ScottFactor.com Conservative Blog

Posts Tagged ‘Gina Miller’

The following was written by Gina Miller. Her opinions don’t necessarily reflect those of ScottFactor.com, but because they’re here, they probably do.

The defenders of marriage are gearing up for a huge battle in the state of New Hampshire.  Mass Resistance reported that the Democrat-controlled state legislature forced homosexual “marriage” on the state back in 2009, in spite of strong public opposition.  As a result, the Democrats were thrown out of office in the next election.  Now, New Hampshire has a strong Republican majority in both chambers of the legislature, although their Democrat governor managed to be reelected.  The Republicans have the numbers to override the governor’s veto, should they choose to muster the courage.

Now the Republicans have introduced a bill to repeal the homosexual “marriage” law and clearly define marriage as being between one man and one woman—you know, the only thing a marriage can be!  The bill will be debated and voted on in the coming weeks, and as you can imagine, the powerful, wealthy, radical homosexual agenda minions are pulling out all the stops to keep this perverse law on the books.

From the Mass Resistance report,

“There are definitely the votes in both houses to pass it. But the Governor has promised to veto it, so the trick is getting the 2/3 votes to override his veto.

On paper, the votes are there to both pass it and override the Governor’s veto. But the lobbying campaign, pressure, and intimidation from the homosexual lobby is gearing up. It’s up to the people to keep some of the mushy Republicans from caving in to that.

And the homosexual lobby, as usual, is hitting hard with their well-used tactics. They’re using the old canards about ‘equality’ (i.e., homosexuality being equal to heterosexuality!) and ‘civil rights’ – trying to persuade people that homosexuality is just like the Civil Rights movement. And of course, their well-rehearsed emotional stories, [of] discrimination, etc., to portray homosexual behavior as completely safe and normal.

This year’s session effectively ends around the end of March, and the schedule for actually taking up the bill is still up in the air.”

As with most issues supported by the radical Left, lies are used to push the agenda.  For these homosexual advocates to hijack the cause of civil rights to peddle their twisted wares is despicable.  For them to compare their demand for legitimacy of their degenerate behavior to the genuine struggle for equality before the law by black Americans is pathetic.  It is an insult to real civil rights causes for the homo-activists to lie and make such an absurd comparison—their bad behavior to the immutable characteristic of skin color.

Another lie is their demand for “marriage equality.”  There is no such thing as homosexual “marriage,” and there never could be.  It is a sickening shame that such an ingrained and ancient truth would have to be stated today.  Throughout the history of mankind, since the dawn of time, men have understood what marriage is, and no group of moral reprobates will ever be able to change it.  Man can declare a lie to be the truth all he likes, but he does so at his own peril.  God does not smile on the willful mutilation of His precious institution of marriage, through which families are made.  Just ask the former residents of Sodom and Gomorrah how their flaunting of abominable, deviant behavior worked out for them.

The battle to restore rightful marriage in New Hampshire will be a fierce one.  The forces of Hell are gathering to apply terrible pressure to state lawmakers.  The amount of money backing the homo-radicals is massive, and as we have seen before, homosexual activists will stop at nothing to get their sorry way.  They must be prevented from succeeding.

Mass Resistance also reported on the fact that wealthy homosexual activists who do not live in New Hampshire contributed large amounts of money to the campaign for homosexual “marriage” in the state, including maximum donations to politicians, and huge sums the Democrat party and political action committees, in exchange for support of homosexual “marriage” legislation.

Today, Tuesday, is a big day in the battle for marriage in New Hampshire.  As Mass Resistance reports,

“A website with the Orwellian name of ‘Standing Up for New Hampshire Families,’ is the public face of the homosexual lobby to fight this bill. The group is having a press conference on Tuesday at 10 am in the State House to declare that the fight is over because the sentiment is ‘really’ on their side.

Pro-family people have decided to have a rally right after [the homosexual] lobby’s press conference, at noon right in front of the State House in Concord to show the Legislature that the citizens are very serious in their support [of] traditional marriage and aren’t taking this lightly all.

As [State Representative David] Bates said,

‘It is very important that we have a strong showing of people who want our state law to reflect the proper definition of marriage — the union of one man and one woman. I need your help conveying the urgency of the point of decision we are at concerning marriage in New Hampshire. Many people do not recognize the ramifications of what is at stake if we lose this battle. Among other things, some of our fundamental liberties are at stake. Rights of conscience, religious liberty, and even freedom of speech become severely curtailed wherever homosexuals succeed in imposing their ‘values’ in place of the basic, true mores society once embraced. If we do not rise to the occasion now, there may not be another chance.’

Too often, when homosexual groups have press conferences and similar public events, we on the pro-family side just sit there with our hands in our pockets. But not now, say New Hampshire pro-family leaders.”

The pro-family forces need all the help they can get.  They need money and volunteers.  They need people to show up at this New Hampshire rally today and to continue to boldly stand for marriage against this hell-born assault.  To those who do not see the seriousness of this issue, I would remind you that this is about much more than the perversion of the institution of marriage.  As Representative Bates pointed out, our very freedoms are at stake.  Our freedom to worship as we see fit and our freedoms to conduct our businesses in a manner consistent with our consciences and our freedom of speech are all on the chopping block of the radical homosexual agenda.

As I have written before, freedom of religion and the success of the radical homosexual movement cannot coexist.  If they succeed in forcing their will on the American people, it will ultimately become illegal to publicly express opposition to homosexuality, and that will include preachers and members inside churches as well.  Do not doubt this.  We already see many legal cases against Christians who oppose the mainstreaming of homosexuality in Europe and Canada, and more and more cases are popping up in America all the time.  Do not think we will be spared.

It is essential that we firmly resist and defeat the efforts by the militant homosexuals to get their perversion of marriage made “legal.”  Spineless, amoral politicians have already allowed far too much pro-homosexual legislation to make it to the books, including homosexual-preference “hate crimes” legislation and the adding of “sexual orientation” to the list of classes of people protected from discrimination.  These kinds of laws are eroding our freedoms, even as they attempt to elevate the bad behavior of homosexuality to the level of normalcy.  Homosexuality will never be normal; it will only be what it has always been: an abomination of God’s natural design for human sexuality.

Another front in this fierce battle is in our government run public school classrooms, which are targets of the militant homosexuals.  Our kids are being indoctrinated with pro-homosexual curriculums, and in one extreme case, California has mandated that homosexuals be portrayed in a positive light in the public schools beginning at the kindergarten level.  This is utterly detestable, and a hard push-back at this kind of disgusting child abuse by the godless State needs to be made by parents in every state.

