Michelle Bachmann is the dark horse

It's my belief that Michelle Bachmann would survive and rise in the polls in the coming weeks. I am yet to be satisfied that her positions and desirability have precluded her from gaining the GOP candidacy.

Now, Herman Cain is on the rise by his tax plan and his lack of funds are a liability. Mitt Romney remains a Mormon who is under suspicion of being a liberal. Newt is has too much baggage to continue and every believes he has too much baggage. Rick Perry is now Alice in Wonderland. He has lost his bearings and would continue to falter. Santorum is not too charming and he does not inspire confidence that he would beat Obama.

The two left are Ron Paul and Michelle Bachmann. When the dust would have cleared only two candidates could survive the conservative test in my view.

Brown signs California Dream Act

On October 8th, 2011 the Los Angeles Times reported that California governor Jerry Brown signed the California Dream Act into law. The legislation "granted illegal immigrants access to state financial aid at public universities and community colleges..." Why any state would enact such a law eludes me.


The usual criticism is that such financial incentives ignore federal law by encouraging and condoning illegal migration. Further, out of state U.S. citizens and legal resident still have to pay out of state tuition. Consequently, illegal immigrants enjoy benefits that some citizens and legal residents don't. Not to mention the fact that the state of California is running on a deficit budget. The question is why give freebies to individuals who don't deserve it in a time of scarcity?


The proponents of state's rights would say that California has the right to make such a concession to illegal immigrants. Fair enough. Just like the federal government, the government of California eludes the fact that reality always bites the deficit spender in the butt. Sooner or later the state would be broke and be forced to raise taxes and cut spending. I would imagine that the very individuals who benefited from the subsidization of illegal immigration would move to another state with the education they got thanks to the late great California.


According to the LA Times 'Brown downplayed the cost to taxpayers. He said the California Department of Finance estimates 2,500 additional students will qualify for Cal-Grants as a result of the Dream Act, at a cost of $14.5 million." Of course, all the estimates ignore the a potential increase in illegal immigrants to California. Additional students will qualify on top of the 2500 figure because there is an incentive for illegal immigrants to move to California. The problem of enumerating illegal immigrants (the college bound and other)remains despite Jerry Brown's estimates.

The Pathetic attempt to smear Iran and save Holder

According to Associated Press "The Obama administration accused Iranian government agents Tuesday of plotting to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in the United States and immediately used the thwarted plot to ratchet up sanctions and recruit international allies to try to further isolate Tehran."


Of course, it's okay for the United State government to assassinate individuals in foreign nations and kill innocent individuals in the process. However, when it comes to a supposed plot by another nation to do the same thing, then a grave sin has been committed.


The question is what Iran had to gain from the act? Also, why was the plot so shoddy in operational details whereby Iran could not have denied involvement had it happened? Why is the Iranian government being punish for the conspiracy when no evidence was cited that the government itself was involved?


At this point the story around the plot is ridiculous. The only parties who benefit from the plot are the U.S. attorney general and other arms of the state that want to weaken Iran.

Ron Paul wins Values Voter Summit straw poll

Ron Paul has won yet another straw poll. Indeed, he delivered a powerful speech before an audience at the Values Voter Summit presidential straw poll. Paul discussed how debt, overspending and economic woes take a toll on the family. He also correctly cited the fact that many military families are broken because soldiers are gravely affected by war psychologically, physically and financially. Underlying this sentiment is Paul's view that many of the wars being fought now are unjust and unnecessary; a sentiment that I endorse. 

Of course, the malcontents are saying that straw polls are irrelevant. Some have even gone far enough to claim that the Paul campaign was too effective at getting supporters to vote therefore something morally wrong must have taken place. 

To my understanding, a straw poll is a simulation designed to gauge the level of support for a candidate in an area and around a time period. The mere fact that supporters would show up to vote in a nonbinding election is indicative of what likely to play out on an actual election day. Moreover, the winner of a straw poll normally gets to dominate the news cycle for a few days or weeks.

It would be mistaken to say that straw polls are useless when the case of Herman Cain winning the Florida straw poll meant more media coverage for him and his subsequent upswing in polls. 

Ron Paul winning the straw poll should mean more positive media coverage. In this sense, winning the poll is vital to a candidate that has few advocates in the mainstream media. 

