Archive for March, 2014

“Why I don’t support the Detroit bailout” – by State Rep. Greg MacMaster

Greg MacMaster SenateOn Jan. 22, Gov. Rick Snyder proposed spending $350 million in tobacco settlement money to shore up the Detroit’s two city employee pension funds.
These pension funds are currently underfunded by $3.5 billion, according to Kevyn Orr, the city’s emergency manager.
The Legislature is currently informally discussing the governor’s proposal, and although a vote has not been scheduled there is an expectation that it will occur before the summer break.
Based on what I know today about the governor’s $350 million bailout proposal, I will vote against it for the following reasons.
■ It’s not fair to local taxpayers.
It’s not fair to force northern Michigan taxpayers to — again — pay for Lansing projects that don’t benefit our communities or our region. On a whole variety of issues, our tax dollars flow to Lansing only to be spent in southeast or west Michigan.
Our local governments receive less in state revenue sharing, our local infrastructure is underfunded, and our per-pupil school funding is less than in other parts of the state.
The time has come for the legislature to stop using northern Michigan as its piggy bank.
■ It’s not fair to local governments.
Fitch Ratings, an independent Wall Street credit rating agency, has indicated that the governor’s priority of bailing out Detroit’s pension funds could make it more difficult and more expensive for other Michigan municipalities to issue bonds and borrow money.
Northern Michigan’s local governments are run well. And to think this bailout could result in them incurring higher borrowing costs because of another city’s mismanagement, and subsequent state bailout, is unacceptable.
■ It creates a troubling precedent.
No Michigan municipality — even those under state receivership — has received a bailout similar to that which is being proposed for Detroit.
The unfunded liabilities of just the third of all the municipalities that belong to the Michigan Municipal Employees Retirement System consortium are nearly $3 billion.
While I have great sympathy for Detroit’s public employee retirees, whose retirements are being jeopardized by that city’s fiscal mismanagement, the fact remains: if Detroit is bailed out, how can any of these other municipalities be denied a bailout?
The governor’s plan creates an implicit contract that Michigan taxpayers will be the funders of last resort for any mismanaged public pension fund. And these amounts could run into the billions.
■ Detroit already receives special treatment from Lansing.
Historically, Detroit has received generous support from state government.
The state has decreed that Detroit is the only city in Michigan that can assess its own utility tax. It’s the only city that can assess a wagering tax. It has the highest city tax in the state. The state has helped Detroit borrow $610 million between 2005 and 2011 alone. The list of special treatment goes on and on. But perhaps the most egregious example of how Detroit is treated better than other municipalities is in state revenue sharing payments.
In 2013 state budget included $236 million in optional revenue sharing payments to cities, villages and townships. That’s funding that helps to pay for local fire, police and a host of other local government services.
Detroit alone took 58 percent of these payments. Michigan’s other 1,240 townships, 275 cities, and 257 villages split up the rest.
Far from the claim that the state has been neglecting Detroit, the state has been propping up Detroit for years. And what have Michigan taxpayers received for their generosity? Epic corruption and fiscal mismanagement.
I want Detroit to be successful. And I believe the city has turned a corner.
But northern Michigan has needs too. Our taxpayers can no longer be the state’s piggy bank. And until the state returns its $971 million surplus to taxpayers, reduces the size of government and distributes state funding more fairly, I cannot support this $350 million bailout of Detroit.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 
State Rep. Greg MacMaster, R-Kewadin, currently represents the 105th District and is running for the 37th State Senate seat. 


Sarah Palin: Crazy as a Fox?

By Adriana Cohen, Boston Herald March 26, 2014 6:58 am

Hillary Clinton is probably the last person Sarah Palin wants to see in the Oval Office. Which makes Palin’s near-endorsement of Clinton a bit of a head-scratcher. But Palin, despite the smears back in 2008, is a lot smarter than the left-leaning press has ever been willing to admit.

“I would like to see women run for the higher office. I think America certainly is ready for more female candidates at that upper echelon,” Palin told Mario Lopez on “Extra” when he asked about a Clinton run. And the stunned speculation about why Palin would say anything nice about Clinton began.

The fact is, Clinton is a dream candidate for the Republican Party in 2016.

Never mind all those polls that say Clinton walks away with it.

