|
December
01 2012
|
||||
| |||||
Conservative Videos
New ‘Intelligent’ Rifle Claims To Give You A Perfect Shot Every Time |
New ‘Intelligent’ Rifle That Claims To Give You A Perfect Shot Every Time
|
|
||||||
City Attorney Tells Residents To ‘Lock Their Doors & Load Their Guns’ Because of Police Downsizing
|
Liberals Boo God, but Cheer Barack Obama
|
States pass life-saving legislation
While U.S. Supreme Court decisions limit how much individual state legislatures can do to prevent abortion-on-demand, a number of actions are still clearly possible.
And for state legislatures, sonogram laws are one of the most effective ways to save lives.
Thanks to the persistent work of NPLA members and other pro-lifers across the country, more states are passing this life-saving legislation.
This year, Texas and Virginia passed strict laws that require a woman to obtain an ultrasound before getting an abortion.
Their laws, which require a woman to view an ultrasound before obtaining an abortion, force the mother to come face-to-face with her decision about the life inside of her.
And the fact is, the overwhelming majority of abortion-minded women who see an ultrasound change their minds and decide to choose life.
Despite a hailstorm of negative media attention and vitriolic attacks from the abortion lobby last session, the hard work of NPLA members and other pro-lifers prevailed and life-saving ultrasound legislation passed in Virginia.
The law, which was enacted this past July, requires women who want an abortion receive an ultrasound at least 24 hours prior to any abortion procedure.
Abortion facilities must refer their clients to nearby facilities who provide sonograms at low cost or for free – and that list often includes pregnancy resource centers.
Even better, because of sonogram laws, in states where abortionists can’t or won’t provide ultrasound imaging, many are being forced to refer women to pro-life organizations for free ultrasounds.
Because these laws have proven to have such strong life-saving effect, NPLA members and staff has fought for both federal and state level legislation requiring women to face the truth about the life inside her.
And this year, your NPLA will continue pushing for both a federal bill (H.R. 3805) and for multiple state measures to require that mothers have access to their “first baby pictures.”
For Life,
Martin Fox, President
National Pro-Life Alliance
P.S. If you are able, please chip in to help your NPLA pass federal and state ultrasound laws.
Breaking News from Western Journalism
Dec 01, 2012 01:44 pm | Chris Enloe
Here’s
a simple question: At what point do you know you’re a communist?
As a strongly principled Conservative/Libertarian, I feel like I could
easily recognize other strongly principled Conservatives and
Libertarians because their views fall similar to mine.
Using this… Continue to Post
Dec 01, 2012 01:36 pm | Daniel Noe
Dec 01, 2012 01:12 pm | Doug Book
The
signature power grab of the left may be the “law of the land” as
conceded by ever-conciliatory House Speaker John Boehner, but getting
the massively complex statute up and running will be far more difficult
than getting it passed.… Continue to Post
Dec 01, 2012 01:02 pm | Daniel Noe
Dec 01, 2012 12:56 pm | Tim Powers
It
has become abundantly clear that our Constitution is having less and
less to do with governing our country. It would appear that “we the
people” have lost our power to govern under our Republic. America has
fast become catagorized… Continue to Post
Dec 01, 2012 12:50 pm | Daniel Noe
Dec 01, 2012 12:42 pm | capblack
Hating
White folks is quite popular in our ranks. Our Klan behavior is mostly
self-inflicted, so we’ve yet to see American Whites running for their
lives from Black lynch mobs.
White nationalists argue that Black-on-White violence rates describe a
more… Continue to Post
Dec 01, 2012 12:34 pm | Daniel Noe
Dec 01, 2012 12:29 pm | Michael Nellett
If
you stand back and watch the circus going on in Washington D. C., you
would observe the following: first, the Republicans are so busy
negotiating the solution to the “fiscal cliff” crisis that they forget
that compromise takes TWO… Continue to Post
Dec 01, 2012 12:17 pm | Daniel Noe
Dec 01, 2012 11:57 am | John Gaver
It’s
all the rage to talk about the “Fiscal Cliff”. Both Republicans and
Democrats are talking about it and with good reason. It’s a serious
issue.
But that fiscal cliff is closer than any of the politicians or pundits
are… Continue to Post
Dec 01, 2012 11:32 am | B. Christopher Agee
Just a few miles from my North Texas home, a hapless criminal unintentionally proved the merits of gun ownership.
During a botched burglary attempt, a knife-wielding 21-year-old broke a window to gain entry into a home just a few blocks… Continue to Post
Dec 01, 2012 11:30 am | Breaking News
Secretary
of State Hillary Clinton has reportedly taken sides in the ongoing
question of who President Barack Obama will select to replace her: She
wants Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) over embattled U.N. Ambassador Susan
Rice.
“Hillary is not close to… Continue to Post
Dec 01, 2012 11:28 am | Breaking News
The
House of Representatives will cut back on Fridays during the 113th
Congress, being in session only 15 Fridays through all of 2013, which is
nearly a 30% drop from 2011.
The House was in session for 21 Fridays in 2011. In… Continue to Post
Dec 01, 2012 11:23 am | Breaking News
I
know that we’ve been debating getting rid of the penny for some time
now, and there are a couple of reasonable arguments to be made for that.
