Who is the “Other Side?”

by Jayne D. Frank

For the last few weeks President Obama has started up his campaign rhetoric for the mid-terms as he continues to try and manipulate and excite what is left of his core 18 to 29-year old base that elected him in 2008.  Why does he now always refer to us as the other side?  It is quite obvious.  The other side is anyone he perceives is “after him” because they disagree with all of his big government, huge spending, crushing deficit policies that he has enacted over the past 20+ months.  His words are quite accurate because no longer are just Republicans against his policies.  Independents, Libertarians and a large segment of moderate Democrats have deserted him and know that his policies are leading America down the path of destruction.  He even has had trouble amassing the young voter crowd in his travels as they have seen firsthand those failed initiatives and are certainly smart enough to bail on the “coolest President they have ever seen” and rely on their upbringing and inborn instincts.  For those 18-29 year olds, the other side is:

1.  Their parents who have worked hard all their lives to make sure they have the educational opportunities that perhaps they didn’t have for a more technologically advanced career; those parents who paid more than their share of taxes, paid into the social security system which is broken and has been robbed by decades of government career politicians.

2.  The other side are the small businesses in this country who will provide the jobs for the young voters and who rely on a favorable tax structure and incentives to create those long lasting jobs.  Under this President, they are facing an uncertain future because of the inability of Congress and this President to extend tax cuts for everyone, and have been or are going to have their medical expenses increased so dramatically in the coming year, that they have pulled back and are not going to hire additional employees who they would be mandated to cover at these steep rates or else drop them completely.

3.  The “other side” consists of grassroots Americans who have taken all their spare time in the last two years to work aggressively to make sure their children and grandchildren’s future is protected by getting all of the incumbents ousted and candidates from winning in November; the People’s representatives who vote against the very principles and values that this country was founded upon and whose legislation will ensure those children and grandchildren will not have the opportunities and a standard of living even close to what their parents had.  These grassroots Americans know that President Obama has accumulated more debt for this Country than the previous 40 Presidents combined because of his agenda of redistribution of wealth.

4.  The “other side” is a Christian America, not afraid to use the words “God”, “Creator” or “Jesus, my personal Savior” when describing the basis for our Constitution or the basis for our everyday actions, and who will fight to make sure “God” is not removed from our landmarks, our celebrations, and our founding documents or our currency.

You are right in one respect, Mr. President; the other side is coming after your policies, your Marxist agenda and the people who sacrificed their principles in Congress for their cushy jobs.

And most of all, Young Voters are not stupid.  They may be entranced for a short time by “star” quality and hyperbole which feeds into boredom and general unrest among this group because of the economy; but they have educated themselves and know now that you can use all the clichés such as “green jobs,” “the way forward,” and “hope and change” that you want, but in the mid-terms and in the 2012 Presidential elections will vote to protect their jobs, their future, and yes, their Constitution.

The Arrogance of America’s Ruling Class

by Richard H. Frank

Daniel Webster once wrote “I am committed against every thing which, in my judgment, may weaken, endanger or destroy (The Constitution)…and especially against all extension of Executive Power; and I am committed against any attempt to rule the free people of this Country by the power and patronage of the Government itself…”

What gift of foresight did the Founders such as Webster possess that gave them the ability and wisdom to predict the ever-present temptation for those that would be granted the power to govern to raise themselves to a position of aristocracy?  The very structure they created for the Federal Government having “enumerated powers” subject to checks and balances through equal branches of government was envisioned as the means to suppress any attempt to rule by power and patronage of the Government itself.

Notwithstanding all their warnings against unlimited power vested in a central government, professional politicians and political ideology usurping the values and principles so eloquently stated in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, we find Government today viewed as the “Ruling Class” in America.  The Representative Republic created in 1787 has evolved into a body closely resembling the European parliamentary system populated by arrogant, ego-driven individuals more intent on personal status that upon representation of their constituents.  The title of Congressman, Senator or Justice has replaced that of  Baron, Duke and Earl holding power over their serfdom in ancient Europe.

