On Thursday, the 21st of November 2013, the Senate of the United States abolished the power of the minority political power by abolishing the filibuster.  The filibuster gives the minority political party an opportunity to block the passage of political nominees of the President of the United States.  This rule has been part of our government for nearly 200 years; now it is dead because of the Democrats desire for political dominance.

On August 2, 1934, after the death of German President Paul von Hindenburg, the Nazis announced the following law, which was dated as of August 1, 1934:

 "The Reich Government has enacted the following law which is hereby promulgated. 

Section 1. The office of Reich President will be combined with that of Reich Chancellor. The existing authority of the Reich President will consequently be transferred to the Führer and Reich Chancellor, Adolf Hitler. He will select his deputy. 

Section 2. This law is effective as of the time of the death of Reich President von Hindenburg."

The actions of the Democrats have in fact done the same to the Constitution of the United States by this new passage of Senate rules; they have given the President of the United States powers of the “Führer” by making President Obama a dictator.

This Senate judiciary procedure, by the Democrats, should make all Americans wakeup to the criminal actions of this administration.      


Two Guns



Two Guns is an action packed thriller involving the mistrust of rival governmental bureaus staring Mark Wahlberg and Denzel Washington, both of who distrust each other and in the end realize that survival depend on mutual cooperation.

After watching this film I came to the conclusion that this plot is from real life; governmental agencies seeming fighting for the same goal, yet distrustful of each other’s motives.  At times it was difficult to figure out who were the ‘good guys’ and their motives, let alone their loyalty to the United States, ending with the suspicion that it is all about greed.

The movie is a parody of the life and motives in Washington, D.C. and the consequences of strange bedfellows who enjoy some type of symbiotic relationship out of mutual need.  At times we don’t know who the good guys are and we are swayed by the likeability of the actors, i.e. politicians who line there own pockets, picking ours while we willingly oblige them by looking the other way. 

Homosexuals want equality and they see this equality personified by allowing them to be ‘married’ in the eyes of the law.   For over five thousand years marriage has been viewed as the union between a man and a women.  The very nature of the word marriage is partly derived from the Latin word matrimonium, which means, “mother.”  Given the biological fact that same sex couples cannot procreate, the real meaning of the word has little relevance. 

Although there are a few perverted examples of “marriage” in an unnatural sense, like Nero marring young boys and Caligula desire for his horse in ‘marriage’ these incidents do not give historical justification for the change in the meaning of the word marriage and its intended purpose.

From a biblical standpoint, Jesus Christ gave his blessing on the institution of marriage when he turned water into wine, thus beginning his mission.  Many of the biblical texts use the term marriage in describing a holy union, or covenant, between a man and a woman.

To give a legal status to an institution that is basic to the very framework of society is detrimental to its very existence.  What seems to be most at play here is the desire by same sex partners for the ‘blessings’ of society, so to speak, on their perverted lifestyle. 

The movie Les Misérables is packing in theaters across the nation for its cinematic grandeur and stunning musical performances.  It’s a story about the relentless pursuit of Jean Valjean by a hardhearted policeman called Javert.  The policeman’s goal is pure dedication to the letter of the law and an abandonment of compassion or logic.

The backdrop of this movie is the Fourth French Revolution in which the working class held power in Paris for only two month in the spring of 1871.  The movie glamorizes the fight of the French proletariat against a defeated French government of Napoleon III as a result of the Franco-Prussian War.  In fact The Paris Commune, as the Fourth French Revolution is sometimes referred to as, was a Communist revolution caused by social discontent; people will only take so much from an oppressive or poorly run government.

The most notable song of Les Misérables is “Do You Hear the People Sing.”  It begins, “Do you hear the people sing

Singing the song of angry men

It is the music of a people

Who will not be slaves again…”

Our country has fought for freedom since its inception as it broke free from England and that love and drive for freedom has not waned since.  The Obama administration’s measures to deprive us of our freedom of religion, speech and the right to defend ourselves has stirred the “song of angry men” and they sing out that they “will not be slaves again.”

We did not trade one oppressive government only to be enslaved by another.  2013 will be a year of trial and triumph when the people take their fight to the courts and public opinion against the tyranny of unjust laws and draconian government mandates; “there is a life about to start, when tomorrow comes.”