The Clintons have enough skeletons in their political closet to petrify a haunted house — and Bill, the former impeached president, will be a part of this race, too, as the nation’s prospective first First Husband.

The Democratic-friendly media has already been forced to notice the way she attacked the women her unfaithful husband targeted, though her party is supposed to be all about protecting the sisterhood.

Eventually, the media will have to address why it does make a difference who killed our ambassador and three other Americans in Benghazi.

There’s the question of whether — given her angry outburst before Congress — she has the temperament to be president.

By 2016, Iran — aided by Clinton and President Obama’s exercise of soft power — may well have nukes.

Secretary of State John Kerry accidentally gave Bashir Assad his lifeline with that Russian-brokered chemical weapons deal, but Clinton missed the chance to support a real Syrian democracy movement, before al-Qaeda co-opted it. Then, there’s her support for Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood.

Now, thanks to Crimea, Clinton’s infamous Russian “reset” rings hollow. That phone Clinton was ready to answer at 3 a.m.? It turns out it was … not in service.

Then, there’s Obama-care. Clinton was a major failed proponent of big government health care even before Obama succeeded in making a mess of it.

Palin, who couldn’t catch a break back in 2008, probably wouldn’t mind seeing Clinton catch a little of that political heat.

But maybe, Palin was doing the last thing her detractors would ever expect — voicing a laudable ideal, taking the high road, with no partisanship at all.

Maybe Palin, actually thinks, as she stated, that it’s good for women to run for high office. Women, no matter what their politics, should be running for high office. Maybe that’s all Palin was trying to say.

Adriana Cohen is co-host of Trending Now. Follow her on Twitter @AdrianaCohen16.

Lt. Governor Brian Calley endorses Part-Time Legislature ballot initiative!!!


Calley for Michigan

Dear Fellow Conservatives,

In 1837, Henry David Thoreau wrote, “The best government is that which governs least.” Those words have been one of the guiding philosophies behind our push to eliminate over 1500 rules and regulations since 2011.  It is also one of the reasons that I, along with my colleagues Tom McMillin, Dave Agema and Justin Amash, introduced a constitutional amendment in 2009 to give Michigan a Part-time Legislature.

While there are many arguments that favor the institution of this style of government, there is one that stands out above all else: Part-time legislative systems produce fewer laws each year than full-time systems.  That’s a win for the people in my book.

Over 40 states have Part-time Legislatures.  The People’s business still gets done, constituent needs are still met and laws still get passed (albeit a lot less of them).  As Article 1, Section 1 of the Michigan Constitution says: “All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their equal benefit, security and protection.”  A limited scope of government best ensures that this will remain true.

This is why I intend to vote for a Part Time Legislature if it makes it on the ballot this year.


Brian Calley

Paid for by Brian Calley for Michigan
PO Box 16173, Lansing, MI 48901

Minutes of January 20th, 2014 Meeting

Antrim County Republican Party – Meeting Minutes

Forest Home Twp. Hall
January 20, 2014

The meeting was called to order by Chairman – Randy Bishop at 7: 37 p.m.

Invocation led by Mark Rubingh was followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.

Chairman welcomed guests and asked how they had heard about our meeting. He subsequently introduced the Executive Committee

Laura Bogdan presented the Treasurer’s Report advising that the Corporate Account contained $x,xxx.xx and the State Account $x,xxx.xx (numbers are available, in person at our meetings).

2014 Membership applications are available: Dues are $20 for individual and $30 for family memberships.

There was no Secretary’s Report because Priscilla Miller was absent from last meeting due to surgery. Welcome back Priscilla and Bill Miller.

Vice Chair Report presented by Lori Luckett who advised of Dell computer and Quicken software purchase research and amounts stating that no purchase had yet been made because of the cost. Attendee asked if other brands had been considered and offered to assist in the purchase of Hewlett Packard computer. Luckett also reported that the computer must be purchased with funds from the State Account because it will be used for campaign issues and candidates. Luckett also reported that she will temporarily be assisting Priscilla Miller with the minutes.

