Liberals & Conservatives Wrong on DOMA Ruling

Liberals: Now is not a time to rejoice. The Supreme Court has changed its ruling on multiple cases in the past. View Lochner v. New York (1905), Adkins v. Children’s Hospital (1923), Chisholm v. Georgia (1793), Adler v. Board of Education (1952), Bowers v. Hardwick (1986), Pace v. Alabama (1883), Austin v. Michigan State Chamber of Commerce (1990), Oregon v. Mitchell (1970), Wolf v. Colorado (1949), Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) and Plessy v. Ferguson. Furthermore, although unlikely, the states could adopt a constitutional amendment to define marriage between a man and a woman. Why then should gays and lesbians place their faith in a handful of arbitrary people who are rotated through every decade or so? Also, the ruling still does not grant gay couples all rights enjoyed by heterosexual couples. Adoption is a good example of this. Gay couples will still not be able to adopt in many states due to state laws. Additionally, there are still many states with constitutional amendments preventing gay marriage.

Conservatives: How often do republicans quote, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” (US Declaration Ind.)? One cannot call themselves champions of limited government while at the same time advocating for that same government to become so expansive, and intrusive that it has its nose in the bedroom of American citizens. Two consenting adults have the right to do as they please in the privacy of their own home. Individual discretion is a core principle of liberty. The fact is, and always has been that gay and lesbian Americans are treated as sub-human with regard to taxation, hospital visitation, spousal rights, etc. in the eyes of the law. Is justice bind, or is it not? SCOTUS

Solution?– Marriage is a long standing religious paradigm and government has placed its nose where it does not belong– In religion. The ruling could open the door for individuals to sue the church for not allowing them to marry. This is a dangerous path to walk as the State begins to look more like America’s church.

Mike Maharrey, National Communications Director for the Tenth Amendment Center, tells

“Look, I understand the emotional positions held by folks on both sides of the gay marriage issue. But let’s take a step back and consider the absurdity: we’ve essentially empowered five judges to define one of societies most basic relationships for all 350-plus million people in the United States. Not too many years ago – my marriage would have been illegal (Note this was a construct of the state. ) Many people still don’t approve of interracial marriage. I don’t care. I don’t need the Supreme Court, the state of Kentucky, or quite frankly – you – to validate my relationship. While we debated “separation of church and state” across the political aisle, we turned the state into a church, with federal courts sitting in judgement as the supreme ecclesiastical authority.”

If the federal government wishes to make a statement that marriage should be neutral perhaps it should realize that marriage is not one of the 22 enumerated powers granted to it by the Constitution. A worthy cause for both sides would be to shrink the size of the federal government, and rein in the powers, which legislate from the bench. Conservatives would benefit from the downsizing of bureaucracy and government. Liberals would benefit from having ambivalence forever removed from the equation.

Islam in America: From the Eyes of an Iranian-American


In 1986 my father came to America from Iran. He found himself alone, broke and isolated in the southern United States. He couldn’t speak a word of English, had $75 in his pocket and one bag of belongings. He would soon meet a southern belle from Savannah who I would grow up to call mom. My father came to America to escape the Islamic Revolution. He is a man of strong conservative convictions and a thirst for freedom, liberty and justice. These values are reflected strongly in me. Most in my family are Christian. Many of those still in Iran do not claim Islam as their religion, but would in fear of persecution. Some are Muslim, but there is an undeniable dichotomy in Islam where extremism lives, and does not.

Religion has long been a scapegoat for extremism. It is the perfect vector in a sense because it is often protected from legislative action in America. I will start by saying that I know many Muslims who are friends, neighbors, co-workers and peers. Many are peaceful and are shameful of the behavior that is exhibited through Islam. However, the cover-up of the core direction of Islam in America cannot be ignored. At the Democratic National Convention in 2012 Democrats tried to remove God and Israel from the party’s platform. Once this hit mainstream media the chairman allowed for the rules to be changed to allow for an amendment. An amendment was made to reinsert God and Israel into the party platform, which required a 2/3 vote for approval. The vote was clearly not in favor of adding God and Israel back into the platform, but in a video a woman is seen telling the chairman to ignore the delegates and approve it anyways. In the same video of the event, Muslims are seen furious with the adoption of the amendment. Also assess the fact that Benghazi was blamed on an anti-Islam video by the Obama administration and not a premeditated attack by Muslim radicals. Through the Benghazi hearings we now know this to be a lie. Many defend Muslim prayer in public schools, and will simultaneously condemn optional bible courses. How does this hold salt?islam