The critics would argue that the Paul campaign bought the straw poll or they stuffed ballots by busing voters in. All of the foregoing is speculation by incredulous Ron Paul haters. What is fact is that Paul has a high level of support, which translated into actual votes. It matters not how the voters got to the venue; all that matter is that they were there. Ron Paul got values!

Congratulations to Ron Paul and special thanks to those who voted for him.

Omaha Considers Allowing Legal Immigrants to Register Guns...Finally

According to the Omaha World Herald, Omaha Police Chief, Alex Hayes, submitted a memo to the city council on Friday 30th, September proposing changes "designed to make city regulations consistent with state and federal gun registration laws — while adding a section that encourages voluntary weapon registration."

Of course, the City of Omaha, Nebraska was incredibly short-sighted to have restricted the legal immigrants from registering firearms in the first place. The state of Nebraska allows legal immigrants to legally own guns. However, a Nebraskan city with a sizable legal immigrant population disallowed it.


The Omaha police chief said that the changes were in the pipeline for some time now. He even suggested that a lawsuit filed against city was negligible in influencing his or the city's decision. Quoting the Omaha World Herald again,"The lawsuit was filed by the Washington-based Second Amendment Foundation, the Nebraska Firearms Owners Association and Armando Pliego Gonzalez." Indeed, Armando Pliego Gonzalez is reported as saying that "It's a good thing. We have been trying to do something" by KETV NewsWatch 7.

I really hope that the Omaha city council changes the ordinance and allows legal immigrants to register firearms. Surely, it's the right thing to do.

Grammatically Correct

I suffer from the condition known as 'reading from memory instead of what is one the screen'. Therefore, isolated grammatical errors would all be corrected within 72 hours of a posting date.

Anwar al-Awlaki was assassinated.

Anwar al-Awlaki the accused terrorist propagandist and plotter was assassinated in Yemen on Friday 30th, September. According to reports al-Awlaki was killed by a CIA drone strike. Of course, the Muslim hating and blood thirsty avengers of the empire are gleeful at the news. However, wiser men and women such as Congressman Ron Paul have pointed out that a U.S. citizen was executed without first being afforded a trial.

I now quote some of Paul's comments to NBC news while in New Hampshire campaigning for the 2011 GOP presidential nomination:

"Al-Awlaki was born here; he is an American citizen. He was never tried or charged for any crimes. No one knows if he killed anybody. We know he might have been associated with the underwear bomber. But if the American people accept this blindly and casually that we now have an accepted practice of the president assassinating people who he thinks are bad guys, I think it's sad.”

"I think what would people have said about Timothy McVeigh? We didn't assassinate him, who we were pretty certain that he had done it. Went and put through the courts then executed him. To start assassinating American citizens without charges, we should think very seriously about this."


I agree wholeheartedly with Ron Paul in his assessment and concern. Now, those who think otherwise could only muster three types of responses.

1) Claim that al-Awlaki was not a U.S. citizen or ceased to be U.S. citizen because he criticized the state and advocated taking up arms against the state.

2) Claim that the U.S. Constitution does not preclude the extra-judicial killing of a U.S. citizen in all circumstance of which this case is representative.

3) Claim that the means justify the ends. Also, make the case that the law cannot keep up with the complexity of the threats that are faced by the U.S. Therefore, the president must act to eliminate threats as needed.


Firstly, al-Awlaki was born in New Mexico. He is a natural born U.S. citizen. As well, criticism of the government or even calling for an armed revolt does not relieve an American of citizenship. A charge of treason is not a letter to the editor but a legal judgement. It has not been made.


Second, the analogy whereby the police are compelled to kill a suspect to protect their own lives or that of others is not germane in this case. Al-Awlaki was not an imminent threat to the U.S. Further, a police officer who discharges his weapon or kills someone must prove that he acted within law. The U.S. government has not presented any evidence to prove that Al-Awlaki was an imminent threat.


Thirdly, giving the president the luxury of ignoring the Constitution and executing U.S. citizens without a trial is a danger to all of us. The definition of terrorism is very malleable (Patriot Act!)and could be used against anyone. The quest for revenge or justice should not lead to the negation of the very article that makes justice possible: the Constitution.

Further Reading:
     The due-process-free assassination of U.S. citizens is now reality by Glenn Greenwald