New Business
1. Antrim County Commissioner Christian Marcus spoke on his assignment to the Private Property Rights Subcommittee advising that a presentation about Agenda 21 had been made to the County Board of Commissioners by three gentlemen. In addition to providing information, these men asked the Board of Commissioners to educate themselves and to form an advisory committee. The motion by Christian Marcus to form an advisory committee was supported by the Chairman and the private property rights issue was placed under the purview of the Health, Animal and Public Safety Committee. More and more land being purchased by Federal Government. He drew attention to the current push for multiple “Safe Harbors” along Lake Michigan which is being supported by Congressman Benishek. According to Christian, Safe Harbors” are not governed by Michigan law but fall under the Water’s Treaty Act, a federal law, signed by our president, that gives oversight of our water ways to foreign nations. Dave Crandall spoke in support of safe harbors. Christian requested that membership get actively involved and apply for vacancies on various county boards and committees to assure the protection of private property rights.
Jim Gurr stated that the problem in regards to personal property rights is they always sound so good at first, but the details show you end up paying a very high price.
Sam Batell encouraged membership to go on the web and educate themselves about Agenda 21. ICLEI is the local arm of an Agenda 21 group being funded by the United Nations. The largest office in the midwest is located in Traverse City.

Randy recommended doing a Google search and emphasized the Agenda 21 map and Agenda 21 for Dummies. According to Randy, only 23% of land in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula is privately owned. Tom Stillings interjected that there already are attempts to put meters on well water consumption.

2. Tom Stillings reported on the iCaucus advising that he has been named the coordinator for 1st District. The iCaucus is a national organization of grassroots leadership that is responsible for vetting candidates who seek the organization’s endorsement. It is not affiliated with any political party. The goal is to promote financially responsible government officials who understand and will follow the Constitution. Candidates seeking iCaucus endorsement must answer the iCausus questionnaire of 160 to 180 questions. The candidates are then questioned by volunteers about their answers. The goal is to weed out the candidates who speak of conservative principles but have no intention of following those principles if elected. Volunteers are needed as county coordinators to serve on vetting committees and to help iCaucus candidates get elected. To volunteer, contact Tom To participate go to web site and sign up. There are no dues or costs to join.

3. Tom Sommerfeldt spoke on Elk Rapids issues. Voters defeated a school millage in November 2013 by 12 votes. A re-count was called for and millage was still defeated. The Elk Rapids School Board has authorized and paid for a special election to be held February 25. Tom reported that the millage is for security upgrades and for all schools, security cameras for all buildings; a new high school gym containing an indoor track, weight room, dressing rooms, cardio room; handicap accessible restrooms at the soccer and football fields; and upgrades to the counseling, online education and music areas. This is a 10.9 mill bonding issue for which the school is seeking 8.3 mills from the property owners. A home valued at $ 200,000. would see an increase of $83. a year in taxes. for 20 years. The cost to taxpayers for holding election is $8000. Tom urged all voters in the Elk Rapids School District to get absentee ballots and to get out the vote. Discussion ensued pointing out benefits a new gym would provide.

Maryanne Jorgensen spoke about Elk Rapids Township and the efforts to privatize EMS services seeking three bids from private companies. Elk Rapids Township has approached Torch Lake and Milton Townships about getting involved. Concerned residents have threatened to pursue a recall of township officials. Dean Crandall, Forest Home Township Trustee, spoke of supervisor’s successful efforts to form an Ambulance Authority and thought that was a better way to resolve the matter in Elk Rapids and surrounding townships.

4. Chairman – Randy Bishop reported on the U.S. Senate race. Terri Lynn Land, former Michigan Secretary of State is running against Gary Peters for the vacant seat created by Carl Levin’s retirement.. If elected she could be the 51st. Senator and give the GOP a majority in the U.S. Senate. According to Randy, polling shows that Terri Lynn Land is up by 2 percentage points. She is also leading Peters in fund raising and has personally contributed a million dollars of her own money.
Randy also reported that the strategy for the upcoming elections is to grow attendance at local meetings, including the ACRP meetings, to get boots on the ground. Thoughts are that these elections will see significant input from women, moms and grandmas, who are getting concerned about Obama Care and who will tend to vote against the Democrats. There are 10 open seats in the Michigan House which may be filled by women.
Congressman Dan Benishek is being primary challenged by Iron Mountain native, Alan Arcand. Thoughts are that because of the primary challenge Jason Allen and Tom Casperson my enter the race against Benishek.
Randy would like the ACRP to host a candidate debate after the filing deadline and sometime in May or June. The debate would feature Benishek vs Arcand 1st Congressional District, Triston Cole vs Tony Cutler for the 105th Michigan House seat; Greg MacMaster vs Wayne Schmidt for 37th Michigan Senate seat.

