MEGA DATA COLLECTION WITTINGLY DANGEROUS

Whatever you think about the Patriot Act, as to whether it crosses the line or stays within the boundaries of the Constitution's  Bill of Rights' protections, one thing is clear, mega data unwittingly collected but allowed to be stored by our government is obviously an infringement.

When Director of National Intelligence James Clapper claimed that NSA was "not wittingly" gathering data on innocence citizens, he not only lied but failed to disclose that the government was also saving that tangential private data. 

Why is our government allowed to keep this collected mega data?  Why aren't more conservative Republicans amending the Patriot Act and introducing legislation that protects the rights of citizens from government intrusion?

It seems that only Senator Rand Paul is talking about the need to reform this un-patriotic Act, but then again, Paul supported Mitch McConnell's re-election campaign in Kentucky, so they both seem to be licking the same Utah salt.

The line between private and public papers is being blurred by technology, abused by government, corrupted by elites and ignored by our courts. Hillary Clinton uses a private e-mail account and server to conduct official State Department business (illegal) while innocent citizens within range of an NSA spying operation have their cell phone data swept up and then stored by the government. Hypocrisy or downright Big Brother corrupt tyranny? 

Sitting out in Bluffdale, Utah is an NSA facility called the Intelligence Community Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative Data Center or if you prefer the shorter name, the Utah Data Center.

This huge facility holds all the warrantless, unconstitutional seizure of citizen's phone and e-mail records in  brazen violation of Americans 1st and 4th amendment rights. In what can only be termed astounding arrogance, NSA wants Americans to believe that it collected this data unwittingly and  is not reading the personal information it has collected, all while storing citizen's ill-gained personal correspondence in a classified facility. Why?

I think the hills are alive with the sound of muzak. 

"Do, a tale of insincere, Re, a pocketful of lies, Mi, a name WE call ourselves, Fa, a long, long way from truth, Sol, a whole cloth made of fraud, La, our representatives support for Sol, Ti, a drink to jam our heads, that will brings us back to Do, or duh a tale of insincere."

We have been told that the reason innocent people's cell phones were tapped was because the spying technology is so sensitive it picks up the electronic data from a wide swath area beyond the targeted subject. Therefore, "unwittingly" was the term used for why the agency was capturing and collecting innocent American's private information without  their consent or a court warrant. 

We have been further assured that the agency is not reading the warrantless material that it snatched up in its eavesdropping trawler's net, because they claim they are not. Wow, now that's a gold standard of assurance, is it not?

Which of course brings us back to DO, a tale of insincere. For if the government claims it harvested our private data tangentially and is not using it to spy on innocent Americans, then why is it not destroying it, rather than storing it? 

Fisherman using nets routinely  find many different species they are not hunting, unwittingly caught among their intended catch, so what do they do? Keep them, or throw them back into the ocean? 

If you believe that NSA is being honest and not prying into data it collected without a warrant (naive is an inadequate description of your trust level) consider what might happen in the future, given what we already know has happened in the past with agencies holding sensitive information, like the Internal Revenue Service.

We have seen private information passed around by our government from conservative groups to social progressive groups by an IRS that targeted and harassed taxpaying Americans. These targeted American groups' crimes were merely to be in political opposition of the current administration and seeking to restore honesty and integrity in our political process (TRUE THE VOTE). Yet to date, no one has been prosecuted, no one has been charged, and recent news reports have charged that the targeting continues at the IRS.

But hey, if you are a lawful American citizen, committing no crimes and loyal to your country, why should you fear or care if your government has a cache of personal information about your life held in a classified computer facility, in a Utah, city called Bluffdale between Step and Sheep mountain? (The factual names are so metaphorically accurate you might think I made them up, I didn't.)

So considering that you are a law abiding citizen and in the interest of capturing terrorists, you support the NSA program and think you can trust that your government, then ask yourself; exactly what protections are in place for the government to not turn its focus on you?

Edwin Meese III wrote in an article, May 26, 2010 at the Heritage Foundation regarding the increasing trend of overcriminalization of our nations laws; http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2010/05/too-many-laws-turn-innocents-into-criminals

" But the typical American’s deeply held beliefs about the freedoms he cherishes and the fundamental principles of his government are no longer as well founded as they once were. Today, he is far more vulnerable than ever before to being caught up in a criminal investigation and prosecution — and to actually being convicted and punished as a criminal — for having done something he did not even suspect was illegal."

