Newt is NOT a Conservative

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Pop Quiz: Who said this?

“The Progressive Movement has profoundly changed America for the better.”

If you said it was the great conservative, Newt Gingrich, you’d be correct. I’m kidding about the whole great conservative thing.

Yet today, that dope, Rick Perry drops out of the race and follows Sarah Palin by endorsing Newt. Has the world turn completely upside down? Heck, even Rush Limbaugh calls Newt a conservative.

This is yet another example of why I repeat, Newt Gingrich is NOT a conservative. Newt Gingrich is a big government Progressive. He has stated, on several occasions, his favorite Presidents were progressives.
I have personally heard him give positive statements regarding them all. He didn’t describe them as progressives, but has called them out by name. Andrew Jackson, Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson & FDR. The only one he left out was LBJ. What true conservative, with any reverence and understanding of the Constitution, could possibly think this; much less say it out loud. In my opinion, these 4 are not only, not good, but are the 4 worst presidents in history!

Then why would he do this? Why would he speak favorably of these gentlemen? That’s an easy question to answer. He knows, as do many of us, the general public has been taught next to nothing of our history. He throws these historical quips and quotes out during the debates. He sounds like the great historian & is never challenged due to the dearth of historical knowledge of the other candidates or the moderators.

On that note I would like to present one of the great men Newt has recently quoted & appears to have great respect for; President Andrew Jackson.

Many believe the Father of Progressivism was Theodore Roosevelt. In fact it was Andrew Jackson. Andrew Jackson came to prominence as the Founding Fathers died out and I believe the republic that they envisioned also died with Jackson. He could not have done what he did if they had been around.

Jackson believed in Manifest Destiny, which is kind of the perversion of Divine Providence. Divine Providence occurs when you live your life in a good and moral way, try your best and pull yourself up by the bootstraps, God will open doors for you. You know, “Good things happen to good people”.

Manifest Destiny is more of the, “Get out of my way. I’m on a mission from God”. It’s my way or the highway. Like all progressives, he knew better than the people.

Founding Fathers = Divine Providence, Progressives = Manifest Destiny. It’s no surprise Jackson was also the father of the democrat party.

He declared war on the Bank of the United States (B.U.S.). I’m no fan of any national bank but unlike the Federal Reserve of today, the B.U.S. did not wield nearly the power of today’s central bank.

Although he declared it, he wasn’t championing the working class or Ron Paul supporters. He claimed to be fighting for the “little man”. Sound familiar? In fact he just wanted to shut the bank down because he couldn’t control it. Jackson simply wanted to replace it with another bank completely controlled by him and his party. Progressives must control all things for the betterment of society. They arrest control by pretending to be the champions of the “Little Guy”.

Most Americans think the Civil War was fought solely about slavery. In fact Andrew Jackson started the ball rolling when he signed the Tariff of 1832 that taxed imported and exported goods. The North grew successfully
under this tariff. The tax was rough on the southerners. As Andrew Jackson continued to tax goods, southerners found it hard to sell their products to the English and suffered badly.. South Carolina firmly refused to pay the taxes and threatened to withdraw from the Union if the tariff was enforced. It was eventually rewritten, but the damage between the North & South had been done.

Like the progressives that would follow, he was also a flaming racist. He believed neither Indians nor blacks should own any property in the U.S. He particularly hated Indians.

We have all heard of the “Trail of Tears”. That was Andrew Jackson’s doing. He declared war on the Eastern Indian Tribes, signing the Indian Removal Act. There would be no tribes east of the Mississippi. Many Indians were massacred. Those he didn’t have killed, were driven west along; you guessed it,
“The Trail of Tears”. Many of the Indians died on the trail (roughly 25%), freezing to death.

His excuse for the atrocity was, “Well, we needed the land, so we took it”. Manifest Destiny.

Andrew Jackson was a BAD dude & Newt goes out of his way to speak highly of him.

This is the advertised “True Conservative”?

Don’t be fooled!