Randy also advised that he is actively encouraging the State Committee of the Michigan Republican Party to hold its May 2nd/3rd meeting in Antrim County at Shanty Creek Resort.

Our 2nd Annual “ACRP – Fun Day” is scheduled for July 19, 2014 at A-Ga-Ming. Lt. Gov. Calley has this event on his calendar. All proceeds will go into the State Account for donations to candidates and issue advocacy.
Additional discussion of lame duck session and vote to change the allocation of electoral college votes by District instead of the current “winner take all” in Michigan.

Reagan Day Dinner is set for February 8, 2014 at Bay Harbor. This is a glitz and glam affair featuring Brian Calley and his band. The proceeds are to be allocated to the five counties based on attendance. Randy expressed concern about the lack of communication between the NWMRW responsible for organizing this year’s event and the local parties.

Kris Anne Hall is hoping to return to the area for more Constitution training.

Motion to adjourn by Tom Sommerfeldt seconded by Dr. Hoadley. Meeting adjourned at 9:14 p.m.

History Lesson on Your Social Security Card

By Dick Kantenbrger –

Dick K.

Just in case some of you young whippersnappers (and some older ones) didn’t know this.

It’s easy to check out, if you don’t believe it.  Be sure and show it to your family
and friends. They need a little history lesson on what’s what and it doesn’t matter
whether you are Democrat or Republican. Facts are Facts.

Social Security Cards up until the 1980s expressly stated the number and
Card were not to be used for identification purposes.
 Since nearly everyone in the
United States now has a number, it became convenient to use it anyway and the
message, “NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION” was removed.

Old Social Security Card

An old Social Security card with the


Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social
Security (FICA) Program.

He promised: (kinda like if you – “Like your Health Insurance”

 1) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary,

No longer Voluntary

2) That the participants would only have to pay
1% of the first $1,400 of their annual
incomes into the Program

Now 7.65%

On the first $90,000.

3) That the money the participants elected to put
into the Program would bedeductible from
their income for tax purposes each year,

No longer tax deductible

4) That the money the participants put in went to the
Independent ‘Trust Fund’
 rather than into the
General Operating Fund, and therefore, would
only be used to fund the Social Security
Retirement Program, and no other
Government program, and,

Under President Johnson the money was moved to
The General Fund and spent.

5) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed
as income.

Under Clinton & Gore
up to 85% of your Social Security can be taxed.

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are
now receiving a Social Security check every month — 

and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of
the money we 
paid to the Federal government to ‘put
away — 
you may be interested in the following:


Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the
Independent ‘Trust Fund’ and put it into the
General Fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democratically
controlled House and Senate.


Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax
deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.


Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social
Security annuities? 

A: The Democratic Party with Al Gore casting the
‘tie-breaking’ deciding vote
 as President of the
Senate, while he was Vice President of the U.S.


Q: Which Political Party decided to start
giving annuity payments to immigrants? 

A: That’s right,…
Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party. 

Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65,
began to receive Social Security payments! The 
Democratic Party gave these payments to them,
even though they never paid a dime into it!

I had to pay in at least 40 quarters and be at least 62 1/2 to qualify to receive SS.

Then, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!

And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it!

If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of awareness will be planted and maybe changes will evolve. 

The Democrats’ War on our Two-Party System

March 4, 2014 by 

Donkey ElephantWhile conservatives are divided on the political path forward, Democrats are showing themselves to be united in a war against the Republican Party — with one-party rule for America as the endgame. One need only look to the political priorities Democratic lawmakers have recently adopted to gauge this reality.

Led by the Obama administration, a party hijacked by far-left radicals is determined to pass comprehensive immigration reform, prevent the passage of election integrity laws, and use the IRS as a billy club to suppress free speech. Republicans who are inclined to dismiss this agenda need only look to California to see the cost of complacency and denial.

