OzarkGuru's blog

ARRA News Service - Tina Korbe, Hot Air said: When “Cut, Cap and Balance” failed the Senate and both chambers of Congress regrouped around new plans, the first to go of the three crucial elements in the House’s original plan was a balanced budget amendment. Neither of the deficit reduction plans presently on the table provides for the passage of a BBA. It’s also the element of CCB most frequently decried as unrealistic. But political lights from Thomas Jefferson to Ronald Reagan have called for such an amendment, as this video from GOP Labs illustrates. Let President Obama say, “We don’t need more studies; we don’t need a balanced budget amendment.” If ever any unfolding drama proved the need for such an amendment, the drama of the past week has been it. Leave cuts to Congress and what do you get? CBO-certified gimmicks on both sides — even on the side of one sincerely trying to garner savings, one who says he also “wanted more.”

President Reagan Said in a Speech to the Nation on Federal Budget, 4/29/1982: As former President Ronald Reagan says in this video, “Most Americans understand the need for a balanced budget and most have seen how difficult it is for the Congress to withstand the pressures to spend more. … We tried the carrot and it failed. With the stick of a balanced budget amendment, we can stop government’s squandering and overtaxing ways and save our economy.”

Tags: balanced budget amendment, President, Barack Obama, Ronald Reagan, video, economic recovery, conservative, the Economy, taxes, bankrupt, Balance the Budget, Thomas Jefferson, American people

Dr. Bill Smith, Editor, ARRA News Service: The other day I was sharing about standing strong and warning that being a conservative is not for the faint of heart. As it turns out an article was written 9 months ago addressing this very point. I was unaware of the article until after my remarks. But, I have learned over the years, there is "nothing new under the sun." (which is also written over 2000 years ago). Good ideas are eternal and bad ideas are doomed to be repeated until someone again finds the truth.

As we face the upcoming election with the necessity to be constantly involved while also finding ourselves and our families bruised, battered, and stressed out by the constant attacks from Big Government and its mouth pieces, it is critical for us to face the truth of our situations so we can complete the mission. A beginning point folks, is to accept that there is no near term "final solutions" on the horizon. Yes, we hopefully will have interim victories. Also, while it is fact is that our government is driving us off a cliff or just rolling some down a ever steepening hill, it is also a fact that it took considerable time to get us up the hill or to the cliff. It was during this lengthy period of time that many failed to be involved. Yes, while life appeared good, it was easy to fail to focus on the truth of our situation.

Presently, we have are experienced a re-emergence of involvement, of activist groups, of TEA parties, of cries for accountability and transparency, of fear of enemies, etc. And now, we are sprinting to November, 2010. We have hope for success: fresh faces elected to Congress who oppose socialism and elitism and bring conservative values to bear in Washington, D.C. Lord, may it be so!

However, even if there was maximum success in November in getting elected people with conservative core values to Congress, to State offices, to county offices and to local government, this will not turn everything around and would not put things back in good order. Which means, we will not be able to return to a state of indifferent concern. The "battle" for our ideals does not stop with any measured success on November 2010. While we can gain a reset point, the job will not be done for conservatives. Conservatives will need to continue to be vigilant in holding elected people to their promises, in demanding that the influence of government in our lives be rolled back, and in preparing for the next election with even greater involvement by the people.

And while we are doing this, we cannot ignore an ongoing threat. While "We the People" have awakened, the majority of children and grandchildren are still being educated by a liberal system of education. Therefore, we will also bear the responsibility as parents, grandparents, and friends to educate or re-educate our children and grandchildren. It will be critical to offer safe haven of truth verses the pablum of false teachings by liberal progressive elitists.

It will be necessary to focus on becoming abolitionist for those enslaved by big government. American citizens, regardless of social status, relationship stratus, racial or gender classification must be freed from the controlled tyranny of government interfering with almost all avenues of people's lives. We will not agree on everything but we must all be freed of government overreach so that we may continue to be free to openly disagree, to associate and disassociate in our lives with each other, and to live our own lives in the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness as we see fit based on our own merits and not the largess of others or the control of government. Remember, when someone from the Government says, "We are here to help you." Run for your lives.

