Archive | FSP RSS feed for this section

Mark Caserta: America is primary target for jihadists

1 Apr

me

Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot Editor

4.1.16

More than once last week, I heard the analogy “Nero played while Rome burned” to describe the antics of President Obama in the wake of the brutal Islamic terrorist attack in Brussels, Belgium.

Following the attack, despite promptings to return from Cuba to the United States in a presidential display of leadership and support for the Belgium people, Obama chose to stay and attend an exhibition baseball game hours after the attack. The following evening he chose to dance the tango and sip champagne at a state dinner with his wife, Michelle.

Reportedly, at least 31 people were killed and hundreds injured in the attack.

In January 2014, Obama likened ISIS to the “J.V.” team.

“The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a J.V. team puts on Lakers uniforms, that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant,” Obama told David Remnick of The New Yorker.

In a February 2015 interview with Vox’s Exra Klein and Matthew Yglesias, Obama charged the media with “absolutely” overstating the threat of “terrorism” compared to the threat of “climate change.”

During the exchange, Obama was asked “if the media sometimes overstates the level of alarm people should have about terrorism” as opposed to the problem of climate change.

“What’s the famous saying about local newscasts, right? If it bleeds, it leads, right?” Obama said. “You show crime stories and you show fires, because that’s what folks watch, and it’s all about ratings.”

Obama said stories relative to climate change just aren’t “sexy” enough for the media.

Nearly a year-and-a-half after the United States and its allies began confronting the Islamic State, Obama still didn’t have a strategy to defeat them. A June 2015 New York Times column written by Julie Davis and Michael Shear reported Obama acknowledging the fact at a news conference following the G7 Summit in Germany.

isis 2

“We don’t have, yet, a complete strategy, because it requires commitments on the part of Iraqis as well,” Mr. Obama said. “The details are not worked out.”

In February 2015, FBI Director James Comey warned that his agency was investigating suspected supporters of ISIS “in various stages of radicalizing” in every state across the U.S.

Failed leadership and an anemic response to the threat are enabling the return of the Islamic Caliphate and the rise of ISIS. Innocent people around the world are paying the price with their lives.

We know America is a primary target for radical jihadists. One has to wonder when a coordinated array of ISIS attacks will begin in the U.S.

And what our president is doing to prevent it.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

Tags: , , , ,

Mark Caserta: Trump lacks proper direction in his mission

25 Mar

me

  • 3.25.16

It’s time Donald Trump supporters begin to look themselves in the mirror and ask some very pertinent questions about what it’s really going to take to make America great again. I believe it’s going to take more than just a man to return our country to greatness.

Our Founding Fathers were humble enough to know their wisdom was insufficient for the task that lay ahead. They understood they needed to be sensitive to God’s direction and that founding a nation required the Almighty to order their steps and direct them in ways far beyond the scope of earthly wisdom.

The challenge we face today will require a similar approach.

donald

Our nation needs someone willing to seek God’s wisdom in all they say, do and represent. And right now, I simply don’t see Donald Trump as a man willing to lead our nation under God’s direction. In fact, I see a man determined to have it his way – or no way at all.

No doubt, there will be those who will charge me with “judging” or “condemning” the Donald. In fact, I have Christian friends, whom I love and respect dearly, justifying their support of Trump by suggesting his flip-flops on his liberal stances are the result of a life-changing experience with Jesus Christ.

Certainly, all things are indeed possible through Christ. But there’s a huge difference between judging a man’s heart and discerning his ability to lead a country.

I don’t propose to know Mr. Trump’s heart, but I do know the Bible tells us we should look at the “fruit” one produces in life as a barometer of character. Galatians 5:22-23 reminds us the “fruits of the Spirit” include, love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. I simply don’t see Trump’s actions aligning with these traits.

Are we so desperate for leadership that we are willing to allow an individual who vigorously attacks anyone who disagrees with his views and who spews vulgarity in public venues to become our next president?