Coffee is Found to Reduce the Risk of Diabetes

From ACS (American Chemical Society): New evidence that drinking coffee may reduce the risk of diabetes.

Why do heavy coffee drinkers have a lower risk of developing Type 2 diabetes, a disease on the increase around the world that can lead to serious health problems? Scientists are offering a new solution to that long-standing mystery in an ACS, ‘Journal of Agricultural & Food Chemistry’ report.

Scientists are reporting new evidence that drinking coffee may help prevent diabetes and that caffeine may be the ingredient largely responsible for this effect. Their findings are among the first animal studies to demonstrate this apparent link.

Ling Zheng, Kun Huang and colleagues explain that previous studies show that coffee drinkers are at a lower risk for developing Type 2 diabetes, which accounts for 90-95 percent of diabetes cases in the world.

Those studies show that people who drink four or more cups of coffee daily have a 50 percent lower risk of developing Type 2 diabetes and every additional cup of coffee brings another decrease in risk of almost 7 percent.

Scientists have implicated the misfolding of a substance called human islet amyloid polypeptide (hIAPP)

Full length human islet amyloid polypeptide (hIAPP)

in causing Type 2 diabetes, and some are seeking ways to block that process. Zheng and Huang decided to see if coffee’s beneficial effects might be due to substances that block hIAPP.

Indeed, they did identify two categories of compounds in coffee that significantly inhibited hIAPP. They suggest that this effect explains why coffee drinkers show a lower risk for developing diabetes. “A beneficial effect may thus be expected for a regular coffee drinker”, the researchers conclude.

The scientists fed either water or coffee to a group of laboratory mice commonly used to study diabetes.

Coffee consumption prevented the development of high-blood sugar and also improved insulin
sensitivity in the mice, thereby reducing the risk of diabetes.

Coffee also caused a cascade of other beneficial changes in the fatty liver and inflammatory adipocytokines related to a reduced diabetes risk.

Additional lab studies showed that caffeine may be “one of the most effective anti-diabetic compounds in coffee,” the scientists say.

Rick Santorum, A Real Conservative

[Editorial Comment: The following was not a prepared speech. It was completely extemporaneous. There was no script, no teleprompter, no blackberry and no one speaking into his ear telling him what to say. You tell me who the REAL conservative is.]

Lexington, S.C.

From: The Weekly Standard:

In the back room at the Flight Deck restaurant Tuesday afternoon, a voter posed an interesting question to Rick Santorum. What is Santorum’s own view of the Constitution,
the voter wanted to know, given that Ron Paul frequently casts himself as the only candidate who wants to adhere to the Constitution? In response, Santorum fished out of his pocket his miniature copy of the Constitution and held it tightly in his hand.

“I have a very good grasp of the Constitution,” Santorum joked. Then the former senator from Pennsylvania got serious, describing his own philosophy on the Constitution and contrasting it with Paul’s.

Ron Paul has a libertarian view of the Constitution. I do not. The Constitution has to be read in the context of another founding document, and that’s the Declaration of Independence. Our country never was a libertarian idea of radical individualism. We have certain values and principles that are embodied in our country. We have God-given rights.

The Constitution is not the “why” of America; it’s the “how” of America. It’s the operator’s manual. It’s the rules we have to play by to ensure something. And what do we ensure? God-given rights. And so to read the Constitution as the end-all, be-all is, in a sense, what happened in France.

“You see, during the ti
me of our revolution, we had a Declaration of Independence that said, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, [that they are] endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

So we were founded as a country that had God-given rights that the government had to respect. And with those rights come responsibilities, right? God did not just give us rights. He gave us a moral code by which to exercise them.

See, that’s what Ron Paul sort of leaves out. He leaves out rights and responsibilities that we have from God that this Constitution is to protect. And he says, “No, we just have rights, and then that’s it.” No, we don’t. America is a moral enterprise….

My understanding of our founding documents and the purpose of this country is different. I would argue that [Paul’s] understanding of the Constitution was similar to the French Revolution and the French understanding of the Constitution.