If the average American would devote one tenth of the time spent viewing television sports or situation comedies and devote that time to viewing “CSpan”, they would be shocked at the level of competence of which We the People are represented in Congress.  Today the level of debate has degenerated to spewing the political talking points of the day.  Little attention, if any, is spent reviewing the facts surrounding legislation concerning the economy, healthcare, the Federal budget, immigration or our national security.  Talking points set forth by the special interests having the loudest voice or the most money  to obscure the growing issues our government should be addressing.  With each passing year we move closer and closer to the “nanny state” or even worse the state envisioned by George Orwell in his Novel “1984.”

Politicians stand up and shout “Washington is broken!”  In truth “Congress is broken” and has abdicated their pledge to represent the people of this nation.  Fix Congress and we will have taken the first step in returning to the values and principles upon which our nation was conceived.

Consider the following:

  • Term limits:  12 years only, one of the possible options of a) two six-year Senate terms, b) six two-year House terms, or c) one six-year Senate term and three two-year House terms.  SERVING IN CONGRESS IS AN HONOR, NOT A CAREER.
  • No tenure/no pension:  A congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.  SERVING IN CONGRESS IS AN HONOR, NOT A CAREER.
  • Congress (past, present and future) participates in Social  Security:  All funds in the Congressional Retirement Fund move to the Social Security System immediately.  All future funds flow to the Social Security System and Congress participates with the American people.  FUTURE LEGISLATORS MAY THINK TWICE BEFORE RAIDING SOCIAL SECURITY FUNDING OF $2.4 TRILLION.
  • Congress can purchase their own Retirement Plan (401k, etc.) just as all Americans.
  • Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise.  Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
  • Congress looses their current healthcare system and participates in the same healthcare system as the American people.  HOW MANY WILL SUPPPORT OBAMACARE UNDER THIS SYSTEM?
  • Congress must equally abide with all laws they impose on the American people.  UNDER OUR CONSTITUTION NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.
  • All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/2011.  THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DID NOT MAKE THIS CONTRACT WITH CONGRESSMEN; CONGRESSMEN MAKE ALL THESE CONTRACTS FOR THEMSELVES.

The foregoing “Congressional Reform Act of 2010” is being circulated over the internet as “How to fix Congress and the Senate” and is written in plain English contained on one page not 2300 pages.  There is no excuse for our “elected representatives” not to read this proposed legislation. I suggest you read this and ask your candidates for the mid-terms whether they would either abide by these covenants or bring it up for a vote.

The prospect of ever having such a bill introduced is slim at best since finding a Senator and Congressman to introduce such language is viewed as political suicide within the Halls of Congress.  Outside of those walls, such men would be viewed as patriots and raised to the stature of our founding Fathers.

Introduction of such a simple bill would immediately separate the true patriots from those that hang on to their aristocratic career positions in Government.

How refreshing to our liberties and the Nation should we have representatives willing to live up to the statement in our Declaration of Independence that states in part “…with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our Fortunes and our Sacred Honor.”

Three Days in History that Changed the Face of War for America Forever

by Richard H. Frank

September 17, 2010 marked the 223rd Celebration of the Signing of our Constitution in 1787 as the Supreme Law of the land in the United States of America.  Supreme in the words of the document as written or only in our interpretation of those words as to the intent of the Founding Fathers.  Let us take for example Article I, Section 8 which states in part that Congress possesses the power “to declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water…”  The enumeration of these powers is very specific with regard to any Declaration of War by the United States against any other nation.  Further, Article IX, Section 2 states: “The President shall be Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States and of the militia of the several states, when called into actual service of the United States.  Notice the Constitution is silent with regard to what branch of Government, outside of Congress, may in fact actually “call (our forces) into service.”

So just how and when is the President acting as Commander-in-Chief given authority under the Constitution to place our troops in harms way?  The answer is that under the Constitution, he (the President) is not accorded that authority.

Then where, you may ask, does the President acquire such authority?  The answer is simply that he takes the authority by virtue of expanding the words in the Preamble that say “insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence…” much as Congress has usurped “promotion of the general welfare” to lend credence to many of their legislative actions.