It isn’t just the verbiage that’s concerning – it’s the judgment.

Are we so determined to “punish” liberal Democrats and feckless Republicans that we are willing to elect someone with a gaping lack of knowledge of foreign affairs simply because they are politically irreverent?

Are we so nave we’re willing to believe that simply because Donald Trump personally financed his campaign that he will not be indebted to his supporters in the same manner other candidates reward special interest groups and donors?

Unfortunately, we are witnessing millions of true patriots divided by a passionate desire to see our nation rebound from nearly eight years of progressive bondage. And liberals are leveraging this division against us!

But we must not allow our disgust with the current political theater to cloud our vision.

Remember, we got where we are because we elected a man unwilling to listen to others, unwilling to produce Godly fruit and who relentlessly attacked those who disagreed with him politically.

We must not make the same mistake again.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

Tags: , , ,

Mark Caserta: Cruz has bona fides to be US president

19 Mar

me

Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot Editor

Mar 18, 2016

It’s encouraging to see that so many people understand the need to “make America great again” following the failed leadership of the current administration.

But the worst thing we can do in this upcoming presidential election is vote with our emotions instead of our minds. That’s how we got Barack Obama.

For the first time in nearly eight years we’ve an opportunity to logically look beyond the rhetoric and seek out substance in a principled, knowledgeable candidate who has proven he will stand up to both liberal Democrats and the so-called GOP establishment.

Sen. Cruz understands big government is the problem, not the solution. As president, Cruz promises to reduce government by eliminating the Department of Education and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Education will be returned to the states, and the IRS will no longer be a feared government agency targeting anti-liberal policies.

West Virginians know all too well that Obama and his Environmental Protection Agency cronies are deliberately killing the coal industry. Cruz has promised to pull back the massive EPA regulations and allow the coal industry to breathe again, revitalizing jobs across the country.

Cruz understands the economy. He’s consistently voted against raising the debt ceiling, massive spending bills and government bailouts. He’s for free trade and against government subsidies where government picks “winners and losers.” He understands business, not government, creates jobs.

Ted Cruz understands foreign policy and the quandary in the Middle East. He led the fight against Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran and promises to “tear it up” early in his presidency. He’s been a staunch supporter of Israel and doesn’t believe in a “neutral” approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

And finally, in January’s edition of “Charisma News,” Cruz openly shared his testimony about his faith and his commitment to religious liberty.

“When I was 8 years old, I went to our church’s summer camp, along (with) my cousin Bibi. At the invitation, tears streaming down my face, Bibi and I both walked down and gave our lives to Jesus.

“And it changed my life. To have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, to know that God’s only Son died to pay for my sins, that I was fallen that I am redeemed by the blood of the Lamb, nothing is more important to me. I am a new creature in Christ, and it is central to who I am today.”

Serving in the highest office in the land requires a servant’s heart, not a taskmaster’s whip.

And it requires someone with proven integrity.

Ted Cruz toes the line.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

Tags: , ,

Mark Caserta: Candidates should avoid brokered convention

11 Mar

me

Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot Editor

  • 3.11.16

In addition to being plagued with mammoth egos and juvenile behavior, the Republican Party is certainly in a political pickle right now. And it could get much worse.

Now, I plan to support the GOP nominee and the constitutional process – period. Besides, in my estimation, any of the four remaining candidates are more qualified than either of their Democrat opponents.

convention

The problem is the voters may not be the ones choosing! The GOP could be facing their first “brokered convention” in nearly 70 years.

What is a brokered convention? Here’s how it works.

During the primary and caucus season, a candidate seeks to win enough votes to be awarded a simple majority of the available delegates during the first official vote of the party’s nominating convention. For the Republican Party, the magic delegate number is 1,237. Of the GOP’s 2,472 available delegates, the majority are “pledged” delegates, meaning they will be bound to vote for a particular candidate at the convention.

Here’s where it could get nasty.