The French had 21,
I think, constitutions, but their constitutions were initially patterned after the American Constitution. Gave radical freedom, like ours does.

But their founding document was not the Declaration of Independence. Their founding watchwords were the words, “liberty” and “fraternity.” Fraternity. Brotherhood. But no fatherhood. No God. It was a completely secular revolution. An anti-clerical revolution. And the root of it was, whoever’s in power rules.

Ah, Islam. The Religion of Peace

Last week, the principal Palestinian Authority religious leader, the Mufti Muhammad Hussein, presented the killing of Jews by Moslems as a religious Islamic goal.

A moderator at an event celebrating the 47th anniversary of the founding of Fatah said, “Our war with the descendants of the apes and pigs (i.e., Jews) is a war of religion and faith”.

The Mufti then cited the Hadith (Islamic tradition attributed to Muhammad) saying that the Hour of Resurrection will not come until Moslems fight the Jews and kill them.

There are numerous collections of Hadith, some of which are not accepted as reliable.

However, the Mufti stressed that the Islamic belief that Jews will be killed by Moslems as a precursor to Resurrection, is an authentic Islamic belief because it appears in “the reliable” and trusted Hadith collections of Al-Bukhari and Muslim.

This is not the first time the Mufti has incited to hatred against Jews in the name of Islam. In a sermon at the Al-Aqsa Mosque in 2010, he preached that the Jews are the “enemies of Allah.”

The Mufti is appointed by Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas. The same leader with which the United States insists Israel have peace talks.

This Islamic tradition asserts that as the killing of Jews will progress, Jews will hide behind stones and trees, but even they will expose the Jews and call out: “Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.”

One tree however, called the Gharqad, will hide the Jews from
the Moslems.

The Mufti in his talk at the Fatah event claimed that in
response to this Islamic belief, Israelis have been planting Gharqad trees around their cities and towns, in order to have a place to hide from the Moslems who will be coming to kill them.

The Mufti proclaimed, “The Hour [of Resurrection] will not come until you fight the Jews. The Jew will hide behind stones or trees.”

“Then the stones or trees will call: Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Except the Gharqad tree [which will keep silent].”

“Therefore it is no wonder that you see Gharqad [trees]
surrounding the [Israeli] settlements and colonies.”

Anyone who believes there can be peace between Israel and these Islamists is surely a fool.

Attribution: Independent Media

Americas Next Great Fuel Source

The United States Navy, the world’s largest single user of marine fuels, burns around 40 million barrels of oil a year. It is busy trying to find a replacement for the dirty, planet killing substance and has pledged to cut 50% of its conventional oil use a year by 2020.

Maybe they should install windmills on every ship, or replace the aircraft carriers flight decks with solar panels.

While both of my suggestions hold merit, the Department of the Navy is instead experimenting with algae oil as a way to wean itself from petroleum.

Drilling for our own oil is evidently out of the question.

It seems our military has not only become a great social experiment but has also become the next laboratory for the green movement.

Industry reports claim that unlike early biofuels, which made transport fuel from food crops, the new “second generation” process uses only plant (crop) waste and does not displace foods which could be fed to people. Nevertheless, immense amounts of feedstock (nutrients) would be needed to produce the algae oil to power the world’s ships.

Maersk, the worlds largest shipping line, estimates it would take the crop waste (feedstock) of an area half the size of Denmark to completely power its ships.

Math time: Half of Denmark is roughly the size of Massachusetts (the whole state), about 16,600 square miles. There are 460 acres in a square mile. That’s 7,636,000 acres for one shipping company. What a deal. The entire proposed ANWR oil drilling site was 1,500,000 acres (3260 sq miles).

Unfortunately crop waste or “residue” is not just waste. It is already being utilized as livestock feed & fertilizer. Thus the name, “feedstock”. So, instead of diverting a primary food source like corn, we deplete a secondary source. Either way, the cost of food goes up. Hooray for more starving people!