More and more we are not only seeing an explosion of laws by our federal and state government but an unmistakable, undisguised and completely brazen political corruption of our justice system. If you belong to the politically correct group, have the political correct pedigree and are part of the elite power peddlers then you are safe from prosecution. Everyone else that is not included on that safe list is fair game and vulnerable.

You might also ask, is that mega data safe from foreign hackers that could use that megadata information for identity theft? Do you think given the revelation recently that both the White House and the State Department computers were hacked that the computers storing data at the NSA would be safer? What about another Snowden, another spy slipped into the NSA with classified clearance but this time with far more sinister plans?

Americans have the right to use the latest technology under the assumption that private stays private. Just because this technology makes it easier for the government to ensnare us without breaking into our homes without a warrant, doesn't mean they should, nor does it mean that Americans must go off the grid to protect their privacy. We need to reform the Patriot Act.

The First and Fourth Amendment in our Bill of Rights has no expiration date, wittingly or unwittingly Congress must uphold our Constitution!

MO MO MO MONEY!

If you ask big government lovers what the solution is to every incompetent, corrupt and dangerous practice exercised by the federal government, the answer is always the same: they need more money.

Never does the government-loving left ever admit a federal program or agency might be counterproductive, expedient or ineffective. They hold on to their federal bureaucracies as though they are precious keepsakes passed on from their beloved ancestry.

Also in keeping with their complete unabashed shameless hypocrisy they fail to see the irony of calling themselves "progressives" when they instead support the propping up of old failed policies while stifling progress and innovative change.

The recent Amtrak train crash is illustrative of the Democrat's recalcitrant and nonsensical argument that always is intoned to the ears of a "Gruberite" crowd. They argue that if those big bad Republicans just gave Amtrak more money, then the engineer that allowed the train to travel 106 mph on a track curve in Philadelphia rated for 50 mph, the disastrous crash would not have happened.

Obviously lowering Amtrak's federal subsidies was the reason for the crash, right? Obviously giving Amtrak all the money it requests would insure that there would never be another train crash, right? Obviously, if every federal agency and program was fully funded then government would be efficient, honest and make all our lives better, right?

Wrong is the correct answer, of course, but it brings up an interesting question. If this logic is so obviously ridiculous why, and better yet who, is being influenced and swayed by this constant barking of bunk by the left? A better question still, might be to wonder why they always need a punching bag? 

Of course no sane person would buy this  irrational response, but the left isn't trying to provide answers anymore, instead they are selling blame. Theirs' is a political "gotcha" game that points fingers at the liberal's Bogeyman; named Republicans.  

It has become such a nasty naked political trick for the left, that they have lost any faint hue of shame in parading their farce. The factual truth that their liberal policies have failed, time and time again, is the real bare bottomed embarrassment that causes them to lash out at conservatives rather than suffer self-reproach.

Recently the President made an incomprehensible accusation, that FOX news depicts poor Americans as lazy and undeserving. The President in true left-wing form, made this broad bushed statement while citing no examples, referencing no particular segments and showing zero evidence that his perception drew on any substantive fact, save his own esoteric ideologically driven mindset. Well, of course, if the President of the United States says FOX news is full of classism then it must be a fact, right?

Wrong again, but this isn't about sane dialog and intellectual discourse, this is about deflection, blame shifting and avoiding having to admit defeat. Perhaps I failed to mention that the President made these remarks at a Georgetown University panel meeting to discuss poverty. Constructive criticism or destructive scapegoating? I will leave the you to judge. 

The Democrats have sold themselves as the savior of the poor since Lyndon Baines Johnson declared war on poverty in his "Great Society" programs. Head Start, food stamps and work study all came out of the Federal Treasury to ensure that poverty would be significantly marginalize. Year after year, decade after decade Democrats continue to roll out the taxpayer cash on these programs even when data suggests poverty is increasing. 

Even the dimmest bulb understands that eventually a government that operates on the backs of hard working taxpayers to fund its bloated weight will need to shift its policies and priorities or see itself implode.

So what is the alternative that today's Democrats have for us to consider? What are their new ideas and innovative suggestions as to how to slow the rise of increasing poverty and crumbling inner city decay.

More federal spending is the only idea that the liberal Democrats have to offer the American public.

This double down on failure Party, this blame game Party, this federal program hocking Democrat Party is exposing its indifference to the very victims it claims to support. For the only people rising up above poverty and becoming rich from the current liberal government welfare programs, are political leeches like Bill and Hillary Clinton not the inner city single mom.

Instead of more, more, more, money, Americans must start shouting enough, enough, enough!  

