Greg Penglis is the morning host at 1330 AM WEBY, 6-9 Central time. He is turning “talk radio” into “action radio,” by creating a “citizen legislature” out of the radio/internet audience. He also authored “The Complete Guide to Flight Instruction,” a blunt critique of our flight training system, and how best to get through it.
During this entire budgeting and continuing resolution process, there are two words that will never be put together. They are “constitutional,” and “budget.” Why? Because no one in Washington wants to be restrained by the Constitution when it comes to getting money, spending money, and especially spending money they don’t have. Which is why we are some $20 trillion in for the National Debt. But it never had to be this way.
It’s one thing to talk about the Constitution. It’s quite another to actually live by it. The Supreme Court doesn’t. They assumed judicial review, a power they were never supposed to have. Presidents have gotten us into wars that were never declared. And Congress has spent us into a debt from which we may never recover. But if we ever get serious about paying off the National Debt, it can be done. And the simple answer, as in most cases, is to look to the Constitution.
The problem with all Leftist arguments and debates on any position is that they completely blur any distinction between lawful and lawless, in an effort to confuse, distort, and force their position that since everyone is lawless in some way, no one is, and individualism still means everyone is the responsibility of everyone else, from each according to their wealth, to each according to their fair share.
Take the Second Amendment. There is no difference to the Leftist between a law abiding gun owner, and a mass murderer, because all gun owners are potentially mass murderers, they think, which is how they rationalize banning all guns and gun ownership ever incrementally.
If we are all being completely honest, the Democrats want a Leftist justice who will advance the socialist agenda in spite of the Constitution and has no problem making law. That is how Kagen, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor govern from the bench. Republicans want a constitutional originalist/texturalist who reads the Constitution as it exists now, and doesn’t add or subtract from it, and decides according to law without making law. Under this criteria, no justice appointed by Trump would be acceptable to the Democrats, just as no appointee of Obama was acceptable to Republicans. So how did Kagen, Sotomayor, Breyer, and Ginsberg get to the Supreme Court, because they violate their oath to the Constitution with virtually every ruling?
Anyone else get the feeling we’ve been standing still for 8 years, maybe longer, and if Trump had run instead of G.W. Bush, we would be so far ahead right now it would be amazing?
Is anything more stupid that the two state solution for Israel, when the Palestinians are a made up people, with no language, culture, homeland, or history? How about a one state solution, Israel, and the others either get along or leave?
I thought it would be instructive to offer you a quiz that you can take and share, to show whether you deal in truth, or whether you choose to believe the lies and propaganda of the Clinton campaign and the Leftist media. As was more than adequately demonstrated last night, Meryl Streep is deeply into the propaganda bubble, and so she actually believes her own lies. She doesn’t even realize she is telling lies. She expects you to believe her lies too. She can’t imagine any sane person not believing those lies. Such is the liberal propaganda bubble. Conservatives were never in it. Liberals can’t get out of it. But maybe, just maybe, the conservatives out there can give your liberal friends this quiz and help them burst the liberal propaganda bubble. There is a real world out there just waiting for them to join back in.
Let’s try a little event history here to make sense of this Russian election hacking accusation. It’s not exactly in order, rather it is how the events appear to connect and make sense to me, with lots of speculation on my part.
Hillary Clinton sets up a private email server as Secretary of State, so that she can hide her correspondence from government scrutiny and from becoming part of the public record. This is because it might open her up to future criminal charges if the content of her emails ever became public or were officially investigated.
If socialist, leftist cities like San Francisco, Chicago, New York, and a bunch of others nationwide, can pass Sanctuary City laws to harbor fugitive illegal aliens from federal law enforcement, then why can’t cities, counties, and other entities under the oppression of unconstitutional gun laws, create Second Amendment Sanctuary Cities where no infringing gun laws apply?
A Second Amendment Sanctuary, is where a town, city, or county government, has passed laws outlawing the enforcement of any law touching the right to own and carry any firearm. It is where law enforcement officers honor their sworn oath to the Constitution, and refuse to arrest anyone exercising only their right to own and carry a firearm, regardless of infringing unconstitutional laws still on the books, and in defiance of any orders of superiors, judicial orders, executive orders, or any orders. It is where Americans unaccustomed to their birthright freedoms can actually experience what it would be like if we were a free country, and the Second Amendment was fully enforced.