Meanwhile, let us pray for the pro-family forces in New Hampshire and pray for the State Republican leadership to stand fearlessly in the face of the menacing, moneyed minions of the homosexual lobby to reverse this terrible homosexual “marriage” law and override the Democrat governor’s veto.

Originally from Texas, Gina is a graduate of William Carey College in Gulfport, MS, with a Bachelor of Fine Arts. Gina currently presents an audio blog on News Radio 104.9 FM in Biloxi, MS. Her blogs can be heard twice weekly on the Kipp Gregory morning show.

The following was written by Gina Miller. Her opinions don’t necessarily reflect those of ScottFactor.com, but because they’re here, they probably do.

The other day I was talking to Kipp Greggory, our morning talk show host, during whose program this radio blog broadcast airs.  We do not see each other very often, but when we do, it’s a fast-paced gab fest!  He brought up a point of aggravation to him that amazed me, because it is something that bothers my husband and me, as well, and I have not heard anyone else make the point.  It is the profusion of advertising that appeals to the prevalent sense of entitlement that infects many people in our society today.

You have heard the ads on the radio.  You have seen them on television.  Whatever product is being pushed, the message is often phrased in the “you deserve” angle.  “Get the credit you deserve.”  “Get the home you deserve.”  “Get the job you deserve.”  “Get the body you deserve.”  “Get the love life you deserve.”  “Get the good night’s sleep you deserve.”  The list goes on and on, and is enough to drive you crazy, if you are paying attention to such foolish messaging.

I think one of the earliest incarnations of this dumb message was by McDonalds, when it launched the early-1970s “You deserve a break today” ad campaign.  Yes, we all deserved our splendid pick from a delightful fast food menu.

What is it that bothers me so much about this message?  Well, for one thing, it is stupid.  How can we logically conclude that we “deserve” any of the things the advertising world pushes at us?  If we have eaten ourselves into five sizes too big, how can we justify believing that we “deserve” to have a body like the beautiful, trim model on the exercise machine pictured on television?  If we have spent ourselves into a chasm of debt, how can we imagine we should get the credit we “deserve”?  It makes no sense, except to a mind blinded by lazy, selfish greed.

But, the bottom line of why this message irks me is the fact that I know what we all deserve, and some of you will not like to hear it.  We all deserve death.  Yes, death.  Whether we like it or not, and whether we even accept it or not, we are accountable to our Creator.  God is.  And, we owe him our very existence, because we cannot take a breath without receiving it from Him.  All we have comes from Him (and we think we earned it on our own).  He made us and all we see, and He has a standard of perfection that none of us can achieve.  His law requires perfect obedience, but not one of us could ever perfectly obey, and God’s penalty for breaking His law is death, which is eternal separation from Him. 

God knew from before He created time and set us in it that we would choose sin and death, and Adam wasted no time in making that choice in the Garden, so God, Who loves us infinitely, made a way, a bridge, between God and man.  That bridge is God the Father’s only Son, Jesus Christ.  Jesus willingly took on the form of fallen mankind and lived a sinless life—not once did He break God’s law—and He offered Himself up as the perfect sacrifice for our sins.  He gave His life—no one took it from him, because no one could.  He took upon Himself the death we all deserve.

There is no other way to God, except through His Son.  Yes, it is exclusive.  That is why Jesus said that broad is the way that leads to destruction—with the many, many false religions, false versions of Christianity and idols in the world—and many people go down that deadly path, but narrow is the gate that leads to life, and few find it.  Jesus is that Gate.

I suppose this message of salvation is what makes the “you deserve”-entitlement-mentality advertising so sinister.  The very message of “you deserve” is a lie, and although I realize lots of advertising is lies, this lie is somehow worse, because it directly contradicts the truth of God’s Word.  It serves to lift man up on his own mini-god pedestal, where he “deserves” the finest things this world has to offer, and if he is up there on his lofty perch, how can he see himself as the hopeless wretch he truly is, who is in desperate need of salvation?  He can’t.

The message of salvation is plain and simple, and it is a sweet fragrance to those who embrace it, but it is a stench to those who refuse it as they perish.  The Apostle John transcribed the words of Jesus in this powerful passage,

“And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. 

And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:  That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.  He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.  For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.  But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.” 

The fact that we are moving around and living our lives is a testament to God’s great patience and mercy.  Most of us do not get what we deserve in a timely manner.  God gives us countless chances to turn to Him and accept the free gift of salvation through Jesus.  I thank God that I will not get what I deserve, for though I stumble on a daily basis, when I die, I will not experience eternal separation from Him.  I will be covered by the blood of Jesus.  Thanks be to my Father in Heaven!

The principle of getting what we deserve also applies to the shabby state of our nation today.  The Word of the Lord through the Apostle Paul in his letter to the Galatians states one of God’s immutable truths,

“Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.  For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.” 

America turned its collective back on God several decades ago.  Those among us who despise God and Christ have worked hellishly and feverishly to force even the mention of the Lord’s name out of the public square, and those of us who love the Lord allowed it to happen with hardly a fight.  What do we suppose we deserve as a nation for spitting in His holy face?  We have the degenerate society we deserve.  We have the corrupt government we deserve.  We have the wicked public education system we deserve, which cranks out the godless, socialist automatons we deserve (Occupy Wall Street, anyone?).  We have the criminal fraud of a President we deserve.

And, unless this nation somehow makes a sharp, right-hand U-turn to the Lord, we will continue to get the hell we deserve in increasing measure.  But, no matter how bad things get in our country and the world, each of us individually has the opportunity—as long as we are still alive—to accept God’s free gift of salvation through Jesus Christ.  If you have not already done so, please accept Him while you still can, so that you can possess true peace, wisdom and knowledge during your time on this earth, and so that on that great and terrible Day of the Lord, you will not get what you deserve.

Originally from Texas, Gina is a graduate of William Carey College in Gulfport, MS, with a Bachelor of Fine Arts. Gina currently presents an audio blog on News Radio 104.9 FM in Biloxi, MS. Her blogs can be heard twice weekly on the Kipp Gregory morning show.

The following was written by Gina Miller. Her opinions don’t necessarily reflect those of ScottFactor.com, but because they’re here, they probably do.

The so-called “mainstream” media are despicable.  The government propaganda news reporters of the past in places like Soviet Russia and their modern contemporaries do not hold a candle to the current communist Democrat mouthpiece news “reporters” here in America in their ability to lie to the people.  Those of us who have watched the sickeningly fawning, fiercely biased reporting on Barack Obama (or whatever his name is) since before the 2008 presidential election know exactly what I mean.  Reporters for the media establishment would not report the truth about Obama even on pain of death.