They cost more to produce than they’re worth and far too many of them… Continue to Post
Dec 01, 2012 11:19 am | Breaking News
The
new movie version of Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina might be a bit stagy for
some tastes, but any movie that–a) stars Keira Knightley and
b) advances Leo Tolstoy’s worldview–is surely worth watching.
I will leave the story itself to the moviegoer, but in the… Continue to Post
Big Health Report
Eligibility challenge returns to haunt Florida
'Obama is a direct threat to the safety and security of the United States'
by Bob Unruh
A lawsuit challenging Barack Obama’s presence on the 2012 presidential election ballot because of questions over his constitutional eligibility that was thrown out by a judge who earlier determined it wasn’t timely has returned to haunt election officials in the state with a request that the Obama victory results be quashed.
“Defendant Barack Hussein Obama is a direct threat to the safety and security of the United States, and its Constitution, which plaintiff must protect and defend by oath,” according to the complaint, which was delivered to Secretary of State Ken Detzner today.
The case earlier this year was dismissed by Circuit Judge Terry Lewis, who said Obama’s eligibility could not be challenged at that time because under Florida election law, technically, Obama hadn’t been nominated to the position.
As WND reported, Michael Voeltz, who identifies himself as “a registered member of the Democratic Party, voter and taxpayer in Broward County,” had challenged Obama’s eligibility, arguing that the “natural born citizen” clause was rightly understood in historical context to mean a child not only born in the U.S., but born to two American-citizen parents, so as not to have divided loyalties.
Obama, however, readily admits to being born a dual citizen because of his father’s British citizenship.
In his decision then, Lewis noted that the United States Supreme Court has concluded that “every person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States.”
However, attorney Larry Klayman, who is representing Voeltz, said, “The judge equated being a ‘citizen’ with a ‘natural born citizen’ and cited no authority to conclude the two terms are the same.
He quotes other state’s cases, where judges reached that conclusion, but that’s not precedent for him.
What other courts said in lower cases means nothing to him.”
Klayman also had been concerned that the judge determined the burden of proof that Obama is ineligible fell on Voeltz – but then refused to authorize discovery in the case which could have confirmed that eligibility status.
“How can you say we have the burden of proof, then not allow discovery?” Klayman asked. “He says we have burden, but doesn’t allow us to meet it.”
And he said Voeltz has standing to bring the case, under Florida law.
Is Obama constitutionally eligible to serve? Here’s WND’s complete archive of news reports on the issue
The original case sought to exclude Obama from the 2012 ballot. Klayman and Voeltz claimed that Obama is not a natural born citizen as required by Article 2, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, because he was born a British subject.
The case cited the evidence produced by Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s special investigative unit, which has asserted that the birth documentation from Hawaii that Obama claimed was “proof positive” of his Hawaiian birth is not real.
And Florida law provides that anyone qualified to vote in an election may challenge a candidate based on ‘ineligibility of the successful candidate for the nomination or office in dispute.”
Now the new complaint explains the challenge to Obama’s eligibility is “within the proper time frame and venue established by the ‘contest of election’ statutes of Florida.”
“Plaintiff asserts that Defendant Barack Hussein Obama is not a natural born citizen of the United States because he was born a British subject of a British subject father, Barack Obama Sr., who was married to the mother of Barack H. Obama at the time…,” it explains.
“Barack Obama Sr., a citizen of the British colony of Kenya, and his children, were subject to the operation of the British Nationality Act of 1948. By the operation of Part 1 Section 1 of that Act, Barack Hussein Obama became a British subject, upon birth to a British subject father. It is not known whether he has lost that birth allegiance to the British crown.”
And, according to the complaint, the natural born citizen clause specifically was inserted to address the possibility of foreign influence at the highest levels of the U.S. government, in the White House.
“Law of Nations defines the term of art ‘natural born citizen’ as one born in the country [to] parents who are that country’s citizens.
“Plaintiff Michael C. Voeltz has standing, as a Florida voter, and taxpayer, to challenge the ‘nomination or election of any person to office’ based on the winning candidates’ eligibility for the office sought. … The state of Florida has chosen, by popular election, the electors for Defendant Barack Hussein Obama to be president … Plaintiff has fulfilled all aspects of the Florida election statutes for this challenge of eligibility, as to timing, venue, and indispensable parties.”
The case notes that the complaint is being filed before the Florida electors meet to cast their vote in the Electoral College, a procedure that affirms the popular vote choice made Nov. 6.
The case asks the Florida Elections Canvassing Commission to decertify the Florida General Election upon a “judicial determination of the ineligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to serve as president … and to certify the electors for Mitt Romney as the winner.”
Klayman has argued that since Obama, by his own admission, was not born to two citizen parents, he is not a “natural born citizen” and, therefore, is ineligible to be a candidate on the state’s election ballot.
Florida’s election statutes provide broad protections for voters to ensure that the integrity of the election system is beyond reproach. One of the laws allows voters to challenge the nomination of a candidate who is not eligible for the office he is seeking.
Minute Men News
| December 1, 2012 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)