First, I would like to welcome all of our new friends of the Constitution on the left. I do have a couple of questions though.

Most folks have seen or heard about CVSs decision to stop selling tobacco products by October. I have seen mixed responses from talking heads on TV and radio and the people on the blogs I frequent. Those on the right seem split in their opinions, while those on the left universally celebrate CVSs decision. The argument I hear from the left is taht it is CVSs right to decide what product they choose to sell or not to sell. I would like to congratulate the left on finding the Constitution. This doesbring a couple of questions to mind.

1) We have now established that a corporation has rights Citizens United?

2) Tobacco is a legal product and smoking is a legal activity. CVS has decided its policy based on its prejudice against people engaging in a legal activity. We have seen a couple of cases recently where owners of bakeries refused to bake wedding cakes for homo couples. The cry from the left is, a business cannot refuse to sell to a person because the business has no right to decide not to serve someone because that produst or service is wrong. Do you leftists now support the right of the business owner to refuse service based on its prejudice

I have been waiting for a true apples to apples comparison. I finally got it. Now, lets see how the loons contort themselves to support their different opinions on the identical subject.

February 3, 2014 by Dr. Kevin "Coach" Collins
Question: It’s clearly unpatriotic to be a Democrat; but is it immoral?

Democrats hate the military and are always working to undermine America’s defense so we have no protection from their international friends. When they are in power, Democrats always act in ways that favor America’s enemies and insult our friends. Hearing Democrats say they are embarrassed to be American is commonplace from newsrooms to the highest offices of our government.

Democrats have urged surrender in every conflict we have been in since Viet Nam. Immediately after a terror attack, Democrats jump to act as apologists for those who would see us dead. It is hard to find a Democrat under 60 who is patriotic, and it’s a good bet that those who ran off to Canada in the 1960s and 70s are today’s most reliable Democrats.

Clearly Democrats are not patriotic, but there is good evidence that they are immoral as well.

They are the Party that has gleefully declared itself enemies of God. They have booed God’s name. They cheered Barack Obama during his phony government shutdown when he threatened to arrest Catholic priests who tried to minister on federal property.

Bloodthirsty Democrats see even partial birth abortion as a secular sacrament and worship gay “marriage.” Their stranglehold on healthcare has endangered the lives of millions of Americans. Poverty levels under Democrats are always climbing because of their greed and avarice.

Their deficit spending immorally burdens future generations far into the future. They want to go easy on criminals while stripping us of our right to own guns for protection.

Government-run schools in Democrat-controlled cities are among the worst in the country. They constantly promote class warfare, pitting rich versus poor and vice versa.

They are underrepresented in our military and over-represented in our jails.

Surveys show they are the least charitable among us, preferring to spend the money they tax out of other people rather than their own.

By any standard, Democrats are clearly unpatriotic and immoral.

It would appear as though it's time to post this once again as there is a whole new breed of useless useful idiots on board the forum now.
_______________________________________________
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under
the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist
program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without
knowing how it happened."
Norman Thomas (1884-1968)
Defining liberal (AKA) useful idiot

The term “useful idiot” is thought to have been coined by communist mass murderer Vladimir Lenin. It describes naive communist sympathizers in the West (liberals). While Lenin and the Soviets held these stupid liberals in utter contempt, they also saw them as useful tools for dispensing propaganda.

You will often find useful idiots (aka libtards) lounging about in a Starbucks with friends, discussing the shortcomings of America over a frappuccino. Useful idiots are a mix of urban hipsters, brainwashed college kids, busy bodies, self righteous do-gooders, silver pony-tailed hippies, (now college professors), quirky wannabe-intellectuals, hysterical females, girly-men, and Michael Moore devotees.

Useful Idiot Libtards aren't necessarily bad people, and in many cases, are exceptionally warm and kind hearted. Many have high IQ's and hold advanced degrees. They can hold files full of factoids in their brains, but lack the capacity to weave them together to find a coherent pattern. Though they fancy themselves as "free thinkers", they are actually the most authority worshipping (politically correct) and servile creatures you will ever meet. When it comes to independent critical thought, they are astonishingly stupid .....and very dangerous! To paraphrase the late great Senator Joseph McCarthy, libtards are "the unwitting hand maidens of the Communists."

It is important to note that many "conservatives" are just as deluded as useful liberal idiots. They spend all of their energy attacking low level libtards, feminists, environmentalists etc, while refusing to confront the real power that pulls their strings. From lofty perches high above the cloud level, the untouchable Globalists laugh as the "right" and the "left" beat each other up.

The good news about useful idiots, is that when one of them finally figures out how he has been played, he often becomes fanatically anti-Communist / anti-Globalist. There is hope for them...or at least some of them.

Communists and Liberals: Comrades for Life

http://thecollegeconservative.com/2012/04/26/communists-and-progressive-liberals-comrades...