 The acceptance of Sharia Law by the liberal is a contradiction to their very movement.  This is the mystery of understanding the mind of the “liberal woman” who say that they want to control their own bodies, yet through their support of the liberal agenda, give up control of their very being. Birth control was not really a true concern of women in the fight for equality in the early days of the suffragist movement, as the present liberal politician would like women to believe. Susan BrownelL Anthony, 1820–1906, American reformer and leader of the woman-suffrage movement, knew that birth control was an advantage for men because it subjected women to be used for sexual gratification and freed men from the obligation of responsibility of taking care of offspring. She fought the idea that women were the “property” of men in her day, and if she were alive today, she would say that Sharia Law is no different from the attempt by 19th century men in her time to control women.
A Typical Liberal Attack

The following is a response to a teacher who questioned my qualifications in questioning her authority and her own qualifications in the educational system in Wisconsin.  She holds a Masters Degree, yet her rant included a spelling and sentence error.  If you’re going to make the point of being a quality educator, I would suggest proofing your work.


I find it interesting that when someone challenges the liberal agenda it gets personal and it becomes a pissing contest who is smarter.  Yes, I am a collage graduate, but I do not have a masters.  I do know how to spell education versus your creative version “eduction.”  Also, an interrogative sentence is followed by a question mark.

Now that we have that out of way, I will answer your question about my qualifications.

First of all, besides my college education, I am the father of six children.  If anyone thinks that I do not know anything about children and their education, they have another guess coming.  Believe me that I have seen and lived all of the problems children face from kindergarten to college years.

I also had the opportunity to work in a school system that paid, with federal funds, marginalized students to go to school.  Yes, they were paid to learn so teachers could have a job and the students could have some money.  What the students did with their time and to the teachers were troubling and a complete waste of tax payer money; the students considered it a joke.  It was a symbiotic relationship, the teachers and students feeding off the government.   

In West Side Story a misguided youth tries to justify his misbehavior, “Gee, Officer Krupke, we’re very upset, we never had the love that ev’ry child oughta get.  We ain’t no delinquents, we’re misunderstood.  Deep down inside us there is good”

This whole attitude of misguided delinquents and the need to understand them, rather than the felons conform to the social norms of society, is the whole foundation of our current education system.  Another name for this is relativism.  The public educational system has lost its way and liberals have stolen the map to reason.

I always believe in the old adage, “It is a poor worker who blames his tools.”  Budget cuts really do not have a bearing on the quality of the educator, because parochial schools excel in quality of education in comparison to public schools with less money everyday.


If there was ever the “perfect storm” in national politics, this election will be that tempest.  It will be more than just the fight between conservatism and liberalism; it will be the battle between freedom and slavery by government.  It will be a clash of ideologies that will have a profound impact on our American society, greater than the American Civil War and more lasting because the outcome will basically amend the Constitution of the United States.

The recent selection of Representative Paul Ryan as the vice-presidential running mate with Mitt Romney is in stark contrast to Vice-president Joe Biden.  The Biden half of the Democratic ticket represents a worn out cliché in American politics; the back slapping, demigod politician who tries to win support for an issue based on political muscle developed in the back rooms of union meeting houses.   Born politically into the liberal atmosphere of the seventies he somehow managed to survive the instability of politics in spite of his marginal academic abilities.

Paul Ryan is the antithesis of Biden; he is smart, articulate and disciplined.  Both profess being Roman Catholic, yet the Catholicism of Biden is more the buffet catholic than Ryan’s orthodoxy.  While Biden seems to fly by the seat of his pants, Paul Ryan has a plan; a well thought out plan that is willing to take on the issue of deficits and make decisions based on reality.

The selection of Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney’s running mate has been critized by some in the news media, saying that he does not have a broad base constituency.  That assumption is very wrong because his strong Catholic beliefs will certainly attract both the large block of conservative Catholics, i.e. real Catholics, and Christian Evangelicals, who see Obama’s attack on the freedom of religion as a real threat.

Realizing the fact that freedom of religion, one of our most important freedoms, is at stake in this election, the selection of the vice-president may be the most central issue in this campaign.  When it comes to religion, people will die for their beliefs, and that issue alone should not be underestimated.
Chick-fil-A’s president, Dan Cathy, created a lot of controversy for simply saying that, “We are very much supportive of the family – the biblical definition of the family unit.  We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives.  We give God thanks for that.”

