[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOpf1fyFyDA[/youtube]
Palin:
Things like that, that people hear and see and realize how out of touch the Mainstream media is...
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZIfymzTJZA[/youtube]
Sarah Palin & Ted Cruz Talk DC Scandals on Fox and Friends - 6-17-13 
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpX2FbMjo0M[/youtube]
Sarah Palin guest hosted the third hour on Fox and Friends this morning but it began with an interview with Palin who talked DC scandals, Edward Snowden, and her new book about Christmas.
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdLxfgLsxHE[/youtube]
Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin criticized the Obama administration’s decision to supply weapons to the rebels in the civil war in Syria today, arguing that the U.S. should “Let Allah sort it out” until there is a stronger leader in the White House.
“Militarily, where is our commander in chief? We’re talking now more new interventions. I say until we know what we’re doing, until we have a commander and chief who knows what he’s doing, well, let these radical Islamic countries who aren’t even respecting basic human rights, where both sides are slaughtering each other as they scream over an arbitrary red line, ‘Allah Akbar,’ I say until we have someone who knows what they’re doing, I say let Allah sort it out,” Palin said at the Faith and Freedom Coalition Conference.
Earlier this week, the White House announced it confirmed that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime has used chemical weapons in the fight against its own people, and the Obama administration will provide more “direct support” to the Syrian opposition since the president’s “red line” has been crossed.
The White House said today that Obama discussed the civil war in Syria with European leaders in a teleconference Friday, and the issue is expected to dominate much of the conversation at the G-8 Summit in Northern Ireland next week.
Palin, speaking at the conclusion of the three-day Faith and Freedom Coalition Conference, also took a swipe at another speaker at the conservative forum, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who argued Friday that one of the reasons to support the Senate’s immigration reform plan is because “Immigrants are more fertile.”
“I think it’s kind of dangerous territory, territory to want to debate this whole one race’s fertility rate over another, and I say this from someone who’s kind of fertile herself,” Palin said. “I don’t think that’s where we want to go in deciding how will we incentivize the hardworking responsible families who want to live in the light, follow the law, become Americans, versus those whose very first act on our soil is to break the law? There are different ways that we can debate this.”
As she warned the conservative crowd of “tyranny” in government, Palin said that the recent scandals involving the Internal Revenue Service and the National Security Agency make the country feel “so Orwellian around here, you know, ’1984.’”
Calling Washington, D.C. “one hot mess,” Palin also doled out some advice to Congress, who she said should follow the lead of a young senator whom she backed in his 2012 race — Texas. Sen. Ted Cruz.
“You know what I wish Congress would do? If they would just for one week perhaps, put themselves on Cruz control, on Ted Cruz control,” Palin said. “Just for a week and let’s see where things go.  I think we’d see some solutions.”
Though she has often served as the butt of jokes on NBC’s “Saturday Night Live,” Palin joked about the frequency with which the comedy show makes fun of her, saying she’s provided an ample amount of jokes and jobs for comedians.
“They should think of me as a friend.  For a while there, I was providing more job security for the Tina Feys of the world and doing more for those employment numbers than Obama’s ever done,” Palin said.
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9VxeGaa6XA[/youtube]
Rep. Kristi Noem speaks about sexual assault in the military during a recent radio interview.
2
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTmqidHJyLo[/youtube]
U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) today addressed the Senate floor to bring attention to the upcoming elections in Iran. He expressed concerns of the ongoing suppression of the Iranian people by its government and Iran’s efforts to expand its influence in the region, particularly through its pursuit of nuclear capabilities.

“On Friday, the people of Iran head to the polls to make a false choice. They will be forced to select not the candidate of their choice, but from those chosen for them by the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who are guaranteed to continue the Supreme Leader’s policies of political and religious oppression and pursuit of nuclear capability at all costs,” Sen. Cruz said.

“Twenty-six years ago this week, President Ronald Reagan stood in front of the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin and challenged the Soviet leader Mikael Gorbachev to tear down the wall that divided the eastern and western halves of the city. 