The Democrat Party is the NEW Communist Party in America

http://maricopaconservatives.com/2012/10/22/the-democrat-party-is-the-new-communist-party...

Well, the best news of the week (or even the month) is that someone on Capitol Hill still has a spine.

When Rep. Steve Stockman got up and walked out of the president's State of the Union address on Tuesday night, I rejoiced. Finally, someone has decided that enough is enough!

Stockman apparently couldn't make it through the entire speech without losing his temper. He's mad that President Obama is rewriting the U.S. Constitution, and he has every right to be.

Here's what Stockman had to say:

"Tonight I left early after hearing how the president is further abusing his Constitutional powers. I could not bear to watch as he continued to cross the clearly defined boundaries of the Constitutional separation of powers.

"Even worse, Obama has openly vowed to break his oath of office and begin enacting his own brand of law through executive decree. This is a wholesale violation of his oath of office and a disqualifying offense."

Stockman didn't stop there, either.

He went on to proclaim: "I'm considering filing Articles of Impeachment against Barack Obama."

Now we're talking!

The nation is tired of the Republican leadership's complacency and the "let's all get along" culture that's endemic among politicians. And finally, it appears that someone on the Hill agrees.

Instead of acting like nothing is wrong, Stockman is speaking the frustration of millions of Americans, citizens who are sickened by their selfish, do-nothing leaders who only care about getting re-elected at all costs.

Recent polls show that just 31% of Americans believe that the country is better off now than in 2009, when Obama was sworn in. And a new Rasmussen poll reported that 69% of likely voters believe that the president should work with Congress, while only 27% believe that the president should go around Congress.

A CNN snap poll conducted among State of the Union viewers found similar results: 67% said that they wanted Obama to compromise with Congress, while just 30% said that they preferred for him to act on his own.

Stockman told NPR that "acting unilaterally, without Congress, is not the concept of what our Founding Fathers envisioned. And I had hoped [Obama] would reach across the aisles and - especially in his final years - make a difference."

Meanwhile, the rest of the Republican leadership would be smart to follow Stockman's lead. Impeachment should be on the docket - it's what the American people want. On top of that, the process is long overdue. To recap:

1. Obama's administration has trafficked guns to Mexican drug cartels.
2. Obama's administration ignored calls for help from numerous Americans in Benghazi, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, resulting in their deaths.
3. Obama's administration has unilaterally rewritten bankruptcy laws and stripped investors in GM bonds, including a teacher's pension fund, of property rights.
4. Obama illegally bombed Libya without Congressional authorization.
5. Obama unilaterally rewrote the Affordable Care Act, exempting chosen businesses, unions and Congress from the effects of the law.
6. And now he plans to usurp the powers of Congress and govern by decree. I truly wonder how much more these other Republicans can stomach before they join the calls for impeachment, too.

Your eyes on the Hill,

Floyd Brown

Liberals have always hated to see any black people who don't go along with them, politically. They don't like any black person who is conservative and of course they have to keep coming at them.

Can they stand to see any black man or woman win an election? They just plain fear black conservatives. They do fear J.C. Watts, Mia Love, Tim Scott and of course Allen West. They continually tell each other that those Uncle Toms, as they call them, are just serving conservative whites. Of all the black politicians I know of JC Watts would be my favorite to be our President.

http://eaglerising.com/4353/two-scariest-words-white-liberals-allen-west/

The US report revealed by the Russians started by saying that “if Egyptians don’t have a reason to kill each other, we must find them one…”

Our main goal is to push the Egyptian Military and the Egyptian People to fight each other before year 2015. If things remain the same as they are right now in Egypt, we will be facing a new Nasser in the Region. But this time Sisi will be supported even from the Gulf Oil countries which was not the case of his predecessor. On the Political and Economical levels, things will not be in the interests of the USA.

http://www.barenakedislam.com/2013/11/13/egypt-shocker-russia-reveals-u-s-confidential-report-about-obama-plan-to-get-egyptian-army-involved-in-a-civil-war-to-overthrow-general-sisi/

"The Obama Administration has been seeking to dialogue with The Islamic Front which comprises six major Islamist rebel groups. And in doing this, they have been covering up for Muslim terrorists.

Secret documents which have been circulating the Middle East media for some time, reveal that Saudi Arabia, instead of executing its criminals who were sentenced to death by beheading, are releasing them instead into circulation to carry out Jihad in Syria in what it now calls the Islamic Front.