SPACE TO DESTROY

The Mayor of Baltimore, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake is failing to lead her city during its time of need. Her devotion to liberal ideology caused her to refuse to mark a clear line of distinction between protesting and rioting, or between peaceful marching with signs and wholesale looting, vandalism and mob violence.

She may have misspoke, when she said that "we also gave those who wished to destroy, space as well" but like a true victim loving liberal, she takes no accountability, preferring instead to blame the media for "twisting her words". 

One wonders what example she is following? Certainly not the President of the United States who has always taken responsibly for mistakes? Oh wait, no, this President, like this mayor loves to serve us goat, scapegoat that is, while only taking full credit for positive outcomes.  

The irony in America today is that under the leadership of a the first black American President, that received overwhelming support from the black community, instead of life improving for minorities, our urban cities are on the brink of chaos.

Yet, the reality of hope and change that has descending into dope and deranged, is only ironic to those that believe that only blacks lead blacks, women lead women, Latinos lead Latinos etcetera, and so on. In fact, voting for leadership based on color, sex and ethnicity as the sole criteria for public office is not just ignorantly prejudiced, it has brought more incompetence and corruption into local and national politics.

There are four relevant awareness exposed transparently in the wake of urban violence for Americans to come to terms with as their eyes view urban unrest.

One, America's racial tensions are worse not better under the leadership of social-progressive liberalism, for it  preaches the ideology that minorities are eternal victims and all white males should be punished or given a whip to flagellate their never-ending guilt for past slavery. It is not about coming together as Americans but rather to further divide Americans into voting blocks, so that progressives can control and consolidate power.  

Two, under the leadership of liberals many cities and communities have gone from poor and crumbling infrastructures needing jobs and private investment to be treated instead as victims and handed more taxpayer money that has caused an impoverished work ethic and demoralized social structure where gangs and thugs rule the streets.

Three, there has been a growing problem with police militarization, which by the way, was started by Bill Clinton allowing the Department of Defense to sell our urban and suburban police forces their out dated military equipment, which has all Americans concerned.

Yet, instead of addressing the issue when police use excessive force and vigorously prosecuting unlawful police behavior, liberals use examples (Fergeson) that are neither unlawful police action nor honest (hands up don't shoot) characterizations of facts. Their purpose is to race bait and further divide Americans rather than to address how police unions are in part responsible for bad officers remaining on the job. 

Four, is the hypocrisy of liberals and their media spokesmen that continue to conflate city riots with free speech protests. Apparently if you are a liberal protest group (Occupy Wall Street) you are a wonderful civic minded activist group to be celebrated, yet if you are a (Tea Party) conservative group demonstrating peacefully, you are an "angry mob" acting un-American. But, if you are a minority rioting in the inner city against police, well, then liberals will accommodate you by giving you "space to destroy" and excuse that thuggish behavior by empathizing with your lawless, self-defeating immorality as righteous anger against "the system".

Is it lost on any American that "the system" in most of these areas has been created and controlled by liberals?

Is it beyond most Americans common sense to realize that double digit unemployment in urban areas results in greater breeding grounds for crime and corruption?

Is it lost on any American's sense of sanity that moral leadership starts at the top and then leaves its results at the bottom? 

It is an apt metaphor that social-progressive-liberalism has had many decades and lots of "space to destroy" America. It has had too much space to destroy America's value system of freedom, personal accountability, self-reliance and moral family structure. It has had too much space to destroy the foundation of a country that has given so much opportunity to so many in the world.

Indeed, if we could  see its America's intangible values as solid visible buildings, in the same way as we see stores in Ferguson, and businesses in Baltimore, we would see American values up in smoke.

We would see the windows of our values smashed with the shards of broken glass animosity of selfishness the only legacy being passed on to the next generation.

We would see our American treasure been looted (Hillary Clinton) right under our noses without anyone being arrested or held accountable.

We would be watching and hearing the scornful liberals berating America and the Americans that made sacrifices for their country in favor of those that make excuses as to why they need to destroy her.

Just like the rioters in Baltimore, liberals claim to want to fix America but their solution is to continue to blame the past, blame the system, blame everybody else and be allowed the "space to destroy" America. Instead liberalism has been given the space by voters and proven its ability to destroy itself by its own self-loathing hypocrisy.

TWO IN THE BUSH IS NOT WORTH A JEB

If Jeb Bush were elected President, it would be the first time in American history that both a father and two sons, occupied the oval office. It would thereby establish an elitist lineage resembling a monarchial system as opposed to our Democratic Republic. 