In the history Congress has seen fit to declare war on only five (5) occasions:

  • War of 1812 on June 18, 1812
  • Mexican American War on May 13, 1846
  • Spanish American War on April 15, 1898
  • World War I on April 6, 1917
  • World War II on December 8 and 11, 1941

Additionally Congress saw fit to authorize our military on twelve (12) occasions between 1798 and 2002 to place our forces in harms way – all without a Declaration of War.  The price paid in human life for Korea, Vietnam, Gulf I and Iraq totalled over 96,600 alone.  On at least seven (7) occasions, our forces were called upon by the United Nation’s Security Forces between 1950 and 2004.   There are recorded 125 occasions over the years where the President acted without any express military authorization from Congress to wage war.  More than one forth or 28 instances were against the American Indian.  Never in our history to date has any President been challenged in court for seizing the authority to go to war which is not specifically enumerated and delegated to him under the  Constitution.  So much for this document as being the Supreme Law of the Land!

Why have our elected representatives and “We the People” allowed such usurpation of power to go on for so many years without a challenge to the Executive Branch of Government or through Amendment to the Constitution?  The answer prior to December 7, 1941 may forever remain a mystery.  However three events including the attack on Pearl Harbor have forever altered how America will go to War.  I believe the three dates that have shaped our policy for going to war are as follows:

  • December 7, 1941 – Japan’s Attack on Pearl Harbor
  • August 6, 1945 – “A” Bomb on Hiroshima, Japan
  • September 11, 2001 – Attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

The period of 1941 thru 1945 marked the last time Congress declared war and was fought conventionally against Japan, Germany and Italy initially.  With the advent of the nuclear age and our bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the face of war, Nation against Nation, was forever altered largely due to the threat of nuclear retaliation and unlimited assured mutual destruction to all parties engaged in such madness.  The nuclear standoff or stalemate continued between the great powers for almost 50 years before the fall of the former USSR and now remains at levels considered defense by all countries possessing nuclear capabilities.

Today, beginning with September 11, 2001, and the attack on the World Trade Center in New York, America knows that we are  no longer immune to attack by radical terrorist groups and organizations none of which can be identified as a nation against which Congress can declare war.  As a result they (Congress) have resorted to adopting legislation in the form of the “War Powers Resolution” empowering the President to act in his capacity as Commander-in-Chief to retaliate against aggression from terrorist organizations around the world.

To date, this legislation and power inherent within that document has yet to be challenged within our Judiciary as to the Constitutional validity of the law.

Thus, if our enemy is nameless with regard to nationality and point of origin, how are we then to ask Congress for a Declaration of War?  On the other hand, how are we to believe that any single individual acting as Commander-in-Chief should be allowed such awesome power?

The genius of our Founding Fathers does however protect us from over zealous actions on the part of any President by retaining the power of the purse with Congress.  Should all else fail to reign in misguided action by a President,  Congress still possesses the ability to de-fund any war, police action or peace-keeping force they as Representatives of the People deem wrong.

The powers inherent in the title Commander-in-Chief should not be taken lightly by the electorate.  Any candidate for the Office of President must possess credentials that qualify him to hold such auspicious power.  In recent years, the electorate has focused heavily upon domestic issues that affect their daily lives and personal security.  Today, we are faced with proliferation of nuclear weapons throughout the Middle East.  Recent administrations in the United States have all stated that we will not tolerate nuclear weapons in Iran.  Yet, we sit by and impose idle sanctions on this country with no apparent impact on their momentum to obtain such weapons.  As we approach the coming elections in 2010 and 2012 every American must understand that being a community organizer, an academian or ex First Lady do not qualify one to hold the auspicious office and responsibility of Commander-in-Chief. 

If we return to the Preamble of the Constitution, it states “We the People of the United States …, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”  As such, it is our responsibility through the serious vetting and selection of our representatives in Government to provide for the common defence and general welfare of this Nation.  Never before in history has this responsibility been more imperative.

Politics Today: The Game of Follow the Money

by Richard H. Frank

Every elected Representative in Government – local, state or national; each and every political appointee and member of the Judiciary, and every member of our Armed Forces takes an oath to “Preserve, Protect and Defend the Constitution of the United States of America.”  This oath is the only commitment along with the pledge to “faithfully discharge the duties of the office to which they are elected or appointed that sets a benchmark against which they may be measured.

The average American voter has almost no knowledge of the scope or limitation of the duties for a particular political office, nor does he or she possess an informed understanding of our Constitution.  We may thank our public education system for a diminished level of knowledge in these areas of enlightenment over the past 50 years.