The Islamic Front is a newly concocted name for Jihadi terrorists who are under Saudi control. This is all done in order to make them palatable as a partner in the Geneva Conference and is why the Obama Administration is courting this group to continue the war with the Shiite regime in Syria. Never mind that Saudi Arabia through these thugs can drink the blood of the saints by beheading and raping Christians in Syria. In one document, the Saudis sent more than one thousand hardened criminals mostly rapists and drug dealers."

http://shoebat.com/2014/01/26/secret-documents-reveal-obama-administration-works-muslims-behead-christians/

Middle East Report Translated, Declares that "Barack Hussein Obama IS A Muslim Terrorist!"

http://teapartyorg.ning.com/video/video/show?id=4301673%3AVideo%3A2361553&xgs=1&xg_source=msg_share_video

Alan Simpson of Simpson-Bowles fame lays out his experience in dealing with the President.

As you have heard me say before that volunteering at the Bush Center library is a "great gig". I could write about my great experiences daily; but today was one of the highlights, so far…

Southern Methodist University has a lecture series called the Tate Lecture Series which has a significant speaker every month from September to May. Last month was Charles Krauthammer and last night was Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson. Tickets to those events are like "hens teeth" and they are passed down from father to son or family to family and has a waiting list of 7 years for season tickets for the general public. One of the benefits of these visits is that these folks normally visit the library (after normal hours) while in town.

Today's experience was worth a lot. Alan Simpson was the co-author of the Simpson - Bowles Commission appointed by the current president to come up with a plan and path forward to help the nation get back on a sound fiscal footing. It was to include spending limits and controls that would address existing entitlements, a change in tax codes and the abolishment of selected existing tax breaks for special interest groups. Accordingly, It called for a sound fiscal plan that would get us into reasonable balance in 10 years.

As everyone knows, Alan Simpson (R) (82) is a retired senator from Wyoming and is known for his "frank" opinions and statements and in some ways seen as eccentric in some of his views. Erskine Bowles (D) (69), who was Chief of Staff in former administrations, is a respected Democrat and was an equal partner in putting this study and report together with supposedly high respect and influence in the Democratic Party.

The intent was for the current President to use their report as a road map to fiscal responsibility. This report was issued in 2010 and as quickly dismissed by the president as a non-starter prior to the election of 2012 based on its perceived political impact on his re-election.

When I saw Simpson today in the museum, I approached him to welcome him to the museum as a team leader since that is my job for the general public. Normally, VIP's or "celebs" have Foundation escorts during these visits, but in typical Simpson fashion, he wanted to be just another visitor.
All volunteers wear the same uniform and have a prominent name tag for the public to see. Little did I know that when I approached him to welcome him, he would receive me as a long lost friend and it was Howard this and Howard that in typical politician fashion. After two or three minutes of asking about the library (which he loved) and how often we work and what days do we work and other small talk, I asked him for his assessment of our current national fiscal and spending problems and his view on the future efforts needed to turn the nation around.

I spent the next 15 minutes (just the two of us) listening to him expound on his view of our future. His first answer was that with this president we will never make progress. He then related a story that when Bowles and Simpson requested time with the president to urge him to seriously consider their report, he was stunned by the response (as was Bowles).
The president told them that he would take no action on any of the Commission's recommendations and explained his rationale in the following way - prior to his re-election and probably after his re-election he would do nothing. Simply put it was a pure political decision. He stated that to accept reductions in the growth of entitlements would alienate his base and he would only look at the tax increase side of the recommendations after the election. He further added that to accept the recommendations would give the Republicans a victory as seen by the voters and he was not ever going to do that now or ever. He was adamant that he wanted more spending and more taxes and that he would pursue that course throughout his administration until his last day in office.

Stunned by that answer, Bowles asked him if he would do what's right for the country and exert some leadership to save the nation's fiscal future. Obama's response was that he would let the next president worry about the spending and debt, but he was going to spend and tax and re-distribute wealth throughout his term.

Both men were furious and after spending 1.5 hours with the president, they left in utter disbelief. Bowles, thinking that he could have some credibility with the D's in the House and Senate tried to gather some influence with that group and was quickly advised that the Obama agenda would go forward at all costs
.
In one desperate attempt to get some traction, Bowles thought that if he went to see the president without Simpson being there, he could have a more meaningful result. That effort resulted in the same answer as they got the first time and that meeting was closer to the election and was dismissed as untimely and unnecessary by Obama. The end result is what we are now seeing each and every day. Bowles and Simpson believe that this president is not interested in anything except his political agenda.
About this time Simpson's wife joined us and we talked for few more minutes as she reminded him that they had a plane to catch and they had to move along.

In summary, I should not have asked my questions given my role of a neutral docent, but as an American I wanted to know his thoughts. I was stunned that he would be that candid with a perfect stranger, but knowing Simpson it has been typical of his behavior over his career.

These are the reasons that volunteering at the Bush Center make life in America bearable for me at this time. I thought you might want to see this insight from an experienced Washington insider. He was candid and as he left he said, "Don't expect anything good for America until this guy is gone".

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=96050817