Faced with the difficult road ahead, conservatives must not be faint of heart. Yes, in the interim until November, 2010, we work hard. We hope to win a lot of elections; if so, we give each other some high fives, go to bed, wake up the next day. Then, we continue on!

The article alluded to previously was written by Salena Owens in November 2009. I do not know Salena. But, I hope we meet along the way for she has got it right with respect to the fact that "Conservatism is not for the faint of heart. Never has been." While Owens' writes from the perspective of a traditional values Christian, her words are also appropriate in principle for those who do not share her faith or beliefs. And, for those that do share her faith and beliefs and have not joined the battle to reclaim America from Big Government - please Wake Up; we need you and all other conservatives!

------------ Tags: conservative, conservatism, Conservative values, conservative principles, faint of heart, big government, enslavement, Salena Owns, Bill Smith To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

What are we to believe when we have two extreme liberal democrats talking about an event where a crime may have been committed and both are telling different stories? And, who do you believe?

One person is a retired 2-Star U.S. Navy Rear Admiral (upper half) after holding for a short period the rank of a 3-star Vice Admiral. A man with over 30 years service and the highest ranking former military officer currently serving in Congress. A person who commanded USS George Washington aircraft carrier battle group in Afghanistan and Iraq. He served as Director for Defense Policy on the National Security Council under President Bill Clinton and, following the September 11 attacks, was selected to serve as the first Director of "Deep Blue," the Navy's anti-terrorism unit. This man was a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy with a Bachelor of Science degree in American political systems. Between tours at sea, he earned a Master of Public Administration and a Ph.D. in political economy and government from the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.

The other person is an experienced political operative who was part of the Chicago political machine. He attended the University of Chicago majoring in political science. After graduating he worked as City Hall Bureau Chief and a political columnist for the Chicago Tribune. He is a longtime strategist for Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley and styles himself a "specialist in urban politics." In 2002, he was retained by the Liberal Party of Ontario Canada to help Dalton McGuinty and his party to be elected into government. In 2004, he worked for John Edwards' presidential campaign. In 2006, he consulted for several campaigns, including for Eliot Spitzer in New York's gubernatorial election and for Deval Patrick in Massachusetts's gubernatorial election. He also served in 2006 as the chief political adviser for Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair U.S. Representative Rahm Emanuel. He also served as the chief strategist and media advisor for Barack Obama's 2008 presidential campaign. On November 20, 2008, Barack Obama named him as a Senior Advisor to his administration.

The first man is Pennsylvania U.S. Congressman Joe Sestak and the second man is Presidential Senior Advisor David Axelrod. Sestak says that he was offered a position in the Obama Administration if he would withdraw from the Democratic Senate primary as a candidate against Sen. Arlene Specter. If true, by law this would constitute an attempted bribe. Admiral Sestak is either telling the truth or he is lying.

Enter David Axelrod who tells CNN’s John King that there is “no evidence” that the bribe attempt ever happened. Axelrod acknowledged that if such an offer had been made that it would have been “a serious breach of the law.

So who do you believe is speaking the truth? Is it Sestak, who appears to have not hid that he had been offered a at least a promise of a position not to run for elections. Or, is it Axelrod the Chicago political activist? Heck, both may be are telling the truth.  Maybe Axelrod is playing the shill having been offered no or little info and is parroting the response fed to him. If so, who provided the comment being parroted?  Do we have a conspiracy going on in the White House?   If a bribe was offered, who made it and by what authority? If the position was Secretary of Navy or another significant post, how could the position have been offered without knowledge of the President Obama? Was another presidential adviser responsible; maybe White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel or senior adviser and assistant to the president Valerie Bowman Jarrett?  If no position was offered, then the Admiral is lying and needs to withdraw from office.

Who will be the scapegoat to protect President Obama? Heck, maybe they can blame the presidential teleprompter! It is time for a Congressional investigation and for a Special Prosecutor to be appointed to determine the facts  on whether a position was offered to Sestak and if it was, who offered the position and by what authority.  Let's cut the distraction and get to the facts. 

Tags: Joe Sestak, David Axelrod, bribery, interfering with election process, Obama administration, Barack Obama Cross-posted from the ARRA News Service.

Bill Smith, ARRA Editor: My mother used to quote as teenager Bill headed out the door, "Be Good, remember your sins will find you out." Of course, I grew up in the days when many Bible verses were embedded in the common conversation of people. Tomorrow, across the nation, citizens will gather together at TEA Parties. The influence of this grassroots effort has been blessed and continued to grow since it began a year ago. Even noted celebrities, or at least conservative celebrities, now make a serious attempt to be at or aligned with the TEA Party events and the message. Politicians on both sides of the isle have taken note. Some favor the efforts while others fear the efforts. And the liberal progressive democrat leadership in Washington, D.C despise "We The People." Liberals who in years past have been active in grassroots efforts, maybe not so large but definitely more violent, hate the TEA Party movement. They skipped right over envy and have gone directly to hate. Others are fueled by the liberal media who verbally attack and accuse anything conservative as being hateful and racist even when the conservatives are black or some ethnicity other than "blanco." And progressive socialists and their minions hate the fact that over half of the Tea Party members are Democrats and Independents many of whom are tired of the DNC and the marxist-sociopaths that have "forgotten" the United States Constitution. Recently, efforts have uncovered people intent on "Crashing" the TEA Parties by pretending to be TEA Party members and carrying out nefarious acts to embarrass and negate the efforts of the TEA Party members. This effort is designed to carry out actions that will "tar" all TEA Party members with the predetermined negatives espoused by the leftest media. Michelle Malkin has laid out some of this effort in "Crash course: Your illustrated guide to the Tea Party saboteurs." Malkin identifies:

Over the last week, conservative activists online have thoroughly exposed the loser behind an Internet call to "Crash the Tea Party." His name is Jason Levin. To follow his trail, check Free Republic here, Canada Free Press here, and Velvet Hammer here. After failing to cover his tracks, Levin is now basking in the glow of attention on his tpartycrasher Twitter page and on his personal Twitter page (where he brags that he has hit the big time and “gone viral:”). . . Before them, it was Craig Varoga — a shady Democrat political operative and overseer of a convoluted, money-shuffling web of 527s. He launched "TheTeaPartyisOver.org” in January to target Republicans who supported the Tea Party movement and to prevent the "radical" and “dangerous” fiscal accountability agenda from “gaining legislative traction."

Fast forward a few days and we learn that a lot of bloggers and conservative geeks (yes we have our own geeks - freedom loving conservatives who come in all shapes, sizes, party affiliations, religions, non-religions, ethnicity, sex, sexual persuasions, etc.) have been digging around the internet. One thing that has united us even in our differences, is we love freedom and we do not like people taking our money and redistributing it to others. We like spending our money as we so determine and we love our freedom, our own choosing, and independence. Viva La Difference and Viva La Liberté! While digging, it was discovered that Jason Levin - Tea Party Crasher Is Under Investigation By Employer. Adam Bitely explains:

The founder of the CrashTheTeaParty.org, Jason Levin, is under investigation by his employer. Interestingly, this character has been exaggerating his job, among other things. He actually works in the media lab at Conestoga Middle School in Portland, Oregon. Levin claimed in an interview with Talking Points Memo that he was a technology consultant. Apparently he is a public toad now facing an investigation for abusing the taxpayer dollar to organize his anti-Tea Party efforts. Levin, who sought to demonize Tea Partiers by placing faux tea party activists at rallies across the nation that would portray the tea partiers as bigots and homophobes, has seemed to land himself in a great deal of trouble. Not only does the Tea Party movement gain more credibility because of this bozo, Levin may now find himself out of work. Also, please enjoy the image of Jason Levin in his Star Wars outfit. Hat Tip to UnCoverage.net.

