Boston Bombing...The Plot Thickens.

By Jessica Keith
 About a week ago we found out new details about the Boston Bombers.  We learned that while Dzhokhar was stashed away in the boat, he left the authorities a little love note. There was some pretty graphic and unnecessary language, but the gist of it was that America is the great Satan and "when you attack one Muslim, you attack us all."  In said note, he claims that he is not sad about his brother being dead, "because he is a martyr in paradise."  He also states that the victims at the marathon were "collateral damage." (http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/16/us/boston-bombing-investigation/index.html)  This guy gets a top notch defense team yet four families lost their loved ones.  Hardly seems fair to me.

Well, the last time I checked, it was the Muslim fanatics who attacked Americans on 9/11.  You attack one of us, you best believe the full force of America is going to come after you, your children, your children's children, and your children's children's children.  To quote from Independence Day:" We will not go quietly into the night!" We will not vanish without a fight! We're going to live on! We're going to survive!" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116629/trivia?tab=qt&ref_=tt_trv_qu).  

You cannot come into our back yard, break our toys and stomp on home and think we won't come after you.  WE WILL COME.  WE ALWAYS COME.

That all having been said, I pose this question, why, if America is so horrible, did you stay here for 15 years Dzhokhar?  Why, in 2012, did you decide to become an American Citizen and take all the rights and privileges given to you?  Why did you immerse yourself in your school and community?  I am sure Chechnya would have loved to take you back.  WHY DID YOU STAY if America is so awful? 

According to NBC Nightly News (http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nightly-news/51971493/#51971493) Tamerlan was allegedly involved in a homicide in a Boston suburb in 2011.  This coming from a suspected terrorist who later attacked FBI agents and was shot and killed, but nonetheless, this guy was serious bad news, and we failed to stop him from inflecting harm on Americans.

Can we go ahead and classify these fanatics as what they are? TERRORISTS. There does not seem to be any gray area here.  He [Dzhokhar] made it very clear what the motives were behind the attack on April 15, 2013.  Stop sugar coating what he is.  Call a spade a spade. Ronald Reagan said "Facts are stubborn things."  You cannot ignore the fact that this was and always will be a terrorist attack.  Plain and simple.

George W. Bush said "Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America.  These acts shatter steel, but they can not dent the steel of American resolve."( http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/g/george_w_bush.html#CpvZv4rtbB2LyLiQ.99  )

To Dzhokhar and Tamerlan, I say this, YOU LOSE.  We cannot be broken.  Americans are resilient people.  We will always come back stronger than before with a resolve to fight on.  We will live to fulfill our dream.  You won't.  America wins again. 

IRS Scandal Why Does it Matter?

We first discussed what was going on in this scandal here and here. I think it is important now  to discuss why this scandal matters to the American people. First is that our government and it's leaders have been entrusted to execute the law with fairness and equality. We even created the 14th amendment to ensure equal protection under the law. Second the power that our government has can be abused, and when it is there should be consequences for those who abuse that power.

I want to share a personal experience with you that I had with the IRS. A few years ago I  was a student working for a little cafe on campus making a mere $7 an hour, 15 hours a week. One year I forgot to submit my taxes until July. When I became aware of this I paid up on my taxes and even paid the late fees on my taxes. I owed $25 because the school didn't withold any taxes, and my penalty was around $100. I paid the penalty, but not in time before the next penalty was assessed. Between moving and several stops that penalty again was eventually paid, but cost me another $50. 

Why did I share this story? Because with the IRS you pay and you pay on time, you do it right, and you do it their way. Things do not become ok with them by just saying that you are sorry, you can't plead the fifth and have the IRS tell you it is ok and that they won't investigate further. They demand a response, and if that isn't enough they will take the money directly from your bank account. They can audit your personal finances, your business, and your family members at any time, even with no just cause for such intrusions. To most of America, we fear the IRS and what power it holds in our lives. 

Now when investigating these matters of intrusion by the IRS by illegally targeting conservative groups, it is now makes things ok for saying I'm sorry. According to former IRS Chief Douglas H. Shulmann he is sorry for the IRS actions in these matters, and Lois Lerner started her remarks by apologizing originally which brought this story to light. Today she went before the House she pleaded the fifth. It will become more clear later this week whether or not she will be forced to testify due to her making a statements. This is being debated because of an interpretation issue. 

So why does it matter so much that the IRS is targeting conservative groups? Why does it matter? Because it a gross overreach of power among groups that should be even handed in their approach. As we saw last week in the house ways and means hearing, this was not just a simple overreach of power, and begs a few questions to be asked. First who made this decision? Why did they make the decision to target specific groups? Why were these follow up questions asked? Why didn't they have more supervision over these questions when they were asked?