If during the first vote at the upcoming Republican National Convention in Cleveland on July 18-21 the delegates are split among candidates and there is no clear majority, the convention is then considered “brokered.” The Republican National Committee will then press the proverbial “reset” button, releasing all delegates from their pledged candidate and enabling them to cast a vote for the individual of their choice.

A “no holds barred” nomination process then ensues with self-serving party leaders bartering back room deals to wangle a candidate they feel could garner the necessary delegates. Subsequent voting would then take place until one candidate receives a majority.

Now, here are some points to consider regarding this process.

First, it renders months of primary and caucus voting null and void, taking the American people completely out of the process, which could have huge ramifications.

Sen. Marco Rubio and Ohio Gov. John Kasich, for all intents and purposes, are out of the race. A brokered convention, controlled by the so-called GOP “establishment,” would be their only hope of winning the nomination.

And this same establishment hates businessman Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz. A brokered convention would most assuredly not result in either of these candidates receiving the Republican nomination.

Additionally, given the poor caliber of the Democrat candidates, I believe the jury is still out on their presumptive nominee. While Democrat leadership certainly doesn’t want to show its “down card” this early in the process, Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry or former presidential candidate Al Gore could easily step up as party “benefactors” and become formidable candidates.

My political “Xanadu” rests with Rubio and Kasich dropping out after the March 15th primaries, reducing this to a two-man race. I believe the changing dynamics would result in a Cruz nomination before the GOP could orchestrate a brokered convention and sidestep voters.

Regardless, unless the equation changes, a brokered convention may be inevitable. And the American people would just watch from the sidelines.

Here’s hoping candidates simply do the right thing.

Mark Caserta is a Cabell County resident.

Tags: , , ,

Mark Caserta: What will you do with your freedom?

5 Mar

me

3.4.16

We all hear the word “freedom” bandied about often enough, but what does the word actually mean to you?

The principal author of the Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton, may have said it best.

“The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for, among old parchments, or musty records. They are written, as with a sun beam in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of divinity itself; and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power.”

While sitting in my “Men of Truth” class in church this past Sunday, I thoughtfully considered the greatest freedom of all – the ability to choose one’s path in life.

Now, the ability to choose our own belief system is a God-given right which no man should be able to abrogate. And the freedom to express or exercise our religious faith is certainly an integral derivative of the process. But simply believing isn’t enough!

Dr. Steve Nutter, our class teacher and mentor, used believing in God as an example of how we must each put our faith into action. “Believing isn’t enough,” Dr. Nutter paraphrased from the Bible, the Book of James. “Even the demons believe, and they tremble in terror.”

It’s how we put our Godly belief system into action that fosters God’s consummate freedom in our lives.

The freedom from bondage and addiction are, in essence, the temporal chains of this world. One could argue these worldly obstructions are meant to create a communication barrier between us and God, deafening us to potentially life-changing inspiration from our creator.

And then there’s the freedom to prosper and grow in an environment that nurtures and rewards hard work. Capitalism is certainly the quintessential example of this freedom in America, although under attack by the progressive movement.

A freedom which I consider to be the antithesis of all virtuous freedoms is the freedom from the rule of law and accountability. This nefarious, illicit freedom fosters suppression of principled, lawful ones. Probably the most prominent example of our day is the right to exercise your religious freedom.

Let’s be constitutionally honest, shall we? How can “freely exercising your religious beliefs, outside of any government interference,” be interpreted as “Congress making a law that shows respect to one religion over another?”

I’ll tell you how. We allowed it to happen.

The desire for freedom, while inherent in us all, may be driven by the wrong conviction. Ronald Reagan said, “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.”

Someone always wants to take it away.

So, beginning today, what will you do with your freedom?

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger and a Cabell County resident.

Tags: ,

Mark Caserta: Christians’ votes can make the difference

26 Feb

me

Christians, are you happy with the state of our union? Are you comfortable that our nation’s leaders represent us and govern without Godly values and a servant’s heart?