Mass immigration and sweeping amnesty initiatives are the Democrats’ primary tools for realizing their ambitions. A devastating report produced by Phyllis Schlafly, ”How Mass (Legal) Immigration Dooms a Conservative Republican Party,” details that reality in no uncertain terms. Citing surveys from the Pew Research Center, the Pew Hispanic Center, Gallup, NBC News, Harris polling, the Annenberg Policy Center, Latino Decisions, the Center for Immigration Studies and the Hudson Institute, Schlafly reveals that immigrants have always been the mainstay of the Democrat Party, emphasizing that this dynamic has been occurring for at least a century. Furthermore, as a result of the current rate of accelerated immigration that brings 1.1 million newcomers to America every year, the GOP will be reduced to fringe status within a decade.

The statistics are daunting. A 2008 National Annenberg Election Survey revealed that 62 percent of immigrants favor single-payer, government-run healthcare. A 2010 Cooperative Congressional Election Study shows that 69 percent of immigrants favor Obamacare. The Pew Research Center revealed that 53 percent of Hispanics hold a negative view of capitalism and that 75 percent favor bigger government and more social services compared to only 41 percent of Americans. Only 37 percent of naturalized citizens believe the Constitution takes precedence over international law, compared to 67 percent of native Americans.

The state of California represents the proverbial canary in the coal mine. Ronald Reagan carried California with 59 percent of the vote in the 1984 election. Yet beginning in 1986, the amnesty bill that legalized 2.7 million illegal aliens began the transformation of that state from red to blue. Amnesty recipients began becoming citizens, reaching a level of 40 percent by 2009. By 2012, a combination of Hispanic voters naturalized by that amnesty, or related to people who were, gave 70 percent of their vote to Barack Obama. And until yesterday, when a pair of California state senators went on indefinite leaves of absence to fight corruption charges, Democrats had an unassailable supermajority in the state legislature. They still maintain one in the lower house, the State Assembly, while they also control every statewide office and both seats in the U.S. Senate.

Yet there are far more insidious forces at work here. As Ann Coulter explains in a recent column, since the 1965 Immigration Act went into effect, 90 percent of those who have entered the nation on an annual basis have been unskilled, Third World workers. That has produced a glut of low-wage workers whose wages have steadily declined as a result of the influx. But when Republicans counter with economic reality and a list of demands in return for a “pathway to citizenship,” they are labeled “heartless” and “uncaring” with regard to economics and business and “nativist,” “bigoted” and “xenophobic” with regard to immigration.

Democrats have also been unanimous in their opposition to any attempt to improve fairness and oversight of elections. With regard to commonsense voter ID laws, Democrats have managed to convince a substantial number of Americans that protecting the integrity of the electoral process is nothing less than an effort to suppress the vote of minority Americans. Thus, Eric Holder and his minions at the U.S. Department of Justice will continue to pursue lawsuits against the states of Texas and North Carolina to prevent newly enacted voter ID laws from being enforced. They will do so despite a 2008 Supreme Court decision validating the constitutionality of a picture ID requirement for voting in the state of Indiana. Liberal Justice John Paul Stevens declared that the law ”is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting ‘the integrity and reliability of the electoral process.’”

The Supreme Court upped the ante on that reasoning last year, when it struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act. Prior to the change, states that had historic records of voter discrimination were unable to change their election laws without approval in advance from the federal government. States like Florida were prevented from purging their voter rolls of non-citizens, a situation unanimously hailed by the Left. “Our country has changed,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority. “While any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions.”

Holder, whose contempt for the rule of law was made plain when he urged state attorneys general to literally ignore those laws they themselves determined were discriminatory, is essentially ignoring two Supreme Court rulings in pursuit of his agenda.

There are glaring problems with that agenda. Nearly three-out-of-four Americans support photo ID requirements for voting. Moreover, despite charges of racism that the demand for photo ID elicits from leftists, the idea that any particular subset of Americans is less capable of procuring such identification is itself bigoted. Democrats’ charges of racism are nothing more than projections of their own warped worldview.

Yet far more important is the reality that voter fraud is a genuine problem. Statistics compiled by the True the Vote website reveal the extent. They note that in 2012, voter fraud cases were being pursued in 46 states. In addition, 24 million invalid voter registrations remained on the rolls nationwide, 1.8 million dead voters remained registered to vote, and 2.75 million Americans are registered to vote in more than one state.

Ironically, the principal architect of the problem is Eric Holder and the DOJ. According to former DOJ employee J. Christian Adams, the department refused to enforce Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) that tasks the Department with bringing voter rolls up to date by purging dead and ineligible voters. Once again, Holder’s determination to selectively enforce the law is the key element here.