Why did Lois Lerner plead the fifth? Several members of congress believe she made at best incomplete statements regarding the targeting of conservative groups which applied for tax exempt status while she was chief of the tax exempt division of the IRS. We of course know due to and inspector general report that she new of the targeting as early as June 2011 and that she has testified before congress since then that there was no targeting.

This is transparency at it's worst, when an administration and branches of government hide behind executive privilege(fast and furious) and claiming to have no knowledge of these incidents until they come to public, we must ask the question, does the administration and President really think that the american people are incompetent enough not to make the connections, and realize that his administration is corrupt? We have had four major scandals with no firings, a couple of resignations, but no real consequences for anyone that has taken part. Lois Lerner has even been rewarded by being put in charge of the Obamacare implementation! 

This frankly speaking was a coverup, and continues to be a scandal of import, as it seems that the most overbearing government agency was used for political means to punish those opposing the party in power's authority. It makes perfect sense that of course the same individual in charge of that division of the IRS was then appointed to head up the implementation of Obamacare, because they knew she would do what they wanted her to do, punish the groups that they want punished. Whenever there is power to be had those in power will always seek to keep, increase and often abuse that power.

Something needs to be done, I am encouraged by Senator Heller's (R-NV) actions. Senator Heller (R-NV) has introduced a bill to cut funding to increase IRS agents as requested by Obamacare. 

IRS Scandal Goes Deeper

By Tim Newton
It seemed fairly light, but still overreach at first, with a simple apology by the Chief IRS Director over non-profit organizations admitting that conservative groups had been targeted for extra scrutiny. As it has grown, we now know that this overreach was extremely overbearing and details show a great deal of harassment. It was not however just the overreach of targeting groups that has so many individuals upset, the scandal continues to grow in force and shines more light on the lack of transparency and accountability both in the IRS and in the Obama administration.

We now know that Lois Lerner had a planted questioner ask her about questions that had been asked in the media about the IRS and Tea Party Groups   and she issued an apology, This came just days after her hearing before the Ways and Means Committee herself and right before the Inspector General's report on the IRS's mishandling on Tea Party and conservative groups requests for tax exemption. She has now stated that when she appears before the house she will plead the fifth. This of course comes from the most transparent administration in history. Her current position after being head of this besieged department? She is now the head of the division which has been charged with helping to implement Obamacare.

Some senators see the overreach of the IRS as too much, and that they must be held accountable. Senator Dean Heller (R-NV) has introduced a bill to cut funding to increase IRS agents as requested by Obamacare.
He stated:
 "News that the IRS has been targeting conservative groups violated the trust that the American people place in their government. Nevadans are already concerned about ObamaCare, so the fact that Congress could hand over even more power to an agency under intense scrutiny to enforce the health care law is deeply concerning. The ‘IRS Accountability Act’ suspends funding for new ObamaCare IRS agents because right now we can’t trust the IRS to do its job"

Then we were told by the Obama administration that they had no knowledge of it . We now know that administration officials knew at least three weeks beforehand. Apparently his aids did not inform him of the scandal so he did not "interfere" with the ongoing investigation. Why does our president seem to not know about everything that is going on in his administration? But as we also learned last weekend Obama has had no hand in running government in the last four years to begin with ;).

Now it wouldn't be as bad if this was just a targeting issue, as we learned from the hearings last week before the House Committee on Ways and Means that it wasn't just targeting, but a great deal of harassment including asking for the content of possible prayers that members of the group may pray, voluminous amounts of records, financial details of members, along with audits of businesses and individuals involved with these organizations.

Details keep emerging in this case but the further it goes, the deeper it gets for the Obama administration, as scandals within the departments of  Treasury, Justice, and State continue to be investigated. The Senate's Finance committee sent a bipartisan letter requesting large amounts of documents to be released to the public after hearing from large numbers of non profit groups.It has even extended to a further scandal of investigating and threatening prosecution against a Fox News reporter for an investigation he was conducting. The Justice Department hole keeps being dug deeper, and the time for restraint of the government by the people is need now more than ever.

IRS Ways and Means Hearing overview

By Tim Newton
A quick overview of some videos for the ways and means hearing. This hearing was conducted this morning(5/17/2013). Below are a few videos of questions and responses given to Steve Miller the outgoing acting chief of the IRS. He resigned this week amid this ongoing scandal.