Jason Levin is dressed in the wrong Star Wars outfit unless his intent even in this garb signals his intent to infiltrate the good side. He should have dressed as a brainless storm trooper. My mother would say today based on the above article that Jason's sins (devious behavior - Is he using public school time and money?) have found him out. So, tomorrow attend your TEA Party and shout and cheer. Be aware of potential infiltrators but don't fear. If you read this about Jason Levin before going, take time to remark that TEA Party Crashers like Jason Levin are full of Pelosi!

Tags: TEA Party, crashers, APRIL 15, Tax Day, Jason Levin, Oregon, Michelle Malkin, Adam Bitely Hat Tip ARRA News Service.

Tomorrow is Tax Day, Earth Day and thank goodness for those opposed to all these taxes: a self-proclaimed TEA Party Day. The Obama Administration's spending in the past year has been unprecedented and Tax Day won't come and go quietly. In just over a year, Democrats in Washington have proposed trillions of dollars in new taxes on American Families -- and passed hundreds of billions in new taxes to pay for their government takeover of our health care. These new taxes affect you and your family -- every day.

Tags: increase taxes, Democrats, Washington. D. C., increased Federal spending, Tax Day
Posted from the ARRA News Service.

Bill Smith, ARRA Editor: Before proceeding it is only right to say that as a 22 year veteran, I am by nature a "hawk" and support all efforts to stop the enemies of America. However, I already saw one war - the Vietnam War - mired down by bureaucracy and lack of direction. [For those who prefer using the term "Vietnam Conflict," tell it to the American families, friends of the veterans who served and lost 58,159 comrades in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia plus all those who died from war related issues after that "conflict."]

Most career military have served under Presidents with whom we did not politically agree. Some Presidents were more competent than others. Most Presidents and Defense Secretaries who had not served in the military have made decision or failed to make decisions that resulted in the wasting of military resources and lives. Although not always understood by the general population, military leaders clearly understand that the military is both a tool in defending America including America's economic interests and a tool of diplomacy. However, when a president lacks declared interest or focus during a time of war - or major deployments with people at risk, military casualties increase and troop morale suffers and leads to more losses.

The Times Online is reporting a story about "American troops in Afghanistan losing heart." It is like "deja view" - a scene from the past when leadership and adequate direction was not shown by prior Commander-in-Chiefs and Secretaries of Defense. A few excerpts from the article:

American soldiers serving in Afghanistan are depressed and deeply disillusioned, according to the chaplains of two US battalions that have spent nine months on the front line in the war against the Taleban [sic, Taliban]. Many feel that they are risking their lives — and that colleagues have died — for a futile mission and an Afghan population that does nothing to help them, . . . “They feel they are risking their lives for progress that’s hard to discern,” . . . “They are tired, strained, confused and just want to get through.” The soldiers are, by nature and training, upbeat, driven by a strong sense of duty, and they do their jobs as best they can . . . admitted that their morale had slumped.

“We’re lost — that’s how I feel. I’m not exactly sure why we’re here,” . . . “I need a clear-cut purpose if I’m going to get hurt out here or if I’m going to die.” . . . Asked if the mission was worthwhile, . . . “If I knew exactly what the mission was, probably so, but I don’t.” The only soldiers who thought it was going well “work in an office, not on the ground”. In his opinion “the whole country is going to s***”.

The battalion’s 1,500 soldiers are nine months in to a year-long deployment that has proved extraordinarily tough. Their goal was to secure the mountainous Wardak province and then to win the people’s allegiance through development and good governance. They have, instead, found themselves locked in an increasingly vicious battle with the Taleban [sic, Taliban].

They have been targeted by at least 300 roadside bombs, about 180 of which have exploded. Nineteen men have been killed in action, with another committing suicide. About a hundred have been flown home with amputations, severe burns and other injuries likely to cause permanent disability, and many of those have not been replaced. More than two dozen mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles (MRAPs) have been knocked out of action.

Living conditions are good — abundant food, air-conditioned tents, hot water, free internet - but most of the men are on their second, third or fourth tours of Afghanistan and Iraq, with barely a year between each. . . . The men are frustrated by the lack of obvious purpose or progress. “The soldiers’ biggest question is: what can we do to make this war stop. Catch one person? Assault one objective? Soldiers want definite answers, other than to stop the Taleban [sic, Taliban], because that almost seems impossible. It’s hard to catch someone you can’t see,” . . .

