What's Wrong With These Headlines?

U.S. troops in Afghanistan now have far-reaching new protections against rogue killers among their Afghan allies, including assigned "guardian angels" -- fellow troops who will watch over them as they sleep. Marine Gen. John Allen, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, ordered the added protections in recent weeks to guard against insider threats, according to a senior military official. They come in the wake of 16 attacks on U.S. and coalition forces by Afghans that now represent nearly one-fifth of all combat deaths this year."

While the troops are there to protect the opium poppy crops, a sick culture of death, and where pedophilia is common in some regions, here's what their president, Hamid Karzai, said as the flag draped coffins continue to arrive back on US. soil:

The anger over the killing of their civilians is totally understandable, but we really don't know what happened with that soldier. It takes time to conduct an investigation. In the meantime, you, me, our children and grand children will continue to be buried in the debt, close to $2 BILLION borrowed dollars a month, for the lunacy of staying in a country that doesn't want us there. We will see more of this despite ramped up efforts for our own to protect their own in a country we should never have invaded and occupied to begin with:

WASHINGTON (AP) - "An Afghan soldier shot to death a 22-year-old Marine at an outpost in southwestern Afghanistan last month in a previously undisclosed case of apparent Afghan treachery that marked at least the seventh killing of an American military member by his supposed ally in the past six weeks, Marine officials said. Lance Cpl. Edward J. Dycus of Greenville, Miss., was shot in the back of the head on Feb. 1 while standing guard at an Afghan-U.S. base in the Marja district of Helmand province." In other words, he was murdered by a soldier serving the same country we're occupying. Is it any wonder our soldiers are coming home and killing themselves or suffering from such several mental trauma, they'll never get better?

Absolute lunatics are running the White House and infest the U.S. Congress for allowing those occupations to continue even one more day. Yeah, go ahead and write your incumbent in the Outlaw Congress; you'll get back the same boiler plate form letter he/she's been sending out for nearly a decade. War is big business and business is booming.

"The Afghan narrative has been curiously lobotomised - censored, even - by those who have been trying to explain this appalling massacre in Kandahar. They remembered the Koran burnings - when American troops in Bagram chucked Korans on a bonfire - and the deaths of six Nato soldiers, two of them Americans, which followed. But blow me down if they didn't forget - and this applies to every single report on the latest killings - a remarkable and highly significant statement from the US army's top commander in Afghanistan, General John Allen, exactly 22 days ago. Indeed, it was so unusual a statement that I clipped the report of Allen's words from my morning paper and placed it inside my briefcase for future reference.

"Allen told his men that "now is not the time for revenge for the deaths of two US soldiers killed in Thursday's riots". They should, he said, "resist whatever urge they might have to strike back" after an Afghan soldier killed the two Americans. "There will be moments like this when you're searching for the meaning of this loss," Allen continued. "There will be moments like this, when your emotions are governed by anger and a desire to strike back. Now is not the time for revenge, now is the time to look deep inside your souls, remember your mission, remember your discipline, remember who you are."

"Now this was an extraordinary plea to come from the US commander in Afghanistan. The top general had to tell his supposedly well-disciplined, elite, professional army not to "take vengeance" on the Afghans they are supposed to be helping/protecting/nurturing/training, etc. He had to tell his soldiers not to commit murder. I know that generals would say this kind of thing in Vietnam. But Afghanistan? Has it come to this? I rather fear it has. Because - however much I dislike generals - I've met quite a number of them and, by and large, they have a pretty good idea of what's going on in the ranks. And I suspect that Allen had already been warned by his junior officers that his soldiers had been enraged by the killings that followed the Koran burnings - and might decide to go on a revenge spree. Hence he tried desperately - in a statement that was as shocking as it was revealing - to pre-empt exactly the massacre which took place last Sunday." Rest at link.

"Just when you thought the government couldn't possibly find another social justice program to blow taxpayer money on, the Obama Administration is asking Congress for a whopping $770 million to help developing countries with global climate change initiatives. Here comes the best part. During Obama's presidency American taxpayers have already doled out nearly $3 billion for this preposterous cause, according to a new congressional report posted this week by a think tank that publishes hard-to-find government documents of public policy interest.

"The figures are tough to swallow for a country that's $15.5 trillion in the red and counting. In fiscal year 2009 the administration got $323 million for the program-officially known as Global Climate Change Initiative-and the figure nearly tripled to $939 million in 2010. In 2011 it dropped slightly to $819 million and in 2012 it dipped a bit more to $773 million. Do the math. That's more than $2.8 billion to save the developing world from the presumed ills of global warming. That's downright outrageous! But it's part of Obama's plan to categorize climate change as U.S. foreign assistance so that more money can go to the cause and "core" agencies-such as the Treasury and State Department- can participate. In fact, last month Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced a new State Department coalition dedicated to the cause."

There is ZERO authority for the outlaws in the U.S. Congress to steal our money to give to any foreign country for any reason, period. Usurper Hillary Clinton is an in your face one world government advocate, but only Congress has control of the purse strings. Both parties allow stealing the fruits of our labor year after year after year and brain dead voters go to the ballot box and reelect them every two years to the U.S. House and six years for the unlawfully seated U.S. Senate. (Of course, electronic vote fraud, voter registration and illegal aliens voting helps keep the betrayers in office.) BILLIONS more borrowed dollars. More debt slapped on our backs plus the interest.

"The Obama administration says it will give $100 million in cash to Tunisia for short-term debt relief as the North African country struggles to improve its economy after the ouster of its long-time authoritarian leader last year."

Even if Obama had been eligible and legally elected (which he wasn't and still isn't), no where in Art. II, Sec. II of the U.S. Constitution does it give a sitting president the authority to steal from we the people to give debt relief to any foreign country. Reaction from the Outlaw Congress - especially those 'smaller government' Republicans who moan and grown about big government? The silence is deafening. Business as usual as they all violate their oath of office. $100 million dollars more debt plus the interest.

"Wind farms in the Pacific Northwest -- built with government subsidies and maintained with tax credits for every megawatt produced -- are now getting paid to shut down as the federal agency charged with managing the region's electricity grid says there's an oversupply of renewable power at certain times of the year."

Government subsidies? No. Those subsidies come from you and me in the form of higher and higher taxes. In this particular case it could run as high as $50 million a year. No where in Art. 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution does it authorize the outlaws in the U.S. Congress to steal the fruits of our labor to give as loans or subsidies for any reason, period. Since the U.S. Treasury is overdrawn by $15.3 TRILLION bux and not a single penny of your income tax dollars going to fund a single function of the government, it will all have to be borrowed. More borrowed debt while the crooks in Congress are busy working to screw we the people every minute of the day.

First of all, Obama/Soetoro has no legal authority to offer money to anyone even if he were a legitimate president which he isn't. That stealing was announced by the unconstitutional Department of Labor. Please remember what Joseph Story, Associate Justice, U.S. Supreme Court, said in Commentaries on the Constitution, 1833, because it is exactly what the framers of the Constitution had in mind at the time this republic was birthed:

"Another not unimportant consideration is that the powers of the general government will be, and indeed must be, principally employed upon external objects, such as war, peace, negotiations with foreign powers and foreign commerce. In its internal operations it can touch but few objects, except to introduce regulations beneficial to the commerce, intercourse and other relations, between the states, and to lay taxes for the common good. The powers of the states, on the other hand, extend to all objects, which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, and liberties, and property of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the state."

If the state legislatures in the Union wish to allocate money to help those released from prison after serving their time, that is their right. If the citizens of a state don't want their tax dollars spent on such programs, they make their voice heard. That $20 million stolen from you and me, kissed and blessed by the thieves in Congress will have to be borrowed. More debt plus the interest.

"Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan defended the expansion of Medicaid under Obamacare today by arguing that "It's just a boatload of federal money for you to take and spend" and concluding "It doesn't sound coercive to me."

"Kagan made her comments at today's Supreme Court hearing while questioning attorney Paul D. Clement who was presenting an oral argument on behalf of 26 states seeking to have the federal health care law declared unconstitutional:

"Mr. Clement: "Mr. Chief Justice and may it please the court. The constitutionality of the act's massive expansion of Medicaid depends on the answer to two related questions. First, is the expansion coercive? And second, does that coercion matter?"

"Justice Kagan: "Mr. Clement, can I ask you as just a matter of clarification; would you be making the same argument if, instead of the federal government picking up ninety percent of the cost, the federal government picked a hundred percent of the cost?"

"In other words, the federal government is here saying: we're giving you a boatload of money. There are no, is no matching funds requirement. There are no extraneous conditions attached to it."

No where in Art. 1, Sec. 8 of the U.S. Constitution does it give the General Government the power or authority to steal the fruits of your labor to pay for the neediest in another state. We all pay state taxes (either a direct personal state income tax or other taxes as here in Texas; we have no state income tax) that fund health care coverage for several categories of people in our own state. Here in Texas it costs my husband and I roughly $600 a year to pay for someone else's medical coverage on top of paying our own health care premiums on top of paying someone else's medical bills through Medicare (which I will fight to stay out of). How much are you paying in your state?

Then the thieves in the Outlaw Congress steal more from us to pay down the debt they created to borrow more from the central bank to "give" back to the states hundreds of billions in Medicaid with "no matching requirement!" Yeah, whoopie!. For once, Kagan actually uttered the truth: boatloads of money to spend, spend, spend!

But, it must not bother the herds because they've been out there campaigning the past few months to get their incumbent reelected to Congress by winning primaries. Why? I would never vote for a Republican! Our family are Democrats because the Democrats care for the working man! I will not vote for Democrats because Republicans are fighting for smaller government! How's that really worked out for you the past few DECADES?

A closed mind is a terrible thing. An uneducated mind is a dangerous thing. Our republic is dying because tens of millions of voters are so uneducated about the proper role of government, they continue to work hard for their own destruction regardless of which party they belong to. Sadly, they are taking all of us over the cliff with them.The common mantra (BS) we always hear during an election year is "reelect experience". We need so and so's experience in Congress! In other words, don't vote for a challenger in the primary against the incumbent. We need more of the same! Isn't that what being a conservative is all about these days? Conserving the same insanity by continuing to vote for the same poltroon over good candidates who are not the anointed one of the party machine.