Today, I ask all Americans to join me in urging the regime in Iran to tear down the walls of political and religious persecution, to relieve the pain of unnecessary economic hardship, and to renounce the isolation caused by Tehran’s aggressive and belligerent policies.”

Sen. Cruz also reiterated his call for the release of the Iranian American pastor Saeed Abedini who is serving an eight-year sentence in Iran’s brutal Evin prison for professing his faith. Earlier this year, Sen. Cruz sent a letter to Secretary Clinton advocating for Pastor Abedini’s release and to Secretary Kerry thanking him for his statement supporting the pastor.
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oH0Y8CgVdOA[/youtube]
Ted Cruz:
This debate is about one simple thing. If we're going to raise the debt ceiling, it should require 60 votes, not a simple partisan majority, so that we have a conversation about fixing the deep fiscal and economic challenges in this country.
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5-Q5fSbofQ[/youtube]
My one minute speech today on the Floor of the House. 
Don't yield an inch! 
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvBlcKGnTRY[/youtube]

arlier today, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) spoke on the Senate floor against the Motion to Proceed to immigration reform. He argued for major fixes to the proposal that would make it passable by both houses of Congress. As it stands, the bill will not pass the House, Cruz declared, and that's unfortunate because like most people, he would like to see "commonsense immigration reform." Unfortunately, all of the amendments he introduced to improve the bill were struck down by Democrats.


“I very much want commonsense immigration reform to pass,” Cruz said in his remarks. “As written, this bill will not pass into law. And if this bill did become law, it would not solve the problem. Indeed, it would make the problem of illegal immigration that we have today worse rather than better.”

“If you likewise want to see commonsense immigration reform pass, then you have reason to be both optimistic and pessimistic. You have reason for optimism because there is widespread bipartisan agreement on many, many aspects of immigration. Outside of Washington, DC, there is widespread bipartisan agreement that, number one, our current immigration system is broken. It is not working. Number two, that we have to get serious about securing the borders, about doing everything we can to stop illegal immigration, that in a post-9/11 world it doesn't make any sense that we don't know who is coming into this country, we don't know their history, we don't know their background. And number three, that we need to improve and streamline legal immigration, that we need to remain a nation that doesn't just welcome but that celebrates legal immigration. On those basic principles, there is widespread bipartisan agreement, and if this body were to focus on those areas of bipartisan agreement, that's how we would get an immigration bill passed into law.

“The reason, Mr. President, however, for pessimism is that to date the conduct of the White House and the Senate Democrats who have been driving this process suggests that they are more interested in finding a partisan issue to campaign on in 2014 and 2016 than they are in actually passing a bill to fix our broken immigration system.

