Obama's Impeachable Offenses by Michael Connelly

Obama's Impeachable Offenses

This an article I just read that lays out the argument of impeachable offenses that Pres. Obama has committed despite him being a Constitutional Law Professor. It is written by a constitutional law instructor named Michael Connelly. Mr. Connelly teaches law, including constitutional law, through Education to Go, an online company that provides courses to numerous universities. The author of three books and publisher of a website, he resides in Carrollton, Texas, and can be reached by email. It's a good read although I can't say I agree with anything that is in it. Either way I have attached the link above labeled "Obama's Impeachable Offenses" as well as to having added the content to the body of the post. Hope you enjoy!

Obama's Impeachable Offenses
by Michael Connelly

I have recently been asked by a number of different people if I think that the President of the United States, Barack Obama, has committed any offenses that subject him to being impeached by the Congress of the United States. The answer is without a doubt yes because he is repeatedly breached his oath of office. The oath of office of the President of the United States the simple and concise. It reads:

"I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Instead of living up to that oath, President Obama has actively attempted to subvert, ignore, and completely destroy large parts of the Constitution. I believe the President of the United States is well aware of what he is doing, and it is completely intentional. Listed below are what I believe are impeachable offenses and the list continues to grow.

1. President Obama has appointed numerous people to cabinet level positions without the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate, as is required by the Constitution. These individuals are given extraordinary power and independent funding, and are not under the scrutiny of Congress. The fact that Obama calls them Czars does not make them legal.

2. The push by Pres. Obama to pass health care legislation in the Congress of the United States that he was fully aware was unconstitutional. He has continued to use his powers and executive branch of government to implement this legislation despite the fact that a federal judge has declared the entire law unconstitutional, and ordered that it not be implemented.

3. Despite the fact that the United States Senate refused to pass the Cap and Trade bill, the President has ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to use regulations to implement key portions of the bill, including those regulating so-called greenhouse gases. Obama himself has acknowledged that this will force energy prices in this country to skyrocket. He is taking these actions in direct defiance of the will of the people of the United States, the will of Congress, and the Constitution.

4. Through the Department of the Interior Obama has placed a moratorium on offshore oil drilling or exploration off both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the United States and in parts of the Gulf of Mexico. He is also prohibited new drilling exploration in any states in the United States. These actions by the Department of Interior have continued in direct defiance of several court orders issued by a federal judge in New Orleans, Louisiana the declared that the department had no authority to issue such a moratorium. In fact the Secretary of the Department of the Interior has been held in contempt by the same judge.

5. Instead of allowing American companies to drill for oil domestically, Obama has betrayed the American people and authorized loans of billions of dollars to countries like Brazil and Mexico so that they can drill for oil, and then sell that oil to the United States. This will dramatically increase our dependence on foreign nations such as Venezuela, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, and even Libya that do not serve the interest of America or the American people.

6. President Obama has abdicated his responsibility to enforce the laws of the United States against illegal immigration. He has virtually declared our southern border an open border by declaring certain areas of federal land in states like Arizona as off-limits to federal, state, and local authorities. This is despite the fact that these areas are being used to bring in thousands of illegal immigrants, massive amounts of drugs, and also being used by foreign terrorists to infiltrate the United States. He has also ordered the border patrol not to arrest most illegal immigrants entering the country, and has stopped deportation proceedings against thousands of people in this country illegally. He is bypassing the Congress of the United States which has sole authority over immigration matters.

7. The President and his Atty. Gen. Eric Holder have clearly violated their oath of office by joining with foreign countries in a lawsuit against the sovereign state of Arizona to stop it from enforcing the federal immigration laws.

8. President Obama has ordered the Federal Communications Commission to adopt regulations giving the federal government control of the Internet and its contents, including providing Obama with a kill switch that gives him authority to shut down the Internet if he sees fit. This is in direct violation of a decision by the United States Supreme Court that the FCC has no Constitutional authority to control the Internet.