“It’s a very frustrating mission,” . . . “The average soldier sees a friend blown up and his instinct is to retaliate or believe it’s for something [worthwhile], but it’s not like other wars where your buddy died but they took the hill. There’s no tangible reward for the sacrifice. It’s hard to say Wardak is better than when we got here.” "We want to believe in a cause but we don’t know what that cause is.” . . . The soldiers complain that rules of engagement designed to minimize civilian casualties mean that they fight with one arm tied behind their backs. . . “You get shot at but can do nothing about it. You have to see the person with the weapon. It’s not enough to know which house the shooting’s coming from.” . . .

The constant deployments are, meanwhile, playing havoc with the soldiers’ private lives. “They’re killing families,”. . . “Divorces are skyrocketing. PTSD is off the scale. There have been hundreds of injuries that send soldiers home and affect families for the rest of their lives.” The chaplains said that many soldiers had lost their desire to help Afghanistan. “All they want to do is make it home alive and go back to their wives and children and visit the families who have lost husbands and fathers over here. It comes down to just surviving,” . . . “If we make it back with ten toes and ten fingers the mission is successful,” . . . “You carry on for the guys to your left or right,” . . .

Lieutenant-Colonel Kimo Gallahue, 2-87’s commanding officer, denied that his men were and insisted they had achieved a great deal over the past nine months. A triathlete and former rugby player, he admitted pushing his men hard, but argued that taking the fight to the enemy was the best form of defense. . . . Above all, Colonel Gallahue argued that counter-insurgency — winning the allegiance of the indigenous population through security, development and good governance — was a long and laborious process that could not be completed in a year. “These 12 months have been, for me, laying the groundwork for future success,” he said. . . .

These reported comments depict more than just complaints by G.I.s. They are a clear signs of bigger issues both at the DOD, in the force structure and support of today's military, and with the direction of the war as defined by the President of the United States. As for the field commander on the record comments about his belief in the mission, this was expected but it is not a measurement of success. However, while failing morale and expressions like "you carry on for the guys to your left or right" are both true and admirable, they are also a definite indicator of failed purpose and direction.

As heads up, the following comments are directed to what appears to be an often AWOL (absent without leave) Commander-in-Chief: Mr. Obama, you choose to run for President of the United States. And, the American people elected you to be president. Most Americans know that a "chief" responsibility of the president is being Commander-in-chief of the military. It is not being the commander of the American people. While you have "fiddle around" tripping off to other countries expressing your regrets about the United States or to another location to promote or sign a bill that could have been done efficiently right in the Oval office; while you wasted time trying to recruit the Olympics or taking time for another sports event or White House party; while you expend a disproportionate amount of your time on agendas which have or will send the United States further into debt and on efforts to reshape the social fabric of America, you are not focused on your primary responsibility of being Commander-in-Chief.

American military are dying or at risk because of your lack of leadership. Members of the military understand sacrifice and giving their lives for a greater cause. However, they do not understand dying without purpose or a clear objective. Often they die for their comrades but they do not wish to die for absentee leadership or an undefined mission.

Mr. President, above all else, (except possibly for those who feel they must engender themselves to you for their jobs and their agendas or who happen to hate America) people on both sides of domestic issues expect you to complete your primary duties as president. The United States of America has men and women in harms-way risking America's chief treasure - American blood. For "Pete's sake" - Wake-up! You are the Commander-in-Chief! It cannot be delegated; nor should it continue to be ignored! It is a lonely sacred responsibility. Mr. President, no matter how important you believe your other agendas to be, you must focus on your primary responsibility as Commander-in-Chief!

by Bill Smith, ARRA News Service: While I wouldn't trust the leftist biased DailyKos polling numbers, I found it interesting that they polled Arkansas on the following Question: Do you believe that Barack Obama was born in the United States of America or not?
      Yes    No    Not Sure
All   63     17     20
Dem   84      8     8
Rep   33     29     38
Ind   68     16     16

DailyKos added their opinion that "Two-thirds of Arkansas Republicans are deluded conspiracy theorists." Their polling numbers identify that 37% of those polled said no or not sure regarding Obama being born in the United States of America.

As with many polls, the DailyKos sought to highlight what we all already know. While it was interesting to poll what "what one believes." that is not the important issue. The important issue is "Was Barack Obama born in the United States of America?" A president should not leave 37% of those polled in doubt. Omitting even those classified as "birthers," a properly designed detailed polling question would yield a significantly higher percent for those in doubt of his citizenship. For example, the following question would yield a different results: "President Barack Obama has never allowed public access to his birth certificate by even the press and election officials to validate that he was a natural born American Citizen (born in Hawaii verses a foreign country or territory). This situation has caused some people to be concerned about Mr. Obama meeting the requirement of being a natural born citizen to be qualified to be the President of the United States as set forth in the U.S. Constitution. This issue has not been an unresolved issue previously in U.S. history. Note: that all citizens of the United States are required from time to time to provide their birth certificate to meet legal requirements or to obtain benefits and services. Do you believe that Barack Obama should make his birth certificate public to alleviate the unanswered question concerning his meeting the requirement of the U.S. Constitution and thereby allow the citizens of the United States of America to resolve this issue for all time?"

Like other citizens, I have been required to present my birth certificate on numerous occasions. For example, to be sworn in as a commissioned "regular" military officer, I had to provide my birth certificate to prove that I was born in the United States of America. To receive a Top Secret clearance, the U.S. Government investigated to see if I was born in the United States of America. For one of my sons to be validated as a natural-born American, both my wife and I had to provide proof to the State Department overseas and before a Federal Judge in the United States that we were both born in the United States of America. To get my previous diplomatic passport, I had to provide my birth certificate. And there are other situations for which I had to prove that I was born in the United States of America! They same is true for all other U.S. citizens.

While I am not part of or pursuing the interests of the "birther movement," both as a citizen and commissioned military officer, I expect President Obama to do no less than I have done. Mr. Obama is not a potentate but a citizen servant. I would expect him to resolve this issue by demonstrating leadership and by presenting any and all documentation to remove all doubt by citizens of the United States as to his being a natural-born citizen of the united States.

Like many others, I am disappointed that the traditional media failed to do their job and to address this issue prior to the primary so that this issue would not be an issue. They clearly showed a bias unequaled in history and their failure to do so will be judged by history. It has been almost nine months since Barack Obama took the following oath of office to be President of the United States:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

He previously, took the following oath as Senator:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."

By the taking both of these oaths, President Barack Obama has a responsibility to resolve this issue by laying before American citizens his birth certificate and by allowing the press public access to his original birth certificate. This issue will never be hidden in history by the things which Mr. Obama hopes to achieve as President or even by the things he does later in life. If not resolved, Mr. Obama will go down in history as the "Unnatural President" and his actions and his programs will be tainted in history. This can be easily resolved by Mr. Obama presenting his birth certificate as other Americans have done on numerous occasions.

By Bill Smith: In blatant disregard of the truth, MSNBC follows CBS into the annuals of history (the toilet) for falsifying a news story by controlling or editing camera shots and by preparing and presenting a false narrative that seems be the intent on inflaming racial tensions and casting false allegations of threats. Racial bias was deliberately projected by the MSNBC reporters on to a story with blatant statements impugning whites at a rally as potential racist and threats to a black President.

When in fact, the person at the center of the story narrative was hidden from the public by parlor camera tricks and a false narrative. That person was a patriot citizen who happens to be black. MSNBC actions to falsify this story showed its bias against the general public participating in recent rallies and town hall meetings MSNBC introduced its own form of racial bias and evidenced a willingness to smear Americans exercising both their first and second amendment rights.

MSNBC willingness to advance and promote a false story to pursue either a biased agenda or to boost ratings was indeed despicable. This action opens up to question what other lies MSNBC may have perpetrated on the American public with fictitious or edited camera shots and falsified news story narratives. Americans rely on a free free press to report unbiased and truthfully. Media bias in the past years has become a matter of major concern. However, for members of the press to falsify the news, destroys and jeopardizes public trust and places all Americas at risk.

As identified by Adam Bitely at NetRight Nation, "MSNBC is up to their typical routine of running erroneous reports. One from yesterday was particularly troubling." It is unfortunate that Adam and the rest of the public have observed MSNBC as prevaricator of the truth.

Today, Bill Wilson, President of America for Limited Government sent a letter calling on MSNBC Executive Producer Steven Capus to fire all involved with producing a misleading broadcast that Wilson termed a "nefarious assault on decency." Bill Wilson is right. However, it is also time for the print media, the network media and the cable channels to take seriously false reporting and to police their own actions including calling MSNBC into accountability. A free press will not remain free if society becomes so distrustful that it turns to and trusts in government to monitor the accuracy of the "press." When that happens, the freedom of the press will cease to exist.

Cross-posted at the ARRA News Service

ARRA News - The story out of Honduras is that the people of that stalwart little country have now taken it into their own hands to preserve their democracy in the most courageous action since they established their constitutional republic nearly three decades ago. Just as former Honduran President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales prepared to seize full power in direct violation of the nation’s Constitution, the military leadership – with the backing of the people – removed him from power.

Unfortunately, Barak Obama, after encouraging the Zelaya coup with his complicit silence, has now condemned the people’s move to uphold their Constitution and preserve their freedom. And, as expected, the mainstream media has joined Mr. Obama in censuring the restoration of democracy by censoring the full story. Yet, what actually occurred in Honduras is a case study in the survival of freedom against the most oppressive odds.

Earlier this year, in the face of strong public opposition, Honduran President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales declared that he would stage a referendum to have the country’s constitutional term limits law overturned, thereby allowing him to remain indefinitely in power. The people of Honduras had adopted the single, four-year--term limit as part of their Constitution in January of 1982. Significantly, the term limits provision is one of only eight “firm articles,” out of 375. By law, cannot be amended.

The Supreme Court of Honduras declared the Zelaya referendum unconstitutional, his own Liberal Party came out in strong opposition, and the public overwhelmingly opposed his power grab. Despite this, Zelaya, a leftwing politician with strong ties to Cuba’s Castro and Venezuela’s Chavez, scheduled the referendum for Sunday, June 28. At midnight, Wednesday, June 24, the strong-arm president gave a televised speech accusing his opposition of promoting “destabilization and chaos” by attempting to thwart his unconstitutional referendum.

As the situation in Honduras continued to deteriorate, the Zelaya’s attorney general called for his ouster; his Defense Minister resigned; he fired the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for stating that he would refuse to send out troops to put down public protests; the chiefs of the army, navy, and air force resigned; and the country’s Supreme Court ordered the nation’s army and police not to support the unconstitutional referendum.

Through all of this, Barack Obama abetted the Zelaya power grab through his calculated silence. Yet, the brave people of Honduras – enduring almost unfathomable duress – stood firm in support of their Constitution and the term limits embodied in it. Now that the will of the people has triumphed over tragedy, we believe the time has come for Mr. Obama to concede the defeat of his partner and policy, and for the U.S. media to support those who, putting principle above personal safety, have let freedom ring. We applaud the Freedom Fighters of neighboring Honduras. [Source by ALG News]

Bill Smith, ARRA Editor: The Cato Institute has been following the Citizens United v. FEC case, in which the Supreme Court is set to rule on whether an organization can use speech about a political candidate in the days leading up to an election. The Federal Election Commission banned Citizen United from showing a film against Hillary Clinton on a pay-per-view basis shortly before the last year’s election.

The so-called Citizens United case offers the Supreme Court a chance to severely curtail the free speech abuses of the Federal Election Commission. If the government can ban broadcasts under federal law, that else can they ban? Books? Commercials? In the following CATO video, campaign finance law and free speech experts discuss the case, and what it means for the future of free speech. The Supreme Court is set to rule on it in the next few weeks. John Samples, Director of the Cato Institute's Center for Representative Government, Institute for Justice Senior Attorney Steve Simpson and George Mason University law professor Allison Hayward weigh in.