“The only thing that can change that is if the American people speak up. The only thing that can change that is if the stakeholders make clear to the Obama White House, to the Senate Democrats failure is not an option, that if this fails because as a political matter you insisted on a path to citizenship and threw everything else overboard, that failure would be unacceptable. I very much hope we work together in a bipartisan manner to fix this problem in a way that secures the border, in a way that respects rule of law and in a way that improves legal immigration so we remain a nation that welcomes and celebrates legal immigrants.”
3
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06wJ50p6rMs[/youtube]
In the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee today, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) today questioned ATF nominee Todd Jones on the low number of DOJ prosecutions of felons and fugitives who try to illegally buy guns.
The nominee acknowledged he had prosecuted zero such cases.
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9FrGUh_9Xs[/youtube]
Rand Paul:
My appearance on Sean Hannity last night. When it comes to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, Senator Obama in 2007 sounds much different than President Obama today.
1
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxrx68Erbak[/youtube]
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) appears in a new television advertisement designed to promote the immigration amnesty bill currently being debated in Congress. The minute-long advertisement calls the proposal "conservative immigration reform" and attempts to make amnesty appealing to Republican voters. Partisan politics aside, the amnesty ad is misleading on a number of counts, outlined below.
The ad was produced by Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg who created the floundering FWD.us, an advocacy group aimed at promoting amnesty. One of the group's offshoots is something called "Americans for a Conservative Direction", which is cited at the end of the ad. Here is the transcript:
RUBIO: Anyone who thinks what we have now in immigration is not a problem is fooling themselves. What we have in place today is de facto amnesty.
ANNOUNCER: Conservative leaders have a plan, the toughest immigration enforcement measures in the history of the United States.
RUBIO: They have to pass the background check, they have to be able to pay a registration fee, they have to pay a fine.
ANNOUNCER: Border security on steroids. Tough border triggers have no giveaways for law breakers.
RUBIO: "No federal benefits, no food stamps, no welfare, no Obamacare, they have to prove that they're gainfully employed.
ANNOUNCER: Bold, very conservative, a tough line on immigration.
RUBIO: It puts in place the toughest enforcement measures in the history of the United States, potentially in the world and it once and for all deals with the issue of those that are here illegally but does so in a way that's fair and compassionate but does not encourage people to come illegally in the future and isn't unfair to the people that have done it the right way.
ANNOUNCER: Stand with Marco Rubio to end de facto amnesty, support Conservative Immigration Reform.
Every claim made in the ad is deceptive, and each claim is addressed below.
RUBIO: "Anyone who thinks what we have now in immigration is not a problem is fooling themselves. What we have in place today is de facto amnesty."
Very few Americans believe that we don't have a serious problem with illegal immigration. It is true that this country is experiencing a de facto amnesty for illegal aliens, and it is largely the result of the Obama administration refusing to enforce immigration laws on the books. The problem is that Rubio wants to turn this "de facto" amnesty into a formal amnesty, and grant millions of law-breakers work permits, driver's licenses, Social Security accounts, travel documents, and an unknown number of additional state-level benefits. Rubio is trying to help President Obama fulfill his campaign goal of keeping all illegal aliens in the country and giving them benefits reserved for legal residents. If Rubio was actually troubled by the de facto amnesty being advanced by the Obama administration, Rubio would side with the ICE officials who are suing the Obama administration over the president's effort to prevent them from doing their jobs. Top-ranking ICE official Chris Crane explained the lawsuit to Fox News, here. Mr. Crane's recent congressional testimony, available here, raises many troubling issues. ICE's additional concern is that the amnesty bill would make permanent their inability to enforce the law by giving DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano "virtually unlimited discretion" to waive all enforcement of immigration law. If an amnesty is passed, the Obama administration will likely continue to undermine any immigration enforcement provisions in the bill.
ANNOUNCER: "Conservative leaders have a plan, the toughest immigration enforcement measures in the history of the United States."
The so-called "Gang of Eight" senators who wrote the bill aren't all "conservative leaders", unless you consider Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), and Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) to fit that description. True, the gang also includes Republican senators, but it is up for debate whether one considers Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.), Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), and Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) to be conservative on immigration. Their immigration report card grades, from the pro-enforcement group NumbersUSA, are troubling: Graham has a "C", McCain a "D", and a Flake "C". This is in contrast to Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, who has an "A+" from NumbersUSA.
The voiceover in the ad also cites a newspaper article for the "toughest enforcement measures in the history of the United States" language. This commercial carefully avoided some of the language in the article's full sentence, particularly the part noting that this bill would allow previously deported illegal aliens to return to the country. The article's full sentence reads:
The controversial proposal would grant most of the 11 million people here illegally a path to citizenship and give thousands of deported individuals a chance to return, but would also adopt some of the toughest immigration enforcement measures in the history of the United States.
No immigration bill in the history of the United States has ever permitted previously deported illegal aliens to return to the United States to receive citizenship, so it is difficult to see how this news organization concluded that the bill is the "toughest" our country has ever seen. Of course, the article is really claiming that the bill would "adopt some" tough enforcement measures, not that the bill itself is tough.
On closer inspection, many of these measures (noted below) are not as tough as they seem to be.
RUBIO: "They have to pass the background check, they have to be able to pay a registration fee, they have to pay a fine."
Within six months of the bill's passage, illegal immigrants would become immediately eligible for legal status, and many of the hoops that illegal immigrants would have to jump through to get such status do not amount to much. It is likely that any illegal immigrants who simply claim to be eligible will be able to avoid deportation, even if they're already in detention. This is exactly what is already happening under President Obama's deferred action program. ICE agents are being instructed to release any illegal aliens who claim to be eligible, even if they haven't filled out an application form. The same situation will unfold under the large-scale amnesty bill. ICE will be virtually handcuffed and will not be able to carry out most enforcement.
To acquire the primary legal status offered under this bill, illegal immigrants would have to undergo a simple background check. But the bill would still grant legal status to illegal immigrants with a significant amount of criminality on their rap sheet. For example, crimes like ID theft and vandalism are not considered serious enough to deny a person status, despite the fact that such crimes create real victims. Specifically, two misdemeanors will not result in legal status being denied and under the bill multiple misdemeanors could be counted as "one" misdemeanor, provided they occur on the same day. Additionally, any problematic history an illegal immigrant has in his home country is unlikely to be uncovered; in a sense, our public safety would depend on the bookkeeping of police departments in the alien's homeland, and there are many things that Americans consider criminal that are not criminal overseas.
Finally, the government's capacity to conduct background checks on millions of illegal immigrants is questionable. ICE Union head Chris Crane explained in a video interview with the Daily Caller that there is "no such thing as a background check on a foreign national." The 1986 amnesty also had background checks, but hundreds of thousands of fraudulent applicants were rubber-stamped. The amnesty granted legal status to someone who used his new status to freely travel to the Middle East to pick up terrorist training and helped lead the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Had we enforced our immigration laws, he would have been removed from the country and the attack might never have occurred.
The recent Boston Marathon bombing should also illustrate the government's inability to carefully vet backgrounds. The FBI interviewed at least one of the terrorists, his family members, and his neighbors, in addition to analyzing his Internet usage. They apparently found nothing that would have raised a red flag. Despite the fact that DHS estimates there are many problematic foreign-born people living in the United States, the millions of illegal aliens applying for the amnesty will not have nearly as vigorous of a background check as the Boston bombers had, suggesting that some bad people will receive legal status through the bill. As written, the bill would allow known gang members to become U.S. citizens if they simply "renounce" their gang affiliation.
Rubio also claims that illegal aliens applying for the amnesty would have to pay a fee, but there are waivers and no specificity. The bill simply notes that illegal aliens aged 16 and older who want legal status will have to pay a fee "in an amount determined by [DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano]". While it is unclear how much the fee would be, the bill says it should be enough to cover processing the applications. (See here for David North's estimate of the size of the fee needed to process applicants properly.) But in the next section, the bill gives Napolitano the power to limit the fee and to exempt "classes of individuals" altogether. With such broad authority granted by Congress, it is unclear whether this fee would apply to most amnesty applicants.
It should also be noted that USCIS already offers waivers for those who cannot afford certain fees — in fact, the Obama administration created a form for such waivers in 2010 — and similar waivers may apply to any future amnesty. To obtain a fee waiver for some existing immigration benefits, an applicant simply must show that they are currently using a welfare program. Currently, 71 percent of illegal alien households with children make use of at least one form of welfare.
Rubio also claims that amnesty applicants would have to pay a fine. A fine is different from a fee and, by definition, a fine is meant to be a punishment for breaking a law. The bill puts the fine at $500 for the initial legal status — not much of a punishment considering the laws that have been broken. This initial status turns the illegal aliens into legal residents and grants them work permits, driver's licenses, Social Security accounts, and many other benefits. Applicants would have to pay another $500 over the next six years. If a person wants to upgrade from this provisional status to full green card status (and eventual U.S. citizenship), they would have to pay another $1,000 many years down the road. But there are many exceptions. For example, people of any age who claim to have entered before age 16 and have a high school degree or GED would not have to pay either of the $500 fines, nor would they have to pay the $1,000 fine for green card status. Also, all people under 21 years of age, regardless of when they entered and whether they have a high school degree, would be exempted from both of the $500 fines.
Furthermore, it is likely that some pro-amnesty groups will assist applicants in paying the fines — some of which will be using taxpayer-provided funds to do so. The bill would actually grant groups like La Raza $150 million of taxpayer dollars to help illegal aliens apply for the amnesty, and the bill grants them a lot of discretion to decide how to spend the money. In reality, the fine may not be much of a punishment at all — particularly if American taxpayers are the ones footing the bill.
Absent from Rubio's list is the requirement that illegal aliens pay back taxes. The reason he is no longer citing it is because that provision never made it into the bill. For months Rubio and other amnesty advocates sold the bill on the notion of requiring illegal aliens to pay back taxes for the years they have worked off the books. But it was simply part of an attempt to mislead the public into thinking this bill is tougher than it really is. Only "assessed" taxes have to be paid, and if the IRS doesn't audit illegal immigrants working off the books — which is won't — then there will be no "assessed" taxes to pay.