So it comes as no surprise that the most spiked (unreported) story of the past several weeks is that of three legal complaints against Obama in the State of Georgia that demand he prove his constitutional eligibility to hold the office of President, and thus, his ability to legally be on the ballot in Georgia.  This story has not been covered by the mainstream media, except in rare isolated instances of vitriolic presentation.  Have you seen it on your local evening news?  Have you read it in your local bird cage liner newspaper?  Nope and nope.

This story is huge, yet the Obot media, in lockstep with the sinister character in the White House, refuse to report on it.  In the event you are unaware of this story, the bottom line is that finally after more than three years’ worth of legal challenges, one judge has been willing to allow the case against Obama to proceed on its merits.  At last, we find a judge who appears to respect the Constitution.  That judge is Michael M. Malihi of the Georgia Office of State Administrative Hearings.

Judge Malihi rejected the Obama team’s demand that he dismiss a subpoena requiring Obama to appear in court in Altanta to prove his eligibility.  The judge refused.  Then, Obama’s attorney, Michael Jablonski, tried to go around Judge Malihi’s court and sent a letter to Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp demanding that he abolish the court case and announcing that neither Obama nor his counsel would attend (“contempt of court” anyone?).  To his credit Secretary Kemp basically told team Obama to put it in their pipe and smoke it.

So the hearings were held last Thursday sans Team Obama.  Arguments were heard which include that Obama is not a natural born citizen—as required by the Constitution—because his supposed father was not a U.S. citizen and that Obama possibly possesses a fraudulent Social Security number.  The judge has yet to issue a ruling. 

He could have issued a default ruling against Obama, but as WND’s Bob Unruh reported last Friday,

“Attorneys who argued in a Georgia court this week that Barack Obama isn’t eligible to be president say Administrative Law Judge Michael Malihi considered granting a default judgment before they even argued the case.

That presumably could have recommended that Obama failed to prove his eligibility and therefore should not be on the 2012 ballot, since he and his lawyer snubbed the hearing, for which Obama was subpoenaed.

But the attorneys argued against such an easy victory on the point of the single hearing, expressing instead their desire to get the evidence concerning Obama’s eligibility or lack of it in the record, so that it would be there should the case elevate to an appellate level.

The attorneys also said the strategy decision by Obama to simply ignore the subpoena and the hearing may ultimately backfire, because judges typically aren’t pleased to listen to arguments from someone who wants to introduce evidence during an appeal.” 

The fact that Obama did not show when subpoenaed further illustrates his complete contempt for the rule of law in America.  He has repeatedly violated the United States Constitution with non-recess recess appointments, taking over private sector car companies, signing the takeover of the health care industry and mandating that all Americans buy health insurance, running guns into the hands of enemies of America in the Mexican drug cartels, bypassing Congress to enact his will, etc.

As I have said before, Obama is behaving as a dictator, and someone needs to hold him accountable.  I am not holding my breath for anyone to arrest him for contempt of court, but someone most certainly should.  Despite what he seems to believe, he is not above the law; however, if no one is willing to hold him accountable to the law, by default he is above it.  This is a terrible place in which we find our nation—with an utterly lawless man in the office of President.

Besides Orly Taitz and Mark Hatfield, another attorney who argued against Obama before Judge Malihi last Thursday was Van Irion, co-founder of the Liberty Legal Foundation.  He had some serious observations about Obama’s disregard for the authority of the court, and in part, he wrote,

“One of my earliest childhood memories is of my parents talking about Nixon and the Watergate scandal. I remember the newspaper headline: ‘Nixon Resigns!’ President Nixon’s fight against court subpoenas made international news. Yesterday President Obama completely ignored a court subpoena, and the world shrugged.

Obama’s behavior yesterday is even more disturbing than Nixon’s. Nixon at least respected the judicial branch enough to have his attorney’s show up in court and follow procedure. Nixon’s fight in the courts followed existing law. Nixon acknowledged the authority of the judicial branch even while he fought it. Obama, on the other hand, essentially said yesterday that the judicial branch has no power over him. He ordered his attorneys to stay away from the hearing. He didn’t petition a higher court in a legitimate attempt to stay the hearing. Instead he showed complete contempt for the entire judicial branch and for the rule of law. Rather than respecting the legal process, Obama went around the courts and tried to put political pressure directly on the Georgia Secretary of State. When that failed, he simply ignored the judicial branch completely.

The rule of law, and our three-branch system of government, now hang in the balance. If the Georgia court issues a ruling on the merits and an order finding Obama in contempt of court, and if that contempt order actually results in real punishment of some kind, then we will still have a Constitutional Republic. If this doesn’t happen, then Obama will have been rewarded for showing complete contempt for the judicial branch.”

Yes, indeed. 

There is most certainly contempt in every aspect of Obama’s being.  He displays contempt for our nation, our military, our freedoms, our Constitution and rule of law, all while insulting our intelligence with his interminable lying.  We will have to wait to see what Judge Malihi decides.  I have no word on when he may issue his ruling, but it is said to be soon.  I pray—and patriots throughout our nation pray—that he makes the right decision. 

It is far past time for someone to hold this lawless criminal in the White House accountable.  Yes, I said criminal!  If you consider that to be too strong of a word to describe the behavior of Barack Obama, then you are simply uninformed or of like mind with him.  The time for mincing words and playing polite with this communist Democrat regime is over—actually, the time for it never was.  Now, more than ever, we must tell it like it is with this administration and shout it from the rooftops.

When you consider polling (if you believe any of the polls) that indicates about fifty percent of Americans support Obama for reelection, then you know how much trouble we are in.  If after three years of Obama’s outrageous behavior in office, we see that that many Americans are still truly so clueless, it is only a matter of a very short time before the commie zombies will completely rule over us.  We must fight to educate and inform the voter zombies where we find them, and hope they will listen.  Otherwise, it may soon be too late.

Originally from Texas, Gina is a graduate of William Carey College in Gulfport, MS, with a Bachelor of Fine Arts. Gina currently presents an audio blog on News Radio 104.9 FM in Biloxi, MS. Her blogs can be heard twice weekly on the Kipp Gregory morning show.

The following was written by Gina Miller. Her opinions don’t necessarily reflect those of ScottFactor.com, but because they’re here, they probably do.