9. One of the paramount responsibilities of the President of the United States and his executive branch of government is to enforce and defend laws adopted by Congress unless they are declared unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court. Obama has decided that he should ignore this Constitutional mandate, and that as President he is more powerful than either the Congress of the United States or the Supreme Court. He has unilaterally declared that the Defense of Marriage Act passed by the Congress is unconstitutional, and further declared that he will not have the Justice Department defend it against lawsuits. He has essentially said that he is the supreme ruler of the United States, and that the Congress and the Federal Judiciary are irrelevant.

10. It has recently been learned that acting through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms the Obama administration has been involved for the past several months in getting legitimate and law-abiding gun store owners along our southern border to supply weapons to straw buyers that the government knew would deliver them to the drug cartels in Mexico. This was billed as a sting operation against the cartels when in fact it was designed to produce fraudulent data showing that large numbers of weapons were going from the United States to the Mexican drug dealers. This data was then to be used, and is being used, to try to justify new gun control regulations to limit the rights of American citizens to keep and bear arms. It has nothing to do with arresting members of the drug operations. The administration has, in effect, armed our enemies, and one border patrol agent has already been killed by one of these weapons. Now, he intends to impose gun control laws by Executive order so he will not have to deal with Congress.

11. The President of the United States is not authorized by the Constitution to take our nation to war without the consent of the Congress of the United States. The only exception to this is the authority granted to the President by Congress under the War Powers Act. This law allows the President to take immediate action without the consent of Congress if there is an imminent threat to the security of the United States, or its citizens. Although there was clearly no such imminent threat caused by the Civil War in Libya, the President committed members of the United States military to combat missions in a foreign country without the consent of Congress. He based his authority on a United Nations resolution, and a resolution by the Arab League.

12. Last but not the least, of my dirty dozen of impeachable offenses, is the fact that since taking office the President has used executive orders, laws pushed through Congress in the dark of night, and administrative actions by his departments to nationalize and control automobile manufacturers, banks, insurance companies, and portions of the healthcare industry. This is designed to take our country from a free enterprise economy to a socialist economy. There is absolutely no authority in the Constitution of te United States that allows the President to do this.

Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution provides as follows:

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."
I contend that among those high crimes and misdemeanors is the intentional violation of the oath of office administered to the President and all other federal officials. In fact, federal law at 5 U.S.C. 7311 specifically provides that violation of the oath of office includes advocating the overthrowing of our constitutional form of government. This is specifically declared a criminal offense in 18 U.S.C. 1918 and is punishable by both a fine and imprisonment.

In the 12 areas I mentioned in the paragraphs above I firmly believe that Obama, Eric Holder, and numerous other members of his administration have gone beyond just advocating the overthrow of our constitutional form of government. They are actually engaged in making it happen, and as a result should be impeached and convicted.

Will there be an impeachment and conviction in the current Congress? Probably not, since it takes a two thirds vote in the House of Representatives to impeach, and a two thirds vote in the Senate to convict. With Harry Reid and the progressives still in control of the Senate, and many of them guilty of some of the same impeachable offenses, they will resist it.

However, we are the American people and we still have a right to control our government, and the people elected to represent us. Therefore, I am personally calling on the conservative members the House of Representatives to bring this action based on the grounds I have enumerated so that the American people can understand what is really at stake here. Then we the people, can make our voices heard.

Come On....Really...Gov. Romney!

Romney Interview 

I think it is clear by now that I am a Romney supporter. This isn’t to say I am blind by my wanting there to be a Liberal Republican to change the face of the party, but I do think the recent issue with Gov. Romney’s quote about the poor does need to be cleared up.

Soon after winning the Florida Primary Gov. Romney was quoted saying this about the poor in our country;

”I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there.”

Sounds horrible right? But here is his whole quote;

“I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I’ll fix it. I’m not concerned about the very rich. They’re doing just fine. I’m concerned about the very heart of America, the 90-95 percent of Americans who right now are struggling.”