All of this came to light after Lois Lerner had a planted questioner ask her about questions that had been asked in the media about the IRS and Tea Party Groups   and she issued an apology, This came just days after her hearing before the Ways and Means Committee herself and right before the Inspector General's report on the IRS's mishandling on Tea Party and conservative groups requests for tax exemption.

Mike Kelly (R-PA)
Asks about how it came about and who was responsible for these acts. Also talks about the fear of the IRS and government overreach in America.






Rep Pat Tiberi (R-OH) Discusses individuals in Ohio and their experiences trying to receive tax exempt status including voluminous material required by the IRS.





Rep. Aaron Schock R-IL discussed tea party groups and questions asked, including whether the content of a persons prayers was an appropriate question to be included in follow up questions.



Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX) asks is this still America? Discusses whether there has been extreme government overreach and targeting of individuals. Also asks about sharing of this information to other government agencies.





And last but not least, Rep Paul Ryan (R-WI)

A week of scandals IRS, AP, and more

By Tim Newton

Four years ago our Nation heralded in a man who said he would put aside the partisan politics of the past, that a new age of bipartisanship had begun, and that his administration would be the most transparent administration of all time. The media went crazy; people cried at his inaugural address thinking that the world would never be the same.

Fast forward to this last week, which some might call the president's worst week in Washington. Not only has he been dealing with the overhang of the Benghazi whistleblowers appearing before congress, but now he is dealing with two additional scandals: the first being the IRS targeting conservative groups and the second is the AP phone records requests from the Justice Department.

So we have an overreach of power so much that even Jon Stewart couldn't control himself.



Even he said it: "A good government has the power to improve peoples lives and the people have the power to restrain it's excesses."

For the last few years I have not remained silent in my contempt for the current administration. An inexperienced man in power giving too much rope to his subordinates with too little accountability leads heavily down the lane of abuse of power by said subordinates in order to maintain their power and control. If Fast and Furious and Benghazi wasn't enough,  we have now added in two additional scandals to the mix to show that in all reality the president is one of two things: a dirty Chicago politician or an ignorant inexperienced leader with no actual control over his administration. I hope for his sake it's the latter, because at least that would mean he wasn't lying as he continues to have his press secretary say that he had no knowledge of these different scandals.

The fairytale is over, the shine has faded off of his presidency, and we are left to understand the basic deception of it: that a people wanting a celebrity president got one, who then in turn was really just a politician playing them like any other previous politician. Watch this from the Chicago Tribune:



The deception is over, the curtain has been pulled, and now we see the man who uses power to get what he wants exposed for who he is.  He is not a god. He is a man, and a man with power cannot be trusted to any degree.

At his commencement address at The Ohio State University, he stated  “You’ve grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that’s at the root of all our problems. You should reject these voices. Because what these suggest is that somehow our brave, creative, unique experiment in self-rule is just a sham with which we can’t be trusted.”

I beg to differ with his opinion on this matter. The cynics are not as concerned with the form of government that has been established - a restricted republic with checks and balances - as they are with the abuses of power that seem to be inherent when one group or individual gains too much power. It seems to be human nature that too much power brings out the worst in men, sometimes the best, but more often than not the worst. As someone once said, "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." It is therefore necessary that we limit this power with checks, including legislative, judicial, and regulatory. When compared with the other two branches of government, the Executive Branch has seen a much broader expansion of powers. This expansion throughout our history has exceeded by far its mandated responsibilities granted by the Constitution.

Our founders when conceiving our constitution were afraid of factions taking over portions or all of our government and oppressing individuals. They gave the government checks and balances, to ensure that even though the government might not be the most efficient, it would have the best shot at restraining tyranny. We must restrain the excessive power of our government, and I believe we need to begin with the executive branch. 

The RNC Benghazi Attack Campaign Ad That Never Ran.

By Tim Newton This ad was one which the RNC created but never ran during the campaign.
Why did the RNC decide not to run this ad focused on Benghazi, which could have put further heat on a president who was nowhere to be found in the aftermath of a deadly terrorist attack on a Libyan mission?



The ad states:"It's 3am and your children are safe asleep but there's a phone in the white house that's ringing, something's happened in the world." It then says: “The Call Came … On September 12, 2012.”  After the screen goes black, the words continue: “Security Requests Denied. Four Americans Dead. And an Administration whose story is still changing. The Call Came.”

ABC News reported:”A source familiar with the creation of the ad says the RNC leadership approved the ad but it was scrapped at the last minute because of objections from the Romney campaign, which was concerned the ad would distract from Romney’s efforts to focus on the economy.”


Upcoming soon, one of our authors will cover the Benghazi story in depth, giving us some understanding of what happened, who's to blame and why it still matters now. But I leave you with one question: Should the RNC and Romney Campaign run this ad? Tell us what you think below.

Mitt Romney, CNN and Religious Fanaticism

Earlier yesterday I posted about civility in political discourse. On April 27th Mitt Romney, the former Governor of Massachusetts and former GOP Presidential Nominee spoke at a commencement for a small college in south western Virginia called Southern Virginia University. The University has 725 students enrolled, and a graduating class of 125 students. Afterward, CNN had this to say:



A few points I would like to make about the speech itself before I begin discussing CNN's commentary on the issue. While the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints(LDS Church) does not own SVU, the University is over 90% LDS presided over by a former general authority of the LDS church. His speech was centered around religious thought it is true, as he was speaking to a religious audience.  The portion of the speech that CNN used was quoting from a verse from Psalms 127:3-5: 

"Lo, children are an heritage of the Lord: and the fruit of the womb is his reward. As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth. Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them: they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate."

What was Romney advocating? He was advocating for good people to get married and have kids, something he has experience in, and has found joy in. Later in his speech Romney also said “I don’t think God cares whether you get rich…life on this Earth is about learning to live and work in a place where God does not make everything work out for good people,” he said. “The best advice I know is to give those worldly things your best but never your all.”

To paraphrase his speech his message was that as graduates-men and women we need to launch out into the deep, and that by launching deep we are challenged greatly and have the possibility, if we persevere, to have extremely rewarding experiences. He stated that being a husband and a father have been the most challenging and rewarding parts of his life. That by facing these challenges we would grow like no other opportunity would allow us.

It is interesting that CNN was so quick to call this religious fanaticism. That encouraging getting married and having children is now considered to mean a person is a fanatic. Let's do a little symantic study into the idea of what the word fanatic means: "A person marked or motivated by an extreme, unreasoning enthusiasm, as for a cause." What they are implying is "this is extreme religious thought that Romney is advocating, and that this is why he lost the election." 

I do agree with them on one point though-this is the real Mitt Romney. Mitt Romney is a man that is dedicated to his family, supporting and loving his wife, his 5 sons and his many grandchildren. He spent many years as a lay clergyman serving others. His religion is part of who he is and he has never denied that. 

If I get this right; if I speak from my heart on matters of both home and religion in to a religious audience, that now labels me as a religious fanatic? Such extremism and absolutism seems to me a bit extreme myself.

My point is mostly this: I feel that there has been an unusually high bias against religious thought in popular culture and that any appeal to the bible or religious doctrine to support good policy is somehow "radical" or "fanatical" thought. Romney was not suggesting we get married at 16 or that we marry goats which would be extreme. He was talking to college graduates and those who would be finishing in the next few years and telling them that they should get married and have kids because that is what he did and that it has made his own life better.

On a personal note, my own marriage has been the best thing in my life and I haven't regretted it once. It has been challenging and has driven me to be better, and the rewards have been enormous for me. For most of the general population this is true. The benefits of marriage for the general public have been studied at length and are far reaching from health to wealth. 

Some of these benefits include:

1. Increasing Your Pay
A Virginia Commonwealth University study found that married men earn 22 percent more than their similarly experienced but single colleagues.

2. Speed Up Your Next Promotion
Married men receive higher performance ratings and faster promotions than bachelors, a 2005 study of U.S. Navy officers reported.

3. Keep You Out of Trouble
According to a recent U.S. Department of Justice report, male victims of violent crime are nearly four times more likely to be single than married. You may remember this as Mitt Romney mentioned that one way we could decrease crime is to have two parents and for men to marry.

4. Help You Beat Cancer
In a Norwegian study, divorced and never-married male cancer patients had 11 and 16 percent higher mortality rates, respectively, than their married counterparts.

5. Help You Live Longer
A UCLA study found that people were 88 percent more likely to die over the 8-year study period than if they were single.  To quote from the study:
"Virtually every study of mortality and marital status shows the unmarried of both sexes have higher death rates, whether by accident, disease, or self-inflicted wounds, and this is found in every country that maintains accurate health statistics.”

6. It is Likely to Help You Remain Sane and Happier 
Several studies have shown that men who are married have lower instance of mental health issues than the general public and generally remain happier throughout their life



Not all of popular media took the same view as CNN though, an article from the Atlantic said this about Romney's speech:
 "In this passage, Romney articulates the so-called "cornerstone" theory of marriage: that marriage is an institution worth building life on, not something to enter into once you're already established in life. This vision of marriage is countercultural at the moment, of course: As the National Marriage Project's "Knot Yet" report shows, people are getting married later and later, and more and more people are seeing marriage as a "capstone" to life's achievements rather than a foundation for those achievements (and inevitable disappointments)."
The article continues:

"More remarkable, in my view, is how he holds in tension two ideas that often drown each other out in discussions of marriage: that marriage is both 'tremendously challenging' and 'enormously rewarding.' As I've written about before, people today tend to have an unrealistically rosy view of marriage—that it'll be an endlessly fun, sex-filled slumber party—or an unnecessarily negative one—that the institution is so broken it's not worth entering into. Both of those perceptions of marriage are too extreme. Marriage is good, but hard. Marriage is hard, but good."

I am glad that one organization was willing to view what Romney had said and look for the positive in it rather than belittling and condescending the man. I am glad they analyzed it and adapted it to their own perspective, and then reported what they learned, rather than attack the man without considering what he was saying. 

To CNN and the other news outlets that had negative things to say about Romney I ask this: So if it is counterculture to tell men and women to get married is this really a bad thing? Mitt Romney was not glorifying marriage as the end-all be-all of life or this blissful happily ever after thing. He said that it is "tremendously challenging" and "enormously rewarding." He said that by doing so you would be stretching and learning and that you would find great rewards from doing so based upon his own familial and religious experience.

I find it a little disturbing CNN's coverage had no defense for Romney's speech, not one person stood up for his point of view, and said "hey this guy was really saying..." but instead they shrunk to hitting a man for his religious beliefs. This kind of incivility in the media is both shameful and saddening to me. I hope that in the future we can learn to disagree with a person's beliefs without shrinking to attacks on their person. 

To watch his full speech see the video below.

Political Discussions: The Ground Rules

There was a time when all scientific thought centered around the idea that the earth was the center of the universe. As time increased we realized that the earth rotated around the sun, and that our planetary system was part of a galaxy and we were very much not the center of it. We know now that there are 200 to 400 billion stars in our galaxy, and the wonders of the universe continue to humble and astound us. We need to remember that each of our realities have been arranged based on observations that we have made, some of which may be very similar to primitive man thinking the sun rotates around the earth. These observations often come with assumptions and we only grow in our understanding by reaching outside of our comfort zone and taking in more truth into our reality.

As members of the American community we often make assumptions that we are the greatest country in the world, and that we are always right. Our ways of doing things are right even if they are frustratingly difficult to use versus something that makes complete sense (I.E. Metric System). We are therefore often labeled as arrogant and intolerant. That can be difficult to hear, which often makes us turn a deaf ear to anything that they are saying.

I believe that true tolerance comes from having a greater understanding of others, if we are to grow as Americans we must reach outwards to learn more and to try to understand truth to the best of our capabilities. 

This is not just arrogance and intolerance is not solely an American trait, but all of humanity has a tendency to find and stick to our point of view adamantly without consideration for another person's opinion. We need to change in order to grow. Politics can often be difficult and cause conflict, but there are good ground rules that can be used to make sure that we retain civility within discourse. I write this with the assumption that most people when arguing wish to alter another's opinion on an issue rather than just hear their own voice. I recently came across a blog post which referred to some ground rules for civil dialogue when discussing difficult issues which might result in conflict. 

Those rules are: 

"1)    Assume that the person with whom you are speaking is a person of intelligence and good will.

2)    Candidly disclose your motives for engaging in dialogue (both to others and to yourself) and be honest in raising points of sincere disagreement.

3)    Share the time equally."

I would hope as we continue to discuss important issues that we might come to realize the benefit of these common ground rules. Each of these allows for mutually consenting open communication to occur, something that is often lacking in media reporting today. I also would add some specifics to this that may help people to discuss without becoming completely closed off:  Please remember to abstain from using profane language. It is offensive and does not add value to your argument.

We also discourage the use of name calling of individuals on the site or politicians. Name calling reduces the value of your discussion as well, because you have now minimalized the ability of your message to reach the other person and add to their reality. Remember that even if you are using the name correctly, it diminishes the effectiveness of keeping open discourse by closing off the individual.


I can easily admit that I have been found to be argumentative and frustratingly opinionated and at times even closed-minded. My hope is that as we continue to discuss issues that are important to our country and world that we will do so more civilly, and I will do my best to do so as well.

I ask as you continue to read the blog to please feel free to comment, ask questions and we as writers will attempt to answer them and consider them in our own ideology.  This does not mean you have to agree with me at all. In fact we encourage you to contribute to the discussion by leaving your thoughts on our posts that agree or disagree.

Bottom line: feel free to disagree, but please do so civilly.