Back in September on this broadcast I reported on a stupidly wrong ruling by a three-judge panel of California’s 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.  You may recall the story.  From my September radio blog broadcast,

“The communist Left’s campaign to drive every hint of God from our nation’s classrooms continues.  In case you missed the story from a couple of weeks ago, the latest twist in the case of the assault on one teacher’s freedom of speech has been a blow dealt by the notoriously leftist 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that ruled that school district authorities did not violate the teacher’s right to freedom of speech when they ordered him to remove patriotic banners from his classroom that included the name of God.

This ordeal began back in 2007 when Brad Johnson, a math teacher in San Diego’s Westview High School of the Poway Unified School District, was ordered by the school’s principal to remove the banners.”

One of Mr. Johnson’s banners displayed the phrases, “In God We Trust,” “One Nation Under God,” “God Bless America,” and “God Shed His Grace On Thee,” and another had the line from the Declaration of Independence, “All Men Are Created Equal, They Are Endowed By Their Creator.”  He had been displaying those banners in his classroom for 25 years for the first banner and 17 years for the second, but in ’07, the politically correct, anti-Christian principal ordered him to take down the banners, because they mention the name of God.

Besides the obvious violation of Mr. Johnson’s rights, another truly crummy aspect to this story is the fact that the same school district allows teachers in other classrooms to display Tibetan prayer flags, pictures of Buddha, the Dalai Lama, Muslim leader Malcolm X, and even the lyrics to John Lennon’s anti-religion song, “Imagine.”

In this California school district, anything goes, except the name of God.  In a state where lawmakers have mandated the pushing of the radical sodomite agenda to indoctrinate the state’s captive audience of public school children with a pro-homosexual curriculum, any hint of the Lord is extremely offensive to the minions of Hell who run that state.

Not being an easily-cowed Christian, Mr. Johnson sued the school district for violating his First Amendment rights, and he prevailed in the court of a federal judge.  As WND reported at the time,

“A federal judge in California has handed down a scathing ruling against a school that required one of its teachers to remove signs celebrating the role of God in American history from his classroom walls.

… ‘May a school district censor a high school teacher’s expression because it refers to Judeo-Christian views, while allowing other teachers to express views on a number of controversial subjects, including religion and anti-religion?’ posited U.S. District Court Judge Roger T. Benitez in his judgment. ‘On undisputed evidence, this court holds that it may not.’

He continued, ‘That God places prominently in our nation’s history does not create an Establishment Clause violation requiring curettage and disinfectant for Johnson’s public high school classroom walls. It is a matter of historical fact that our institutions and government actors have in past and present times given place to a supreme God.’

The judge further reprimanded the school, stating that while teachers at the district ‘encourage students to celebrate diversity and value thinking for one’s self, [they] apparently fear their students are incapable of dealing with diverse viewpoints that include God’s place in American history and culture.”

That was a solid and correct ruling and a refreshing one in light of so many anti-Christian court rulings nowadays.  But, school district leaders were not going to tolerate the presence of God’s name that easily, so they filed an appeal to the 9^th Circuit which quickly shot down the lower court’s ruling with a hypocritical, dead-wrong ruling of its own.

Now, the Thomas More Law Center, which is representing Mr. Johnson, is appealing the 9^th Circuit ruling to the Supreme Court.  From a Thomas More press release on Tuesday,

“He displayed the banners pursuant to a 30-year school district policy that permitted teachers to maintain classroom displays of non-curricular messages that reflected their personal opinions and values. In effect, the school district designated classroom walls as forum for the expression of the teacher’s private opinions and viewpoints.

However, in 2007 school officials ordered Johnson to remove his banners because they promoted a ‘Judeo-Christian’ viewpoint.

In an outrageous case of double standard, school officials allowed other teachers to display non-Christian religious displays in their classrooms.

… Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center, commented, ‘This case is a prime example of how public schools across our nation are cleansing our classrooms of our Christian heritage while promoting atheism and other non–Christian religions under the guise of cultural diversity.’

Continued Thompson, ‘The Ninth Circuit Court’s rationale in allowing the Tibetan Prayer Flags and references to other religions while outlawing America’s patriotic slogans that mention God is unconvincing. Brad Johnson was simply exercising his free speech rights in a forum created by the school district to inform students of the religious foundations of our nation.’

Attempts to get a rehearing in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals failed, and so the Law Center pursued its only remaining option– a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari (appeal) to the United States Supreme Court.” 

Now, our God-given, First Amendment-protected rights are at the mercy of the Supreme Court of the United States.  Even though this case is representing a lone teacher in California, it truly represents each of us in America, because of the implications of precedent.  If the High Court refuses to hear the case or rules against Mr. Johnson, it would be a major blow to freedom of religion, speech and expression for all Americans, not to mention, it would be unconstitutional for the Court to rule against the First Amendment. 

This year, the Supreme Court must also rule on the constitutionality of the clearly unconstitutional individual mandate in the atrocious Obamacare legislation.  One disappointing bit of news is that the Court has just refused to consider a hearing to determine if Elena Kagan should recuse herself from the case, since she has a conflict of interest, having reportedly helped create and defend the Obamacare legislation when she was acting as Obama’s Solicitor General Cheerleader.

It is a frightening time in our nation’s history when we see our Supreme Court just a single swing vote away (Justice Kennedy) from undoing our country as founded.  And, if Barack Obama (or whatever his name is) is somehow reelected (by hook and crook), then we are looking at the prospect of his being able to tip the Court over to a radical leftist, firm majority.  He has already appointed two unqualified, radical leftist women to the Court in his first term.  As the Judicial Watch website noted last November,

“Obama’s two Supreme Court appointments (Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan) also have documented histories of bias and favoring liberal causes or favored groups. Sotomayor was a top policy maker at the leftist Puerto Rico Legal Defense and Education Fund and a member of the open-borders National Council of La Raza. Her race-conscious and activist judicial philosophy was in full force during her Supreme Court debut when she introduced a pair of new terms aimed at describing illegal immigrants in a more friendly and politically correct way.

Kagan is a liberal activist and political operative with no experience as a judge. This month Judicial Watch obtained internal documents that indicate Kagan was involved in crafting Obamacare during her time as solicitor general. This is important because Kagan will likely participate in the Supreme Court’s upcoming deliberations to review the constitutionality of the controversial healthcare law. As the president’s top advocate Kagan was responsible for drafting the measure’s defense in the event of a legal challenge.”

We are certainly living in dangerous times for the future of America.  I am weary of watching with dread the actions of our government and courts, but I pray that the Supreme Court will do the right thing this year: defend our freedom of religion and freedom of speech, and drive a stake through the heart of the hellish socialized medicine law of Obamacare.