ANNOUNCER: "Border security on steroids. Tough border triggers have no giveaways for law breakers."
DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano simply has to submit a plan for border security and a fencing plan within six months of the passage of this bill. As soon as she submits the plans, illegal aliens become eligible for work permits, Social Security accounts, driver's licenses, travel documents, and countless state-level benefits. Past amnesties show that these benefits are mostly what illegal aliens are looking for; green card status and U.S. citizenship are not priorities for most illegal immigrants. No border security has to be in place for these benefits to be handed out. A proposed amendment to the bill that would have made border security come before these benefits are handed out was rejected by the Senate. Sen. Jeff Flake and Sen. Lindsey Graham, two of the alleged "conservative leaders" who helped authored this bill, voted against the amendment along with all of the Democrats.
The "triggers" — border security, an entirely new electronic verification system (to replace E-Verify), and an operational exit-tracking system — are required to be in effect before illegal immigrants can upgrade to a green card. But even this isn't exactly true.
The bill does provide a significant amount of funding for border security, but it remains unclear how that money would be spent and whether the border would ever actually be secured. The bill requires an "effectiveness rate" of 90 percent and defines such a rate as "the percentage calculated by dividing the number of apprehensions and turn-backs in the sector during a fiscal year by the total number of illegal entries in the sector during such fiscal year." This equation requires some estimate of the number of missed illegal entries, but the metrics of border security have been up for debate for many years and it's unclear how such an estimate would be reached. Shawn Moran, vice president of the National Border Patrol Council asks, "How are they going to measure effectiveness?" He fears the bills language "will put pressure on Border Patrol management to fudge the number in order to fit political purposes."
Rubio has said that if effective control of these sections of the border is not met within five years, "it goes to a border commission made up of people that live and have to deal with the border and they will take care of that problem." But in the bill, the "Southern Border Security Commission" would be made up of six Washington-appointed members (two by the president and four by congressional leaders), plus one from each southern border state (appointed by the governor), and it could do nothing but issue recommendations. But it gets worse. The bill also says that if "litigation or a force majeure" prevents the border from being secured then Secretary Napolitano has the authority to go ahead and issue illegal aliens U.S. citizenship anyhow.