Speaking of cost, in October 2010, the US Navy purchased 20 thousand gallons of algae biofuel for a single Naval ship trial.

Jackalyne Pfannenstiel, assistant secretary of the Navy for energy, speaking at the Point Loma Naval Base pier proclaimed, “ This event marks a major milestone in our progress toward a great green fleet”.

How much did they pay for this major milestone, you might ask? Only $424 a gallon. Crack the Champagne!

The cost has apparently come down though. Couldn’t be due to the Navy, the U.S. Energy and Agriculture departments investing $170 million each to fund biofuel development.

By the way, that 20,000 gallons of green crude was supplied by Solazyme, a San Francisco-based biofuel company.

And, just a rumination. San Francisco is in who’s congressional district? Oh, that’s right, Nancy Pelosi. Sheer coincidence. I’m such a cynic.

So, I guess mankind has developed yet another “viable”, cost efficient alternative to the dreaded hydrocarbon.

What’s next, The Matrix?

Hooray for Allen West

From Daniel Halper of The Weekly Standard:

Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.), a former Army lieutenant colonel, sends THE WEEKLY STANDARD an email commenting on the Marines’ video, and has given us permission to publish it.

“I have sat back and assessed the incident with the video of our Marines urinating on Taliban corpses. I do not recall any self-righteous indignation when our Delta snipers Shugart and Gordon had their bodies dragged through Mogadishu. Neither do I recall media outrage and condemnation of our Blackwater security contractors being killed, their bodies burned, and hung from a bridge in Fallujah.

“All these over-emotional pundits and armchair quarterbacks need to chill. Does anyone remember the two Soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division who were beheaded and gutted in Iraq?

“The Marines were wrong. Give them a maximum punishment under field grade level Article 15 (non-judicial punishment), place a General Officer level letter of reprimand in their personnel file, and have them in full dress uniform stand before their Battalion, each personally apologize to God, Country, and Corps videotaped and conclude by singing the full US Marine Corps Hymn without a teleprompter.

“As for everyone else, unless you have been shot at by the Taliban, shut your mouth, war is hell.”

End: Weekly Standard Article

What is a General Officer level letter?

A General Officer level letter or LOR (Letter of Reprimand), is an administrative censure or “chewing out” given to a soldier for a failure to comply with established standards.
It may be filed in either ones Military Personnel Record Jacket (MPRJ) or Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).

A LOR filed in a soldier’s MPRJ can only be made by an enlisted soldier’s immediate commander (or a higher commander in his/her chain of command), school commandant, any general officer or an officer exercising general court-martial jurisdiction over the soldier. Letters
filed in your MPRJ may remain for up to three years or until you are reassigned to a new general court-martial jurisdiction, whichever is sooner.

A LOR filed in a soldier’s OMPF, regardless of the issuing authority, can only be filed upon the order of a general officer senior to the soldier, or by direction of an officer having general court-martial jurisdiction over the soldier. Letters filed in your OMPF are permanently placed in the performance fiche (P-fiche), and may adversely affect your military career in the future. Moreover, the LOR is also placed in your MPRJ as long as it remains in your P-fiche.

So what is an Article 15?

Within the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) is a provision for punishing misconduct through judicial proceedings like a court-martial.
The UCMJ also gives commanders the authority to impose nonjudicial punishment, described in the UCMJ under Article 15. Article 15 provides commanders an essential tool in maintaining discipline. The Article allows commanders to impose punishment for relatively minor infractions. Only commanders may impose punishment under Article 15. A commander is any warrant officer or commissioned officer that is in command of a unit and has been given authority under AR 600-20, either orally or in writing, to administer nonjudical punishment.

Article 15s come in different levels: Summarized, Company Grade and Field Grade. They differ in two main respects: the severity of the punishment and in how the record of it can affect a soldier’s future in the Military.

Maximum Punishments In Article 15:

The EPA Must Just Hate Us All

This may cause blood to shoot out of your eyes. As Glenn Beck says; this is a true “Duct Tape” moment.