When I moved here over 30 years ago, this was a fabulous state. It had about half the population, the towns in the San Francisco Bay Area were actual separate towns, the highways carried the traffic pretty well, there was adequate water in the reservoirs despite a three year repeating rain and drought cycle, and the governors were Republican. Illegal aliens back then weren’t as big a problem. They couldn’t get driver licenses, or vote because no one checked I.D., or be harbored as fugitives by “sanctuary cities.” Racist advocacy groups such as La Raza were no where near as prominent, students didn’t march down the streets behind flags of Mexico demanding that the vote for President be overturned, and we weren’t all identified, divided, and ruled as separate skin colors by our state government.
Dear Democrat Electors:
It is time for you to rise up and stand with your country and your President. Change your vote and vote for Donald Trump. He won anyway, so why not go with the winner? Show what a great and just nation this is and how even though you were previously committed to a completely corrupt, socialist, organized crime boss with an insatiable lust for power, that you can rise above this and vote your conscience. So change your vote and vote for Trump.
Regarding the Russian election hacking. I’ve heard that CNN works for the Russian Government and is actually in on the hacking. Since they were connected by debate questions to the Clinton campaign, and are probably connected to the Clinton Foundation, I think the CNN / Kremlin connection has to be investigated. We should probably get this to the electors before they vote. I think Congress has to hold hearings on this immediately.
Every time the issue of illegal aliens or deportation comes up, the Left, argues against something they know isn’t going to happen. But the reason the Left always brings the conversation to the line, “how are you going to round up and deport 15 million undocumented immigrants?” is not to get an answer, It is to get you to feel bad for even thinking about deporting anyone. Because they know it isn’t going to happen the way they describe, their argument is completely bogus. But it is incredibly effective, which is why you keep hearing the line.
I am quite fascinated with the obsession the Left currently has with the popular vote for President. As usual this is a matter of expediency, desperation to get their own way given the results of the election, and the usual public deception for how our system actually works. There certainly isn’t a shred of principle involved. So let’s investigate this a bit.
We are a Republic, thank God, not a Democracy, so the popular vote is irrelevant to presidential elections. It simply doesn’t matter, it is meaningless, so talking about it is just an obsession with nothing. We elect by Electoral College, a brilliant system that involves the whole country in the election, and not just a few big, urban cities full of government dependent Democrats. The system is designed to make the best decision for President, and in this case it worked perfectly.
There is an effort by the Clinton Campaign and their operatives and fundraisers to install Clinton as President. They are using the public face of Jill Stein to raise millions in funding, to force recounts in states that the Democrats think they can somehow overturn. But has anyone stopped to think for a second what would, could, or might actually happen at this time, should that come to pass?
Since no media outlet in the country to my knowledge has or will sit down with Donald Trump before the election, and in a logical way go over and review his Contract with the American Voter, I shall do my own review. Considering what is at stake in this election, wouldn’t it be nice to have an explanation from Trump, and a critique, so the voters can make an informed decision? I think Trump is doing a tremendous disservice to himself, all his supporters which includes me, and especially the independent voters, by not going over this Contract a whole lot more. Independents have no chance of getting to know Trump fully unless someone introduces this material to them. Don’t y’all read a contract before signing? It’s the same with voting. So, let me go over this with you and perhaps you can share this analysis and talk about the governing agenda Trump is running on. Because no one, not even Trump, is making this the priority it should be.
Here are two links (Here and Here) to the Contract which spell it all out. I’m not going to copy the descriptions, just give you enough so you know which point I’m talking about.
All rights come from God. We are born with them. They are unalienable, which means no power on Earth can take them away. They stay with us for life. All rights are individual, and they are absolute within the context of the right. If rights are not absolute, then they aren’t a right at all. If one aspect of a right can be shed, then so can the whole right. If a right can be “interpreted,” then it can be interpreted out of existence. One right that is universal and a natural right is the right of self-preservation. Included in that is the right of self-defense. Implicit in that is the right to possess the implements to defend oneself. It is because rights are absolute that the right to the implements of self defense can not be touched by government. Because if the implements (arms) could be touched (infringed), then the right wouldn’t be absolute, and therefore wouldn’t be a right at all. Which is why there is no such thing as a “reasonable restriction” on a right.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2017 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2017 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement