No the world is not going to end.
As a libertarian, I have the point of view of never really getting what I would like to see elected to any significant office, and we are likely still years away from seeing even a member of the U.S. House come from the Libertarian Party. As such, I have seen that it doesn’t matter who occupies the White House. Things over the last several presidents have stayed roughly the same.
It is true that economic and civil liberties are just as likely to erode as they did when President Obama was in office, and President Bush before him. The main object of people in power seems to be that they wish to continue to consolidate that power.
Many of you who are on the left are starting to feel what people like me feel every day. The lesson from this is not to grow government when you have the reins, because someday, the other side will end up getting the seat that you grew. The power and abuses you ignored under President Obama are now under a different banner. The sad thing is that the Republicans who spent the last eight years bemoaning the power of the President under Obama, will now work to consolidate it under President Trump.
This cycle repeats regularly. It takes stepping back and looking over a much longer scope of history to see this. It really does require to look at more than a single presidency or even the last couple. You need to look over the span of generations and it requires you to approach it in a different way. You need to approach things as objectively as possible to see the power pendulum swinging. You have to look at the reactions and bias of the groups on both ends as the transfer of power takes place.
I didn’t always see things this way. I used to be a Republican who would do this same cycle I speak of. Only talking about Democrats being bad and excusing things Republicans did. It took me going to war in Iraq to wake up and see that Republicans aren’t exactly freedom loving or economically inclined. I personally hope that you don’t have to wait for something as drastic as going to war to see the writing on the wall of the need for power to be limited, not grown, in government.
I invite you to seriously consider looking at things in a different way. People like me are available to answer questions all over the internet and the nation. We know what you are feeling and we know ways to help make things better in the future. We have an opportunity to build things together. Ignore the people who are trying to tell you to riot or burn things down. They are just as power hungry as any other politician. Peaceful protests are more than fine, but we need to build, not destroy.
We are going to get through this if we are willing to work together in spite of government. We can bring about a more voluntary and loving society if we ignore the rhetoric and push to improve our lives and the lives around us. Our communities are where we make a difference. One man doesn’t change that. You have all the power required.
Once again the media, in this instance the Park Record, has decided to exclude me from being able to answer questions given another candidate. I have taken the liberty of copying down the questions and answering them for the voters of 1stDistrict.
Voters deserve to know where all candidates stand on the issues. Until the media decides to stop playing the partisan games, we will have to continue to do things this way, though I would encourage all who read this to send in letters and phone calls to the media and ask that they fairly cover all candidates in a race instead of skewing it to the Democrats and/or the Republicans.
Please describe how your background prepares you to serve in the office you seek and why you have chosen to campaign for that office.
To start off, I served nearly 8 years as a United States Marine in the infantry. This has given me first-hand knowledge of what happens in war, as I was deployed twice in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. It also gave me the skills of leadership and teamwork that are necessary to help bridge the divide our nation is experiencing. It also taught me that there is such a thing as honor, and to honor my oath I took on June 16, 2003, I chose to run to defend the rights of the people; it had no expiration for me.
I also served 3 years at the Internal Revenue Service in the Business Division. This has given me great insight to the many problems within our tax code. I dealt with the direct issues employers were having. I have heard their complaints every day, and also heard their suggestions. Though at the time I could not do anything to change the way the law was, if elected, I would be able to apply this experience to helping the businesses in America grow and prosper.
Finally, I am a small business owner. I know what it is like to roll up your sleeves and get to work. I chose to forge my own path, and while it may not be a multi-million dollar corporation, the fact that I can feed my family is a success. Tied in with this business experience, I am also the President of two non-profits, so I deal with the day in and day out of working with people.
The Park City and Summit County economies have performed solidly during the current two-year congressional term. Please discuss your reasoning for the performance of the local economy and identify one policy you will pursue during the next congressional term to ensure further economic expansion in the community.
Utah overall has had great results economically compared to other states in the nation. Our unemployment is one of the lowest, and I think it can really be attributed to the “can do” attitude the people of this state have. We aren’t afraid to roll up our sleeves and do the jobs necessary to take care of our loved ones. Park City and Summit County are no exception. They have that same grit to do what they need to, and because of this attitude, it’s not just surviving but thriving.
