passes through the body, this stays in your skin.
  4. Google Dr. John Sedat’s letter to TSA warning of dangers of “Back Scatter Technology.”
  5. You don’t want strangers to see you naked.
  6. Ask the TSA employees if they can wear radiation detection badges.  They should, but they are prohibited.

Why should you be forced to put your health and dignity at risk just to travel in the “land of the free and home of the brave”?

The 4th Amendment to US Constitution: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated

Teaparty, anyone?

Arizona Immigration Law = National ID for Arizonans

Despite protestations to the contrary from the law’s sponsor and others, this law turns the Arizona drivers license  (actually any state license) into a national id.

It’s a common misconception to believe that the national id must be a card or a chip.

National ID not a card or a chip, but is the data that the federal government has on you.  What the federal government has been attempting to do for many years, most notably under the Clinton administration, was to find a way to integrate all of the various data they have on American citizens into an easily searchable, easily sharable database and data exchange format.

SB1070 states

F. Except as provided in federal law, officials or agencies of this state and counties, cities, towns and other political subdivisions of this state may not be prohibited or in any way be restricted from sending, receiving or maintaining information relating to the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual or exchanging that information with any other federal, state or local governmental entity for the purposes of determining eligibiltiy for any … license and for the purposes of verifying any claim of residence or domicile.

This section removes ALL restrictions from the exchange of license data between any state agency and any federal agency.  This section applies to ANY PERSON.  This section includes ANY LICENSE.  Under this section ANY state agency may exchange ANY person’s license data with ANY federal agency without any restriction whatsoever.

This problem has nothing to do with what occurs at a police stop. It removes ALL restrictions from data exchange, including a full data dump, or including full back and forth real-time queryability, between any state license database and any or ALL federal agencies, beginning July 1, including the IRS or Homeland Security.

Protestations from the bill’s sponsor have included:  “That’s not what it says.”  “That’s not what it means.”  “It’s not in there.”

Yes, Mr. Pearce, but that’s what the law SAYS word for word, in black and white, in 8th grade level English, no lawyers required.

Other  protestations such as in this post include playing word games….

The fact that A.R.S. section 11-1051 allows for the sending, receiving, maintaining or exchanging of immigration status information with any federal, state or local agency does not in any way invoke the application of RIDA (REAL ID Act) in Arizona.

First, what does the REAL ID act have to do with it?   Nothing.  The REAL ID Act was a single federal program which attempted to force the state to turn over certain data to the feds.  This bill turns over the same data that the REAL ID Act mandated, but does so voluntarily by the state, having nothing to do with REAL ID, but having everything to do with national id once the federal government gets their hands on the data.  REAL ID here is completely irrelevant.

Second, what is “immigration status” relative to a citizens’ domicile?  Or how would you verify a citizen’s eligibility for a drivers license (or any license) via exchange of that citizen’s data with the federal government?  Why would you need to?  Where is the limitation to the term “immigration status” in the data exchange with the federal government in checking a citizen’s domicile information with the feds or a citizen’s eligibility for a driver’s license (or a business license, or a hunting license – ANY license, remember). Nowhere.  Why would the state need to do so relative to its citizens?  But that’s precisely what the law enables.

The county attorney’s office goes onto state:

Subsection F states four limiting “official purposes.” If a public agent or bureaucrat cannot demonstrate that he accessed a person’s information pursuant to subsections F’s official purposes

A bureaucrat accessing the person’ s information is not at question here.  Removal of all restrictions in sending law abiding citizen’s data to the federal government relevant to check the citizen’s domicile and/or eligibility for a license is.

Arizona law cannot dictate what the federal government does with law abiding citizen’s data once it is handed over to the feds.  The feds, of course, will promptly put the data into whatever database they want which accomplishes their longstanding goal to implement a national id system.

Again, national id is NOT a card. It is the unique identifiers such as your name, SSN, domicile and biometric data such as your digitial photo on file with the MVD, once turned over to the feds and put into their national id database.  Once the data is placed into the national id database, then your DL can be run against that national id database and is, VOILA, a national id.

Russell Pearce continues to protest stating that he’s against national ids and that this bill does not contain national id.

And, yet, he fails to address the matter of the data exchange of law abiding citizens’ license data with “any agency” of the federal government, including Janet Napolitano’s agency, who is dying to get her hands on this information, especially gun owners’ information.

The only time the exchange of citizens’ data has ever been addressed was in the opinion that Andrew Thomas’ office wrote, linked to above, which stated it’s not REAL ID.   So what?  REAL ID is not the only national id program.  PASS ID, BELIEVE ID, or just drivers’ license database dumps into the Homeland Security database all turn state drivers licenses into national ids…..

….but only if the state hands over the data.  Which SB1070 does, willingly, of all citizens.

Russell Pearce is quoted as saying, “If we don’t turn over all of our data to the federal government, then how will be know who is SUPPOSED to be here.”

Wait a second, Senator Pearce, I thought this bill was supposed to be about who is NOT supposed to be here.

Senator Pearce, if you’re telling the truth and are against national id, THEN FIX THE LAW and prohibit the exchange of law abiding citizens’ data with the federal government.

No patriot hands over the private data of law abiding citizens to the feds, such as you have done in SB1070.

Anyone who does betrays the hard work of conservative patriots who have been fighting national ids since before the Clinton administration and since.

Fix the law before July 1. Otherwise, welcome to the leftist globalist Clintonista agenda as implemented by the right.

Lastly, Ronald Reagan opposed national ids http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa237.html

Gun Owners of America oppose national ids because they state that once the federal government has your drivers license data, they have enough information to track gun purchases…

“Since I need a driver’s license to purchase a gun from a dealer, BATFE would finally have its long-coveted tool to impose gun control on targeted groups — particularly under a liberal anti-gun administration. If you believe in the Second Amendment, please vote against this anti-gun monstrosity.” http://seclists.org/politech/2005/Feb/0016.html

Not to mention the fact that from the federal side of the fence, they plan on using the SAME SYSTEM to enable AMNESTY.   We can’t have it both ways – to use secure ids to keep illegal aliens out and at the same time use secure ids to let them in.

Fix the law, Senator Pearce.


Right’s Fervor to Enforce Immigration Law Hijacked to Serve Leftist Agenda – Part II

Several weeks ago, I posted about how the right, in its vigor to try to stem the problems of illegal immigration, is actually advancing the leftists agenda of national id and north american integration.

This installment is to provide more evidence of the same.

In a March 8, 2010 Wall Street Journal article, “ID Card for Workers is at Center of Immigration Plan”, you can see that it is the explicit intent of the leftists (such as Schumer), globalists and RINOs (such as Lindsay Graham) to force anyone applying for a job to present a national id to obtain one.

What do you think e-Verify is?  It’s a web front end sitting on top of the US Department of Homeland Security’s national id database which integrates data from the US Department of Labor, the US Department of Health and Human Services, the State Department, pretty much every department, but most importantly and worst of all, from the states.

Why do the feds need the state data on the states’ own citizens so badly?  Because otherwise, the feds to not have all of the data they need to track each legal citizen uniquely.  Why? Because in the past it’s been ILLEGAL to do so.  Not to mention the fact that there is absolutely no authority in the constitution for the federal government to track law abiding citzens, nor to expend sacred tax dollars on doing so.

How does the federal government get data from the states?  There are several ways, but here’s a summary of a few relevant ones….

1) 42USC666 (a)(13), implemented under the federal Deadbeat Dad’s law.  This federal statute required states to collect SSNs from all drivers’ license applicants and remit them to the federal government.  However, this information alone was still not enough to create a water  tight data tracking system for citizens (nor to obtain enough information on individuals to tie to legal gun purchases from dealers, but that’s another story.)

2) REAL ID. The REAL ID program was a federal mandate on the states to collect and remit certain information on their citzens in order for the federal government to complete building out their national id database.  The cost of compliance on states was very high.  Additionally, conservatives opposed this strongly on religious and political grounds and many states, such as Arizona, “opted out”.

3) A state voluntarily hands over the data.

This one is a tricky one.  For example, the state of Arizona, has always traditionally resisted handing over data from its law abiding citizens.  However, recently under SB1070, the anti-immigration law, SB1070 removes ALL RESTRICTIONS from sending and exchanging license data for ANY LICENSE for ANY PERSON (legal or illegal), with ANY AGENCY of the federal government.

SB1070 does not restrict the sending and exchange of law abiding Arizona citizens’ data with the feds to a police stop.  It removes ALL RESTRICTIONS and ALL PROHIBITIONS from the exchange of law abiding Arizona citizens’ license data with the federal government, beginning July 1.

That means any agency that has license data on Arizonans can send all or none, it can send the entire database of license data anytime it wants, beginning July 1, 2010.

You can rest assured that the federal government, especially Janet Napolitano and the US Department of Homeland Security, will amply incentivize the MVD and DPS to do so, so she can get her hands on the data she needs to track your gun purchases, among other things.

So, whereas Arizona opted out of the federal mandate program called “REAL ID” wherein the federal government attempted to pull data from Arizona to complete its national id database data on Arizona citizens, under SB1070, Arizona turns around and hands Janet Napolitano and G_d only knows who else, including the IRS, all data it has on you as a law abiding Arizona citizen.

Hmm… betcha didn’t know that was in the immigration law, did ya?

Read the bill – indeed.

So, how does that turn Arizona licenses into national ids?  Despite the cartoon picture at the top of this post, a national id is not a card, barcode, RFID chip, nor a magnetic strip.

It is the DATA the government has on you, such as your unique identifers, name, domicile, any biometric identifiers such as the digitized MVD photo on your license, which is also in your MVD data file.

So, if Arizona hands the data over to the feds and the feds promptly stick the data in their national id database and all of that data links directly to your drivers license, guess what?!?!?!?

VOILA…. your Arizona drivers license turns into something Clinton always pined for and dreamed of foisting on the country, A NATIONAL ID CARD!

The same card can and will be used to deny birth certificates for your children, unless you agree to a national id card check.

The same card can and will be used to deny you the ability to work, per the WSJ article above, to deny you work.  In other words, no citizen may work before the US Department of Homeland Security clears them to work (or doesn’t if you happen to be a political opponent.)

If you do not have your unique identifiers and national id on your mind or in your hand at all times,  you will be denied the ability to buy, sell, or engage legally in any commercial transaction, such as banking, buying/selling a home, opening a business (SB1070 does not exempt the exchange of business license data with the feds either.)

Conservatives have ALWAYS opposed national ids, since day 1 when FDR wanted them, in the 1980s, Ronald Reagan was vehemently opposed, in the 1990s the conservatives stopped every Clinton and democrat attempt at creating them.

Now, conservatives are supporting them.    Worse, it’s conservatives advancing the leftist globalist agenda, which has always been to number and catalog citizens as a form of control and……..



Right’s Fervor to Enforce Immigration Law Hijacked to Serve Leftist Agenda

The left has wanted Americans to register with the federal government and obtain a national id card ever since Franklin Roosevelt tried (and failed initially, until he stacked the court in 1937) to get the Supreme Court to rule that the Social Security system was constitutional.

Ever since then the left has been pushing the idea of registering Americans particularly in order that the federal government can dictate who can work.

In the 1990s it was the Clinton Goals 2000 program that resurrected the concept which conservatives vehemently opposed and prevailed, building upon Reagan’s vehement opposition to national ids in the 1980s.

However, today, national id has been resurrected both on the left and on the right.  On the right, it is being touted as the only way to tell who is here legally and who is not.  However, the actual animus behind the proposals being put forward by the right as the “solution” to the illegal immigrant problem comes directly from the left.

According to beatthechip.org

Legislators talked into surrendering privacy for security in the past by signing onto the Patriot Act and the Real ID Act (2005) seem content to move another form of national identity forward. The mandate would require all citizens to provide their biometrics [fingerprints, iris scans, DNA] on an ID card to work in America. This national ID initiative is the latest on the stack of many attempts to legislate the market for identity in America.

Interestingly in the 2000s, it was the “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” (read: amnesty) supporters such as John McCain, Jon Kyl and Senator Bennett (now defeated), who first put forward the concept of law-abiding Americans needing to get prior permission and prior clearance from the federal government before getting a job via Homeland Security’s e-Verify system.

Why would the left be touting something the right believes in so strongly as a solution to the illegal immigrant problem?

That’s the wrong question.  The right question is:  Why would the RIGHT be touting something the left believes in so strongly as being the solution to the illegal immigrant problem?

First of all e-Verify is the implementation of Hillary Clinton’s proposal from the early nineties: school-to-work, Goals 2000, federal government tracking of students through school and federal government targetting of who should be able to work and where they should work.

Secondly, e-Verify was first touted by the Council on Foreign Relations (the very same people who brought you the North American Union) as the system to use for amnesty, i.e. for employers to use to see who is employment eligible and who is not.  I.e. once amnesty passes, all of those who registered for amnesty would – POOF – overnight gain employment eligibility as verified via the e-Verify system.

At some point along the line since the early 2000s, either the right has been duped into adopting this federal top-down driven verification system as a solution, or they knowingly did so because, despite protestations to the contrary, they actually support the concept of a national id.

Further, beatthechip.org reports:

Over 2 years ago, the release of national ID card regulations in drivers licenses challenged advocates in new and unusual ways. Regulations had a tangible reach into State’s coffers as an unfunded mandate due to national law, the Real ID Act. The law became controversial through its association with the border fence, immigration, surveillance and tracking technologies, and its ability to deny citizens the ability to bank, to travel or enter federal buildings based on identity prerequisites….all 50 states are still being held to benchmark compliance deadlines. Many of these States will receive grant monies towards standardizing drivers licenses after appropriations were passed for Homeland Security operations.

So, I think as conservatives we really need to ask ourselves, why were our predecessors in our movement so vehemently opposed to national ids or Hillary Clinton’s school-to-work employment eligibility idea?

Do you know?  If you don’t, find out, or else you’ll find yourself in a position where you are betraying the hard work and dilligence of the hard-core conservative, limited government patriots who came before you.



A few days ago I posted a piece (CELEBRATION, ANYONE?) that featured the following paragraph:

“Black History Month reminds me of that portion of an application form that asks for the race of the applicant; race is not supposed to matter but everyone knows that it does—especially to Liberal policy-makers and administrators. Despite the Civil War, a civil rights movement, several acts of congress, amendments to the constitution and ongoing preferential treatment Liberals are still convinced that new and institutionalized racism is the cure for past racism. They must believe that new injuries cure old injuries.”

The Census Bureau provides for us another example of the “Liberal policy-makers and administrators” that I wrote about in that paragraph. Question #8 of the 2010 census form asks: “Is Person 1 of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin?” If the answer is ‘yes’ there are several boxes for you choose from that identify the specific type of “Hispanic” that you are. Among the selections are “Mexican”, “Mexican Am.”, “Chicano” (Does anyone know which country “Chicanos” come from?), “Puerto Rican” and “Cuban”. By the way, can someone explain to me what the difference is between a “Mexican” and a “Mexican Am.”?

If you answer ‘no’ to question #8 question #9 then, allows you to declare what race you are. A few of the options include “White”, “Black”, “African Am.”, “Negro”, “American Indian”, “Chinese”, “Japanese”, “Filipino”, “Vietnamese” etc. Apparently none of these groups was special enough to merit a whole question just about them—they had to be lumped in with the “White” people. Let the healing begin!

The concept of being judged not be the color your skin but by the content of your character was a fundamental component of the Civil Rights movement that I once supported but, it is not a component of modern Liberal philosophy. Liberals are obsessed with race and skin color. I wouldn’t mind their obsession if they quietly kept it to themselves but, they keep forcing it on the rest of us. They’re not interested in simple equal protection of the law for all people. Instead, they want to engage in social engineering by redistributing wealth and bestowing rewards and preferences on some groups based upon their victim status and voting value to Liberal politicians.

If Liberals were really ‘liberal’ in the true meaning of the word they’d quit asking the rest of us intrusive and insulting questions that keep the nation racially divided. Leave us alone!

Is your privacy worth $100?

By Nick Dranias
Goldwater Institute
Confidentiality appears to be guaranteed by the Census Bureau when you fill out one of their mandatory surveys. But when it comes to sharing your private information with the federal government, the only real guarantee is that there isn’t one. 

The Patriot Act provides the legal authority for Homeland Security to gain access to confidential Census Bureau data through The National Center for Education Statistics. But that authority isn’t restricted to crafting education policy.

The law was amended in 2002 to authorize access by other federal agencies to NCES data for “investigation and prosecution of terrorism,” which is broadly defined. 

The only thing keeping Homeland Security away from your confidential Census Bureau data in the NCES’ possession is the requirement that the Attorney General apply for a court order before it can access it. But the court’s only function is to confirm the application shows “the information sought” is “relevant” to “investigating or prosecuting” a laundry list of federal offenses. This is a far lower standard than the test of probable cause required for criminal search warrants. Unless someone botches the application, the court’s only real power is to verify it was signed.

The bottom line is that not much stands between Janet Napolitano and your confidential census data. Fortunately, you risk no more than a $100 fine for each question you do not answer; and it is unlikely you will be fined more than once. So the question to ask yourself is whether your privacy is worth $100–or whether the Census should be reformed to ask the only question the U.S. Constitution actually authorizes: “How many people reside in your household?”
Nick Dranias holds the Goldwater Institute Clarence J. and Katherine P. Duncan chair for constitutional government and is the director of the Institute’s Dorothy D. and Joseph A. Moller Center for Constitutional Government.

10 Questions to Ask at Healthcare Town Hall Meetings

I’m saying this right up front, full credit for the following goes to Robert Wenzel, editor and publisher of the Economic Policy Journal.  To read it at his website, the link is provided.  These questions are based on material provided by three individuals, who unlike the Organizer-in-Chief or the Speaker of the House, have actually bothered to read the pages of the legislation.

The following questions were written by Robert Wenzel

He was assisted though the truly Herculean reading of the 1,000 plus page healthcare document by Peter Fleckstein, and also Russell Wilcox.

When history books for this era are written, both these men’s names should go down as heroes, for letting the public know what this so called, “healthcare” bill is really all about.

Question 1: Who actually wrote this bill? Congressman can you get us the names of the people that wrote this bill, so that we can understand their views on healthcare?

Question 2: If this bill is only about getting the poor insurance, why will the Secretary of Health as opposed to my doctor determine if I should be re-admitted to a hospital, as outlined on pages 284-288, SEC. 1151?

Question 3: Why, if I am happy with the type of health insurance I have, can you force me to get different insurance as outlined in pages 167-168, section 401 or force me to pay a penalty tax?

Question 4: Why is a simple catastrophic health insurance not allowed under this plan, when that is really what insurance should be about? Is this really happening in America? I reference pages 26-30, SEC. 122.

Question 5: Why will the Health Secretary have full say over all health payments as outlined on page 124, Sec. 223? Isn’t this against the free market system and more in line with the thinking of Mussolini?

Question 6: Why does the healthcare bill on pages 195-196, SEC. 431 and on page 145, section 312 open up my tax information to federal employees, and force my employer to supply any information asked of him by the Health Choices Commissioner, the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and the Secretary of the Treasury?

Question 7: Why MUST any Doctor who orders durable medical equipment or home medical services be enrolled as a Medicare provider , as outlined on pages 719-720 Sec 1637?

Question 8: What are these so called home visitation programs by the government for families with young children & families expecting children, as outlined on pages 838-845?

Question 9: On page 936, this bill mentions a “Healthy People & National Public Health Performance Standards”. Does this mean you are going to try and tell me what I can and can’t eat? Are you going to force manufacturers to stop making some foods?

Question 10: Most of the Healthcare Bill has little to do with providing health insurance to the poor, and a lot to do with controlling everyone. Why is this so? If I am happy with my health insurance why don’t you just leave me alone?

the president There are 3 recent postings on this topic I have provided you the reader; the first on the duplicity of the Whitehouse in putting out a “snitch” line to stifle freedom of speech, the second on the actual intent of this monstrous legislation, and finally this piece, specific questions to ask Gabby Giffords, Raul Grijalva, Ed Pastor, and Ann Kirtpatrick.  (Look over your shoulder Ann, Bill Konopnicki is coming for your job)

judi online bonanza88 slot baccarat online slot idn live situs idn poker judi bola tangkas88 pragmatic play sbobet slot dana casino online idn pokerseri joker123 selot slot88