Originally from Texas, Gina is a graduate of William Carey College in Gulfport, MS, with a Bachelor of Fine Arts. Gina currently presents an audio blog on News Radio 104.9 FM in Biloxi, MS. Her blogs can be heard twice weekly on the Kipp Gregory morning show.

The following was written by Gina Miller. Her opinions don’t necessarily reflect those of ScottFactor.com, but because they’re here, they probably do.

No matter how hard we try to be thankful for the things we have, we almost cannot avoid taking some things for granted.  I had that truth illustrated to me last week when I ran into a real, live, flaming liberal.  That may sound strange, but what I have taken for granted is the fact that I live in an area where conservatives outnumber liberals.  I have taken for granted that all my neighbors, who are also my friends, are conservatives, and that they have a good grasp on what this dangerous usurper in the White House has been doing since he took office.

I am simply not used to running into leftists in my neighborhood (or many other places around here, for that matter), but last week, I ran into a woman, an acquaintance in my neighborhood, who has apparently held anger toward me for many months now, probably for more than a year.  I had no idea of this until I saw her last week, and she was finally able to give me a piece of her mind.  Her anger at me stemmed from something I said to her back then about Barack Obama (or whatever his name is).  She could not remember what I said, nor could I, but she has harbored the anger toward me nonetheless.  In her mind, I had insulted her president, and that is all she knows.  So, I apparently said something true about Barack Obama, and it offended her liberal sensibilities. 

I believe she was unaware of my job as a conservative talk radio commentator.  If she could hear some of my radio blogs, especially those concerning Obama, I suppose her head would explode!  Now, this woman is not a young punk like the idiot Occupy Wall Streeters, who you might expect to hold stupid political views; she is middle-aged.  I wondered how she could not see the unconstitutional, illegal actions of the communist Democrat Obama and his administration, and I asked her, “Don’t you see that he is destroying this country?”  I thought she might faint with outrage at the question.  No, she did not see at all.  After a few of her insults, I admit I lost my cool toward her with my hot head and ended up telling her she is blind and uninformed, which did no good, of course. 

There is no reasoning with those who are willfully deceived.  As I have thought about that encounter, it occurs to me that the liberal mind is varying degrees and combinations of deception and lies.  Only a person who is grossly uninformed or misinformed could possibly think Obama is a good guy with good intentions and deserving of respect.  I can only guess that this woman is completely detached from the ability to apply critical thinking to discern the awful nature of Obama’s actions of the past three years, or she misguidedly agrees with those actions.  Either way, she refuses to see how bad the Obama administration and the Democrats are for America.

Democrat leaders lie to their constituents, and those lies are believed by people like this woman.  I have often assumed that members of the leadership of the Left could not believe their own over-the-top lies to the American people, but at times I think it is possible they just might.  I wonder if people like Nancy Pelosi and Sheila Jackson-Lee may really believe the outrageous crap that comes out of their mouths.  It does not seem possible, but I may be underestimating people’s capacity for self-deception; after all, how long can you tell blatant lies with such firm conviction without starting to believe them yourself?

The examples of liberal leadership lies are endless.  One of the big dark stars currently on the scene is Florida Congressman and Democratic National Committee Chairman Debbie Wasserman Shultz, who fearlessly tells the biggest whoppers imaginable.  Glenn Beck’s sidekick buddy, Pat Gray, had some strong words to describe her.  He called her a “horrible, heinous, hideous, lying skank.”  As reported at GlennBeck.com,

“Normally this type of harsh characterization is completely over the line and uncalled for in the public discourse. But in the case of Debbie Wasserman Schultz it’s completely justified and extremely accurate. She has no problem lying about crystal clear truths in order to spin for the DNC. Among her classics just in the past few days: Refusing to acknowledge the unemployment rate is higher today than it was when Obama took office; blaming Tea Party for AZ shooting, and calling Romney’s NH blowout victory a sign that he’s a ‘wounded candidate’ going forward.” 

As I have said before, these liberals have never met a lie they are not willing to tell.  When it comes to Barack Obama, there is plenty of documentation of his many lies.  One website, called Obama Lies, has an organized list of lies he has told since the 2008 presidential campaign with the evidence that his statements were lies.  Not to bore you with a long-winded laundry list, but you may recall this sample of the many lies told by Obama:

“I’ve done more for Israel’s security than any President ever.  My church is like any other Christian church.  The USA is producing more oil than ever before.  We have run out of places in the US to drill for oil.  The ‘rich’ do not pay their fair share.  There will be no ‘boots on the ground’ in Libya.  The fence between the US and Mexico is ‘practically complete.’  Mine will be the most transparent administration in history.  I am not somebody who promotes same-sex marriage.  I will close Guantanamo Bay within a year.  The Recovery Act will save or create jobs.  The health care bill will not increase the deficit by one dime.  If you like the health care plan you have, you can keep it.  When a bill lands on my desk, the American people will have 5 days to review it before I sign it.  Then you’ve got [the GOP plan] which is dirtier air, dirtier water, less people with health insurance.  Bill Ayers is ‘just a guy in my neighborhood’”

That is only a fraction of Obama’s list of lies, yet there are still many Americans, like the woman who is mad at me, who are utterly clueless that Obama is the Liar-in-Chief of the United States.  In what passes for logic in their liberal minds, Obama can do no wrong, yet in reality, he has done no right by the United States and the American people, and unless he is booted from office, he will only do worse and worse.

To state the obvious, the bottom line is that we are dealing with opposing worldviews.  Conservatism and liberalism are diametrically opposite and can in no way “get along” with each other.  Conservatism lifts up the freedom and liberty of the individual.  Liberalism lifts up the power of a central government over individual liberty.  Conservatism is free enterprise and the freedom to achieve success to the best of our abilities and desires, free from an overreaching federal government.  Liberalism is burdensome bureaucratic oppression of the private sector.  Conservatism is limited government and low taxation.  Liberalism is unlimited government and excessive taxation and regulation.  Conservatism supports moral truths and absolutes.  Liberalism despises truth and morality.

The contrast between conservatism and liberalism could not be any clearer, and part of the battle to defeat liberalism involves educating the American people about that great divide.  A truly educated electorate is the liberals’ worst nightmare.  I have no doubt that many Americans would embrace conservatism if they could be made aware of its nature in contrast to the true agenda of the Left.  Far too many in this country are disconnected from politics and government activity.  What little knowledge they have is from leftist media sound bites and the not-so-subtle leftist messages in popular entertainment.  The message of conservatism is freedom, and the message of liberalism is bondage to the state, and when people can see and understand those truths, many of them will reject liberalism.

Of course, there are leftist ideologues, like the woman I mentioned, who will never be swayed to reason, because they reject the conservative worldview.  Even if I had given that woman a one-sheet rundown on Obama’s miserable, unconstitutional behavior, with clear-cut proof, she would simply spout the typical leftist argument-stopper of, “That’s your opinion, and I disagree with it.”  No amount of truthful evidence will penetrate the liberal fortress around her mind—and those like her.

So, we need not waste our time on ones like her who do not have ears to hear or eyes to see.   But, for the many millions who are simply not paying attention, there is still hope for helping them see the light of truth about the destructive nature of liberalism, if we are willing to educate the uninformed who may be interested in learning.  With a leftist media and entertainment industry in the tank for the Democrats, we need all the conservative educators we can get.

Originally from Texas, Gina is a graduate of William Carey College in Gulfport, MS, with a Bachelor of Fine Arts. Gina currently presents an audio blog on News Radio 104.9 FM in Biloxi, MS. Her blogs can be heard twice weekly on the Kipp Gregory morning show.

The following was written by Gina Miller. Her opinions don’t necessarily reflect those of ScottFactor.com, but because they’re here, they probably do.

This is quite frustrating.  Poll after poll comes out reportedly showing Mitt Romney in the lead for the Republican nomination.  It makes me sad to think Americans could be that uninformed—I am talking about conservatives, not Democrats.  On the other hand, I would not be surprised to know that many of these polls are heavily weighted with Democrat respondents.  Nor do I doubt that many primary election results will include an organized turnout of Democrat voters trying to put Romney over the top.

Conservatives should understand that Mitt Romney is not a conservative.  Mitt Romney is a liberal.  We have Romney’s words, actions and record as Governor of Massachusetts to show us who he is.  Anyone with just a single eye half-open behind a layer of gauze could clearly see Romney’s record shows him to be a fake Republican.  His words and actions align him with the Democrats.

News broke on Tuesday evening that now posted online is a gold mine of Romney information:  a 200-page document that is rumored to be John McCain’s 2008 opposition research for his Republican presidential primary run against Mitt Romney, although McCain’s people are not admitting it.  This file covers it all, and should leave no doubt in the minds of Americans that Mitt Romney is a political leftist, both fiscally and socially.

The Daily Caller reported on Wednesday,

“If you think you’ve already heard everything there is to know about Mitt Romney, think again. A 200-page document that appears to be Sen. John McCain’s entire 2008 election-year opposition research file on the former Massachusetts governor hit the Internet with a vengeance Tuesday evening. And it’s an eye-opener.

The file explores everything from the assessed value of Romney’s house (‘$3.162 million’) to his views on the Boy Scouts’ ban of homosexuals (‘publicly opposed … in 1994 and 2002 campaigns’). It was made public Tuesday on the social media website Buzzfeed, although it appears to have been accessible online for two months.

… Neither McCain nor his former presidential campaign staffers have authenticated the untitled document, and McCain’s recent endorsement of Romney makes that highly unlikely. Still, the file is comprehensive enough — even by Washington, D.C. opposition-research standards — to suggest that it was assembled as a tool to counter a Romney candidacy on a national scale. And the news articles it references stop late in 2007.” 

The file begins with a timeline biography of Romney’s life, and then has a section called “Top Hits,” which is an overview version of much of the rest of the information-packed report.  It begins with social issues.  Illustrated is his support for, and flip-flopping on, abortion, his strong support for the radical homosexual agenda, and his support for gun control.  Later, the report goes into greater detail on each of the topics, as in Romney’s strong support for embryonic stem cell research, a position he has now supposedly reversed.

Here are a few cherries from the “Top Hits” social issues section of the file,

“Romney says he changed his mind on abortion meeting with Harvard stem cell researcher – Romney claims the doctor said scientists ‘kill’ embryos after 14 days, but doctor later said Romney ‘mischaracterized my position.’

Months after his ‘conversion,’ Romney stated his commitment to upholding Massachusetts’ abortion laws and appointed pro-choice judge to state district court.

Romney health insurance plan expanded access to abortion, required Planned Parenthood representative on state panel.

Romney endorsed legalization of abortion pill RU-486 access during his 1994 Senate race and backed federal funding of abortion, saying ‘I think it’s important that people see me not as a pro-life candidate.’

Romney endorsed Rep. Barney Frank’s Employment Nondiscrimination Act in 1994.

In 1994, Romney called ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy first step toward having gays and lesbians ‘able to serve openly and honestly in our nation’s military’ and said he would provide ‘more effective leadership’ on gay rights issues than Ted Kennedy.

Romney promised to make gay partnership benefits a ‘hallmark of my leadership as governor’ and has said he would attend gay weddings if invited.

Romney publicly opposed Boy Scouts’ ban on homosexuals in 1994 and 2002 campaigns.

In 2002, Romney backed hate crimes legislation that included sexual orientation provisions.

In 1994 Senate race, Romney backed Brady bill and assault weapons ban, saying ‘I don’t line up with the NRA’ and ‘that’s not going to make me the hero of the NRA.’

As governor, Romney quadrupled gun licensing fees and vowed not to ‘chip away’ at tough gun laws.

In 2004, Romney signed permanent state-level ban on assault weapons that was mirrored after federal assault weapons ban.

In January 2006, Romney said he owned a gun – then two days later admitted he did not and the gun belonged to his son.

Romney bragged about being member of the NRA but later revealed he didn’t join until August 2006, just before launching his presidential campaign.

Romney recently said he’s ‘been a hunter pretty much all my life’ but later admitted he hunted only twice in his life, later clarifying remarks by claiming he has hunted ’small varmints … more than two times.’”

So, the former Mormon missionary to France, Mitt Romney, does not hesitate to tell lies.  That’s just great!  Currently, his most prominent lie is his claim of conservatism, as his words and actions prove otherwise.  He switched his party affiliation from Independent to Republican in 1993, just before he ran for public office in 1994.  As I have come to learn, the category of “Independent” usually means liberal.  In this day of stark contrast between the Left and the Right, there is no real middle ground.  Of course, I do not believe in gray areas, and I never have.  There are two sides to this battle, two sides only, and Mitt Romney is not on our side.

Other points covered by the Romney file demonstrate that he is a big-government spender and taxer who once proposed a 10 percent tax on private political campaign donations.  He has supported amnesty for illegal aliens.  He has shown his support for the massive hoax of man-caused global warming and supports oppressive “cap and trade” taxation.  He has supported raising the federal gas tax.  You already know he implemented socialized medicine in his state, although he now says he is opposed to Obamacare.

The file covers his business record and his stand on political issues.

 A few lowlights under the overview of political issues include,

“In late 2002, Romney described himself as ‘a progressive-on-social-issues governor of Massachusetts.’

Romney left the state GOP weaker than when he took over as governor, with the party described as being ‘at its weakest point in years.’

In 1994, Romney opposed the Contract with America without even reading it.

Romney has made political contributions to Democratic candidates, saying he places friendship above politics.

Romney appeared in 2003 TV ad endorsing Democrat Rocky Anderson – who has been outspoken in calling for President Bush’s impeachment over Iraq war – for reelection as Salt Lake City mayor; Romney featured an Anderson testimonial in his own TV ads while running for governor in 2002.

Romney proclaimed he wasn’t a Republican during the Reagan years, saying ‘I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I’m not trying to return to Reagan-Bush.’

Romney voted for Paul Tsongas in the 1992 Democratic presidential primary.”

Mitt Romney is clearly a leftist.  He is obviously designed to either be a spoiler for the Republican voters (many of whom will not vote for him under any circumstances), or if elected President, an acceptable choice for the Democrats.  Either way, we have a daunting challenge facing us:  keeping Romney out of the Republican nomination. 

Who do we have instead?  Since the political establishment destroyed my choice in Herman Cain, it looks like we are left with Rick Santorum as the closest thing to a conservative remaining in the field.  I know there are those who like Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich, but in all-around conservatism, Santorum seems to be the closest thing to the real deal.

For any of you who may still be clinging to the notion that Romney is the right guy, please take some time to read this eye-opening report.  Another excellent resource on the social issues position of the candidates can be found at saveamerica.com.

We must remember that we are also fighting Democrat voting in our Republican primaries—Democrats who will be voting for Romney—so it is paramount that we all turn out to vote against Mitt Romney in the primaries.  But, with the unacceptable way the primary elections are held, by the time many of us get to vote, we may not even have a choice left.

Originally from Texas, Gina is a graduate of William Carey College in Gulfport, MS, with a Bachelor of Fine Arts. Gina currently presents an audio blog on News Radio 104.9 FM in Biloxi, MS. Her blogs can be heard twice weekly on the Kipp Gregory morning show.

The following was written by Gina Miller. Her opinions don’t necessarily reflect those of ScottFactor.com, but because they’re here, they probably do.

There are many people, including some supposed “conservatives,” who scoff at those of us who warn of the dangers of the radical homosexual agenda.  “What homosexual agenda?  There is no such thing,” they say.  “Giving homosexuals the equal right to marry will in no way hurt traditional marriage,” they say. 

Despite these false assertions, we still keep sounding the alarm, and each week brings new evidence that what is at stake is nothing short of the loss of our constitutionally protected freedoms of speech and religion.  I have warned that these freedoms cannot coexist with a successful implementation of the radical homosexual agenda’s platform, and the proof of this truth keeps rolling in.

You may have read or heard about the judge in New Jersey who, last week, stole the First Amendment rights of members of a ministry who refused the request of two homosexual women who wanted to make a mockery of the marriage ceremony on the ministry’s property.

WND’s Bob Unruh reported last Thursday,

“A ministry that follows the dictates of its faith is engaging in wrongdoing, according to a New Jersey judge who recommended today that the state Division on Civil Rights find the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association violated the state’s nondiscrimination law.

‘The respondent violated the [Law Against Discrimination] when it refused to conduct a civil-union ceremony for Ms. Bernstein and Ms. Paster,’ wrote Solomon Metzger, an administrative law judge whose determination will become final if not overturned by the Division of Civil Rights.

‘Respondent opposes same-sex unions as a matter of religious belief, and in 2007 found itself on the wrong side of recent changes in the law.’

The seaside location has been popular for years for weddings, but the association, which is affiliated with the United Methodist Church, determined it could not biblically allow same-sex ceremonies to take place on its property.

So when Harriet Bernstein and Luisa Paster signed up for such a ceremony, they were turned down. They filed the discrimination complaint, and the state’s Division on Civil Rights joined their cause.”

Here is yet another example of activist homosexuals pushing their cause by attempting to force those who hold to Christian knowledge to bend to the will of members of the radical homosexual movement.  This is happening regularly all across our nation, and leftist judges are fully on board with this program of Hell.  This judge’s ruling is clearly an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment rights of the members of the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association.

This kind of faulty ruling is one result of tacking on the designation of “sexual orientation” to the list of non-discrimination laws for specially protected groups.  Non-discrimination laws, with the added dimension of specially protected, unnatural sexual behaviors, are detrimental to the First Amendment freedoms of American citizens in general, and therefore could be argued to be unconstitutional.

After this New Jersey judge’s ruling, the Alliance Defense Fund, which represented the ministry, is considering its options, but, as Bob Unruh reported, it appears options are limited, because the judge’s ruling will stand unless it is overturned by the New Jersey Division on Civil Rights—the bureaucracy that the two homosexuals already have on their side.

It is these kinds of rulings that are steadily eroding our God-given rights to freedom of religion and freedom of speech and expression—rights that are supposed to be protected by the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights.  Those who argue that the homosexual agenda poses no threat to American society are either ignorant, deceived or lying.  The goal of radical homosexual activists is the total silencing of any opposition to their unhealthy, immoral behavior, and they have been waging a militaristic campaign for several decades now, a campaign that includes heavy pro-homosexual indoctrination of public school children and college kids, as the next story clearly illustrates.

Have you heard about the brave, Christian Girl Scout who called for a boycott of Girl Scout cookies and why she did it?  A 14-year-old Girl Scout from California named Taylor, with no last name released, posted a You Tube video calling for the boycott in response to Girl Scouts USA admitting that they now allow boys who think they are girls to be members of the Girl Scouts.  We are talking about boys as old as high school age being allowed to be “Girl Scouts.”

WND’s Drew Zahn reported that Taylor had to set her You Tube page to “private” after the vicious backlash she received from pro-homosexual You Tube members.  Her video can still be viewed, having been posted by at least one other person who only posted it in order to berate the girl.

What is most sickening in this story, besides the obvious point of the Girl Scouts USA allowing boys to be members, is the flood of ignorant and deceived reactions to her video.  I watched several responses, and it is plain to see the depth of pro-homosexual indoctrination that has occurred in the minds of our young people. 

Far too many kids nowadays are deceived about the truth of homosexuality and related mental and spiritual disorders, including so-called “transgender” people—people who imagine they are members of the opposite sex.  Our kids—at least those who do not have a proper foundation of truth knowledge—have been brainwashed into believing such nonsense is reality and acceptable, and it is quite disturbing to see this deception on parade in those You Tube responses.