Well, you must be.

Despite the fact that most Christians I know would agree our nation is severely lacking in terms of its reliance upon the biblical precepts and principles of its founding, millions of potential evangelical voters are content to live their lives on the sidelines and stay out of politics altogether.

According to a December 2015 Gallup Poll, about 75 percent of Americans identify with a Christian religion. The poll described the “Christian” category to include Catholics, Protestants, Mormons and non-denominational Christians.

The U.S. Census Bureau website shows that around the same time

period, our nation had just over 318 million citizens, with 77 percent over the age of 18. Without getting too bogged down in the math, that equates to just over 183 million potential Christian voters.

To put that number in perspective, Barack Hussein Obama won the 2012 presidential election with just under 66 million popular votes! It isn’t difficult to see what sort of impact Christians could have if they would simply get out the vote!

The Providence Forum, a nonprofit organization whose mission is to “preserve, defend and advance the faith and values consistent with those of our nation’s founding,” recently shared an online analysis of the Christian vote in America.

The edition, entitled “Your Vote Matters,” revealed that only 50 percent of Christians in America are even registered to vote. Of those, only 50 percent actually show up at the polls. This means that around 75 percent of all Christians aren’t doing their part to mold the future of our nation. That’s over 137 million voters!

The apparent apathy of Christian voters in executing their spiritual duty to God, their patriotic duty to their country and their kindred duty to their family is simply inexcusable. If Christians would fulfill their responsibility and vote, not only would we attract more candidates that share our belief system, we would win every presidency in a landslide!

In my lifetime, I can’t recall our country ever being as derailed from the temporal tracks of morality as it is now. The progressive movement is effectively spreading its liberal theology into every nook and cranny of our nation, to include our schools, government and even churches! And they’re tenaciously attacking every semblance of God and replacing it with their sliding scale of morality.

But this doesn’t have to happen. With a little studying of the issues, some fervent prayer and a 30-minute trip to the polling booth, you can make all the difference.

There is power in unity and the sideline is no place for a Christian. Remember, Jesus took only 12 men and shook the world. And He told us we will “do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.”

Your vote matters. Now, more than ever.

Because without the Christian vote in November, we lose – period.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger and a Cabell County resident.

Tags: , ,

Mark Caserta: America’s very future depends on court’s balance

19 Feb

 

Over the years, the U.S. Supreme Court has become a prized possession for the reigning political party. It’s balance, whether conservative or liberal leaning, denotes potentially decades of consequences for “We the People.”

 

Understand, a successful confirmation to the Supreme Court is a lifetime appointment. And while the very vital role these justices play in our judicial system involves interpreting, not transforming the law, the progressive evolution of the court’s discretionary character has unfortunately acquiesced to paltry judicial activism for their party.

scotus

In recent history the Supreme Court has given us Roe v. Wade, Obamacare and nationalized gay marriage. These progressive rulings alone have dramatically changed the face of America and left our children facing many unknown challenges.

No doubt, conservatism has seen its share of setbacks. But we may have just incurred one of our biggest.

 

Last Saturday, our nation’s leading conservative voice on the Supreme Court died at the age of 79. Multiple news agencies reported Justice Antonin Scalia died in his sleep during a visit to Texas. Unsurprisingly, his passing sparked a flurry of debate on the terms of filling the vacancy.

 

Should Obama or the next president and Senate be charged with nominating and confirming Scalia’s replacement? With Democrat leadership calling for the seat to be filled right away, President Obama vowed to nominate a replacement.

judge scalia

“There will be plenty of time for me to do so and for the Senate to fulfill its responsibility to give that person a fair hearing and a timely vote,” Obama said. “These are responsibilities that I take seriously, as should everyone.”

 

Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., quickly called for the vacancy to be filled after the Obama presidency.

 

“The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president,” McConnell said in a statement.