0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdC2s3WE_OM[/youtube]
A resolution expressing 'no confidence' in Attorney General Eric Holder is getting bipartisan support, says Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.).
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtFcgVbtqiI[/youtube]
Sen. Rand Paul said Sunday he wants to mount a Supreme Court challenge to the federal government logging Americans’ phone calls and Internet activities.

Paul, R-Ky., a leading voice in the Libertarian movement, told “Fox News Sunday” he wants to get enough signatures to file a class-action lawsuit before the high court and will appeal to younger Americans, who appear to be advancing the cause of less government and civil liberties.

“I’m going to be asking all the Internet providers and all of the phone companies: Ask your customers to join me in a class-action lawsuit,” he said. “If we get 10 million Americans saying we don’t want our phone records looked at, then maybe someone will wake up and something will change in Washington.”

.....

Paul also said the government should be using a specific warrant, not a general warrant, to get the data, arguing the Fourth Amendment prevents unreasonable search and seizure.

“The Founding Fathers didn’t want that,” he said. “I think the American people are with me. Young people who use computers are with me.”

President Obama said Friday that the programs have made a difference in tracking terrorists and are not tantamount to "Big Brother." 

The president acknowledged the U.S. government is collecting reams of phone records, including phone numbers and the duration of calls, but said this does not include listening to calls or gathering the names of callers.  

"You can't have 100 percent security and also then have 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience,” he said. “We're going to have to make some choices as a society."

