An accident of the calendar may prevent Rand from running in 2016
Election Day 2014 brought a lot of good news for Republicans, but for one Republican, it wasn’t quite good enough. Rand Paul, the junior senator from Kentucky, had to be disappointed that the Republican sweep didn’t extend to Kentucky’s House of Representatives. For Paul, this means more than partisan disappointment; it may well destroy any chance he has of becoming president.
Rand Paul, the son of libertarian and sometimes Republican, Ron Paul, was elected to the U.S. Senate in the Tea Party victories of 2010. Like his father, a perennial presidential candidate in his own right, the younger Paul seems to have had his eyes set on the White House from his first days in the Senate. He was a founder of the Senate Tea Party caucus and, perhaps following his father’s lead, has emerged as a vocal critic of U.S. foreign policy. He emerged as a political star in March 2013 with a 12 hour filibuster of President Obama’s nomination of John Brennan as CIA director. The filibuster, inspired by Paul’s opposition to President Obama’s use of drones, lasted 12 hours and 52 minutes on a slow news day and catapulted Sen. Paul into the limelight.
Whenever the subject of immigration reform comes up, a charge that is certain to be bandied about is that Republicans are trying to foist amnesty on the country. Almost every Republican of note has been accused of supporting amnesty at some point in recent years. Are these charges true? What is the truth about the Republicans and amnesty?
First, what is amnesty? Merriam Webster defines “amnesty” as “a decision that a group of people will not be punished or that a group of prisoners will be allowed to go free” or “the act of an authority (as a government) by which pardon is granted to a large group of individuals.” Similarly, Merriam Webster defines “pardon” as the “act of officially saying that someone who was judged to be guilty of a crime will be allowed to go free and will not be punished.” Is this what prominent Republicans are advocating? Continue reading →
Hi guys…sometimes even in the midst of all the chaos that Barack HUSSEIN Obama has caused our side does win a few small battles, and winning one such battle involves getting our conservatives voices heard on a larger scale.
Our conservative message is important for all to hear for America is changing and NOT for the better. A progressive liberal agenda has overtaken simple common sense as our once centrist country now leans so far to the left that the left can shake hands with the right…and this must end for we must return to the law of our land…the U.S. Constitution…if America is to survive as we conservatives know and love her.
Everyone is familiar with Senator Joseph McCarthy (R-Wis.). In the 1950s, McCarthy made a cottage industry of searching out and finding hidden communists throughout the federal government. In the post-WWII era, communism was a real threat. McCarthy, however, was a charlatan.
McCarthy’s inquisition began on Feb. 9, 1950 with a speech to the Republican Women’s Club of Wheeling, W.V. What McCarthy said wasn’t recorded, but, according to “The Politics of Fear” by Robert Griffith, the senator waved a piece of paper in his hand and proclaimed, “I have here in my hand a list of 205 names that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in the State Department.”
The name Marco Rubio has been mentioned many times as being in the running for the 2016 Republican Presidential nomination. However, with his name comes the issue raised by some of does he meet the requirement of being a ‘natural born citizen.’ This issue can be resolved by just reading the words of the Constitution itself…just reading the words as written, and NOT trying to change or reinterpret words that are clear and simple in their meaning.
Let me explain.
While we all know that status as a natural-born citizen of the United States is required to be President or Vice President of this country, NOWHERE, I repeat NOWHERE, in the Constitution does it define what is meant by the words ‘natural born citizen’. Native born citizen is clearly defined…natural born is NOT defined at all. Any and all attempts after the Constitution was adopted are simply supposition, just attempts by others to guess what the Founders meant and no more. Continue reading →
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) tore into Barack Obama while appearing on The O’Reilly Factor Wednesday, saying that the president doesn’t “have the guts” to tell America he doesn’t believe in the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
“I actually believe the president doesn’t have the guts to admit he doesn’t believe in the Second Amendment although he states that he is,” Rubio said.