 

Now, over the next few weeks, you’ll hear political pundits argue that Scalia’s absence imperils the 5-4 conservative majority on the court.

 

But I’m afraid the risk is much greater for conservatives.

 

There are really only two conservative justices left in the high court — Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito Jr. Justices Anthony Kennedy and Chief Justice John Roberts are, in my opinion, moderates. That leaves a court laden with the staunch liberal views of Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Steven Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

Another progressive addition to the court would secure disaster for conservatism as we know it. So for now, the Senate must stand firm on confirming the right nominee.

 

Incredulously, while the Constitution spells out multiple requirements for becoming president or even a member of Congress, it mentions no rules for joining the Supreme Court! A justice doesn’t even have to have judicial experience!

 

Placing such unmitigated power into the hands of potentially unqualified individuals makes no sense.

 

It’s time to alleviate the long-term political impact of an unbalanced court.

 

We must act now to add term limits for Supreme Court justices as well as establish clearly defined qualifications.

 

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

Tags: , ,

Mark Caserta: Be wary of tactics to influence voters

12 Feb

me

Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot Editor

2.12.16

It may surprise you that Donald Trump’s massive presence in liberal media outlets such as MSNBC or CNN isn’t meant to educate the voter as to his qualifications to be president.

Understand neither Democrats nor the liberal media want the villainous Hillary Clinton having to face anyone but Republican real-estate mogul Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election. In fact, he may be the only chance she’s got.

 

The recent Iowa caucuses were a perfect example.

Nearly every single poll (including the esteemed Des Moines Register and Bloomberg) had Trump up in entrance polling by as many as 5 points over Texas Sen. Ted Cruz. At one point leading up to the voting, some polls had Trump up by as many as 22 points!

But that doesn’t mean he ever was.

You see, there’s something about the human psyche that makes folks want to go with a “winner.” And the major media players count on that. They believe they can influence the outcome of an election with early polling “slanted” toward their candidate feigning a substantial lead – so don’t waste your vote!

It turns out, Cruz won by nearly 4.5 points, nearly a 9 point turnaround. In this case, the incredulous consideration of Donald Trump as the GOP candidate was just too surmounting to be overcome by any media ploy.

Now, don’t get me wrong. This tactic isn’t proprietary for the liberal media. Other major conservative channels like Fox News are just as guilty of tilting the voter’s focus one direction or another.

For example, it’s pretty obvious to me that initially the Fox News tailwinds were in the sails of Jeb Bush. After all, the Bush legacy has been kind to owner Rupert Murdoch. But after seeing the Jeb ship wasn’t seaworthy, the talking heads jumped on Mario Rubio’s speed boat. And clearly the questions and interview angles given Rubio are slow pitches compared to the knuckle balls thrown at Ted Cruz and other candidates.

It’s a pretty sad state of affairs, actually. We have the national liberal media promoting the weakest possible GOP candidate while providing Hillary an endless supply of “get out of jail free” cards. And we have the comparative conservative media attempting to influence their lion share of voters with sometimes fair and “unbalanced” reporting.

So, don’t fall prey to this nuanced reporting and skewed polls. If we’ve learned anything from recent history, it isn’t only the politicians who will lie to you – some media outlets will as well.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