Sounds better right? The point he is making here is quite clear. The working poor have safety nets in place, food stamps, welfare, and WIC. It’s the people who make just enough not to qualify for these programs but mind you are still struggling who he wants to assist. Why is that wrong? It simply isn’t.

This nation’s immediate focus cannot be to fix the programs that are working to help people survive. Yes! They are broken, but they are helping for the moment. This nation needs to fix itself to be able to help the 95% of American that don’t qualify for these programs but still need help. Let’s get them back to work. I believe Mitt Romney can do this.

My Man Mitt Could Do It! Better Yet I Hope He Does!

USA TODAY ARTICLE

Mitt Romney For President

I have been saying this ever since the Presidential Candidates entered themselves in the race but now it seems to be official Gov. Mitt Romney can make Pres. Obama compete in the swing states as well as carry the south.  This could even project him to a win in November according to USAToday.
   

Now despite the fact that Pres. Obama has been pouring money into blasting Gov. Romney, despite the fact he does not have the nomination yet.  Moreover that the President has put a lot of money in media buys in the swing States and Illinois it has seemed clear to by just the basic study of Politics that a win for Gov. Romney was not only possible but moreover he could win in the swings.

But why?   Right that’s what you’re asking yourself.   I think it is as easy as looking where was he a Governor; he came from one of the most liberal states in the Union.  They just elected there first Republican Senator in 2009 with Sen.  Scott Brown.  But I feel it’s more than that…we have to look deeper.  Why did they, the people of Massachusetts, elect him? 

Gov. Romney represents a large a growing movement in the Republican Party.  No not the Tea party, well not exactly, he represents Fiscal Conservatives.  Conservatives who do not belong to the party for the Social reasons i.e anti-gay, pro-life; but people who feel Government should be limited, small, and more efficient.  The Regan Democrats also will flock to him for this reason.  However what makes him carry the South and their strong ties to the party for these social issues is the incumbent is a Democrat.  This is why I feel he didn’t win the nomination in 2008, and if he would have he would have lost.  But now the time is right.

I cannot express   how excited I am to not only be right; but to see a Republican who represents me best and to think he could very well be the next President and change the history of the Republican party…in my opinion for the better.  

A Nation's Sad Day!

Our hearts and prays go out to the Kirk family today. Sen. Kirk (R) IL suffered a stroke Sunday evening. Let’s all remember him and his family in this time of sorrow, and pray for a speedy recovery. Doctors as of yesterday had no medical updates to his condition for the future. It is sad for this to happen to anyone, and hits home even more him being a Navy Commander. As a veteran of this great nation I salute all that serve.


Also today Rep. Giffords (D) AZ resigned today to consecrate on healing from her wounds suffered a year ago by an assassination attempt. Let us all keep her and her family in our prayers. It is always sad to see good and honest Statesmen and women have to leave their post despite their party. This nation was better because she served. Her district I am sure will miss her, and I personally hope she returns to public service as soon as she is ready.

Why is Being Noise Important to Political Issues?

Over the weekend one of the top Republican Presidential Candidates was asked a question at the Republican debate in South Carolina, a forum I might add is for vetting candidates on the issues, was -asked about allegations that his ex – wife told in an news interview. The question was his comments on his alleged inquiry to establish an open marriage with her. Yes! This was the first question of the night.

Yeah! I was also like wait WHAT? This is a debate question? How does this show he can lead? And even if the American people want to know, why should they be allowed to indulge in this prying like he is some pop star?

Now before I get to the quotes, I have to make it known that I do find Speaker Gingrich’s response well worded, but completely hypocritical for other reasons. However the question was if there rumors were true, The Speakers answer:

“I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate on a topic like that,” Mr. Gingrich said, adding that even raising the issue, “is as close to despicable as anything I can imagine.”

Now like I said before it is a little hypocritical coming from the same Speaker who called for then President Bill Clinton to resign over his sex scandal, but the message hits to the core of my question. Why is being noise important to political issues? By allowing these questions we are prohibiting potential political saviors from entering the field just because they do not want to deal with this crap (and that is what it is CRAP)!

So what did you or could you have learned from his answer to this question that would have showed how good or bad of a leader he would have been?

Now it’s not just Gingrich. Look at the tax return paperwork that all presidents have to turn in during the campaign. Why what do we learn from that. Should it be held against President Obama because he took a well-paying Professor position at a well-respected law school. Or should we hold it against Romney because he has met the American Dream in his own way by making a very nice life for himself; of course we shouldn’t. After all they are perusing their own American Dream. Plus what do we learn about them and the issues by seeing how much they made. Nothing!

I am pretty sure the Supreme Court said we have a RIGHT to privacy. Now I get it once you’re in the spot light of politics you surrender some freedom….but not this much. Why do we care if President Obama is on vacation for Christmas with his family, I am sure millions of Americans did the same, trying to forget for a minute the problems with the economy. Plus it’s not like he doesn’t have access to the information if he needs it.

So let's ask ourselves next time "How does this help me to understand where he/she stands on the issues?" Let’s stop treating Politicians like pop stars and get to their stances on the issues. Sound Good America? Good!

Go to the Virtual Poll!

Poll

Take the poll and give your opinion on who should win in South Carolina!

Gay Pride for Indiana Motorists

Youth Gay Pride

Indiana kicked the New Year off the right way in taking a big step and issuing Youth Gay Pride license plates. Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles unveiled its recent addition to specialized plates that benefits gay causes.

It might not sound like much but coming from a politically traditionalist State it is a big step. Around $25 from sales of each $40 plate goes to the group serving lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender youth. Indiana is the second State to do so (Maryland being the first).

I personally couldn’t be happier to see this State moving into a direction to stopping the assault on Gays and Lesbians, my only hope is that it continues. Come March when it is time to renew my own, if the Marine Corps doesn’t have its own for Hoosiers like years before, I will be buying this one.

America Is Looking For a Leader

With all the uncertainty in America right now, the only obvious answer is America needs a Leader.  Our national debt surpassed our GDP, our parties in Washington have stopped compromising, and our President stopped leading.  It is time for a Leader!

Now don’t get me wrong I am not taking sides.  I believe just as Gov. Christie pointed out in an interview a few months ago that both parties are to blame for our National Crisis.  In his words “they spend more time talking at each other than with each other.”  Now this is seen everywhere from blocking of bills to just plain looking idiotic and out of touch, to inside party attacks for being a compromiser. 

Look at the last budget bill and what Speaker Bohner tries to do.  It wasn’t two months before that stale mate the Senate in a almost unanimous fashion brought a bill that set the plan for a year.  He and the Tea Party Caucus wouldn’t vote on it, saying it need more and ask for a short temperay fix.  But when the Senate brought that (a two month extension) He called for a year extension, the same one he said a month earlier he didn’t want.  Why?  Because both parties want to fix things and no one wants to compromise. 

Look at Indiana and the effort the Sen. Dick Lugar did to get bills passed in the Senate.  But yet the right is attacking him saying he compromised?  Wait isn’t that what we want him to do, and that is get stuff done.  Standing on principle is fine but in the end don’t we want results?  I sure do!  But why is this so bad, and why have we become so polarized as a nation?  The President!

The White House and their spin that came from the Super Committee failing to come to an agreement and the lack of involvement by the President.   The White House said that the President knew it wouldn’t work and stayed out of it.  Why?  You’re the leader, that’s your job to get involved. 

Now I am not saying the President is the only to blame for the polarization in this nation, but it is his job to bring them together and by his actions with the super committee he doesn’t feel he needs to because it is doomed for failure.   But in mu opinion that’s what being a leader is: you take risk, you step out on limbs, and you lead.  After all that’s what the name leader means…LEAD.  

No one ever lead from being in the middle of a pack, or from staying out things.  America 2012 is coming up let’s elect a Leader.

Sadly This Really Happens Daily in the Press Briefs

Sad But True

Simpler, Smaller, Smarter!

Simpler, Smaller, Smarter!

New Hampshire......What we can take away from the 1st Primary

Today the voters of New Hampshire took to the polls and cast their ballot for the next Republican candidate to run against President Barack Obama.  With polls closed and the votes counted New Hampshire has cast is vote for Gov. Mitt Romney with 38.3 % according to USA Today.  Analysts have predicted a Romney victory, but the big question was who would take second?  Second place went to Ron Paul with 23.3% of the vote. 

This primary, among other things, says a lot for who can take on Pres. Barack Obama.  With a big win in Iowa with the evangelicals Sen. Rick Santorum tied Romney, but those strong religious views don’t sit well with the East or California.  In order to beat Pres. Obama one has to take the east coast as well as Texas, California, or Illinois; just winning the south won’t secure a victory.  If Romney can win a few southern primaries in order to show social conservatives will vote for him; as well as New York’s a big east coast state I believe he will win against Pres. Obama in the fall.  I also feel the big story here is Gov. Huntsman with 17% of the vote coming in third.  This shows a strong moderate Republican following. 

Now among all of that it is showing some candidates might need to start thinking when a time to drop is.  With Gov. Perry only taking .7% of the vote, Gingrich taking 9.6% it might be time for them to say farewell.  However I think it will take a loss in South Carolina to show some candidates the ride is over.

A New Era for the City of Gary and Indiana

Freeman-Wilson NWITimes

It was an exciting day here in Indiana this past Monday. I am pleased to be able to say Gary, Indiana swore in the State’s first African American Female mayor and the cities first female and African American Female mayor, Mayor Karen Freeman-Wilson. With a campaign based on hope for the city and change to come Mayor Freeman-Wilson inspired the city to rally behind her this past November and allow her administration bring some hope and prosperity to this grief and poverty stricken city.

 Mayor Freeman-Wilson served as a presiding judge of the Gary City Court from 1995 to 2000. In 2000, she was appointed Indiana Attorney General by Governor Frank O'Bannon to serve the remaining eleven months of the term of Jeff Modisett, who resigned to become Deputy CEO and General Counsel to the Democratic National Convention.

Her win this past November came with a landslide victory of 87 percent of the vote. Her campaign received a well-respected endorsement from the then incumbent, and former opposing candidate in 2007, Mayor Rudy Clay. Mayor Clay decided not to run for reelection due to health problems.

 Although are parties may differ the sprite of bi-partisanship reigns over her new administration with State Attorney General Gregg Zoeller (R) made an appearance to commemorate this historic occasion.  Zoller spoke of Mayor Freeman-Wilson and encouraged the city laying politics aside to get behind the new Mayor of Gary by saying ‘"It's time to put aside politics and partisanship," Zoeller told the crowd. "Karen Freeman-Wilson has a monumental task ahead. Everyone in Gary needs to get behind the new mayor for there to be a new day in Gary, and it starts with me. I'm always willing to work with the new mayor to serve the common good of the citizens."

Mayor Freeman-Wilson spoke of the same coming togetherness by saying “This is what unity looks like,” I wish her and the City of Gary the very best in the future. This Story was was referenced from NWITimes.

Tea Party... Dead or Alive?

With the recent victory in Iowa and all the actual supported tea party candidates finishing less than 4th place I have to ask the question is the tea party dead or alive?

As an avid follower of politics I of course follow the tea parties web page 1.6 and they seem to think they are alive and kicking but a recent poll done by them suggests otherwise to me.  In a poll posted on the 1.6 Facebook page of who the tea party favors Rick Santorum came in first with 31.17%. 

Now maybe some are not surprised but it shocks me.  It shocks me because the tea party (it must be said is not an actual party) was formed based on principles of over taxation and large intrusive government.  I mean it is in there very name TEA (Taxed Enough Already.)  With these principles the members who call themselves tea partiers vote for a man who wants to expand the role of government.  That’s right the part who wants smaller government actually voted for a candidate who wants to expand the role of the fed. 

Rick Santorum boasts on his own website that he voted for as a Senator “fought for the passage of the Individuals with Disability Education Act (IDEA), and the “Combating Autism Act” to fight this devastating disease that is affecting more and more of our nation’s children.”  Now they sound like great programs but they expand the role of the fed; but he doesn’t stop there he also brags about want to preserve marriage “Rick spearheaded the debate in favor of Federal Marriage Amendment in 2004.”  Now this also goes against his view on States rights but it also expands the role of the fed.  

So how could he be their candidate?

I think it only obvious, the tea party might not be dead but they are an organization that doesn’t even follow their own principles.  The members who want small government and lower taxes, and more state rights want a man that takes two of the three and throw them right out.  So it’s either they are unaware and out of touch with the candidates issues or they simply just lost the fervor.

Impeach Officials Who Do Not Do Their Duty as Public Office Holders

Day 2 Still at it!
Lazy Politicians

I am unsure how long this is been going on in American politics, but however long it needs to stop. What am I wanting stopped? Not showing up for your duty as a public official. Today the Indiana General Assembly tried to convene for legislative business; but do to the 40 democratic members refusing to show up this was impossible. According to the Indiana Constitution 67 members have to be present to have a quorum without a quorum legislative business cannot be conducted.

Now in case you’re wondering why I am so mad about this it’s not because I want the bill to be passed I have no preference that matters in this context, and it’s not that the one’s doing it are democrats, it is simply because my tax dollars are paying for you to do nothing. We as residents of Indiana pay for your food, hotel stay, traveling money, and salary therefore I expect you to do something to earn it.

Now besides all that you took an oath to uphold the State constitution and if you feel that a bill being presented doesn’t follow along with what you feel the people want then fight. Fight in the chambers of the Statehouse, fight by rally your grass root members, and fight by showing up and debating. Your constituents didn’t vote for you to go to the State capital and sit and not do anything; they voted for you to do your job and that is to legislate. My view is if you’re not going to do the job you were elected for then we should remove you from that job.

Now this may sound harsh but this isn’t the first time this has happened. Last year around this time the democratic caucus in the Indiana General Assembly fled to Illinois over the same bill. That’s right instead of fighting in the chambers they ran to a neighboring state. In my eyes you have breach your constitutional duties in which you swore to uphold.

I did not mention the bill this is all about. I did this in the hopes that the reader could be unbiased to the cause of why they are doing this lazy act. The link above titled “Lazy Politicians” will connect you to the news page in which the bill is mentioned.

Satorum Wins by 8 votes over Romney, Bachmann Suspends campaign!

Iowa Results

2012 Primary/Caucus Schedule

Iowa polls are now open. Below are the Primary and Caucus dates. Please remember to check with your own States board of elections to verify these dates.

Full Primary/Caucus Calendar

January 3, 2012             Iowa (caucus)
January 10, 2012           New Hampshire (primary)
January 21, 2012           South Carolina (primary)
January 31, 2012           Florida (primary)
February 4, 2012           Nevada (caucus)
February 4–11, 2012     Maine (caucus)
February 7, 2012           Colorado (caucus)
                                     Minnesota (caucus)
                                     Missouri (primary) **