An innate difference between Islam and the other Abrahamic religions exists, and it is that many Muslims are radicalized through the Islamic liturgy. Also, it is essential to understand that Islam is not only a religion, but a form of government. This is not so for the other two Abrahamic religions. In 2003 a young man named Carlos Bledsoe moved from Memphis, TN to Nashville to attend Tennessee State University (TSU). Carlos’ father, Melvin Bledsoe, says that Carols became involved with radical Islam professors and groups at TSU and started attending the Islamic Center of Nashville. Here he was radicalized and changed his name to Abdulhakim. Now he sits in a federal prison for the murder of Army PFC William Long. Abdulhakim (Bledsoe) said in an interview, “It was not murder, murder is not justified. What I did is justified under Islamic law. It was justified by common sense. We believe we have to strike back.”

I am of the libertarian-republican strain, and therefore I hold in high regard freedom of religion and the First Amendment. Let it be understood though that when people come to America to use our rules against us, chaos is bred. Recently in Tennessee the Obama/Holder Justice Department sent Bill Killian, U.S. attorney, to warn citizens that they could be persecuted for exercising their first Amendment rights to speak out against Sharia law in America. What the Obama administration and radicalized Muslims fail to understand is that religion may be exercised freely, but it may not supersede constitutional law in this country. Floyd Abrams, one of America’s most respected First Amendment attorneys, is quoted as saying of Killian: “He’s just wrong. The government may, indeed, play a useful and entirely constitutional role in urging people not to engage in speech that amounts to religious discrimination. But it may not, under the First Amendment, prevent or punish speech even if it may be viewed as hostile to a religion. And what it most clearly may not do is to stifle political or social debate, however rambunctious or offensive some may think it is.”

Examine any religious script and you can find a case for rape, murder, polygamy, incest, mass-killings and more. However, we do not practice this, and encroach upon the liberty of others because these scripts say in the name of God it is acceptable. A line does exist. In Syria, where the line does not exist, a rebel recently cut out the heart of a soldier and ate it. The rebel is quoted claiming the act in the name of Allah.

Tolerance of those who wish to pursue peace, liberty and tolerance themselves should always be encouraged in America no-matter the channel. Challenge and opportunity meets any individual willing to take on this endeavor. However, it is important to understand that in countries where Islam is the majority, minority rights are not allowed. In these countries women, Christians, homosexuals, etc. are all persecuted under Islamic law. Meanwhile, in countries where Islam is the minority those of the extremist class demand “rights” to implement laws contrary to those of the Founders, which protect individual liberty.

###  Michael Lotfi is a Iranian-American conservative commentator, campaign consultant, and legislative lobbyist living in Nashville, TN.

Anti-Govnmt Search Engine Rises to Challenge Google

Necessity is the mother of invention, and one company is ahead of the curve. Are you worried about the Federal Government tracking your activity online? may be your new search engine of choice, and if you value your privacy it may have to be. Google is fast becoming too big for its britches. Their new privacy standards, or lack there of, which have drawn scrutiny from the tech world, and privacy advocates leave much to be desired. According to Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., who is co-chairman of the Congressional Privacy Caucus, “The new Google privacy policy is: You have no privacy.” Combine this with Google recently handing over more than 11,000 individuals’ personal information to the government, NSA spying by the feds, the IRS scandal, the AP/Fox Scandal, and Senator Lindsey Graham’s (R-SC) comments that he would censor US citizens’ mail, and you have an American public that is suddenly remembering the need for their Fourth Amendment rights. In the legislative branch US Senator Rand Paul R-KY has begun the process for a class action lawsuit against the federal government, but what can the free-market accomplish to complement Senator Paul’s efforts? growth growth chart

DuckDuckGo was launched in 2008, but only recently has it become viral so to speak. According to online traffic reports DuckDuckGo’s traffic has skyrocketed in the past few months, and especially the past few days in the face of multiple privacy scandals under the Obama administration. Starting in January of this year the site averaged 1.6 million searches/day. As of this month the site is averaging 2 millions searches/day. This last week alone has been the most successful for the search engine since data began recording in April of 2010 (39k searches/day) with more than 2 million searches each day. Why the growth? DuckDuckGo promises an escape from the eyes of big brother. Their privacy policy states that they will not track you, filter bubble you, record you, report you, store your information, spy on you, sell your information, etc. There are many great features available, which includes one that allows you to integrate the search engine onto chrome and other browsers. Perhaps what makes DuckDuckGo so dangerous to its competitors, especially Google is that it provides something no other company does- the promise of privacy in a world where it is in short supply. The free-market at its best.

Lindsey Graham’s World

Op-ed by, Nancy Mace

The Constitution. The Bill of Rights. The Declaration of Independence. To some these are little more than historical documents, but to conservatives these are the law of the land. It is clear as one reads them, the foundation of our country was built with limited government and the free market in mind.

However, Washington is out of touch. Special interests throw money at career politicians. These same politicians fail to lead and simply react to the latest controversy to gain a spot on Sunday morning talk shows.

With congressional approval at an all time low, it’s easy to understand why some would prefer to appear on television sets rather than face their constituents back at home.Immigration reform

President Reagan once said “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction,” that we must fight for it, protect it and hand it down to future generations.

Yesterday South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham endorsed President Obama’s intrusive arm of big brother regarding the collection of data and phone records:

“I’m a Verizon customer. I don’t mind Verizon turning over records to the government if the
government is going to make sure that they try to match up a known terrorist phone with somebody in the United States. I don’t think you’re talking to the terrorists. I know you’re not. I know I’m not. So we don’t have anything to worry about.”

Senator Graham went on to challenge Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky. In his attack, Graham leads us to believe that “In Senator Paul’s world” those who value the constitution would leave America in a weakened position against its enemies. However, true conservatives believe that we can follow the constitution and defend our country against the enemy without sacrificing our freedom.

One week Senator Graham wants to debate the rights granted in the Second Amendment and another he questions the First Amendment rights of American citizens. And yesterday he tells us it’s ok for the government to search our phone records even if we are law abiding citizens.

Most would agree with Senator Graham that radical Islam is the foremost threat to our nation’s security. However, if we are truly protecting Americans from this grave threat, then how does it make sense to supply arms and aid to countries who support radical Islam, bring harm to our allies, burn our flag, hate our culture and allow terrorists to plot against the United States and her friends?

In Senator Graham’s world, arming al-Qaeda in Syria is a good idea.

In Senator Graham’s world, your rights as an American citizen are granted by the ruling political class and not by our Creator.

In Senator Graham’s world, government should always be trusted but never the American citizen.

In Senator Graham’s world, the Constitution doesn’t exist.

In Senator Graham’s world, the entire Bill of Rights is negotiable.

In Senator Graham’s world, our constitutional rights seem constantly up for debate.

In Senator Graham’s world, he says we’re fighting for freedom but is the first to surrender all of them.

In Senator Graham’s world, America is going broke, and taxing hard working Americans while spending more money the country simply does not have.

In Senator Graham’s world, I am concerned about the future of our country.

Maybe Senator Graham has been living in a world of his own for too long.

Nancy Mace is the first woman to graduate from The Citadel, the military college of South Carolina. She is the author of In the Company of Men published by Simon and Schuster. She is a small business owner of a public relations and marketing firm, The Mace Group, based in Charleston, South Carolina.

Fed Govt Takes Over Tennessee Festival

NASHVILLE-   The American public has become increasingly cautious towards the Department of Homeland Security. The federal agency has come under increased scrutiny for purchasing 1.6b rounds of high-powered ammunition and stockpiling heavily armored vehicles to be used in the streets of America. US Congressman Huelscamp (R-KS) has asked the DHS multiple times why they needed to purchase these bullets and tanks. The DHS refuses to answer him, and other members of Congress who are demanding answers. Proponents of big government say it is for our protection, but it is important to recall that our militia and army protect us from any foreign invasion according to the Constitution. This is not the job of non-elected federal bureaucrats armed with weapons, which are outlawed to all American people except themselves. The DHS has had its eye on Tennessee recently. A federal grant was given to the state to purchase drones. The grant spurred legislative action in the state of Tennessee to block drone activity as it was delivered during the same time of the Obama Administration’s drone controversy.

Armored DHS Vehicle

Armored DHS Vehicle

In a developing story the DHS and FBI are said to be taking over Nashville, Tennessee’s CMA Festival, which is the largest country music event in the world. Downtown hospitality industry management have warned their staff to be careful when entering and leaving the city for work, not to bring backpacks, or look suspicious in any way because DHS and FBI agents will be conducting searches and seizures. As the city prepares for the festival DHS and FBI agents have already been seen around the downtown area blocking off bridges and bringing in equipment. A phone call to the Metro Police Department produced an uneasy conversation when the officer would not allow himself to be quoted, but did verify the FBI and DHS would be present. State legislators have placed calls to state leaders to get to the bottom of the situation, which have gone unanswered so far. Being a Southern state, Tennessee residents tend to hold a certain disdain for the federal government while holding the principle of state sovereignty in high regard. This is especially the case when they take over their capital city without regards to their Fourth Amendment rights, and push their elected Sheriffs out of the way to set up shop.

AP Scandal Expands to Include Fox Journalists Targeted as Co-Conspirator

James Rosen, chief Washington correspondent for Fox News, is the latest victim in a scandal, which has the Obama Administration behind it. Federal investigators from the Justice Department in pursuing the case went much further than in the AP case. First, they obtained work email records from Rosen. Also, agents kept records of his visits to the State Department headquarters by tracking security-badge information. Furthermore, investigators seized two days of Rosen’s personal emails, in addition to two months of personal phone records. The new crackdown on Fox News holds striking similarities to a sweeping leaks investigation disclosed last week in which federal investigators obtained records over two months of more than 20 telephone lines assigned to the Associated Press. AP CEO Gary Pruitt said on CBS’ “Face the Nation” Sunday that the AP records grab was not only unconstitutional but damaging to the operation of free press. He continued, “I really don’t know what their motive was, but I know what the message they are sending is— if you talk to the press we are going to go after you.” According to Pruitt, the message is clear. If you are a journalist, then the federal government is targeting you.


What is unique about this particular case is how it was handled. The Justice Department secured a subpoena from a federal judge because according to the Justice Department the reporter had possibly engaged in ‘criminal conspiracy like behavior’. In the press, that behavior is termed investigative journalism. However, this simple spin on words has now opened a gate to where the Obama Administration’s Justice Department is preparing to treat news gathering activity as a crime. Because Rosen uncovered a story, he is now being considered as an aider, abettor and co-conspirator by the FBI.

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” First Amendment lawyer Charles Tobin said, “Search warrants like these have a severe chilling effect on the free flow of important information to the public. That’s a very dangerous road to go down.”

President Obama last week defended the Justice Department’s handling of the investigation involving the AP. There is no response yet from Fox News executives or the President on this latest development.

Rand Paul Begins Campaigning Against Hillary Clinton 2016

It seems that the democratic party is not alone in their speculations of Hillary Clinton mounting a 2016 presidential bid. Although Clinton has said time after time that she is not interested in running the polls strongly suggest that democrats want her and no one else. With the momentum focused on minorities it is not surprising that if Democrats want to maintain control of the White House they need Hillary to make it happen. Who could stop Hillary if she did decide to run? Considering that Obama has mastered the art of elections and online donations as well as the fact that Bill Clinton remains wildly popular Hillary will be a force not easily defeated. It has been said that if republicans wish to remain viable they must find a candidate who can bring together the tea party, the libertarian wing and the traditional conservative wing. Many believe that candidate to be Rand Paul.

Paul Meets With Tennessee Republican Assembly

Paul Meets With Tennessee Republican Assembly

Paul has already been on what many consider to be a campaign spree. He has won every presidential straw poll his name has been listed on. Furthermore, he has now made a major move by sending his lead strategist and chief of staff, Doug Stafford away from his Senate post in Washington D.C. to head up Paul’s national political operation. This is perhaps the clearest indication that Paul is planning a 2016 bid.Paul went one step further when he addressed a crowd of approximately 600 prominent Tennessee senators, representatives, donors and grassroots activists at the annual Tennessee Republican Assembly convention 2 weeks ago. Paul was received with thunderous applause and multiple standing ovations. Here Paul recalled his encounter with Clinton as the only member of the Senate to actively engage Clinton on Benghazi for ignoring requests for more security and not reading urgent cables. While other GOP Senators were singing Clinton praises- Paul told Clinton, “Ultimately, I think with your leaving, you accept culpability for the greatest tragedy since 9/11. Had I been President at the time and I found out you had not read the cables… I would have relieved you of your post.” “I think it’s inexcusable,” he added. As Paul finished his story the crowd again stood in applause. Paul continued to tell the crowd, “I think that should disqualify you from seeking any sort of higher office.” The crowd again roared and the audience was heard screaming, “Rand 2016”. Paul then took questions from the audience. Many questions were geared towards a Paul presidential bid. Paul responded, “Things seem to be falling in that direction, but I am not going to make a decision until after this year.” In this first moment of acknowledgment towards Hillary Clinton’s possible presidential bid it seems the 2016 race is starting to take form as one that would put Rand Paul against Hillary Clinton. Paul seems to recognize this and is drawing first blood.