0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RngDVFuwV0Y[/youtube]
The Bill of Rights is at the heart of our system of government.
Yet the Obama Administration, sadly, often seems willing to circumvent our constitutional rights.
Whether it’s the First Amendment and the seizing of journalists’ phone records, or threatening to punish armed service members who speak openly about their faith;
Whether it’s the Second Amendment and the Administration’s desire to restrict our right to keep and bear arms;
Or whether it’s the Fourth and Fifth Amendments and the Administration’s policy on drone use against American citizens.
And now we learn that the government has been collecting millions of U.S. telephone records. While the details are unclear, this fits into a troubling pattern of disregarding the Bill of Rights.
Congress must do its part to rein in these abuses, but citizens of every stripe need to make their voices heard.
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRn4MRpwyMQ[/youtube]
Tea Party favorite - and proud owner of a solar-powered home in Kentucky - Tom Massie tells Reason why new technology doesn't mean getting rid of the Constitution, why Washington needs more libertarian in Congress, and why the fiscal cliff deal was "a really big turd sandwich without the bread."

Go to http://reason.com/reasontv/2013/06/07... for full links and resources and more info on Massie.


Massie sat down with ReasonTV's Nick Gillespie to discuss government surveillance (2:36), marijuana and industrial hemp legalization (15:05), why the fiscal cliff deal was like a turd sandwich (11:30), taking Paul Krugman's economics class at MIT (24:19), being an insurgent within the Republican Party (30:47), the IRS scandal (5:47), and why the Tea Party should stick to economics (37:51).

Approx. 45 min.
Follow Reason on Twitter at http://twitter.com/reason
Like Reason on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/Reason.Magazine
1
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5dmf5xZJu0[/youtube]
Representative Trey Gowdy gives a passionate opening statement at the House Oversight Committee Hearing on excessive conference spending by the IRS. He states that the institution has a character problem that isn't going to be "solved with another webinar" and that it may be time to "start over."
Passionate and fierce. Rep. Gowdy (R-S.C.) spoke for all Americans. Rep. Gowdy spoke For the Women in the real way, not the Obama way. Rep. Gowdy cares for the most vulnerable in the real way. Rep. Gowdy delivered  a boom-worthy statement blasting the IRS that will be, and should be, remembered for a long time to come. Everyone in America needs to see this indeed.


0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TgsyD6agHs[/youtube]
We all know President Obama loves to golf. He spends much of his presidency on the links. 

Sarah Steelman thinks Obama may use a tactic in the Oval Office that he has encountered on the golf course: 'Slow Play'. 
Slow play for golfers causes them to lose money. The Obama administration enthusiastically embraces slow play as a tool to make people forget about all the serious Washington scandals. So while golfers think slow play is a problem for them, a different kind of slow play is threatening our country as we know it.
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abPeL0KXM5M[/youtube]
Senator Lee and Neil Cavuto discuss corruption in the IRS.
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yI7NMlR8ws[/youtube]
On the Mark Levin show Tuesday night, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, was asked to weigh in on the Supreme Court decision regarding law enforcement officials collecting DNA samples from criminals.
Cruz replied that he was necessarily cautious of government collecting more data and private information from its citizens because it was likely that those in power would abuse it.
“You know, when Orwell wrote about 1984, the image of an all-powerful central government that monitored the citizens at all times, that had an eye on the sky or an eye on the street video taping all of us, that had information about all of us, personal data — that was viewed as science fiction,” Cruz said, adding that the invasion of personal information was due to the “Big Government crowd.”
“You and I both know that the ‘Big Government crowd’ isn’t just the Left, it also includes some on the Right,” Cruz warned. “An excess of power and government is always, always, always, a fundamental threat to liberty.”
1
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-A1b0D_Ama8[/youtube]
Erika Harold, otherwise known as Miss America 2003, is officially running for Congress.
In a video on her new campaign Web site, Harold on Tuesday announced a primary challenge to freshman Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.)
Harold, 33, is a Harvard Law School graduate who was passed over by Illinois GOP officials last year when there was a ballot vacancy in the district. The officials instead chose Davis, a former congressional aide.
In her video, Harold makes no mention of Davis, but instead plays up her record of public service and advocacy for religious groups and work in prison ministry.
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkBZAcmaiOY[/youtube]
"I want to preserve the America that I grew up in - the America that people cross oceans and risked their lives to become a part of... "