I think one of the best things I could do is listen to the small business leaders in the community. We constantly hear about Congressmen and women essentially being bought and paid for by large corporation, and that is why I’m not interested in talking to them. They will survive without my ear. The people who need the most help are the “ma and pa” stores. The self-owned restaurants. The bait and tackle shops. The snowboard rental stores. They are the ones we need to listen to.
I stated earlier that I worked in the Business Division of the IRS and there were a top number of complaints we dealt with: taxation being too much, regulations being a burden, and confusion with the ever evolving tax code. We need to simplify things for the businesses that can’t afford the team of lawyers and lobbyists. We need to make it easier on them.
Please discuss your opinion of the benefits and drawbacks of the Affordable Care Act. Please describe one item you would like added to the health care law and one that you would like removed.
I have been fairly strong worded about the ACA, and for good reason. I honestly don’t think the approach taken was helpful in the least. My dad told me a story to relate, and I will share it with you: When you have a leaking roof, you go up and apply some tar, maybe some new shingles, but you don’t tear the whole house down and rebuild.
There were obviously some needed reforms in the healthcare industry, but the ACA tore down the house, and some problems are still not addressed.
To be honest, I would scrap the entire law and go back to the drawing board addressing one specific issue at a time. Like college students being allowed to remain on their parents’ insurance. That could have been one law passed.
When we address the issues one at a time like this, it works far more efficiently. And if Congress is going to use the excuse that “there isn’t enough time for that,” well, maybe it’s time for them to work more than 120 days out of a year or maybe the bill shouldn’t exist if it needs to be so massively sweeping no one can read it.
The situation in Iraq has deteriorated in recent months, more than a decade after the U.S.-led invasion of the country. What dangers do you foresee for the United States in Iraq and what role should the U.S. have in Iraq as the government there struggles to maintain control?
This is where I am going to be very clearly contrasted from all my opponents in the race. I do not think we have any more business in the countries of Iraq and Syria. It is a no win situation for America.
If we go in and help defeat ISIS, then Bashar Assad will remain in power as a dictator and continue to oppress his people. If we support ISIS, then something worse comes along. We have seen examples like this happen time and time again when the United States starts getting involved with other nations.
Let’s not also forget that we really should not have been involved in Iraq in the first place. I personally believe that the actions we took were at least borderline criminal.
We also have no clear objectives, and as a former infantryman, you need to have a clear mission in order to accomplish it. We cannot continue to risk the lives of our young men and women in international conflicts, the price is too great. Our Department of Defense should actually start worrying about defense and not deploying all over the world to be involved in conflicts we have no business in.
Many Americans see partisan gridlock in Washington, D.C., as one of the inhibitors to progress in the country, pointing to the government shutdown as an example. Please discuss the problems created by the partisan nature of Washington and describe one effort you pledge to make to cooperate with the other side of the aisle.
Well, let me just say that first of all, I am not partisan. I am running to represent the people in Utah’s District, and if the Libertarian Party started to ask me to do things that did not involve increases in liberty or prosperity for all my constituents, I would leave the party.
It’s high time that we stopped having the partisan lines drawn. It is one of the reasons I chose to run in the first place. Congressman Bishop blames Harry Reid, and Donna McAleer blames Congressman Bishop. They are all part of the problem. They will tow whatever line their party tells them to. So in spite of Ms. McAleer’s promises, I’m afraid that she’d only add to the gridlock, not work to solve it.
I have no qualms working with anyone that has the voters’ best interests in mind, so long as the law being passed respects individual and economic liberty, and also falls within the defined limits of the U.S. Constitution.
I pledge to the voters of Utah that I will not join in the political hackery that goes on in Washington, D.C. I am going there to represent you, and I will be your voice, but more than that, lend you and not the lobbyists and special interests my ear.
The tourism-heavy economy of Park City has for years relied at some level on foreign workers, both those in the United States legally and those in the country illegally. Please discuss your preferred immigration reform package. In your answer, please address the idea of amnesty for those already in the United States illegally.
I honestly would like to see a time where we are allowed to freely travel, work, and live anywhere we want, and that includes those in Latin America and Mexico. We do need to have border security to guard against threats, but someone wanting to work here and better their life is no threat.
I do not believe that they should be granted amnesty for citizenship, and should apply like everyone else to become a citizen, but I have no issues with them being here.
To address the concerns of them not paying taxes or getting benefits from the welfare programs, I have addressed this concern in some of the welfare reforms I have proposed and my tax plan to initiate the Fair Tax.
Benefits can only be extended to U.S. citizens, is the short answer on the reforms, but I do have a little more in depth on my website, too much to say here today. As for the Fair Tax, to summarize, it removes all forms of taxation currently in place and essentially creates a national consumption tax based on the purchase of new goods, with the exclusion of necessities like food, water, and housing. This means that all other spending done in the United States is taxed, which means there will be no “under the table” pay not making it into the revenue.
Please identify one of President Obama’s policies you support and one that you oppose. Please explain the reasoning behind your support and opposition.
To be honest, I really cannot think of anything off the top of my head I have openly supported from President Obama. He really seems to be continuing a lot of former President Bush’s policies, and so I don’t have a lot I can say in favor of what he’s tried to do. I really would have liked to see him uphold the promises he made, and has had several opportunities with bill passage he could have vetoed, but didn’t.
Please differentiate yourself from your opponents.
Well, I don’t avoid media questions and constituents like Congressman Bishop has shown to do. I am open and honest about any questions asked of me, and really try to have a 24 hour turn around on answering a question I receive.
As for Donna McAleer, I am the only candidate who is truly without the support of special interests. She has claimed many times that she is the candidate running without them, but when you look into her financials, you can see that she has received money from several sources that are not individual voters (approximately 15% from PACs, though to her credit far lower than Congressman Bishop who is closer to 80%). I have only received money from the Libertarian Party of Utah and individual voters. I’m not interested in money from PACs, unions, or any other groups. The voters’ voices matter.
Many of us have formulated opinions on the case of the Bureau of Land Management and their handling of the Bundy case in Clark County, Nevada. I’d like to share my perspective. I will not be going into the past between the two, only the current situation that has rocked a nation.
My first observation was the fact that his cattle were being seized. I’m sorry, but you cannot take another man’s property without due process of the law. Had there been a legitimate warrant, the local sheriff would have been the one serving the papers, not a federal agency.
My second observation is that if this was really about turtles (as this is why the cattle are supposedly prohibited from grazing), then why was there heavy equipment assisting in the capture of the “trespassing” cows. I’m sorry, but a backhoe is going to do far more damage to a habitat than a cow eating some brush.
Third, the video seen around the world shows a clearly oppressive group of “law enforcement” agents. Who throws down a 56 year old woman, then tazers the person trying to assist her three times? If this isn’t brutality, I’m not sure what is. Not to mention the show of force with snipers, K9s, and as President Obama calls them, weapons of war. Why does the BLM have access and need for such? Clearly not to manage land.
The fourth observation would be the fact that over 3 million dollars were spent on this operation, which failed due to patriots responding to help the Bundy family, over a 1.3 million dollar debt. That was your money wasted on this. It shows the brilliance of our federal government: let’s spend almost 3 times what we need to collect, only, we won’t end up succeeding because people showed up to defend liberty. I’m sorry, but this is how the federal government is. Maybe we need to let the illegals on the Southern Border start grazing down there and call them cows…maybe something will finally be done to seal the border.
The last observation I will make is this: there is only one 1st amendment zone. It begins right after the Mexican border and ends at the Canadian one. There is no way any federal agent is in the right by attempting to corral citizens. We get to speak anywhere in this nation, as enshrined in our Constitution.
Those are some of the things I noticed, and frankly I only have one thing left to say:
PATRIOTS: 1 FEDS: 0
President Obama is reaching into his Saul Alinsky-esque bag of tricks to frighten Americans into believing that a failure to raise the debt ceiling by Oct. 17 will result in cataclysmic economic fallout …
The truth is, he’s lying … again.
The U.S. isn’t going to default on its financial obligations because revenue continues pouring in faster than our debt. As Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA), a Harvard educated finance and banking expert, “There is no need to raise the debt ceiling.”
Obama and the Left just want to continue growing government with no oversight, and to do that they need more money. Holding the line and going over Obama’s artificial “financial cliff” would merely force the nation to balance the budget.
I’m not buying Obama’s lies, and have added my name to a national petition urging lawmakers not to raise the debt ceiling.
Don’t be intimidated. Take a moment to join with me and other patriots who are telling Congress not to raise the debt ceiling.
Please join with me by going here:
Grassfire will hand-deliver these petitions to key members of both the House and Senate as a way to strengthen those who are battling on the frontlines of this debate.
“I think the president can stop it,” Obama said, when asked about the growing income gap. “The problem is that there continues to be a major debate here in Washington, and that is, how do we respond to these underlying trends?”
One must first look at the facts on the ground: we are all given different talents and abilities. For instance, there is no way that I could be a doctor, a mathematician, or a physicist. I don’t posses the drive, or ability to really work with numbers like are needed with those types of jobs. However, I do possess the talent to write, speak, and shoot; all talents I have used in my various jobs.
We are not equal in what we can do, but that doesn’t mean that we cannot find the opportunities to better ourselves and become something greater than we are born into. The main thing on success in the United States is the drive behind the person; how badly they want to achieve their goals. If you want something bad enough, you will pursue it to the ends of the earth, and eventually, you will get what you strive for.
The answer many in the Democrat party has been to take away from those who busted their butts to become successful, and give it to those who do not have the drive to pursue their goals.
I am all about giving a person a leg up, but many policies in the welfare side of things have become more of a lifestyle than that leg up. The intention was to help during hard times, not permanent solution to living.
Redistribution has been tried many times throughout the world and all throughout history, and one thing has become clear.: the longer a society continues to take from those who produce and give to those who refuse to work, the worse the society gets. As more and more people realize they don’t need to work because a social program exists to take care of their every need, they only give the bare minimum or cease entirely.
The way the programs are set up make it impossible to close the gap of income.
This is not to say that people cannot get help when they are hitting hard times. There are things that happen beyond our control. There are layoffs, bankruptcy, medical emergencies, injuries, and a whole myriad of things that can happen to set you back a little bit. That is where the program is good, and I know there are people that only use the system when they have to due to such circumstances.
I have also seen quite the opposite. I have seen people that use the government as their life. No wonder they aren’t millionaires. They aren’t using the opportunity this country gives and making their lives better.
The equality in this country is for opportunity, not outcome. You have a chance to rise, but you also have the chance to fall.
I tried three times before now to run my own business. I failed three times. I tried again, and this time, using what I learned, I was able to create a success. Now, I am no millionaire, but I make due. I pay my bills, and take care of my family. There may be chances to grow eventually, but it took my own dedication to put me where I am today.
The entitlement mentality is responsible for the income gap. And both parties are really to blame. The Democrats for creating the programs, and the Republicans for not standing up to them to create a leg up, not a hand out. That is why we are in the situation we are in.
It is government that has caused the problem, in order to ensure they get reelected. And it is high time the American people wake up to the fact that until you deal with the real issue, there will never be a solution. The problem is the government. The problem are the programs not being properly regulated or having work requirements. The problem is the lack of incentive given, because everything is handed to you these days.
We have a real problem in the nation. So President Obama, you’re right. The problem exists. But what you want to do will further the problem, not solve it.
But the president told the American people something entirely different.
“We don’t have a domestic spying program… What we do have is some mechanisms that can track a phone number or an email address that is connected to a terrorist attack…That information is useful.” The President also said that the programs are “a critical component to counterterrorism,” but he knows that they revelations about the NSA programs have “raised a lot of questions for people.”
The Washington Post has yet another totally different report on the happenings in the NSA programs for Domestic Surveillance.
“The National Security Agency has broken privacy rules or overstepped its legal authority thousands of times each year since Congress granted the agency broad new powers in 2008, according to an internal audit and other top-secret documents.”
This internal audit was not made public but was part of the treasure trove of information leaked to the American people by erstwhile data analyst, Edward Snowden.
“A notable example in 2008 was the interception of a “large number” of calls placed from Washington when a programming error confused the U.S. area code 202 for 20, the international dialing code for Egypt, according to a “quality assurance” review that was not distributed to the NSA’s oversight staff. In another case, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which has authority over some NSA operations, did not learn about a new collection method until it had been in operation for many months. The court ruled it unconstitutional.”
The NSA even accidentally can’t seem to get their story straight and after telling the Washington Post that they don’t tell the oversight people “everything.” When they realized what they’d said, the White House triednew organization to change their quotes. Luckily for the America people, the Post said “no dice.” Here’s the tacit admission of lying to their oversight.
“In one required tutorial, NSA collectors and analysts are taught to fill out oversight forms without giving “extraneous information” to “our FAA overseers.” FAA is a reference to the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, which granted broad new authorities to the NSA in exchange for regular audits from the Justice Department and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and periodic reports to Congress and the surveillance court. Using real-world examples, the “Target Analyst Rationale Instructions” explain how NSA employees should strip out details and substitute generic descriptions of the evidence and analysis behind their targeting choices.”
So we are being lied to left and right, and it is time that the American people said no more. Enough is enough, and we do not deserve the kinds of rights violations this government is committing on the American people. Time to get loud America.
The court appears to take the view that no such recess was in place. The opinion essentially stated that a weekend, or short break is not the Recess mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, and as such, the president was in violation of Section 5 of Article 1 of the Constitution that stipulates that a president cannot make appointments without the consent of the Senate. The failed Obama gambit had hoped to apply the section of the Constitution that reads: “The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.”
Even if the President is found to have made a legitimate recess appointment, the members appointed still have not been able to be confirmed by the Senate, and as such, remain unconstitutional appointments.
The Washington Post reports on the seriousness of this abuse of office, “is more than an unconstitutional attempt to circumvent the Senate’s advise-and-consent role. It is a breathtaking violation of the separation of powers and the duty of comity that the executive owes to Congress.” Crucially, no other president in history has ever tried to force through such alleged “ recess appointments” while Congress is still in session.
As we have noted, the Recess is when Congress (the House and Senate) officially end their session. Since there was not a close to the sessions of either house, there was no recess to be had.
The offenses occurred last year when President Obama opted to bypass Congress and unilaterally appoint three people to seats on the National Labor Relations Board . He also made Richard Cordray head of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (after the Senate blocked action on his nomination). Cordray’s appointment, made on the same date, has been challenged in a separate court case.
Lyndon Larouche has characterized the events as probably the worst violation by any sitting president trying to use a “procedural loophole.”
I feel now I can enter my commentary on President Obama’s reaction to the failed legislation on various gun measures in the Senate. I decided to wait because of the tragedy in Boston, and felt that I should give the political commentary a little bit.
First and foremost, I am utterly disappointed in how the president acted while giving his comments. His demeanor, manner of speech, etc. had the very essence of condescension towards the American people. This ties into my second point that he was more upset at failed gun control than he was over the incident in Benghazi, Fort Hood Massacre, Sandy Hook, or any other major incident in the United States, including the recent Boston Marathon bombing.
He is a sad excuse of a person to show such callousness towards all other events, and only gets fired up like a four year old when he can’t get his way. He stated it was a shameful day, and he’s right. But not about Senators actually abiding by the Constitution, but his reaction to them standing to the oaths they swore.
I have been in this specific debate since Bill Clinton was president, and my major is in the field of criminal justice. The statistics just don’t lie. When gun ownership is high, crimes decrease. The more restrictive laws are on law abiding citizens, the higher the crime rate. Criminals, by nature, do not obey laws.
It is sad to see that a president of this country only seems to get emotional when he doesn’t get what he wants. I personally say kudos to every Senator that listened to their constituents and the Constitution of this great nation. Make no mistake, if you voted for any of the gun restrictions on law abiding citizens, you’re days in office are numbered. 2014 and 2016 are right around the corner, and the patriots of America will not forget your betrayal.