So just how does any individual become a candidate for public office in America today and in what manner do we vet his or her qualifications to hold any particular office? Unfortunately, the truth be told, we need to follow the money for the answer to the question.  Politics today in America is all about money, special interests, party and political ideology.  The adage that “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” has never been truer in the history of the United States.  If you need proof for this statement just look at the record of our Democrat-controlled Congress and Democratic President passing legislation against the Will of the People.” We have failed miserably over the past 100 years to heed the warnings of our Founding Fathers against professional politicians being bought by the special interests to forward their agenda without regard to the consequences for “We the People.”

The 2008 Presidential primaries and general elections are examples of the political candidate selection process at its worst.  Never before in our history  have so many candidates, the majority of which were  professional politicians, begun their quest for the nomination two years prior to the General Election.  This holds true for both political parties.  Money flows from the special interests to the party and finally to the candidates.  Issues for the election, real or created, take center stage and drown out the serious debate to establish an individual’s qualifications to occupy any political office as representative of “We the People.”

The whole mess escalates into a process resembling voting on an American Idol where the most popular, not necessarily the most talented or qualified, individual wins.  Somewhere along the way, we forget to ask about their knowledge of the Constitution and their particular experience to discharge the duties of the  office they seek.  Slogans, oratorical rhetoric and sound bites on the 6 p.m. news become the basis for judgment as we go the polls to cast our vote on how we will be governed over the coming years.  This process is precisely how we wind up with a  “community organizer” possessing little or no skills for  governance as President of the United States.  Popularity over substance, rhetoric over reality and a lack of understanding on the part of voters on values and principles that have made America great result in electing those unqualified to lead us to continued prosperity and liberty.  This isn’t American Idol.  The stakes are much  higher than producing a bad recording  or video.  Our leaders are entrusted with taking the helm of our ship of state and steering a course toward continued peace and prosperity for America.

Therefore, forget all the fancy words and hollow promises when you enter the voting booths and ask yourself:   If elected will this candidate “preserve, defend and protect the Constitution and what qualifies him or her to “faithfully discharge the duties of the office for which they are being elected?

Radical Islam is Alive in Well & We Will Never Forget, President Obama

by Jayne D. Frank and Richard H. Frank

I am not one of those that were at Ground Zero on September 11, 2001; I might as well have been.  I was standing at my kitchen counter when the terrorists’ planes hit the World Trade Center towers and wondered how many of my family was in the air that day; my husband was out of town and my son was on his way to the Philipines on business by himself.  I watched in complete horror and sorrow the entire week as I saw my fellow Americans run engulfed in ashes from the NY buildings, saw the people leaping from the higher floors knowing full well they chose falling to their death to burning in their building.  Then I saw our brave firefighters say Goodbye to their colleagues and run without hesitation into the upper floors of the building, knowing that they would not be seen again.  I myself worked for several days during a period that planes were not allowed to land in  America, trying to get my son back home through various countries not very friendly to the U.S.

And today, the President, cloaked in his desire to have the Mosque built near ground zero and further his agenda of appeasement, said, at least three times in his speech in Washington, that “we are a diverse and tolerant people,” that we have values that give everyone “the right to worship as one pleases” and further that we will not hunker down with our anger.  After this pathetic speech in which he, for the second time, does not thank President Bush for his handling of this attack on America, lastly says that tolerance and healing “is the way we choose to honor those murdered by Al Qaeda.” Unbelievably, he even indicated that this attack was far more devastating to America than was Pearl Harbor.  Is this one more attempt to slam our Armed Forces and the brave battles they fight- I think so. His naivety and lack of understanding is apparent.  He should ask those who bear the scars from fire and wounds inflicted on December 7, 1941, some of whom carry their own obituaries, as a reminder of that horrible day in infamy.  No doubt more souls were lost in the twin towers on 9/11, but the attack on Pearl Harbor crippled this nation’s defenses beyond imagination through the destruction of our entire Pacific Fleet.

Mr. President, we will continue to hunker down and will not forget what happened on 9/11/2001!  Al Qaeda may have been directly responsible for this particular attack on America, but Islamic Extremists (the phrase you have instructed your staff not to use anymore) were and are responsible for many more attacks on American groups and individuals across the world, and will continue until they are hunted down and brought to trial for their crimes against humanity.  Their strategy has changed and they will find their satisfaction in converting regular Americans to their radical ideology, and are planning to again attack us from within.

