|
|
| |
|
| |
Contents
Note:
Depending your email service or app, the internal navigation links (moving around inside the newsletter) in the this block may not operate.
|
|
| Inspired by Selma
by Miriam Chu, Chair
There never has been a "Golden Age" in America. Our Constitution has never been equally applied to all people. Often times, TEA party members and conservatives are viewed as individuals who want to get back to the "Good Old Days." This appearance of a reactionary stance is a cause for ridicule among Progressives.
Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. famously said, "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." His words illustrate the epitome of the Constitutional ideal; that all people are equal before the law and free to fulfill their individual potential. With the progress made in the civil rights era, we are at a point that we have the opportunity to create a "Constitutional Golden Age" in America for all people.
Progressive government policies fly directly in the face of Dr. King's dream and are the gravest threat to our individual freedom and potential for success. Quotas, different standards and different expectations for groups based on skin color, sex or national origin, are the antithesis of a philosophy that will create equality for all people.
Today, Progressives are the ones who are refusing to allow us to integrate into a colorblind society where there really is equality for all. Return to top |
|
|
Legislative Co
mmitte
e Up
date
|
|
|
| h/t http://netrightdaily.com |
|
I Couldn't Say It Any Better
The FCC passed regulations on the Internet. MTC believes in free trade and opposes Internet regulations.I cannot say it any better than Heritage Action:
"Heritage Action opposes all attempts to regulate the Internet. In response to the FCC's actions, Heritage Action is urging Congress to pass a resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act, a 1996 law that allows Congress to review executive branch rules under expedited procedures. If a joint resolution of disapproval is passed and signed by the President, the regulations will be overturned. While a presidential veto is one possible outcome, it would elevate the fight against President Obama's government takeover of the Internet."
Contact:
|
Richard Burr
|
202-224-3154
|
Twitter @Senator Burr |
|
Thom Tillis
|
202-224-6342
|
Twitter @ThomTillis |
|
Renee Ellmers
|
202-225-4531
|
Twitter @RepReneeEllmers |
Tell them to that Congress must pass a resolution of disapproval of the FCC Internet Regulations.
For further information from the Heritage Action piece, read on:
"The Internet is a shining example of what the free market can achieve absent the heavy hand of government regulation. The FCC's recent decision will destroy that success by putting slow-moving government regulators squarely in the path of a rapidly developing Internet.
"A Solution in Search of a Problem: Advocates of net neutrality cite dire hypothetical scenarios that have yet to occur. In the entire history of the Internet, there is only one documented case of an ISP blocking Internet access for anti-competitive reasons. The market has been effective at maintaining competition and access. AT&T originally stopped IPhone users from using Apple's FaceTime application over their cellular data network because the company was concerned that the data-intensive app would overwhelm the company's network. Verizon, one of AT&T's main competitors, did not, and within a year AT&T dropped its restrictions on FaceTime. This sequence of events occurred without any government regulation or intervention, further demonstrating the lack of necessity for net neutrality.
"'Net neutrality' means that ISPs have to treat all traffic on their networks the same. They cannot, for instance, charge a premium for faster service, or slow down Internet traffic on a particular website. This places ISPs in a challenging position. Under net neutrality, if a website like YouTube is monopolizing Internet bandwidth, a provider like AT&T lacks the ability to limit YouTube's usage
on AT&T's own network.
As with any price controls, net neutrality regulation would lead to overconsumption and therefore shortages. The fact that a federal agency will minutely dictate what can and cannot be done by broadband services also has a chilling effect on investment into new broadband infrastructure, because companies are unable to estimate the profitability of new network installations."
|
|
|
| h/t http://netrightdaily.com |
|
| What Happened? It came as a shock to me when the DHS bill, HR240, stripped of its defunding Executive Amnesty provisions, passed the House and was sent to the President. I had actually thanked Speaker Boehner the week before for boldly speaking about standing firm and defunding amnesty within the DHS Appropriations Bill.
The House had passed the bill with the defunding of executive amnesty. McConnell brought up the bill time after time in the Senate, but could not get the 60 votes needed for cloture. We called on Senate Democrats who had expressed opposition to presidential overreach to vote for the bill. We called on Boehner and McConnell to stand firm. We called on McConnell to suspend the filibuster just as Reid had done when he was Majority Leader.
Instead, the Senate stripped the defunding wording and sent it back to the House which passed it after a brief delay. What happened? A masquerade it seems; a series of deceptions.