Becky Gerritson's powerful testimony during today's Ways & Means Committee Hearing. She is a conservative activist claiming to be targeted by the IRS.
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnN7YVTjejw[/youtube]
Congressman Jim Bridenstine:
Mr. Speaker the President's dishonesty, incompetence, vengefulness, and lack of moral compass lead many to suggest that he(Obama) is not fit to lead...
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVOzjpVz5XA[/youtube]
Ted Cruz from just a few days ago at the Watchmen on the Wall conference in DC.  Cruz spends time discussing his own fight against those who have tried to suppress religious freedom in one way or another, including the Obama administration, and how we must all continue the fight for freedom’s sake.
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDgnl8yogCs[/youtube]
Former Alaska governor and Republican firebrand Sarah Palin brought a gift and a surprise for residents of this town of 1,100 who crowded the high school gym to celebrate its graduation Saturday afternoon.
Grads found the gift taped under their chairs onstage: a dollar bill. The currency taught a life lesson, Palin said.
“You gotta get off your butt to make a buck,” Palin said, to cheers from the crowd of 700 or so who had nabbed tickets to the event.
The surprise came later, as Palin revealed the motivation for her acceptance of the invitation from senior class President Tyler Weyer and the rest of the 26-member graduating class. The group posed in the school’s front yard holding a “We Want You, Governor Palin!” banner that went viral on Facebook and eventually led to her agreeing to deliver the commencement address.
Palin told a story about her father, Charles Heath, who in 1964 set out for Alaska from Sandpoint, Palin’s hometown where she had been born just a few months prior. Facing engine trouble, Palin said, he stopped in a small town, where the local mechanic fixed his station wagon for a pittance. That town, she said, was Republic, to gasps and murmurs from residents and graduates alike.
“You got us on our path,” Palin said, to more applause.
Palin’s presence lent a little extra pomp and circumstance to an annual tradition in the Ferry County seat, which boasts Stonerose fossil digs and lies within a rich gold-mining district. The ceremony featured caps, gowns, squealing infants and tearful parents sending face-reddening hand waves toward their children.
There were also subtle reminders of rural Washington. Senior Heather Giddings received the home economics award, earning praise as the “best wild game cook in Eastern Washington.” Giddings and her classmates celebrated their accomplishment on a stage flanked by paper banners bearing the class motto: “You Only Live Once.”
That phrase had special meaning for Weyer, who began the campaign to secure Palin as the class’s guest speaker earlier this semester.
“Through this entire process, I’ve learned many things,” Weyer said in his introduction of the former vice presidential candidate. “Anything is possible; all you’ve got to do is want it.”
More than just Republic’s senior class wanted a glimpse of Palin. Shops along Republic’s main drag welcomed the politician, and admirers from as far away as the Czech Republic were on hand to take in her words. Helen Weinar, who immigrated to the United States and now lives outside Seattle, and her daughter, Helen De Leon, plopped down outside Republic High School at 5:30 a.m. to ensure that they’d see Palin.
“It’s a dream come true,” Weinar said.
The two were soon joined by 1978 Republic graduate Susan Rohn, whose picture still hangs in the high school’s entryway with those of all the Republic graduates dating back decades. Her appearance now, with highlighted locks and thin-rimmed glasses, resembles the former governor’s in many ways, so much so it caught De Leon off guard.
“I said, ‘Mom, what are you doing sitting with the governor?’ ” De Leon said.
Weyer, who earned a scholarship from the county’s tea party political organization and impersonated Palin onstage in front of his classmates in April, said Friday he worried the focus had shifted from the students.
“I think people are really losing touch of what’s important,” Weyer said. Several residents had heard rumors students had been trying to sell one of their 20 allotted tickets for the event. A Craigslist seller last week sought $300 for a seat.
The focus was clearly on the students Saturday afternoon, however, as graduates Cody Wirth and Jesse Harding left the stage beaming and embraced their classmates.
“I’m going to miss the whole class,” Wirth said, clutching a celebratory kazoo the class played after shifting their mortarboard tassels from left to right.
“We’ll keep in touch,” Harding said.
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEbS8AJEhP0[/youtube]
Sen. Ted Cruz tells Eric Bolling, abolish the IRS and much, much more. June 1, 2013
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPCreh9sIWc[/youtube]
Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, a possible 2016 presidential candidate, speaks at the Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California on May 31, 2013.