The robotic and unemotional speech that President Obama gave at the Pentagon today did nothing to help the victims’ families heal and certainly nothing to convince us that this threat is no longer alive and well.  His slam at what happened at Pearl Harbor is inexcusable, but what I find most offensive is his total lack of calling on his avowed Christian religion and personal savior, Jesus Christ, to help heal the wounds of this day.

In comparison, he would have been wise to deliver Michelle Obama’s speech in Shanksville, PA which truly honored those that gave their lives to protect other Americans unknown to them. At least Michelle Obama had the grace to acknowledge the contribution of Laura Bush comforting our nation following the attack on the World Trade Center.  Additionally, Laura Bush’s address was not only appropriate for the occasion but was heartfelt as were all of President Bush’s previous 9/11 remarks, but also captured the spirit of our nation.  The one memorable line from Laura Bush’s speech stated “9 years ago, we saw the worst of the enemy and the best of America.”

Politics over Tribute for Those that Died on 9/11

By: Richard H. Frank

Today September 10, 2010 the American people listened to President Obama hold his first news conference in months since being sworn into office. He could have used the occasion in his opening remarks to honor the memory of those who perished in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Instead he stooped to the lowest level of political activism and vilified the Republican minority in Congress as stopping approval of  his legislative agenda purported to stimulate small business during this prolonged recession. How arrogant, and how insulting to the American public who understand very well that Obama possesses a majority in both houses of Congress and could push all and any legislation he and the Democrats support without a single vote from the Republican minority. Moreover in response to any question dealing with the economy he reverted to the opening rhetoric. For 70 minutes Obama stammered and stumbled incoherently as he tried to field questions ranging from lagging support of his own party on health care, extending the Bush tax cuts and the peace talks between Israel and Palestine.

What ever became of the type of news conferences conducted by John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan and even George W. Bush. I don’t remember the arrogant vilifying of Congress and the outright untrue statements being made in order to support their political ideology. I find it amazing that suddenly the $2500/family savings due to Obamacare is no longer referenced in the President’s speeches or answers to questions from the press.   Now we hear “How can we expect  to extend insurance to millions of uninsured and adding children to their parents policies for up to age 26 without seeing costs rise?” Where were these common sense statements from Obama when the debate over the bill was raging all across the country. During the State of the Union speech the President was challenged by Republican  Congressman Joe Wilson when he called out “You Lie” regarding his statement that costs would fall and you could keep your current coverage and doctor.  It appears Mr. Wilson was correct and is now owed an apology from Mr Obama and Nancy Pelosi.

According to Obama September 11th is to be celebrated  as a day of remembrance and service. In order to justify his position on the Muslim mosque planned for a site near ground zero our President had to resort to quoting George W. Bush stating we were not at war with Muslims but radicals intent on subverting the religion for their purposes.  What we witnessed today is a President in panic attempting to place the blame for his failed policies on the Republican minority in Congress. He has lost control and his policies and administration are disintegrating before his very eyes. The more he talks the more he reveals his incompetence to hold the Office of President of the United States of America.

First Amendment Right Only Important to POTUS When It Suits His Agenda

by Jayne D. Frank

As explosive as the planned NYC Mosque near Ground Zero, the proposed “Burn a Quran Day” by Pastor Terry Jones has exacerbated the already tense relations between American Muslims and Christians.  However, although I believe Pastor Jones’ act to be an incredibly stupid and harmful act in view of the fact that we have our precious American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, there remains a crucial question of America defending and protecting its First Amendment Rights, no matter how distasteful this proposed act may be.  If we start allowing just a few First Amendment Rights to exist, here and there, and disallow those that may “offend,” soon we will be a Country without free speech at all.

However, the purpose of writing this blog piece is to bring to light the despicable way in which our President decides who to “call out” for acts which he thinks are offensive. This week, he called for Pastor Jones to call off his 9/11 Quran burning after intensive pleas and phone calls from officials in Indonesia, perhaps using this as a false excuse of why he is really offended.

My one question is:  Where was President Obama’s condemnation of  the photo and act of Bill Ayres trampling on the American Flag in 2001?