That remark provoked a firestorm of reactions on both sides of the issue.  Former Governor Mike Huckabee supported Cathy’s remark and encouraged people to support the restaurant chain and patronize Chick-fil-A on Wednesday, August 1.  He said, “The goal is simple: Let’s affirm a business that operates on Christian principles and whose executives are willing to take a stand …”

While Chicago’s Mayor Rahm Emanuel said that he would deny a building permit to operate its business in the City of Chicago.  Following the example of Rahm, liberal politicians in Boston, Philadelphia and San Francisco said that they would follow suit.

If there is any question about freedom of religion in this country, this should confirm the fact that freedom is in jeopardy, and freedom of speech is also at risk.  Since when do a person’s thoughts, religious views and business arrangements, based on a moral conviction, condemn them?  What is to become of our most basic freedoms, that of freedom of religion and speech?

Just because some people see the lifestyle of homosexuals as immoral and deviant behavior, should not censure them into silence.  When we have to fear speaking our minds because one-group thinks they have the right to control speech, we are left with a dictatorship of thought.
The ear splitting final installment of the Batman film trilogy, called The Dark Knight Rises, is a story of a girl seeking revenge for her screwed up childhood; which seems to justify the killing of thousands of lives and potentially wiping out millions more.

After a high altitude abduction of a nuclear scientist, which defied the laws of probability, the story line begins with Commissioner James Gordon abruptly canceling a speech that was meant to expose the crimes of Harvey Dent. 

Dent who apparently died in The Dark Knight, changed from ally to archenemy of Batman, but was wrongly eulogized in the minds of public opinion.  Batman was seen responsible for Dent’s demise and also his death was used to justify the implementation of The Dent Act; which gave “Police Commissioner Jim Gordon the tools needed to deal the final blow to the criminal and the corrupt that remain active within our city.” 

Batman was included in the broad interpretation of criminal element within Gotham City.  Batman goes on the lam and Bruce Wayne, experiencing deep depression, goes into seclusion in Wayne Manor, living the life style of Howard Hughes minus the Kleenex boxes, hoarded urine jars and long fingernails.

Bane, a super villain who established himself as the “king” of Peña Dura prison, returns to Gotham City and is part of the plot to destroy Batman.  Wearing a Darth Vader style facemask, Bane lures Batman out of retirement, bankrupts the Wayne financial empire, and blows up all bridges to Gotham, save one, and threatens to blow up the city with the weaponized Wayne Enterprises fusion core.  After all the mayhem, Batman is ultimately imprisoned by Bane, in Peña Dura prison where he pumps up and plans his escape.

With the city a virtual island, the criminal element in control, the “occupy wall street movement” conduct “Star Chamber” trials that end in either death or exile. Death and exile are synonymous because the “guilty” are forced to cross the frozen river, which doesn’t support their weight.  Meanwhile Batman has his broken back healed and climes out of his pit, seeks the help of the woman who betrayed him and eventually comes back to kick Bane.


The conclusion of the movie was as predictable as a clicking time bomb scene and the just in the nick of time save the world moment.  Oh, yeah, there was that part.

In the end the government bails out Wayne Industries, with the condition that the basement remains untouched.  Bruce Wayne, presumed dead by the inclusion of a tombstone with his name, goes into retirement; presumably one of the world’s richest men, unrecognizable as he sits in an open air café and enjoys his meal alfresco, accompanied by the women who betrayed him them shaved him, well you know, while a smiling Alfred looks on from across the bistro.

Meanwhile John Blake, AKA Robin, having given up his job with the Gotham City Police Department, settles into the basement of Wayne Manor. 

Sequel?  You think?

The father of Heath Ledger is calling for tighter controls on guns and ammunition in America while saying that his son has no part in the tragedy in Colorado.  Well, I got news for him; the gratuitous violence in the movie industry is the real cause of the violence in America because it feeds the demented mind of the criminal and gives reason to act out the fantasies of the movie screen.  People in the movies don't just die; they die in over dramatic ways and with a profuse showing of blood and gore.  The finger of guilt should be pointed right at Hollywood and like the drug pusher; it is all about the money.  And like drugs, the viewing audience wants more and more of the violence.  It is time to say no to the over emphasis of graphic violence.