This reason alone should be enough for voters to reject Jeb Bush's candidacy for president, but read on, for there are far more reasons and many more storm clouds over this ex-Governor of Florida.

Two names in Jeb Bush's past should make anyone think twice about handing him the oval office, Miguel Recarey and Claudio Osorio. These two men have more than tangential ties to Jeb Bush and both are criminals that defrauded American taxpayers of millions.

Miguel Recarey had an HMO company called International Medical Centers in Florida and was fond of his connection to both the Cuban mafia and politicians. In the 1980's while Jeb's father was vice President under Reagan, young Jeb Bush was in the real estate business, one of his partners was Miguel Recarey.

Recarey wanted a waiver renewed to allow his company to receive more than 50 percent of its revenue from Medicare. Jeb Bush used his influence by calling the then Health and Human Services Secretary Margaret Heckler on his behalf. Heckler confirms Bush called her, and yes, Recarey did receive his waiver, and by the way, absconded with millions of taxpayer dollars.

Claudio Osorio owned a house construction company called  Inna Vida Holdings LLC that proposed to build hurricane and earthquake resistant homes. In 2007 Osorio  asked ex-Governor Jeb Bush to sit as a board member and a consultant to his company and Bush readily agreed. Indeed, Bush's face on the company, lend it the air of legitimacy, that allowed Osorio to swindle investors of their money. 

General Wesley Clark was also asked, but after a simple check of Osorio's background, that showed problems, Wesley Clark declined. Osorio was a known entity in Florida, for in fact his other company CHS Electronics, was not only bankrupt but had been involved in a class action lawsuit for securities fraud. 

The red flags over the legitimacy of Osorio and his company were not just beneath the surface, they were flying in the air for any mildly skeptical person to check. Jeb Bush earned a 468,000 between 2007 until 2010 from Inna Vida Holdings LLC until, yes, Osorio and his company was investigated and exposed as a Ponzi scheme. OPIC (Overseas Private Investment Corporation) a federally backed agency lost 3 million dollars when Osorio convinced them after Haiti's earthquake, to supply him loans so his phony company could build his imaginary homes. Claudio Osorio is now sitting in a federal prison.

As for Jeb Bush? Well, he paid back 270,000 of the 468,000 he made under this con man without any explanation of where and why the 198,000 balance of money disappeared off the radar screen. He claimed to have been just a victim to both of these men's con artist thievery. 

Well, if we believe Jeb Bush, then he is the most gullible scam victim to ever hold public office. He also would be presenting himself as brick wall dumb and dumber for instead of learning his lesson with the first scam in the 1980's (Recarey) one would think he would have never aligned himself with another swindler (Osorio) more than 20 years later.

However, if we don't believe Jeb Bush, then he is as crooked as the many snakes in Washington and either way, not fit to hold office. Crooked, stupid or both, this Bush should be ashamed to run for President, and the GOP backers should be equally hailed as scam artists.

The state of American politics is shabby, secretive and salacious considering that two crooks Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush are vying for the highest office of the land and are backed by their parties.

The public is kept in the dark about the truth of these candidates backgrounds, and when the true facts start to bubble up like lava to the surface, the liberal media is quick to extinguish the flames as the GOP scrambles to sweep dirt under its rug. 

Jeb Bush is not just a moderate Republican with a dubious background, he holds liberal positions outright and unapologetic, on immigration and federal education. He would make the illegal immigration crises worse in our country, by publicly reiterating his statement that illegal entry over our borders is an "act of love."

His support of Common Core, shows his duplicity in undermining States' Rights and believing as liberals believe in big federal government control. Let alone his lack of concern for the constitutionality of the Department of education even being a valid government agency, which is a conservative principle.

Yet he claims to have been a true conservative Governor of Florida, yet we know the koolaid flavor is orange and the GOP rhetoric makes voters turn ashen in disgust. 

It is important to note that Americans are waking up to the shenanigans of both political parties. Unlike decades earlier, when these type of candidates had more money and money was the only political game that won elections, politically awake Americans are ignoring the party's marquis choice. The people want a genuine American President not a party puppet that allows the country to continue to decline from federal tyranny.  

Jeb Bush should not emerge from the primary, especially when facing off with the likes of Ted Cruz and Scott Walker along with many other bona fide conservatives running for President. The days of the RINO establishment GOP's hold on Americans is fast waning. 

Americans are hungry for a President that loves our Constitution, loves our free enterprise system, loves our federalism and loves our country.

The bird of opportunity to restore our country economically, culturally and internationally is at hand, and not worth beating around the Bush.