Sunday, June 25, 2017

What did the 2016 Election mean to the United States?

Hat Tip: karinsue 1

Simple. It meant that we Dodged this Bullet!  

Memorial to American Soldiers Ignored by Liberal Media

Hat Tip: Jerry Todd

I, for one, am thankful for the power of the Internet.  I would never see this in or on any of this country's main media outlets.

Shame on them.

This statue currently stands outside the Iraqi palace, now home to the 4th Infantry division. It will eventually be shipped home and put in the memorial museum in Fort Hood , Texas  The statue was created by an Iraqi artist named Kalat, who for years was forced by Saddam Hussein to make the many hundreds of bronze busts of Saddam that dotted Baghdad . 

Kalat was so grateful for the America 's liberation of his country; he melted 3 of the heads of the fallen Saddam and made the statue as a memorial to the American soldiers and their fallen warriors. 

Kalat worked on this memorial night and day for several months. 

To the left of the kneeling soldier is a small Iraqi girl giving the soldier comfort as he mourns the loss of his comrades in arms. 

Do you know why we don't hear about this in the news? The media avoids it because it does not have the shock effect. But we can do something about it. 

We can pass this along to as many people as we can in honor of all our brave military who are making a difference.

Let’s Study The Constitution, Part V - Bill of Rights

By Susan Frickey, Center for Self-Governance student

By now you should be seeing a trend in our study of the Constitution.  The Articles set up the form and intent of the Federal Government along with the powers relegated to each branch. But many of the Framers believed this was inadequate for their peace of mind in ratifying this first-ever document. They believed eventually the Federal government would encroach on individual rights, as had happened throughout world history; a history they had intently studied for years before creating our constitutional republic. So in order to get on board with ratifying the Constitution, many of the signers demanded the inclusion of certain guarantees which became the first ten Amendments to the Constitution, commonly known as the Bill of Rights.
Language of Liberty

The amendments in the Bill of Rights guarantee the natural rights of INDIVIDUALS not the rights of certain groups of people.  

The Framers were extremely concerned about protecting the individual and his natural rights against the encroachment of a tyrannical Federal government. They wanted to be certain that individual rights were defined and protected in the official document, even though constraints on the Federal government had been outlined in the Articles.

So, in order to obtain enough signatures for ratification, the Bill of Rights was incorporated as part of the Constitution. The signers wanted the added protection of telling the Federal government to keep its hands off individual rights and freedoms. The States submitted one hundred eighty-nine suggestions. These were finally consolidated into the ten provisions now known as the Bill of Rights.

Lonnie D. Crockett writes, “In truth, the Bill of Rights is not a declaration of rights… it is a declaration of prohibitions against the Federal government. One will notice that Amendment 1 begins, ‘Congress shall make no law’.  The Bill of Rights is, again, the ‘keep your hands off’ declaration.” 

So, the purpose of the Bill of Rights was to limit the Federal government, not the People.  They are statements of what the government is prohibited from doing. They are not rights granted to the People by their government. The Signers of the Declaration had already established that inalienable rights are given to each natural-born person by our Creator and must not be violated, diminished or taken away by government. The first five words of the First Amendment, ‘Congress shall make no law’ reinforces the mission statement of inalienable rights established in the Declaration.

“The American Bill of Rights is a legacy from tens of thousands of Englishmen who suffered torture, hanging, beheading, imprisonment, exile and being burned alive in an effort to preserve those basic rights set forth in previous documents as far back as the Magna Carta of 1215.” ~from The Making of America

The First Amendment is as follows: 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”.

The persecution of religious practices in England was still fresh in the colonists’ minds. It was one of the most important motivating factors in the fight for independence. When the American government declared the First Amendment the supreme law of the land, it set the new nation apart from all others. It is the fundamental building block upon which our Republic rests.
And yet, by a strange perversion of this guarantee to the American people, the enemies of America cite the First Amendment as their protection and support while they attempt to dismantle our Republic piece by piece from within.

The First Amendment guarantees freedom to all Americans from Federal interference in most matters involving religion, speech, press, assembly and the petitioning of government. Remember that the next time you witness a Federal agency like the BLM or USFS create so-called ‘free speech zones.’ These ‘zones’ are actually free speech violations sponsored by our government – the very system We created to protect our natural rights.

It is up to us as Americans to learn our system and maintain our republic. Thomas Jefferson said, “The general (federal) government will tend to monarchy, which will fortify itself from day to day, instead of working its own cures.”

Therefore, it is not up to the politicians to ‘work its own cures’ and keep government within its proper boundaries. Historically, governments’ natural tendency is to grow bigger and bigger until the people are subservient to it. It is up to the People to defend their rights, hold government accountable and keep their republic intact.

John Adams wrote to his beloved Abigail, “Posterity! You will never know, how much it cost the present Generation, to preserve your Freedom! I hope you will make a good Use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in Heaven, that I ever took half the Pains to preserve it.”

Our study of The Bill of Rights will continue next week with the 2nd Amendment.

The Language of Liberty series is a collaborative effort of the Center for Self-Governance (CSG) Administrative Team. CSG is a non-profit, non-partisan educational organization, dedicated to training citizens in applied civics. The authors include administrative staff, selected students, and guest columnists. The views expressed by the authors are their own and may not reflect the views of CSG. Learn more at

Let’s Study the Constitution:

Study supports Trump: 5.7 million noncitizens may have cast illegal votes

Hat Tip: Andrew Benjamin

The following article appeared on on June 19th

By Rowan Scarborough 

A research group in New Jersey has taken a fresh look at postelection polling data and concluded that the number of noncitizens voting illegally in U.S. elections is likely far greater than previous estimates.

As many as 5.7 million noncitizens may have voted in the 2008 election, which put Barack Obama in the White House.

The research organization Just Facts, a widely cited, independent think tank led by self-described conservatives and libertarians, revealed its number-crunching in a report on national immigration.

Just Facts President James D. Agresti and his team looked at data from an extensive Harvard/YouGov study that every two years questions a sample size of tens of thousands of voters. Some acknowledge they are noncitizens and are thus ineligible to vote.

Just Facts’ conclusions confront both sides in the illegal voting debate: those who say it happens a lot and those who say the problem nonexistent.

In one camp, there are groundbreaking studies by professors at Old Dominion University in Virginia who attempted to compile scientifically derived illegal voting numbers using the Harvard data, called the Cooperative Congressional Election Study.

On the other side are the professors who conducted the study and contended that “zero” noncitizens of about 18 million adults in the U.S. voted. The liberal mainstream media adopted this position and proclaimed the Old Dominion work was “debunked.”

The ODU professors, who stand by their work in the face of attacks from the left, concluded that in 2008 as few as 38,000 and as many as 2.8 million noncitizens voted.

Mr. Agresti’s analysis of the same polling data settled on much higher numbers. He estimated that as many as 7.9 million noncitizens were illegally registered that year and 594,000 to 5.7 million voted.

These numbers are more in line with the unverified estimates given by President Trump, who said the number of ballots cast by noncitizens was the reason he lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton.

Last month, the president signed an executive order setting up a commission to try to find on-the-ground truth in illegal voting. Headed by Vice President Mike Pence, the panel also will look at outdated voter lists across the nation with names of dead people and multiple registrants.

For 2012, Just Facts said, 3.2 million to 5.6 million noncitizens were registered to vote and 1.2 million to 3.6 million of them voted.

Mr. Agresti lays out his reasoning in a series of complicated calculations, which he compares to U.S. Census Bureau figures for noncitizen residents. Polls show noncitizens vote overwhelmingly Democratic.

“The details are technical, but the figure I calculated is based on a more conservative margin of sampling error and a methodology that I consider to be more accurate,” Mr. Agresti told The Washington Times.

He believes the Harvard/YouGov researchers based their “zero” claim on two flawed assumptions. First, they assumed that people who said they voted and identified a candidate did not vote unless their names showed up in a database.

“This is illogical, because such databases are unlikely to verify voters who use fraudulent identities, and millions of noncitizens use them,” Mr. Agresti said.

He cites government audits that show large numbers of noncitizens use false IDs and Social Security numbers in order to function in the U.S., which could include voting.

Second, Harvard assumed that respondent citizens sometimes misidentified themselves as noncitizens but also concluded that noncitizens never misidentified themselves as citizens, Mr. Agresti said.

“This is irrational, because illegal immigrants often claim they are citizens in order to conceal the fact that they are in the U.S. illegally,” he said.

Some of the polled noncitizens denied they were registered to vote when publicly available databases show that they were, he said.

This conclusion, he said, is backed by the Harvard/YouGov study’s findings of consumer and vote data matches for 90 percent of participants but only 41 percent of noncitizen respondents.

As to why his numbers are higher than the besieged ODU professors’ study, Mr. Agresti said: “I calculated the margin of sampling error in a more cautious way to ensure greater confidence in the results, and I used a slightly different methodology that I think is more accurate.”

There is hard evidence outside of polling that noncitizens do vote. Conservative activists have conducted limited investigations in Maryland and Virginia that found thousands of aliens were registered.

These inquiries, such as comparing noncitizen jury pool rejections to voter rolls, captured just a snapshot. But conservatives say they show there is a much broader problem that a comprehensive probe by the Pence commission could uncover.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation, which fights voter fraud, released one of its most comprehensive reports last month.

Its investigation found that Virginia removed more than 5,500 noncitizens from voter lists, including 1,852 people who had cast more than 7,000 ballots. The people volunteered their status, most likely when acquiring driver’s licenses. The Public Interest Legal Foundation said there are likely many more illegal voters on Virginia’s rolls who have never admitted to being noncitizens.