February 28, 2012       Arizona (primary)
                                    Michigan (primary)
March 3, 2012             Washington (caucus)
March 6, 2012
(Super Tuesday)          Alaska (caucus)
                                   Georgia (primary)
                                   Idaho (caucus)
                                   Massachusetts (primary)
                                   North Dakota (caucus)
                                   Ohio (primary)
                                   Oklahoma (primary)
                                   Tennessee (primary)
                                   Vermont (primary)
                                   Virginia (primary)
March 6-10, 2012      Wyoming (caucus)
March 10, 2012          Kansas (caucus)
                                   U.S. Virgin Islands (caucus)
March 13, 2012          Alabama (primary)
                                   Hawaii (caucus)
                                   Mississippi (primary)
March 17, 2012          Missouri (GOP caucus) **

March 20, 2012          Illinois (primary)
March 24, 2012          Louisiana (primary)
April 3, 2012              District of Columbia (primary)
                                  Maryland (primary)
                                  Wisconsin (primary)
                                  Texas (primary)
April 24, 2012            Connecticut (primary)
                                  Delaware (primary)
                                  New York (primary)
                                  Pennsylvania (primary)
                                  Rhode Island (primary)
May 8, 2012              Indiana (primary)
                                  North Carolina (primary)
                                  West Virginia (primary)
May 15, 2012            Nebraska (primary)
                                  Oregon (primary)
May 22, 2012            Arkansas (primary)
                                  Kentucky (primary)
June 5, 2012              California (primary)
                                  Montana (primary)
                                  New Jersey (primary)
                                  New Mexico (primary)
                                  South Dakota (primary)
June 26, 2012            Utah (primary)

**Missouri: Missouri will hold a primary on February 7th, 2012, which will not count for delegates toward the 2012 GOP convention. The Missouri Republican Party will hold a caucus on March 17th, 2012, which will determine the delegates sent to the 2012 GOP convention

Information was provided by CNN’s election headquarters.

Why I Might Possibly Vote For Obama in 2012

This being my second presidential election I can vote in and the sixth overall election I have yet to vote for a democrat. Now this isn’t because I vote straight party that is certainly not the case. Living in Indiana I have had the privilege of having good republican candidates or Libertarian candidates to vote for. However this year’s Presidential election isn’t yielding promising hopefuls in my opinion.

When the process began I really wished my home State Governor Mitch Daniels would run. But he decided early last summer he would not. Then I got a glimpse of hope when everyone speculated Chris Christie was going to enter the race. But that fell through as well. Then I fell into the Herman Cain Camp with rhetoric of keeping Church and State separate, this being especially important to me. But after some scandals being reviled that also fell through.

Now don’t get me wrong categorizing myself as a staunch liberty advocate, very centrist republican Ron Paul and Mitt Romney look great. But with the recent polls showing rises in Gingrich, Perry and Santorum I find myself looking more to the left. This isn’t to say nothing to the extremist, anti-gay, anti- state liberty, pro-religious regime craving, Michele Bachmann. These are the problems I find with them.
Michele Bachmann

Where do I begin! One I cannot vote for someone who doesn’t even know how our system of government works. In an interview with Chris Wallace of Fox she was asked on the issue of Gay Marriage and its legality in States that approve it Chris asked

“If a State Legislature passed laws (recognizing gay marriage) and the Governor signed it, it would be a states decision and it becomes state law?”

She subsequently agreed saying “it’s a State law.” She went on to say before this it should be up to the people. She also stated “the 10th Amendment reserves that right.”

But in the New Hampshire debate she said she supports a constitutional amendment that bans gay marriage.

Seeing something wrong here I do. A constitutional amendment would overturn a State’s law.
Quoting her she said “ I do support a constitutional amendment to preserve marriage between a man and a woman, but I would not go into the States to overturn their State law.”

Therefore it wouldn’t be up to the people of that State. Now I realize it’s unfair to assume by these comments that she doesn’t know how our system works so let me quote her response to the question by Chris Wallace in trying to straighten out these two views. Chris showed her a clip of the debate and her comment and stated he was confused on her take. He asked

“If you support a States rights how can you also support a constitutional amendment to prevent any State from recognizing gay marriage?”