Tags: ,

Doug Smith: Thieves, Robbers and politics

12 Feb
DOUG SMITH
Doug Smith: Author, historian and lead contributor to Free State Patriot
2.12.16
I was a sailor. One thing any sailor will tell you is that we do not tolerate thieves.  A thief on a ship is dealt with quickly by his superiors, lest an accident befall him.
theives 1
Life falling overboard holding an anchor.
There is good reason for this attitude.  Ships are notoriously crowed. There is little personal space and almost no privacy. The few personal items we carried; books, letter writing material, candy, coffee cups were cherished and very precious to us. Steal from one shipmate and incur the wrath of all.  If you don’t respect his stuff, you won’t respect mine.
Throughout history, people have cherished their “stuff”.  Handmade knife, corn worked for and tended with sweat and labor throughout the growing season, a pot, a bowl, a pig fattened all year to feed the family for the winter. And just as surely, there have always been thieves and robbers.
(Disclaimer: I have heard it said “There is nothing in my house worth taking a life over.  If a thief wants what I’ve got, it’s better to let him have it. “I disagree. Come to my house to take what I’ve got, what I’ve worked and sweated and sacrificed for, and Ill “let you have it, alright.” Center mass. Two shots.)
And that is, after all, the point. My stuff is not “just stuff.” It is the result, for good or ill, of my hard work, my choices, my investments of the limited number of hours and days of my life. If you steal from me that which took me a week’s work to earn, you are stealing a week of my life. And I will defend it.
Thus it has been with thieves from early times.  A thief makes the judgement that the easiest “work” is to let you sweat and save and sacrifice and struggle for that which he wants. Then, while you rest from your labors, to come and take it, and sneak away. That the result of a week, or a month, of your labor goes with him, and hence a week of your life, concerns him not at all. You have it. He wants it. That is his entire reasoning and morality. Why he wants it does not matter, his desire outweighs your rights.
The robber is a bit more industrious, but no more moral. The robber will not sneak, but will take your stuff, and by the same extension, pieces of your life, by force with weapons or threats. He will not sneak to steal it, he will demand that you surrender it to his desires. Again, his desire outweighs your rights.
theives 2
The most energetic robbers in history, and the best, manage to wrap themselves in a mantle of respectability. Pharaoh of all Egypt (give me your corn and work on my projects, or I will send my soldiers to kill you.) King of Kings, Agamemnon.  First Ill beat Athens, then I force Athens to help me beat Sparta, then force them both to help me beat Troy. Henry Fitz-Empress, 2nd of that name, First Plantagenet, most able soldier of an able time, a King at 21, and ruled in his time an Empire greater than Charlemagne.
These energetic robber kings use a tried and tested formula. Be good at fighting. Beat someone up, but promise to let them live if they help you. Then the 2 of you can beat up on more, and rob them of gold, food, animals, labor, and daughters, whatever you wish. Eventually, you have enough powerful, but less powerful than you, robbers, who will join with you in robbing the labors of thousands, or millions, in return for a share of the booty, and support for your ambitions.
Henry II, Plantagenet King of England, was a prime example of this principle. He lived in a fine castle, but he was not a builder: he was a soldier. He ate the finest foods, which he neither grew nor killed: he was, again, a soldier. And he spawned the bloodiest royal House in British history, with countless commoners, and not a few “royals” slaughtered in the name of their ambitions. (See the Hundred Years War)
But it all came down to robbery.  What Henry and his heirs wanted, someone would provide, because his Sheriffs would collect his taxes at the point of a sword.  It was their disregard for the possessions of others that led to one major step forward in people asserting and demanding their property rights from Henry’s son, John, the Magna Carta. (See Ivanhoe, and Runnymede)
But it is all about our “stuff”. If I am free, but must give you all I earn or produce, my freedom is meaningless and my incentive to produce what I can is only as much as you can force me to do for you. Conversely, the more I am free to keep what I produce, the more I will strive to do so, for my own benefit. Free societies, thus, are always more productive and wealthy than slave societies.
So, (apologies to those who are not lovers of history, like me) what does this little history lesson on thievery do for us today?
Well, let’s see if we can find the thieves and robbers today.  If Bill Gates decides to spend a billion dollars to fight diseases among poor countries, he has the money to spend, and has a generous impulse, and does it. Bill is a philanthropist.
If Congressman Leghorn Foghorn decides to give a billion dollars to his district to build the Foghorn Leghorn Bridge, when he makes $ 150,000 a year, where, we must ask, will he get that money?  If Foggie gets $ 2,500,000 in speaking fees to talk for half an hour to the Bridge Builders Association, and the Department of Architecture housed in Leghorn Hall at Podunk State, what could make his words that valuable? If 1000 people in his district get 10,000 bucks a piece for building his bridge, (that would be $ 10,000,000)
But Foggie is sure of a few thousand votes in November because of all the palms he has greased. Palms belonging to people who said in their hearts, we need this. Somebody has to pay us.
Foggie doesn’t have to come up with the Billion.   The IRS and Sherriff will do that for him, from people who live a long way from his district, and have no interest in Foggie, or his bridge, or Local 864U of the Bridge builders, but have to pay up or the Sherriff will take their homes for which they have worked.
thieves 3
So, in this little morality tale, we can find the robbers, and the thieves, and the serfs, robbed again.
Robin Hood, after all, took from the Sheriffs and John’s nobles to give back to those who had it taken from them. The Magna Carta was forced out of John to respect the rights of his Barons, because he was squeezing too much from them.
No one likes a thief. Some will not tolerate a thief. And eventually, the thieves and robbers are cornered at Runnymede and told “Enough.”
With April 15 coming, and Primaries just beyond that, and a General Election in November, perhaps it is time we all read about John at Runnymede, play a little game of “Who’s the Thief?”, and ask ourselves, “Enough?”