The Republicans could have opposed appropriations for any government department in December 2014. Instead they passed funding for every department except DHS for the whole 2015 fiscal year, including Obamacare. They told us that defunding executive amnesty would be better handled in 2015 when they had majorities in the Senate and House, then funded it anyway. Despite their majority the Republicans had no more control of the Senate in 2015 than in 2014, by choice. Majority Leader McConnell appeared to be high-principled when he refused to change the filibuster rule in order to get the bill passed in the Senate. Not high-minded. McConnell did not want to suspend the filibuster because he never intended to defund executive amnesty. The sell-out was in the quest for money. Big business contributors want cheap labor. So now their excuses for not keeping promises are that Democrats will filibuster and Obama will veto. Again we have "pie in the sky, by and by." So we're left asking, if not for violations of the Constitution, the Supreme Law of the Land, what will the GOP fight for?
Where do we go from here? We defend those whom Boehner, McConnell and other Republican Establishment (aka "GOPE") leaders attack, and we vote out of office those whom they promote. The GOPE is using its American Action Network to further its agenda. That includes running ads sliming Rep. Mark Meadows (NC), who voted against the bill, and thanking Renee Ellmers for voting for it!
Sources:
John Boehner Coward Complex Republican Betrayal? I Beg To Differ Senate Conservatives Fund Responds to American Action Network Attack Ads John Boehner-Allied Group to Launch New Round of Ads
|
"The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Poorer"
Under Obama's Executive Amnesty
If Obama's executive amnesty is allowed to continue, it will cause the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer. As the labor supply increases (because of illegal immigrants becoming legal), wages decrease. As the number of workers seeking employment increases, employers will hire those willing to settle for lower pay, especially in jobs on the lower end of the pay scale. The employers' profits are increased; the poor accept lower pay or become unemployed.
Even Cesar Chavez opposed increasing immigration. The United Farm Workers (UFW), which Cesar Chavez founded, was committed to restricting immigration because it believed that unrestricted immigration undermined U.S. workers. The Reverend Ralph Abernathy, close associate of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. joined the UFW on a march to protest use of undocumented aliens as strikebreakers.
|
Success! We Won the Ammo Ban Fight! ...or Did We?
After an unprecedented outcry from the people, along with 52 Senators and 238 House members in opposition to the ban, the ATF pulled its proposal to ban 5.56 mm M855 green tip ammunition. The fight is never over, of course, and in response to the ATF back-down, Rep. Steve Israel (D., NY), has a new, more extensive proposal for the ATF!
See: Democrats Attempt Ban Of All Rifle Ammunition
|
Status of Loretta Lynch Nomination
for Attorney General
Thankfully, our own Senators Tillis and Burr are on record to
vote against
Ms. Lynch's confirmation, but the vote is very close. Predictably, the Democrats are charging those voting against this radical ideologue with "racism." As Mark Levin points out, if you oppose a Leftist who is black, you are a racist, but if you oppose a conservative who is black, you're a "principled Progressive." As of this writing, the fearless Majority Leader McConnell is one of the few Senate Repubs who hasn't been able to make up his mind, but since the "racism" play has worked to cow Repubs in past, there is no way of knowing which way the "undecideds" will go. For more information, see our main Webpage.
|
|
|
How Do I Do That?
Would you like to find, join, read, "Like" and post on MTC's Facebook group but don't know how to find it? Fortunately, it's easy and whether you're using a browser or an app, it's very similar. All you need to do is open Facebook, type "moore tea citizens" in the search window and click on the group when it appears in the options as you type. This picture might help.
|
| Please patronize the businesses that support Moore Tea Citizens |
|
|
| h/t http://netrightdaily.com |
|
|
|
|
| h/t http://netrightdaily.com |
|
|
| My Thoughts
by Jerry Montgomery, Vice Chair
On March 3, the U.S. House passed the DHS Funding Bill without any illegal immigration attachment. This was passed with ALL the House Democrats joining the GOP House Leadership and 75 GOP members. So much for the Mandate of the People in November 2014 saying immigration was their biggest concern. Totally ignored by the Leadership.
Elections in 2010, 2012, and 2014 increasingly put into office candidates who promised to restore government of the people and the rule of law. Once in office, they conveniently forget those campaign promises. But every time an election comes up they are back begging for our vote again with fresh promises. This activity is like watching the same TV show over and over and expecting a different ending. I have watched this same show over and over myself and
I know how it ends. Rational thinking Republican supporters should also be able to know what the outcome is going to be by now. And it is not going to be favorable for the typical American Conservative.
We do not need any more evidence to support our case. If you think you need any more evidence let me suggest you consider looking at the GOP 2016 presidential race which is already in full swing 12 months before the first primary. How many don't know who the GOP presidential candidate is likely to be? Really!? Just look at who has raised the most money and has the most powerful orgs behind them. I hear reports that it is Jeb Bush. Is Jeb Bush at the top of your list? Is he even
on your list?
The GOP RINO Establishment is going to get the candidate they want. The GOP conservative faithful are going to get a candidate they do not want. They will be forced for the umpteenth time to cast their votes for someone who they perceive to be the better of two bad choices.
This scenario is never going to change for the Republican Faithful. And it is too bad because their intense loyalty is their worst enemy. They just cannot force themselves to break free. It is time for us to change our ways and try something new.
|
|
|
|
| h/t http://netrightdaily.com |
|
Who Is To Check and Balance Whom?
by Peggy Smetana
When Judge Andrew S. Hanen placed an injunction against Obama's implementation of his executive amnesty, you would have thought that Republicans would have jumped for joy because now they had someone else to fight with them against Executive overreach. Unfortunately, some jumped at the chance to bow out of the struggle. There are three branches of government because the Founders envisioned that any two branches would work together to keep the other branch in check.
|
|
April Members' Dinner Program
Our March dinner program went well. We've worked out the logistics with
our new hosts and now have lots of room (and we can go back to the buffet without disturbing the program).
The Program:
Next month will be the rescheduled program that was iced out in February. We will discuss the needs and challenges of our Moore County schools. Our guests will be Moore County's Board of Education members Ed Dennison and Becky Carlson, Superintendent of Schools Dr. Bob Grimesey and the principals from Moore County's lowest performing schools.
Each principal will describe for us the special challenges her students face, what her school is doing to promote student achievement, and how community volunteers can help support her school's efforts.
Schools Superintendent Dr. Bob Grimesey will discuss the master facilities plan, including the concept high school. After his presentation, we will have a general Q&A on topics of interest to you. Have your questions ready.
State Rep. Jamie Boles will attend to offer interface to state government.
This will be a constructive and thought-provoking forum!
|
|
|
|
When
|
Monday, April 20, 5:30pm - 7:30pm |
|
Where
|
Filly & Colt's Restaurant (inside the Longleaf Country Club)
10 Knoll Rd, Southern Pines |
|
Price
|
The buffet is $16, incl. tea/coffee and dessert; tip is discretionary.
Wine, cocktails, beer and soft drinks are available from
the cash bar (with or without dinner). |
|
|
Important Request
(2nd time)
:
At the bottom of this and every email from Moore Tea Citizens is a link that reads "Update Profile/Email Address." Please click that link and update your data, including your email preferences. We who volunteer are on the same data list and get the same email you do. We keep member information confidential and don't subject our then to solicitations, but having accurate information is vital to our upgrading effort. Thanks for your support help with this.
|
|
|
Did You Know?
After the Civil War, our own 2nd Congressional District elected three black Republicans to office: John A. Hyman (1875-1877), Henry P. Cheatham (1889-1893), and George Henry White (1897-1901). Hyman and Cheatham were born into slavery. White may have been but his father, a "free person of color," purchased George's freedom, along with that of his mother and brother. In
1900, the Democrats secured a constitutional amendment excluding blacks from the ballot boxes of the state. That and other "Jim Crow" era acts, including disrupting Republican organizing, fraud and acts of terrorism, stopped blacks from being elected in the South until the passage of the Voting Rights Act in 1965.
|
|
|
| h/t http://netrightdaily.com |
|
|
|
Meet a Member!
by Nancy Kasco
 Kerry Alzner is a long-time member of Moore Tea Citizens and definitely a person you should meet.
Kerry was born in Michigan but calls himself a "four-time resident of Moore County," having been transferred 4 different times to Fort Bragg. Kerry served 26 years in the Army with more deployments all over the world than he can count. Kerry is now a contractor and you are as likely to find him in Afghanistan as in Carthage where he now lives with his wife, Valerie, and two beautiful teenage daughters. Valerie is also a valued member of Moore Tea Citizens.
Kerry shares his lovely home with 2 dogs, 2 cats and 7 chickens. His hobbies include hunting, shooting and skydiving with over 100 jumps to his credit. Kerry is also active in his church.
If Kerry isn't calling me "Ma'am" then he's calling me "Darlin'." Either way, it's always fun having Kerry at our events. He also teaches an excellent concealed carry class, as my husband and I can attest. What Kerry enjoys most about Moore Tea Citizens is seeing our members standing up for our God-given rights.
Return to top
|
|
|
|
Win the Argument
by Neil Oakley, Program Chair
The late Margaret Thatcher said, "First you win the argument; then you win the vote." There are a number of nonprofit groups that are helping constitu-tional conservatives "win the argument," and I believe they are deserving of your support. Below is a non-exhaustive list of these nonprofits, all of which I support financially. You can visit a group's website by clicking on its name. Contributions to each of these organizations are tax-deductible. More importantly, however, by supporting these groups, you are helping us win the argument for fiscal responsibility, limited government, free markets, and constitutional conservatism. Join me in supporting them. See my list.
|
|
| Introducing the American Action Network
Republicans have long been suspicious of groups with appealing sounding names that promote themselves as conservative but prove to be anything but. We immediately raise the red flag of caution when such groups tempt us since most lean left, disguised as conservative.
But, we should be wary of more than just openly Leftist groups. We need to view even those who claim to be staunchly conservative with the same amount of skepticism.
One of these, the "American Action Network" (AAN), is chaired by Norm Coleman, former Republican senator from Minnesota, and has many GOP board members.
On the surface AAN seems to be on the right track, as its website promotes positions most conservatives agree with. But I was troubled by the behavior of AAN after the recent passage of HR 240 that fully funds the Dept. of Homeland Security (DHS) including the provision of amnesty for illegals which President Obama desired.
On its website, AAN trumpets the expense of deporting "unauthorized" immigrants, refusing to even mention the word "illegal." Nor will you find the word "amnesty," even though HR 240 unquestionably leads to that. AAN avoids any mention of any initiative to stop the flow of illegals through our borders!
After the vote something even more troubling occurred, which I consider a blight on the legislative process. Consider it quid pro quo to GOP members of Congress who voted in favor of HR 240. AAN bought ads thanking GOP members for their "yay" votes. Prominent among them was Rep. Renee Ellmers who continues to show herself a Corporatist, aligning with campaign funding interests rather than the majority of her constituents who overwhelmingly opposed funding amnesty.
This may be the pattern we will see in the Republican-led Congress. Do the bidding of interest groups, hidden behind the "curtain" of non-profit advocacy groups, and get laudatory ads in return. Be forewarned!
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| Will the Courts Stop Obama's Executive Overreach? by Miriam Chu, Chair
We all watched as our Congress placed no fiscal restrictions on Obama's implementation of executive amnesty, and it is now assumed that the Courts will stop Obama from usurping powers not granted him by the Constitution. This is by no means a certainty. I have compiled a short list of historical incidents illustrating why it is unwise to trust the courts to fight your battles.
Cou
rts can make bad decisions
-
Dred Scott vs. Sandford - denied citizen status to blac
ks and legitimized slavery.
- National Federation of Independent Business vs. Sebelius, 2012 - Obamacare is a tax.
- Kelo vs. New London, 2005 - Upheld eminent domain seizure for the purpose of increasing tax revenue via transfer of property for private development.
-
Korematsu vs. US, 1944 - Security concerns trump individual rights and upheld removal and confinement of an American citizen based on race.
Courts have no enforcement powers.
- Following the Supreme Court ruling in Worcester v. Georgia, 1832, President Andrew Jackson is widely quoted as saying, "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it," his actual words to Brigadier General John Coffee were: "The decision of the supreme court has fell still born, and they find that it cannot coerce Georgia to yield to its mandate." Despite, its ruling, the Supreme Court did nothing to stop the enforcement of the "Indian Removal Act", (the infamous Trail of Tears) in 1838.
- Pres. Lincoln suspended writ of habeas corpus numerous times during the Civil War, contrary to the Supreme Court ruling in
Ex parte Merryman,
(1861).
Supreme Court rulings do not prevent future violations.
In Clinton vs. City of New York (1998), the Supreme Court ruled that the President does not have the Constitutional authority to alter a law. Justice John Stevens stated in the majority opinion that "there is no provision in the Constitution that authorizes the President to enact, to amend, or to repeal statutes." The numerous executive rewrites to Obamacare are clearly in violation of this ruling, so why has it not been stopped? Nor has there been any effective action to stop "Executive Amnesty," another unauthorized rewrite.
Judges can be intimidated.
Following Franklin Delano Roosevelt's threat to pack the Supreme Court, the justices capitulated on much of Roosevelt's controversial legislation, resulting in "the constitutional revolution of 1937," for which we are still paying the price.
In December 2011, Newt Gingrich was quoted as saying that based on the precedents of Lincoln, Jefferson and Jackson, if elected president, he would defy Supreme Court rulings with which he disagreed. What if Obama was listening?
Return to top |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