Moreover, the reality that True the Vote was involved in illuminating the issue of voter fraud ties directly into the Obama administration’s most egregious effort to undermine the GOP: using the IRS as its vehicle to suppress free speech.

True the Vote’s self-described mission is focusing on election integrity issues, and much of that effort was focused on the Texas Democratic Party and Houston Votes, an ACORN front group. When True the Vote discovered irregularities that were pursued by Texas law enforcement officials, the American left declared war.

That war was pursued with vigor by the IRS after True the Vote applied for their 501(c)(3) non-profit status in July 2010. Hundreds of questions were asked over and over again. The agency demanded to see owner Catherine Engelbrecht’s tweets and Facebook posts. Aggressive audits of her and her husband’s businesses, that included investigations by the FBI, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, the Occupational Safety Hazards Administration, and the state version of the EPA, the Texas Commission on Environment Quality, were vigorously pursued.

Unfortunately, Engelbrecht’s ordeal was hardly an anomaly. As the Wall Street Journal’s Kimberly Strassel reveals, Obama’s contention that there’s not a “smidgen” of corruption occurring within the IRS is as truthful as his contention that American would be able to keep their doctors and health providers once ObamaCare was passed. “Perhaps the biggest fiction of this past year was that the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups has been confronted, addressed and fixed,” Strassel writes. “The opposite is true. The White House has used the scandal as an excuse to expand and formalize the abuse.”

The formalization of that abuse consists of offering conservative groups an “expedited” process for getting approval of their 501(c)(4) tax-exempt status –sold under the guise of pursuing reform. In reality the deal was a thinly-veiled effort to continue inhibiting the activities of those groups. Current rules governing 501(c)(4)s allow for spending as much as 49 percent of a group’s funds on political activity and as much time as they choose to engage in those efforts. In exchange for quicker approval from the IRS, groups had to agree to spend only 40 percent of their funds and time, calculated by the number of hours employees and volunteers worked, on political activity. “The clear point of the ‘deal’ was to use the lure of 501(c)(4) approval to significantly reduce the political activity of targeted conservative groups going forward,” Strassel explains.

Some groups, desperate to be approved, took the deal. But at least two that didn’t, including one that had been waiting three years and three months for approval, were once again targeted by the IRS, who demanded resubmission of information previously supplied, along with new details, such as the groups’ 2012 fundraising letters.

For perspective sake, it should be noted that prior to Obama’s presidency, the IRS approval process took an average of three weeks.

Strassel further explains that the IRS’s efforts to control speech are transparently political, because the bipartisan Federal Election Commission (FEC) can enforce rules regarding political speech. “But the FEC can’t be controlled by the White House, and Democrats have been unable to pass new speech restrictions through Congress,” she reveals.

Nonetheless, in a meeting of the Senate Judiciary Committee markup last Thursday, Democrats made it clear exactly where they stand. At that meeting, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) proposed two amendments aimed at protecting all Americans from IRS abuses. The first one would have imposed a ban on IRS employees targeting individuals or groups based on their political viewpoints. It would have also made it a crime for any IRS employee to engage in willful discrimination against any groups based solely on their political beliefs, or any policy statements held, expressed, or published by that organization. The second amendment would have amended the tax code to use the definitions promulgated by the FEC to determine whether an organization is engaging in political activity, leaving the IRS to focus solely on taxation.

Both amendments were unanimously opposed by Democrats on the Judiciary Committee, leading to their defeat.

This toxic combination of promoting a pathway to citizenship for millions of illegal aliens, along with laying a foundation for voter fraud and codifying suppression of their opponents’ political speech, are odious activities when they are examined individually. Taken as a whole, it becomes clear that Democrats are engaged in a concerted effort to fundamentally transform the United States of America into a one-party political system with their party in permanent control. And if it takes ruining millions of workers’ futures, destroying the integrity of the electoral process and undermining the Constitution to do so, so be it. As with every historical effort to seize unassailable power, the ends justify the means.

  • Next Monthly Meeting; Monday, June 10th, 2024, 7:00 p.m. – 8:30 p.m. Location; Torch Lake Twp. Hall

  • Recent Comments

    • Paid for with