Tags: ,

Mark Caserta: Will the rule of law be applied to Hillary?

6 Feb

2013 0613 caserta 01

Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot Editor

  • Updated Feb 5, 2016

 

Have some government officials risen so high in political power that they’ve indeed risen above the law? Do Americans still value the rule of law over the ruler?

Consider retired Gen. David H. Petraeus, arguably one of the finest minds in military history and certainly a man who played a major role in the U.S. success in the Iraq War.

Originally appointed by George W. Bush to head multinational forces in the 2007 surge in Iraq, Petraeus later served as commander-in-chief of Central Command, head of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, and as the director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

But even Petraeus wasn’t above the law.

In April 2015, he pleaded guilty to providing classified information to his former mistress and biographer and was sentenced, in a plea deal, to two years of probation and ordered to pay a $100,000 fine by a North Carolina court, as reported by Reuters.

So if a decorated general, who no doubt helped save American lives, isn’t above the impropriety of compromising classified information, should an ex-secretary of state?

 

Fast-forward to last Friday, where an Associated Press Newsbreak, written by Bradley Klapper, reported the Obama administration had finally confirmed that Hillary Clinton’s home server contained closely guarded government secrets and at least 22 emails that contained material requiring one of the highest levels of classification, despite telling the American people that she had “never sent or received any material marked classified.”

MONICA 3bh1

The article went on to say the AP had learned of seven email chains containing “top secret” information so highly restricted that it would not be released even with redactions.

“The documents are being upgraded at the request of the intelligence community because they contain a category of top secret information,” State Department spokesman John Kirby told the AP, calling the withholding of documents in full “not unusual.” That means they won’t be published online with others being released, even with blacked-out boxes.

In what I believe was a calculated attempt to “feign” her innocence, Clinton campaign spokesman Brain Fallon issued a classic Clinton bluff.

“We firmly oppose the complete blocking of the release of these emails,” Fallon said. “Since first providing her emails to the State Department more than one year ago, Hillary Clinton has urged that they be made available to the public. We feel no differently today.”

Right! The Clinton camp knows these top secret emails can never be released, further compromising national security, hence the assuming dare to release them.

As a younger man, I viewed hours of the Watergate hearings with great wonder. Soon thereafter, I witnessed President Nixon tender his resignation, fearing impeachment from an espionage operation inside the offices of the Democratic National Committee. While tragic, the system worked and forever changed politics as we know it.

 

Now, over 40 years later, could we be witnessing Hillary’s escape from indictment for far greater crimes against these United States of America?

If so, Americans will never again be able to trust that the rule of law will apply indiscriminately in Washington.

 

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page

Tags: , , ,

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →