Daylight Savings Time SUCKS

God invented time. Man invented clocks to measure and quantify it. Man gave time various names to describe time. Currently, we have Eastern Standard Time (EST), Central Standard Time (CST), Mountain Standard Time (MST), and Pacific Standard Time (PST).

Politicians invented ways to try and "control" time. They invented "Daylight Savings Time" (DST) or sometimes called "Summer Time." They claim it makes better use of the daylight in the evenings in the summer months.

Only a politician could contrive this insane plan. You move the clock ahead in the spring by one hour. This is so you can take advantage of the longer days and shorter nights. In the fall, you reset your clocks back one hour because there is no more "savings" when the days become shorter.

Not all countries across the globe observe "Daylight Savings Time." The ones who do say that moving the clock ahead results in fewer automobile accidents and injuries. They also say that it increases the amount of "outdoor" activities. (Why is that important?) Here in the USA the number 1 reason stated for DST is to save energy. The GREEN movement claims that DST reduces the amount of artificial light required during evening hours. That's true, but I guess they forgot that the usage goes up proportionally in the morning and actually offsets that argument.

The USA and Canada extended DST back in 2007 by increasing the start/stop dates from April start to March and October stop date to November. Many studies have been conducted about the so-called "energy savings" and there are no real marked evidences to indicate any sound reasons for continuing this STUPID idea.

Brief History
Ben Franklin was the first to suggest such an idea in 1784. That was when there were no machines to generate electricity and create light. Lamps used oils of various types and this would reduce consumption of these expensive fuels. No one bought into his idea at that time.

It wasn't until 1905 by an English politician named William Willett. His proposal was published in the House of Commons but was not made into law until 1916 by several countries. They observed DST then to conserve fuels and make use of natural sunlight. (Remember, there was a war going on and these countries need all the fuel they could get their hands on).

Daylight Savings Time didn't come to the USA until FDR mandated it to be "year round" in 1945. He called it "War Time." This kept people here in confusion until about 1966. That's when Congress (politicians once again), established the "Uniform Time Act of 1966." It stayed that way until 2007 when (you guessed it) Congress changed DST once again.

Conclusion
There are no advantages to undergoing an exercise that creates a false sense "saving time or daylight" when it creates jet lag in a large portion of the population twice a year. This is the 21st Century - not the 1700s. Politicians always screw-up things with unintended consequences.

We should leave time alone and leave it to the guy who created it in the first place.

Feel The Pain Yet?

Insult To Injury
Obama created the idea of Sequestration and then he denied it and tried to blame it on the Republicans until it looked like it was really happening. He went on a tirade for several weeks telling us how bad it would be to cut federal spending. When he realized that he was caught lying, Obama decided to pay us (the American public) back in spades. His most trivial cut was closing the White House tours. This punishes all school children who are the recipients of the tours.

A recent memo was uncovered from the White House to the Department of Agriculture in effect telling them to make Sequestration cuts as painful as possible. According to Judge Nathan Napolitano, this act alone by Obama is an IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE. This behavior is a direct ATTACK against the American people.

Assuming that other similar memos went out to the other various government agencies, we can all expect the government to try and make our lives uncomfortable - if not plain miserable. We actually made Obama cut some spending. This is the self-fulfilling prophecy. They said it would be bad, now they are making it bad. As bad as they possibly can.

Obama's latest get-even trick is to ELIMINATE our military's tuition assistance program. The US Marines are next to follow suit. Here is what YOUR government said:

“This suspension is necessary given the significant budget execution challenges caused by the combined effects of a possible year-long continuing resolution and sequestration...”

Where is our Congress? Why aren't they looking out for us? Why aren't they looking out for our men and women who serve our country? Why haven't they accused Obama of committing "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" against us?

Action To Take
Demand that your representatives take action to STOP the maniac in the White House from destroying our military.

History Repeats

We've see this all before. It goes back further than history records. It keeps on repeating itself. Why is this?

Here's some examples:

Germany

Germany 

Iran

Iran

China

North Korea

Russia

Venezuela

Are we next on history's list? Our Constitution is being TRAMPLED by this administration. How much more can we take?

Patriot Groups

Are You A Patriot?
How can you tell if the government "thinks" you are part of a "Patriot Group?" Read the latest report from the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). They warn that there is a growing number of "Patriot Groups" popping up around the country. They warn of these "Anti-Government Radical groups" and the dangers that they have if they direct their activities towards the government.

The SPLC asserts that those who have expressed concerns over gun rights is a true mark of a person who is in a Patriot Group. They also assert that anyone who has views of the "far right" are also part of the Patriot Group movement here in America.

SPLC's Definition
Here is their definition of a person who belongs to the Patriot Group Movenment:

"Generally, Patriot groups define themselves as opposed to the “New World Order,” engage in groundless conspiracy theorizing, or advocate or adhere to extreme antigovernment doctrines. Antigovernment groups do not necessarily advocate or engage in violence or other criminal activities, though some have. Many warn of impending government violence or the need to prepare for a coming revolution. Many antigovernment groups are not racist."

What A Relief
We are NOT RACISTS!  Gee, that's a relief. Or is it? That definition places people like Glenn Beck, Alex Jones, Rush Limbaugh, Senator Rand Paul, and Senator Marco Rubio as all members of the Patriot Group movement.

The SPLC also claims the following:

"A particularly prominent conspiracy in the antigovernment movement is that the United Nations, which is usually seen as spearheading the “New World Order,” is imposing a global plan, called Agenda 21, to take away citizens’ property rights. There is a UN program with that name to develop sustainable communities across the globe. Agenda 21 was agreed to by political leaders from dozens of countries, including the first President Bush. But in typical fashion, these antigovernment activists have twisted it into a global conspiracy."

So thoughts of protecting the country or being "Conservative" are NO LONGER OK because now those that do are "Labeled" a member of the "Patriot Group." This must also include ANYONE associated with the Tea Party as well.

See the pattern yet? Pick a target, isolate it, attack it, ridicule/polarize , and discredit your opponents. This is the strategy taken directly from Rule For Radicals, by Saul Alinsky.

RED FLAG
The red warning light is flashing. Be Scared. Americans just aren't getting the message yet. Is there any hope for America?

Guest Article - Finally, Push-Back!

Sen. Ted Cruz slams AG Eric Holder’s defense of drone strikes against Americans
by Stephen C. Webster

"Under questioning by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder agreed that it would be “unconstitutional” to kill an American citizen on U.S. soil with a drone strike — absent an “imminent threat” like a 9/11-style attack or an enemy bombardment like Pearl Harbor.

Cruz refused to accept without question Holder’s assertion that any use of lethal force would not be “appropriate” given the high probability that a terrorism suspect could be captured by law enforcement personnel instead.

Cruz asked: “My question wasn’t about appropriateness or prosecutorial discretion, it was a simple legal question. Does the Constitution allow a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil who doesn’t pose an imminent threat to be killed by the U.S. government?”

Holder seemed frustrated by the question. “I do not believe… Given all the facts that you have given me, and this is a hypothetical, I would not think in that situation the use of drone– or lethal force, would be appropriate…”

Cruz cut him off. “Attorney General, I have to tell you I find it remarkable that in that hypothetical, which is deliberately very simple, you are able to give a simple, one word, one syllable answer: ‘No.’ I think it is unequivocal that if the U.S. government were to use a drone to take the life of a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil, and that individual did not pose an imminent threat, that would be a deprivation of life without due process.”

They went back and forth, basically agreeing that lethal force would not be used in such a circumstance, but Cruz grew more outraged by the second at Holder’s persistent use of the word “appropriate.” Finally, Holder said, “Let me be clear: Translate my ‘appropriate’ to ‘no.’ I thought I was saying no, alright?”

“Well, I am glad,” Cruz replied. “After much gymnastics, I am very glad to hear that it is the opinion of the Department of Justice that it would be unconstitutional to kill a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil if that individual did not pose an imminent threat. That statement has not been easily forthcoming.”

He added that forthcoming legislation would “make clear” that at no point does the currently-in-effect Authorization for Use of Military Force of 2001 permit the killing of an American on U.S. soil without proof of an imminent threat.

However, the Bush administration seriously considered using the military in a domestic law enforcement capacity in 2002, in a plan that would have sent troops to swoop in on several men in Buffalo, New York who were suspected of hatching a terrorist plot. They ultimately decided against it, even though legal experts say the congressional authorization of the use of military force is without borders and includes U.S. soil.

Holder himself admitted as much in his letter to Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) earlier this week, writing: “It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws… for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States.”"
------
People, it is time to start letting this administration that we will NOT tolerate the abuses demonstrated by this administration any longer.

OK To Kill Americans?

Current thinking in Washington: It's OK to kill Americans.


A recent poll shows that 41% of Democrats actually think that it's all right for the President to be judge, jury, and executioner when it comes to "suspected" American terrorists. In other words, go ahead and kill Americans without ANY proof that they are involved in ANY anti-American activity. Deny the "accused" any of their granted freedoms to defend themselves from an oppressive government. And what's worse, do it on American soil! This near majority believes that the President should have the power to decide who lives and who dies just based on a "hunch" not proof.

So would these American Democrats still feel the same if someone in their family was EXECUTED without ANY trial or access to a lawyer? What the Hell are these people thinking?  Are they THAT stupid or just being naive? If you give that much power to ANY President, isn't it conceivable that there will be abuse of this power? Why find out the hard way?

These same people see nothing wrong with the government's use of drones over American air space. They believe that all police departments, FBI, DHS, and other federal agencies should use this technology against Americans. They see no violations of the Bill of Rights or to the US Constitution. DUH?

This "new" idea to kill Americans without due process is not part of the system of checks and balances that the Founders established. They did so for a good reason. When you give too much power to one individual, the potential exists for abuse and misuse of that power. History shows this is usually the case from many, if not all big governments.

We need to SQUELCH these ideas because if allowed to continue, they will result in loss of freedom and creation of a totalitarian dictator. Think about it. Do you believe that it could NOT happen here in the land of the free? Welcome to "La La Land."

Once again, we cry out to WAKE UP AMERICA!

They're At It Again

Your Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is once again preparing to have combat with YOU, the citizens it's supposed to protect. This time, they are getting ready to use more formidable equipment against you. This is just another piece of the puzzle and if you don't get the picture just yet, then keep on drinking the KOOL AID. This IS Obama's Civilian National Police Force that he spoke about in 2008.

So here's their latest big purchase. They have just bought 2,700 light armored vehicles to go along with their purchase of 1.650 BILLION rounds of ammunition and 1,700 fully automatic assault rifles. Here is a picture or two to let you get some idea of the scope of this:

If those vehicles look like they belong on your local streets and roads, you'd better get used to it. They hold and easily transport 10 well-equipped soldiers. Note the shooting ports in the 6 inch bullet proof glass windows. They originally bought these vehicles for border patrols. Now they are buying them for deployment in all major cities.

These vehicles will be used to quench any civil uprisings in large cities across the nation. As Sarah Palin recently noted, the Department of Homeland Security is preparing for civil war against YOU when the dollar collapses and you have no more money in the bank.

Your only defense against them would be an anti-tank weapon because they are hardened to withstand bullets, grenades, and even rocket attacks. With run-flat tires they can still drive to their own safety - while leaving you dead or wounded. Their only true weakness is FIRE. They can and will burn. In other words, these are cheap "tanks" that they are planning on using on you.

Action To Take

Contact your representatives and ask them who's funding these purchases and what are these weapons going to be used for and against who. Chances are that your reps don't even know that this is happening in front of their very eyes.

If you haven't noticed this activity by DHS, isn't it time to show some serious concern that your government is preparing to use whatever it can AGAINST YOU AND YOUR FAMILY?