"I don’t care if you’re a Republican or a Democrat, there is something profoundly un-American about using the brute force of government to bully someone," Sen. Paul said during his nearly 50-minute address. "And I’m dead serious when I say, if the president doesn’t hold someone accountable, I think he will have lost the moral authority to govern effectively."
0
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOuN-wl9Jog[/youtube]
Ted Cruz:
This Administration has shown a willingness to use the machinery of the federal government as a partisan tool to punish political enemies.
This is extremely troubling.
1
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-nV4AGV50I[/youtube]
Representative Michele Bachmann, the Minnesota Republican who made an ill-fated run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012, announced Wednesday that she would not seek a fifth term in Congress next year.

She made the announcement just six months after being re-elected in what was her most challenging Congressional campaign since she was first elected to the House in 2006. Her announcement also comes as her former presidential campaign faces inquiries into its fund-raising activities.
“I have decided next year I will not seek a fifth Congressional term,” she said in a video on her campaign Web site. “This decision was not impacted in any way by the recent inquiries into the activities of my former presidential campaign or my former presidential staff,” she added.
Mrs. Bachmann is known for her strong anti-abortion stance and adherence to Tea Party values but her presidential campaign was marked by frequent stumbles and her candidacy failed to catch fire in a crowded field of candidates that included Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Gov. Rick Perry of Texas and Herman Cain, who all eventually lost to Mitt Romney.
In her congressional race last year, Mrs. Bachmann won re-election by just 4,200 votes out of 356,000 votes cast, beating the hotelier Jim Graves, who was greatly outspent. Mr. Graves recently announced that he would seek the seat again.
“My decision was not in any way influenced by any concerns about my being re-elected to Congress,” she said. “If I ran I would again defeat the individual who I defeated last year.”
Her announcement comes as the Office of Congressional Ethics looks into claims by Ms. Bachmann’s former campaign aides that she may have improperly used money raised by one of her House-affiliated political action committees to help her presidential bid in the run-up to the Iowa presidential caucuses in January 2012. She came in sixth in that race, even though she campaigned heavily in the state. The defeat led her to pull out of the race the next day.
While her presidential bid initially excited Tea Party supporters, Mrs. Bachmann would later find herself upstaged by conservative opponents like Mr. Cain and Mr. Santorum, and she was prone to misstatements, including saying the vaccine against the human papillomavirus was linked to “mental retardation.”
But her campaign was not without impact. Her victory in the Ames, Iowa, straw poll in the summer of 2011 forced Tim Pawlenty, the former Republican governor of Minnesota, to drop out of the contest early, after he did poorly in his neighboring state.
In her video announcement, Mrs. Bachmann did not rule out returning to politics in the future.
“There is no future option or opportunity, be it directly in the political area or otherwise, that I won’t be giving serious consideration if it can help save and protect our great nation for future generations,” she said.
She also said she expected “the mainstream liberal media to put a detrimental spin” on her decision not to seek re-election, calling its attention to her political fortunes “a true compliment of my public service effectiveness.”
Ms. Bachmann had been a largely obscure member of Congress from Minnesota before the emergence of the Tea Party in 2010. She seized on the movement to brand herself a national voice of conservatives and become the leader of the “Tea Party Caucus” in the House.
In January of 2011, Ms. Bachmann delivered her own, unofficial “Tea Party” response to President Obama’s State of the Union address. She mocked the president’s fiscal policies and urged a repeal of the president’s health care plan known as Obamacare. But the brief, televised response prompted comedy sketches because of its low production values and because Ms. Bachmann appeared to be looking off to the side throughout her remarks.
2
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)