BenghaziGate: Update, October 31st 2012

A most disconcerting report from Washington Times and RadicalIslam.orgconcerning the Benghazi embassy attack in Libya – now officially designated as BenghaziGate scandal, here are facts within the fog of cover-up by BH Obama and Hillary Clinton:

• Prior to the 9/11 anniversary, instead of improved security that was requested, it was reduced. Special Forces detachment of 16 personnel were ordered to leave.
• No help was sent to aid embassy officials and requests for support were denied – more than once.
• Congressional investigators of hearings, FoxNews, Michael Coren (SunNews, Canada), Aaron Klein (WorldNetDaily), and Diana West (syndicated columnist), Frank Gaffney (Center for Security Policy), and Clare Lopez (RadicalIslam.org, strategic policy-intelligence) are investigating what the Benghazi role played concerning Obama administration’s Middle East policy of, as Frank Gaffney stated:

…engaging, legitimating, enriching and emboldening Islamists who have taken over or are ascendant in much of the Middle East.

Another disconcerting revelation: Turkish Consul General, Ali Sait Akin, suspected of involvement in the plot to attack the US mission in Benghazi. Associated Press (AP) reporters were told by Libyans living near the compound tells a different story than what was released by the White House and the Secretary of State. In addition, a “mysterious” Libyan ship heading to Syria has been linked to the US Consulate.

This is an executive administration of the United States government whose campaign ads have accused Mitt Romney of wanting to keep America in perpetual war. This is a political entity in the United States whose political platform is socialism at home and foreign policy of appeasement, apologeticrhetoric abroad that have weakened our status among world nations, as well as in the eyes of the enemies of the free world. This is the same political socialist-progressive movement that accused GW Bush of staging the attack of September 11^th, 2001 despite expert engineers and analysts at Ground Zero proving that the attack was carried out by Islamic fascists and the al-Qaeda terrorist organization. It reinforces my statements that 98% of the time, the American Democrat political party members who accuse others of scandals and even treasonous acts are themselves guilty of what they are accusing, either direct lies or through misinformation.

This also reinforces my call for action: 

no person who desires to campaign for the office of the President, Vice President, or member of the US Congress in the House or Senate should not be considered a viable candidate without passing a full FBI security screening like any American citizen with access to classified documents and sensitive material regarding our national security.

Obama and company are prime examples of why this should be so. When BH Obama, with all of his ties in the subversive organizations of Islamic fascism, is no longer President of the United States – is he not a security risk? The President of the United States has access to every critical document and material that is safeguarded for the protection of the United States and its people.

As I stated in another article: There is no statute of limitations for treason.

In a related bit of news:

Larry Ward at Breitbartreported that his political message in the form of the following image was removed from the page and replaced with a notice of violation by Facebook. When re-posted  the same thing happened again and Facebook suspended Mr. Ward’s account for 24 hours in punishment. This is a violation of the First Amendment, you know, the one that progressives love to invoke, but not allow it when others think differently. Facebook is the one who should be punished.

The image below is not anything than a short statement of truth; unlike that posted by the progressive pundits and bloggers depicting GW Bush as a Nazi, baby killer, warmonger, and destroying the Statue of Liberty – and, worse, part of a conspiracy that instigated the terrorist attack of 911.

During the Bush administration there was a myriad of anti-war demonstrators – but during the four years of Obama and company, none. Why?

War is war, no matter WHO is in office.

Why was impeachment in order for GW Bush for his actions in a war authorized by Congress called for - and no word of impeachment coming from the Congress?

It is because conservatives and constitutional patriots believe that Islamic fascism is a real and present danger – a threat to the United States, its people, and valued allies; at home and abroad. Like other places in the world, the Muslim Brotherhood obtains a foothold through subversionof a nation’s infrastructure through “peaceful” fronts and institutions. Progressives serve socialism; therefore, they must have a policy of appeasementand apologeticdiatribe. More questions ...

Why was the meeting with Turkey consul not at Tripoli, where the embassy is? 

Why did not the Turkish consul provide warning about the roadblocks by Afghan-dressed armed personnel in the nearby streets of the consulate?

As with the four-year record of this president - too many questions with no answers as well as no accountability

Do We the People want to live by mob rule and the whim of the corrupt media or the Rule of the Constitution? 

Fellow Americans who are undecided or Obama fans: If this does not get your attention and help you decide who to vote for on November 6^th national election – I have not a clue what would. 

Clean out Congress and the White House on November 6th.

American needs constitutional representatives and senators - not unconstitutional, compromising RINOs or Socialists; and a President (and Cabinet) of character, who abides by his/her oath of office. If we are to reform OUR government, we must first reform ourselves.

Read More

Obama File: Constitutional Violations and Scandals Continue

On behalf of ten ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement)employees, Kris Kobach, Kansas Secretary of State filed a lawsuit on their behalf against Janet Napolitano, Homeland Security Secretary and ICE Director, John Morton. The lawsuit was begun today and it is legal action against the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivalsplan that President Obama illegally created against laws legislated by Congress that the executive branch refuses to enforce. Indeed, the word Enforcement in ICE is a joke. It isn’t like this was the first president to ignore enforcement of immigration laws, the last four presidents didn’t fare any better – but they didn’t enact an executive order that superseded congressional legislation, a clear violation of the Constitution of the United States. Barack Hussein Obamashould be included in the lawsuit because he authorized the action.

The lawsuit filing consists of 22 pages that the executive administration violates federal law and forces ICE employees to break the law by not arresting certain illegal immigrants. According to Dallas News:

Kobach, who also advised Arizona lawmakers on the state’s controversial immigration bill, said he is representing the employees as a private lawyer and not in the capacity as a Kansas state official. He wrote in the lawsuit that ICE agents have been ordered not to arrest illegal immigrants who claim to be eligible for the administration’s new deportation policy. . . . In June, Napolitano and President Barack Obama said that some illegal immigrants could avoid deportation and be granted a work permit for up to two years. Under the program, immigrants have to prove that they arrived in the United States before they turned 16, have been in the country for at least five years, are 30 or younger, are in school or have graduated or have served in the military may be eligible. They cannot have a criminal record or otherwise be considered a threat to public safety or national security. . . . U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services started accepting applications for the program on Aug. 15. Immigrants have to pay a $465 paperwork fee for the program. DHS officials have not said how many people might be eligible under the program, though the Pew Hispanic Center and others have estimated that about 1.7 million people could be covered. An internal DHS document obtained by The Associated Press shows that the government estimated receiving about 1.04 million applications in the program's first year, with about 890,000 being immediately eligible. The document estimated that the program could cost between $467.7 million and $585.4 million. The department anticipated collecting about $484.2 million in fees.

With unemployment so severe, common sense would dictate that 1.04 million people who have circumvented the law should be deported and provide openings for out-of-work Americans. However, common sense in our government has died long ago.

Media outlets that reported the story are AP, Fox Nation, and Washington Times as of today. The Democrat-controlled media: NBC, CNN, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, and others have failed to report on the matter as of this article posting.

Debbie Schlussel wrote an exclusive on the story. Debbie also has added another federal lawsuit that had been unnoticed concerning Homeland Security employment discrimination against straight male agents by Napolitano. The federal complaint reads that Napolitano favored her lesbian girlfriend and also stated that Suzanne Barr, Chief of Staff of ICE, demanded that a male ICE Special Agent engage in oral sex with her and when refused their offices were relocated to the men’s bathroom at ICE headquarters. All those involved were hand-picked by Barack Obama to operate the Department of Homeland Security.

Blogs like Hotair, Examiner, Weasel Zippers, Sodaheadand others also published hours ago. The Tea Party Organization also wrote an article on the breaking story of the lawsuit.

This White House administration has undergone more lawsuits than any other has. BH Obama has violated several laws, including the articles of the Constitution, where in one he violated state rights in the Arizona lawsuit case that the Supreme Court took sides with the White House and federal authorities. During the entire term of his administration, he has violated constitutional laws and ethics, even jeopardized national security – but not ONE whisper of impeachment hearings to be conducted. It is partly because every time a viable complaint or violation is pointed out, the accusers are immediately denounced as racists. How convenient.

This president claimed in his campaign speeches that he was to “unite” America. Yet, he divides people by race and financial status – common within the political tools of the Democrat Party.

Smart Republicans have listened to and joined the Tea Party movement (those that are true conservative-constitutionalists) demanding extreme reformation policies be put in action within the federal government. The Democrat Party needs to be put into such a minority state of being that they will be forced to reform themselves – although it will take a long time before anyone trusts them. As far as myself, I do not trust Republicans who are part of the political establishment either.

Thomas Jeffersonand other prominent founders warned Americans that they must keep a close watch upon those elected – and a tight rein; otherwise, tyranny replaced by the American Revolution only replaces a different form of it. The Tea Party movement has set off a Second American Revolution – but this time it will be won by votes and the amount of Americans who are willing to stand by truth and principles instead of the garbage they are expected to believe.

The disgusting behavior by the People put in trust to operate our government is beyond words and makes me ill.

Read More

ObamaCare and UN Arms Trade Treaty

Beginning with the FDR administration's New Deal and increasing the population's need and misinterpretation as to what are entitlements during the LB Johnson administration's Great Society programs, too many Americans have become dependent upon the government being brainwashed into thinking government is better than private sector charity programs. 

If the people cannot trust their government to do the job for which it exists - to protect them and to promote their common welfare - all else is lost.
Barack Obama

 

As John Stossel wrote upon the subject:

I once thought there was too much poverty for private charity to make much of a difference. Now I realize that private charity would do much more—if government hadn’t crowded it out. In the 1920s—the last decade before the Roosevelt administration launched its campaign to federalize nearly everything—30 percent of American men belonged to mutual aid societies, groups of people with similar backgrounds who banded together to help members in trouble. They were especially common among minorities. Mutual aid societies paid for doctors, built orphanages, and cooked for the poor. Neighbors knew best what neighbors needed. They were better at making judgments about who needs a handout and who needed a kick in the rear. They helped the helpless, but administered tough love to the rest. They taught self-sufficiency. Mutual aid didn’t solve every problem, so government stepped in. But government didn’t solve every problem either. Instead, it caused more problems by driving private charity out. Today, there are fewer mutual-aid societies, because people say, ‘We already pay taxes for HUD, HHS. Let the professionals do it.’ Big Government tells both the poor and those who would help them, ‘Don’t try.’... When you rely on the government to help those who need it, you don’t practice benevolence yourself. You don’t take responsibility for deciding whom to help. Just as public assistance discourages the poor from becoming independent by rewarding them with fixed handouts, it discourages the rest of us from being benevolent. This may be the greatest irony of the welfare state: It not only encourages the poor to stay dependent, it kills individuals’ desire to help them.

And what Mary Katherine Ham wrote:

I don’t believe an individual’s commitment to helping the less fortunate can be measured by the amount of money one thinks the government should take from others. Having money taken from you does not make you charitable. Conversely, believing the government should leave people’s hard-earned money alone does not make one uncharitable. Rather, the charity is in the giving... I believe private charity could assuage most of the problems the government purports to solve with programs like Medicare, Medicaid, Head Start, and welfare. And it can conquer Katrina, too... Federal and local government programs, of course, is making huge efforts and progress as well. The military and police, needless to say, are always invaluable in search and rescue efforts. I don’t mean to diminish the good work those public servants have done and will continue to do saving and rebuilding lives. What I do say is that private charity allows the generosity and ingenuity of Americans to meet the unpredictability of life head on in a way a staid government program never could.

The United States Constitution has two references of welfare and it is worded as: the General Welfare(of the People), one being in the Preambleand the other in the Taxing and Spending Clause. ⁱ

The welfare state is not really about the welfare of the masses. It is about the egos of the elites.
Thomas Sowell

The US Supreme Court, in the past, has upheld that the clause in the Preamble to the US Constitution –

has never been regarded as the source of any substantive power conferred on the Government of the United States or on any of its Departments. ⁱⁱ

In the Taxing and Spending Clause, the Supreme Court determined that it –

adheres to the construction given it by Associate Justice Joseph Story in his 1833 Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States. ⁱⁱⁱ

Justice Story determined that the General Welfare Clause contained in the General Welfare Clause is not a grant of general legislative power, ^ivbut a qualification on the taxing power ^vwhich includes it a federal power to spend federal revenues on matters of general interest to the federal government. ^vi

The result is that those clauses in the US Constitution are not for the government to be required to provide welfare to some citizens at the expense of other citizens and is not considered grants of a general legislative power to the federal government.

Alexander Hamilton, our first Secretary of Treasury, patriot and Founder, coincided with Joseph Story's commentaries and elaborated the taxing and spending powers in his 1791 Report on Manufactures.

The tyranny of a prince in an oligarchy is not so dangerous to the public welfare as the apathy of a citizen in a democracy.
Charles de Montesquieu

Within the US government archives and disclosed by the US Government Printing Office, p. 161 of the Constitution of the United States of America – Analysis and Interpretation, p. 161:

The clause, in short, is not an independent grant of power, but a qualification of the taxing power.

This may be part of the source where Chief Justice Johnson used to make his decision not to decide that the so-called ObamaCare cannot be legislated because it is not in the power of the government according to the Constitution of the United States and declaring that the penalty provided in the clause of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act can only be constitutional if it is a tax. Or, in his decision, he was playing the “Devil's Advocate” and making way for the legislative branch to do its duty and repeal that unconstitutional legislation. But that is not the purpose or required task of a Supreme Court Justice – the nine justices are chosen (or should be chosen by proper appointment) on the basis that they protect the integrity of the articles and amendments of the Constitution and interpretit only to clarify judgment in individual cases brought before them for their decision. Instead, like the two other branches of government, the Supreme Court has become a legislative entity operating from the judicial bench instead of their sworn oath purpose; using foreign laws in their decisions as well as public opinion or current political philosophies.

The argument whether the penalty clause in the ObamaCare legislation is a tax is moot because the legislation in itself is unconstitutional and outside the prescribed limitations of the federal government within the law of the land – the Constitution of the United States and its amendments. American citizens are as much to blame as those operating OUR government on OUR behalf, for they have come to believe that entitlements established unlawfully are their right. Therefore, we must endeavor to encourage that all Americans know THEIR Constitution and its amendments in order to help safeguard its integrity and its implementation. The US Constitution, for the most part, is written in understandable language and does not require a law degree or a BA in political science to understand its articles and amendments. Therefore, it is every American citizen's duty to self educate themselves in knowing their Constitution in order to ensure that it is being adhered to by the elected officials in government, both state and federal, for the maintenance and preservation of the republic as a free nation For the People and By the People.

[See Also: Constitution vs. Modern Welfare Stateby Larry Elders, published by WND.

UN ARMS TREATY

Recently, another important issue has come to the forefront of discussion: the United Nations Arms Treatythat is to be decided during the month of July with a vote on July 27^thfor national leaders of nation members to sign. In the United States, that treaty, as in all treaties, must be ratified by the Senate of the US Congress.

Before I begin my reasons of protest concerning this treaty, I would like to denounce chain email misinformation that has made the Internet circuit passed on by people who do not look for reputable sources before forwarding.

First, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, while advocating US involvement in this treaty and agreeing with President BH Obama, has not signed the United Nations Small Arms Treaty.

Second, despite questionable actions of President BH Obama in circumventing constitutional procedures, no treaty can bypass the normal legislative process of Congress because it must be approved by a two-thirds vote of the US Senate before they are considered to be binding.

Thirdly, while it is feared that this treaty, if signed by the President of the United States and ratified by the US Senate will be a prelude to mass gun control violating the right to keep and bear armsguaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, and in the 1957 US Supreme Court case of Reid v. Covertdeclaring that the US Constitution supersedes international treaties ratified by the US Senate.

And finally, there is email stating that Australia passed gun control that gathered up personal firearms and destroyed them with outrageous statistical figures that do not correspond to factual statistics. See Snopes on that subject.

Amnesty International, Oxfam, and International Action Network on Small Arms (leader of the Control Arms Campaign) advocating this treaty provided the effects of what the Arms Trade Treaty would interpret as:

• be used in serious violation of international human rights or humanitarian law, or acts of genocide or crimes against humanity;
• facilitate terrorist attacks, a pattern of gender based violence, violent crime or organized crime;
• violate UN Charter obligations, including UN arms embargoes;
• be diverted from its stated recipient;
• adversely affect regional security; or
• seriously impair poverty reduction or socioeconomic development.

Loopholes, according to this plan would be minimized because it would include:

• all weapons – including all military, security and police arms, related equipment and ammunition, components, expertise, and production equipment;
• all types of transfer – including import, export, re-export, temporary transfer and transhipment, in the state sanctioned and commercial trade, plus transfers of technology, loans, gifts and aid; and
• all transactions – including those by dealers and brokers, and those providing technical assistance, training, transport, storage, finance and security.

The treaty must be fully clear in its implementation, but considering the United Nations history, their effectiveness in enforcement and abuse of the treaty remains questionable. Indeed, there has been corruption and violation within the United Nations non-elected members where even they violated their own embargo and/or sanction mandates – as against Saddam Hussein in the Oil for Food Programmescandal.

The most damning element against this UN treaty and the United Nations itself is that nations that are guilty of human rights and violations of sanctions for weapons proliferation are part of this endeavor to control guns worldwide. So it is no wonder that the American people and people who believe in freedom and the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self defense and legal hunting are concerned that this is just a facade for the long-term goals of the United Nation member body. Indeed, being an international body in order to solve differences between nations and punish rogue nations who violate world peace and human rights, its original purpose, have nation members who are tyrants and against all the principles of freedom and human dignity as part of their legislative body.

The United Nations headquarters should be removed from US soil and notice be given to vacate within a prescribed period of time – and the US government, its legislative body and executive administration should seriously consider dissolving our involvement with that corrupt entity, especially in the form of funding. In an economic crisis this would be one of the prudent things to do in order to get a handle on the national debt, as well as standing up for principles that the United Nation non-elected members do not either understand or wish to comply.

It is clear why We the People of the United States and free-thinking people of other nations are concerned about this proposed international treaty when it comes to firearm/weapon control. Our Founders knew full well what happens when a government implements gun control that eventually leads to confiscation – every statistic points to the uselessness of such a political ideology; and indeed points to the ulterior motives behind gun control and outright banning of means of self defense from the citizens of any nation.

Crimes against humanity are not deterred or stopped because of gun control and/or confiscation by government authorities.

History provides clear results:

• 1911 – Turkey (Ottoman Empire) established gun control and from 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians were exterminated.
• 1929 – Soviet Union established gun control and from 1929 to 1953 approximately 20 million dissidents or anyone considered dangerous to the government were unable to defend themselves and were exterminated and/or sent to Siberian work camps.
• 1935 – The Nazi regime of Germany established gun control and 13 million Jews and other ethnic and political people were exterminated.
• 1935 – China established gun control at the same time Nazi Germany did and the Chinese people were unable to defend themselves from tyranny at home and invasion by Japanese. From 1948 to 1952, when Communism was implemented, people were sent to political reeducation-work camps and/or exterminated.
• 1956 – In Cambodia, gun control was established and from 1975 to 1977 one million “educated” people were exterminated.
• 1964 – Guatemala established gun control and from 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan natives were exterminated.
• 1970 – Uganda established gun control and from 1971 to 1979, 30,000 Christians could not defend themselves and were exterminated.
• Today – North Korea has gun control in effect for some time, and now has the largest concentration camp in the history of the world, surpassing the size and scope of the Nazi death camps. I could not find sufficient data to reveal how many have died from the tyranny of North Korea's regime over the decades.

A government that insists that citizens not have the right to keep and use firearms for self defense against foreign and domestic enemies cannot be trusted. If the Second Amendment is dissolved, so then, in turn, will the other amendments of the Bill of Rights dissolve, one by one.

Our government was established by wise and visionary men who not only established a Constitution to limit the power of government and prescribe what its powers are, but included amendments that is called the Bill of Rightsthat is written to ensure that all citizens have certain rights and liberties, especially the basics of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

In conclusion, I fully understand the desire and need to keep firearms out of reach, or less likely to obtain, by organized crime elements and criminals in general; however, gun control laws in American history has shown that harassing and violating rights of lawful citizens only creates the scenario where only criminals (and police/military) have firearms – and the police and military cannot be everywhere at one time. Self defense measures require quick consideration and action, long before any law enforcement agents can arrive on the scene. Most police reports are made of crimes after the violent act has been committed instead of writing a report of a citizen defending his/her property, life, and the safety of family and fellow citizens. It is long past due for the time for mainstream media to include with reports of crimes using firearms mixed with reports of citizens saving lives and defending themselves using a firearm.

It is the main problem with media bias and manipulation we have today, along with its manipulation of political news that results in misinformed voters.

It would be an hypocrisy of our government to sign a treaty that is against our principles of government and the articles and amendments of the United States Constitution.

ENDNOTES

i The Constitution of the United States of America—Analysis and Interpretation

ii Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11

iii United States v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1

iv Story, Commentaries, §919. "A power to lay taxes for any purposes whatsoever is a general power; a power to lay taxes for certain specified purposes is a limited power. A power to lay taxes for the common defense and general welfare of the United States is not in common sense a general power. It is limited to those objects. It cannot constitutionally transcend them."

v Story, Commentaries, §919–24

vi Story, Commentaries, §972–75

Read More

Wisconsin Recall: America is Watching

It must be known to readers by now the request for recall of Governor Scott Walker, Wisconsin has passed the required votes and a recall election is scheduled for June 5^th, 2012. The recall is based upon the views and complaints of union members that work for the Wisconsin state government, to include the teachers' union. It is the public employee and teachers' union that has been instrumental in escalating the matter this far, and is now under national scrutiny, because, if Governor Walker IS recalled, it will show the strength and force that unions have over labor in the private sector as well as the government employment sector. This boils down to the constitutionality of government employees being allowed to have private sector-controlled union entities that meld special interest into the mechanics of government operation and drain the treasuries of government paid for By the People.

As Peter Ferrara wrote at TownHall:

Our Founding Fathers carefully eliminated in American law every special legal privilege of the old aristocracies of Europe. They strongly favored instead equality under the law, later enshrined in the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause, which means not equality of result, but that everyone plays by the same rules. A recall election for Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is scheduled for June 5. But on the ballot that day will effectively be whether we should establish in law after all these years a new aristocracy in America, not subject to the democratic will of the people like everyone else, with special legal privileges, including the right to plunder the taxpayers with virtual impunity. That new aristocracy is state and local government public employee unions. Nationwide, these public employee unions plunder taxpayers for pay for state and local government workers that is on average 45% more than the taxpayers paying those salaries make in the private sector. The bill to taxpayers for each of these workers includes an average hourly wage of $26.25, plus another $13.56 in hourly costs for benefits, for total hourly costs of $39.81, or $80,000 per year on average. …the Manhattan Institute's E.J. McMahon reports that for public school teachers in Milwaukee, the annual cost of family health coverage is $26,844, for which the teachers were paying nothing. State and local government workers today are not exploited in sweat shop conditions for poverty wages as the workers in union lore of old. Today it is taxpayers who are the ones being exploited. Governor Walker offended the public employee union gods now seeking his recall with his state budget reforms enacted early last year. … Walker, based on his experience serving as County Executive for Milwaukee County for 8 years, and in the state legislature for 8 years before that, focused on cutting the growth in state and local government spending instead. That spending restraint included requiring state and local government workers to contribute to their own benefits more like private sector workers. After all the yelling and screaming in Wisconsin, in the end these workers were only required to contribute 5.8% of their salaries towards their pensions, matched by their government employers (taxpayers), and 12.6% of the costs of their health insurance, with the other 87% paid by taxpayers. This compares to private sector workers paying on average 21% of the cost of their company health insurance, with most private sector workers having no pension. The budget reforms also limited collective bargaining to negotiations over salary, but not over benefits or working conditions and rules. This gave counties, cities, and school boards the flexibility to make management changes to reduce costs, without laying off workers and reducing services to the public, and to increase efficiency in serving the public.

The key point in this excellent analysis by Mr. Ferrara is that, as I have advocated all along, that government employees are not the elite of society that they should receive far higher wages than the average compared career field (and that especially includes federal government) and receive benefits without paying a portion of it – like the private sector. This IS Big Government, and that is what constitutional Americans and those advocating the “Tea Party” movement is all about. Therefore, this is not just a crisis that concerns the state of Wisconsin, but instead it is a preview of what could happen all across America – the further strengthening of unions who have infiltrated and taken control of public employment at the expense of taxpayers.

Governor Walker is only implementing what he said he would do when he campaigned for the governorship. Now that it affects those that have sucked up taxpayer funding and kept an attitude of “better than the private sector” – they are not happy, and neither is the power-grabbing unions.

We have seen what unions can do with the right politicians working for them – look at the auto industry bailout and the literal takeover of General Motors by the federal government and United Autoworkers Union. As for results of what Governor Walker has accomplished:

Walker's collective bargaining reforms have added up to over $1 billion in documented savings for state and local governments in Wisconsin in the first year alone. That enabled the entire state deficit to be eliminated without yet another tax increase, and without layoffs of teachers and other government workers, except in three school districts that have continued to resist implementing the reforms. The reforms have also resulted in the smallest property tax increase in 15 years, and the first decline in local school tax assessments in 6 years. In short, Walker's reforms are working. The right of collective bargaining for private sector workers is not at issue in Wisconsin, though President Obama and the Democrats want to confuse the public on precisely that question. Under current law, there are plenty of market and legal checks on private sector unions to keep them from abusing the public. The ultimate limit if they push too far is that their company will be driven out of business. Though that does happen sometimes, that is only when management fails to do its job in resisting excessive union demands. Otherwise, within current market and legal checks, private sector unions actually perform a helpful market function in ensuring that employers keep up with market wages and working conditions as expeditiously as possible. Not so for government unions, which are two words that together spell oppression. Federal, state or even local governments cannot be driven out of business. They gain their revenue forcibly through taxes. As a result, there is no market limit to how much such unions can pirate from the public. … Government employees work for democratically elected officials representing the will of the people, not greedy miscreants exploiting them for personal profit. This is another reason why there is no legitimate role for government unions, and there should be no collective bargaining rights for government bureaucrats. The democratically elected Congress or state legislature cannot sit down and bargain with government employee unions as equals. Government employees are subject to the democratically expressed will of the people like everyone else. They are not and should not be treated like aristocrats with special legal privileges, exempt from democratic governance. If government workers feel their pay and working conditions are inadequate or oppressive, they can join the democratic process to elect new representatives like everyone else. Private sector workers, by contrast, cannot elect new employers.

Such fundamental, unworkable problems with government unions used to be commonly understood, which is why even an ultimate liberal like Franklin Roosevelt would not recognize such unions. And that is why strikes by government workers have been commonly prohibited in American history as well. … These are the reasons that federal employees have no legally recognized collective bargaining rights at all. Governor Walker's reforms would still provide for more collective bargaining for Wisconsin government workers than allowed those so badly oppressed federal workers, whose wages are set by an act of Congress rather than by collective bargaining. … The June 5 Walker recall vote in Wisconsin represents a critical turning point for the entire nation. If the public employee unions prevail in recalling Walker because he dared to challenge their legal privileges and political power, these unions will be entrenched nationwide as the new American aristocracy, which the common serfs are doomed to serve and pay. … Walker faces the might of the national public employee union machine, as well as the national Obama political machine, which sees the public employee unions as the core of its political base. If the American Dream is to remain available to working people, and not just bureaucrat aristocrats, then Scott Walker must survive the recall, and his reforms must remain intact. That means patriots across America must respond to this Paul Revere moment with maximum possible support for the Walker campaign, which can be found on the Internet. Or what was won at Lexington and Concord 237 years ago will be lost in Madison this year.

For Wisconsin voters: This is an important time to show up at the voting polls and decide whether you want unions to control government or We the People. That is the gist of this argument that escalated into a recall election that will cost taxpayer funding as well as their future prosperity. Those selfish government employees and their parasitic unions need to realize and be thankful they have jobs while those in the private sector are beating the streets and checking their newspapers for a chance to be employed. When one looks at the average wage of compared positions within those government jobs, you wonder what the devil they are complaining about. Mr. Ferrara is correct – a new aristocracy has shown its ugly head, and wasn't that part of the reason why we rebelled against a government across the seas in the 18^thcentury?
FDR, Democrat demagogue counterpart to Republican Ronald Reagan, supported unions, but knew full well that unions did not belong in government. Unions have slowly infiltrated its power into government thanks to naive or corrupt politicians.

Vote to keep Scott Walker as governor. He shouldn't be recalled for doing what was expected, correcting the plunder of the state government of Wisconsin by the previous governor and his sociocrat buddies in the state legislature. Where was a cry for recall when Governor Jim Doyle raised taxes each time he started a term, after saying he wouldn't, and in the first month of his second tenure, passed the highest tax increase in the history of Wisconsin - $1 billion. The state fees were raised 38% during a time when Wisconsinites, like other Americans, were trying to make ends meet with an economy pushing towards a national/global depression.

Vote on June 5^thto retain Governor Scott Walker to continue his policy of reducing Big Government and the cost of keeping it.

By the way, Milwaukee is the 4^thpoorest city in America.

Isn't it time to fix that?

Letting unions and the government employee elite having their way will not change that reality. They say they are for the "little guy" but in reality they use the them for their own agenda.

The nation is watching what we do on June 5^th– give in to the unions and selfish public employees or not; and it is significant in the sense that it will be a precedence of future elected officials who actually work at reducing government spending and making life better for We the People.

Wisconsin voters have the right to ask for a recall, assuming it is justified – it is a good process; however, those trying to recall Governor Walker are just the union's and progressive's “useful idiots”. It is the same reason why there is not enough Americans yelling about the income tax system – there are too many not paying their fair share of taxes, relying upon others to foot the bill. And the tax rate can be reduced, thereby improving economy, if those in government wouldn't spend the people's money like drunken sailors. Politicians know that by making Americans dependent upon their programs, they have control. Too many want to keep that control. This is, in effect, what is happening in Wisconsin and the recall movement.
Unions have outlived its usefulness, and indeed has become a parasite that is devouring individual freedom of choice as well as its parasitic operations that has led to economic ruin. There isn't a week that goes by that some union official isn't caught performing unlawful acts. It is and has been a corrupt mechanism that once aided workers into a working life of better conditions and who was originated by socialist and communist organizations and then taken over by elements of the crime syndicate who found a legal means to racketeer and plunder the American economy. In reality, public employees have wages and benefits that those in the private sector would be pleased to have, yet the public employees are always asking for more utilizing the union tactics of what is called collective bargaining. Indeed, the word "collective" versus "individual" is the key word that identifies its socialist/communist origins. It began as a means for the common folk to bargain with the aristocracy and today that bargaining chip has become the aristocracy that the original union concept fought against. A worker has no choice in matters of strikes or even belonging to the union itself through peer pressure and plain, ugly union thug tactics. This must stop in the private sector and unions should not be allowed in the government employee sector, with their wages and benefits directed by the Congress of the United States whose constitutional powers are granted in the Constitution of the United States. Just as the Federal Reserve System should be removed from its seat in power, so must go the unions that feed off taxpayer funding.
The horror to think that government employees must pay into their own health care programs! It is high time that they face reality with the rest of the population. Teachers are an important aspect of a civilized nation -- important in its growth and education of youth that will be future leaders, inventors, et cetera; however, they are well compensated in earnings, the basic average of entry level being $40,000 for nine months of work, not twelve; as well as receiving benefits that other citizens would relish. It is because of unions that education (one reason) has been increasingly unaffordable; as well as not getting the quality education expected of that much funding paid by We the People. 
In another article, I am going to address the long-needed reformation of the American educational system, where reform means that the American people get what they pay for and what they put into the system and at the same time acknowledging the importance of productive teachers that are mentors, that create good students who make productive and educated citizens.
It is important to note: Governor Walker stood by principles of lowering cost of Wisconsin government WITHOUT raising taxes or lay-off of government employees. Those complaining are doing so because they now have to pay into their health care and retirement system like other people do in the private sector -- all instigated by the powerful and corrupt unions. 
Unions have bankrupted industry in Wisconsin (and other states), ruined educational system across America, where the student isn't the priority any longer, and corrupted the political system by funneling vast amount of funding to secure political control. 
Stand up and be counted -- vote to keep Governor Walker on June 5th.

Milwaukee (4^thPoorest City in America) – Journal Sentinel complains about unemployment, created long before Walker took office: Wisconsin Missing Out on U.S. Jobs Gains (forgetting that it is easier to prevent a crisis than fixing it, which the latter takes longer.)

Vote against Big Government – choose Scott Walker on June 5^th. (Did you know that CEOs of unions against Walker make twice (or more) as much as the Governor of Wisconsin is paid?)

FURTHER READING and SOURCES

Scott Walker on the Issues

Wisconsin Improves Under Governor Walker

Governor Christie Supports Governor Walker

Governor Walker Takes Lead in Recall Election Poll

Unions Against Governor Walker

Polls Favor Governor Walker Recall (April 3^rd) – prove them wrong, Wisconsinites.

Union Leaders Against Governor Scott Walker

Union Operatives' Salaries Raise Eyebrows in Capitol

How Liberals Distort the English Language to Deceive and Manipulate

Sixty-Million Dollar Union Assault on Wisconsin Governor Walker

Republican Faithful Gear Up to Defend Walker

Wisconsin's New Aristocracy Is on the Ballot

Poll: Wisconsin Voters Now Oppose Walker Recall By 11-Point Margin

How Wisconsin's Recall Election Works

Wisconsin Recall is High-Stakes Bet for Unions (like the Obama takeover-bailout of GM and financial institutions)

The Right to Recall and, in Wisconsin, the Wrong (Viewing the progress of the recall petition – I and others believe the Left cheated, just as they do in elections.)

GOP Foolishly Ignores Recall Battle in Wisconsin (an example of how the GOP establishment is out of touch with reality – look at their poster boy to run against Obama in Election 2012 as an example). Did you ever notice that “liberal” progressives never protest peacefully? Look at the Tea Party rallies and compare.

Read More