These people have to go!!

From EPAabuse.com:

The EPA has brought surface mining to a halt in Appalachia, allegedly to protect the Mayfly. In surface mining, the miners put the rock and dirt in the surrounding areas or valleys. When water flows through these areas, it can become saltier. The salt may be harmful to Mayflies. It is not harmful to humans.

What’s a Mayfly? It’s a tiny insect that lives in a larvae stage in water for as long as three years. As an adult, it has no usable mouth and usually lives no longer than three hours. The females reproduce during that brief time and then die. In short, these are essentially worthless insects.

To the EPA and the environmentalists, however, the existence of the Mayfly is excuse enough to shut down coal mining in one area of our nation. Lisa Jackson and Obama are willing to sacrifice an abundant source of energy to protect a bug that lives only three hours to lay more eggs.

Ah, but there’s more.

In Nebraska, environmentalists are busy protecting the American burying beetle from the evils of the Keystone XL pipeline. The burying beetle (Nicorphorus americanus) in Nebraska makes its home in the Sand Hills – a route contemplated by the TransCanada corporation for the pipeline.

Because of the beetle, the TransCanada corp. is overhauling its plans so it can avoid the beetle habitat. The company had originally agreed to pledge $2 million to encourage ranching practices that protected the beetles or to purchase land that would be managed for the beetles.
Wyatt Hoback, a University of Nebraska biology professor was actually hired by TransCanada to work with his students to trap and move 2,400 beetles from the original pipeline path, which cut across 100 miles of the Sand Hills.

Hoback’s relocation project for burying beetles was covered on “Dirty Jobs” on the Discovery Channel.

Imagine this: Three environmental groups actually filed a federal lawsuit challenging the relocation program for these endangered beetles! Apparently, it’s not even permissible to move a bug from where they live to a safe location where they won’t be crushed by bulldozers.

The burying beetle’s Sand Hills home is safe from the evil pipeline.
Once TransCanada locates another route through Nebraska, rest assured that some bug-loving lunatic will find yet another bug, mouse, tic, plant or endangered rock formation to protect from the wicked energy producers.

And, you can expect that the EPA will jump on whatever excuse it can find to stop energy production in the U.S. It is clear that Lisa Jackson and her radical allies love bugs more than humans.

Conservatives Rule??

From The Blaze:

While many elements of society seem to surely be shifting ever-further to the left of the political spectrum, a recent Gallup poll released Thursday reveals otherwise. According to the survey, conservatives continue to make up the largest political segment in the country, outnumbering liberals nearly two-to-one.

The Gallup poll shows that 40 percent of Americans consider themselves conservative; 35 percent moderate; and 21 percent view themselves as liberal. The figures are no different than they were in 2010 and conservatives have outnumbered both moderates and liberals for three years running now.

Politico adds:

Conservatives began outstripping moderates in 2008, and the percentage of moderates has declined steadily over the last two decades, from 43 percent 1992 to 35 percent in 2011.

In fact, both self-identified conservatives and liberals have risen in number since the early 1990s, indicating a growing polarization in American politics.

While self-identified conservatives dominate the Republican Party, making up 71 percent, the Democratic Party is more split – 39 percent of Democrats view themselves as liberal, and 38 percent consider themselves moderates.

It might be worth noting that, per the poll’s findings, independents are mainly moderate (41 percent), but veer more towards conservatism (35 percent) than liberalism (20 percent).

The Gallup poll was conducted with 20,392 respondents and allows for a margin of error of plus or minus one.

Editorial Comment: Sorry to be a downer, but I personally am not buying any of this. If this poll is even close to accurate, how is it we keep electing and reelecting, squishy, middle of the road moderates. How is our frontrunning presidential candidate, “Thoroughly Moderate Mitt”.

Maybe it’s conservatives fear of losing that overshadows their better judgement? I don’t know what it is. All I know is that I am conservative & I am disappointed every election cycle.