Her answer astonishes me she goes on to say the states have their system and the federal government has theirs. But she doesn’t seem to realize that one overturns the other. It’s either that or she is a flip flopper either way no good in my book. Now beyond this I do not agree that Gay marriage is a federal issue.

Rick Perry
I believe firmly in the Separation of church and state. With his recent campaign add wanting America to get back to a faith based nation scares me. With all the problems we see today that’s the biggest you would like to fix Gov. Perry? Really the economy in the tank, unemployment at 9%, and faith and God is most important…I hope not, not as President. He also has an anti-gay, anti-abortion belief.

Newt Gingrich
Let’s sum this up quick he is a man of the establishment. I don’t want another straight Politician.

Rick Santorum
I feel he has the same flaws Bachmann does; Anti- Gay, Anti-Woman’s choose. Also his foreign policy scares me in particular his undying support for Israel. Now I know most of the Republican Party stands with Israel. But to say that you support them in any venture is a little out there.

I agree with an Israeli State but this does not mean I would support every Israeli action without even knowing what that commits me to. I see that as foolish and desperate.

Ron Paul and Mitt Romney
Again I love both of these guys. However one is to extreme to get the nomination (Paul) and the other I don’t feel can carry the south to pull off a win (Romney).

Now I am fully aware all of them have flaws and more than what I have listed. I am afraid Perry or Gingrich will win the nomination and if that happened I cannot not vote for them. I come to that conclusion based upon my beliefs in the law and how a government should govern its people. I just feel social issues are not up to government to govern on. In my opinion social issues are issues of morals and not law. Law must be blind.

Now with all that said if it is not Romney or Paul ticket and no one else enters the field I will vote Obama. I can handle an Obama Administration for 4 more years. Even though I am a strong fiscal conservative, I will not let religious laws become American laws. Nor will I vote for someone who takes away a woman’s right to choose or stand behind laws like DOMA. I feel that this is up to her and the doctor. Who am I to judge her for her decision?

Bachmann Interview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdGHXwWewEs


Rick Perry add
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PAJNntoRgA

Stop The Assault On Homosexual Couples.

In 1802, in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association, Thomas Jefferson wrote The Wall of Separation. In it he gave his brief view on how religious establishments and the Government should interact and the way of avoiding that being a separation between the two. It has since been adopted in our system of Government ever since and reaffirmed when the Supreme Court made mention of it in its opinion in Everson v. Board of Education.

It is, in my opinion, we keep this line clear in all aspects of governing. We have to find a way to coexist in a society where religious organizations and the government be kept on their own sides of the dividing line. The law cannot be based solely on religious principles alone like in the shunning of Homosexuals and their right to enter into a marriage.

The court at one time recognized marriage as a fundamental right. In Loving v Virginia marriage was recognized by Chief Justice Warren and the court as a fundamental right to all.

“Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State”.

Even though here the issue was racial, the fourteenth amendment and its principle of equality for all include members of the gay community and their right to enter into marriage with one another. As stated by Chief Justice Warren the principle of Equality is at the heart of the 14th amendment. With that in mind why not allow homosexual couples to get married? My thought is one on religious basis only is religious and I believe this to fatal. Laws cannot reflect religious views. Once we cross that line of separation of the Church and State, that President Jefferson spoke of in his letter to the Danbury Baptist Association, we lose our very basic freedom; the right to associate with whoever or whatever we choose. Homosexual, in some cases have chosen to enter into a marriage with someone of the same sex. What they see to be normal just as I feel it to be normal for me to enter into marriage with someone of the opposite sex. Despite one’s view religiously, the rule of law has to let them do so or it is simply undemocratic.

Every generation of Americans have seen discrimination of a class of peoples for race, ethnicity, and in my generation homosexuals and sexual preferences. I want to stop this head on. We have to stop this head on. This nation is based on the principle of a free people, a people with the right to do anything they choose inside the parameters of law.