One You Tube poster, a girl who appears to be in her early-20s, had this to say,

“Taylor, your main argument appears to be that Girl Scouts is a place for only girls, where girls can have a female-only environment, where they can be themselves as girls.  The fault in your logic occurs when you use the definition of ‘girl’ to mean ‘has a vagina.’  Biological sex, having a penis or a vagina, is different than gender, which is your innate female or maleness.  There’s also a huge range of other gender and sexual identities, but I’ll focus on the binary for now.

For me personally, as a longtime Girl Scout myself, I take the word ‘girl’ to mean ‘identifies as female.’  Because of this, I think the Girl Scouts is the place for any child who feels they are a girl, regardless of what parts they were born with.” 

A boy who appears to be in his mid-twenties said this,

“If there were a Trangendered Scouts of America, that would be an interesting half-step in-between, but again, that would be missing the point that transgendered girls are girls—not anatomically, but still in their minds, in their actions, and in how they perceive themselves and they perceive the world.”

Another young lady spouted the false comparison talking point of the radical homosexual movement which attempts to compare the immutable characteristic of race to the behavior of homosexuality when she said,

“What you need to understand, however, is that the world is changing.  The world will always change.  Years ago, there would’ve been videos like this—if we had the technology available, of course—of someone saying that troops allowed little black girls into the Girl Scouts and how atrocious that was and how they weren’t being honest or faithful or whatever.

I just can’t wait till ten, even five years from now when you look back on that video and you think, ‘Wow.  That’s embarrassing,’ because there will be people who identify as girls in the Girl Scouts, regardless of whether or not they have an ‘inney’ or and ‘outey,’ and I’m not talking about their belly button.”

And, in another video, a 20-something girl made this statement that apparently makes perfect sense to her scrambled mind,

“Now, first of all I want to point out that transgendered girls are girls.  Just because they were born into boys’ bodies does not mean that they are not female.

… These are not transgender boys.  They are transgender girls.  They are born in the body of a boy.  They are identifying as a girl.”

There is your 20-something-year-old mindset.  There is the result of successful homosexual indoctrination of kids by the government-run public schools and colleges, the media and entertainment industries.    There is the death of common sense.  There is the result of decades of parental abandonment of learning and teaching the truth of God’s Word, the truth of the ages and the truth of human sexuality, which belongs to a married man and woman, but which has instead been woefully perverted and abused by a lost and dying world.

When you watch these kids’ videos, when you look into their eyes, it’s enough to break your heart.  These kids are speaking their deeply-held convictions, not realizing how dead-wrong they are.  We have lost the war for the soul of our society.  We lost it years ago, and now that many of us are awake to that fact, we are in damage control mode, but it may not be enough to push back the forces of darkness and perversion that seek to defeat the forces of Christian morality.

Girl Scouts USA is a radical leftist organization.  That may go without saying to those of us who pay attention to such things, but if you have not been watching and are not aware, Girl Scouts is aligned with a number of leftwing causes and organizations.  The Girl Scouts website list of those groups and causes that Girl Scouts has embraced, includes environmental wackoism with “Earth Hour,” the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the “US Green Building Council,” which teaches little girls about the communistic “sustainable development” agenda.  Speaking of sustainable development, Girl Scouts is also partnered with the United Nations—ain’t that swell?  Girl Scouts is also wedded to the deceptive “diversity” movement, as is stated elsewhere on the website.  When you closely examine its agenda, you can easily see that Girl Scouts is no place for girls.

The radical homosexual war on Christianity and common sense continues to rage in America, from the Christian ministry losing its First Amendment rights, to the Christian Girl Scout being viciously attacked for standing for her knowledge of the truth.  Although it seems an uphill battle, we will continue to fight in the court of public opinion, in the courts of law and in the spirit realm, where the true battle is taking place.  Those of us who know the truth and know the Lord should pray for the young people of America, like those deceived kids in the You Tube videos, and for all those people who are trapped in the various manifestations of homosexuality.  We should pray for the healing of their minds and hearts and pray that one day, before it is too late, they will accept the freedom from the slavery to sin which can only be found in salvation through Jesus Christ.

Originally from Texas, Gina is a graduate of William Carey College in Gulfport, MS, with a Bachelor of Fine Arts. Gina currently presents an audio blog on News Radio 104.9 FM in Biloxi, MS. Her blogs can be heard twice weekly on the Kipp Gregory morning show.

The following was written by Gina Miller. Her opinions don’t necessarily reflect those of ScottFactor.com, but because they’re here, they probably do.

Since when is being right considered “controversial”?  You have likely noticed that “mainstream” news media—which simply means media that is aligned with the communist Left—when reporting on issues that are important to the true mainstream of patriotic Americans will call those issues “controversial.”  When reading a news article published in the Miami Herald, I saw the word used to describe the voter identification law in South Carolina.

There is nothing controversial about wanting to protect the integrity of our elections, as voters here in Mississippi did in the last election when we approved our voter ID ballot initiative.  Requiring proper ID to vote is simply common sense.  What is controversial is how the Democrats react to the proposition of the loss of easier access to fraudulent voting.  When ID is required to vote, that means fraudsters who vote in place of dead people, illegal aliens who vote and various other criminal voters have a much harder, if not impossible, time casting those illegal votes.

Of course, Democrats do not put it that way, because Democrats lie to conceal the truth of their unconstitutional, anti-American agenda.  They make the stupidly wrong claim that voter ID laws will prevent blacks and other minorities from voting.  That is not even a good, dumb argument!  In the case of South Carolina and some other states, free state ID is offered to those who claim to not be able to afford to pay the small fee for it, a claim which, in itself, is quite silly.  Nevertheless, if those same people also claim they have no way to travel to pick up their free ID, South Carolina has an 800 number they can call to get a free ride to get their free state-issued ID.

After South Carolina adopted their voter ID law, the despicable, racist Attorney General Eric Holder rushed to command the new law be blocked.  Really, how dare he?  Oh, but he does dare.  This may be the most corrupt “Justice” Department in US history, not only for this injustice, but for numerous rotten actions in the past 3 years, like the wicked and deadly Fast and Furious scheme, the favorable treatment of black criminals as in the New Black Panthers voter intimidation case during the ’08 election, the suing of states that want to protect their citizens from the illegal alien invasion, and the refusal to defend the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

The good news is that South Carolina is not going to stand down in the face of this leftist attack on election integrity.  On Tuesday, three top officials in South Carolina announced that they will sue the Justice Department in Washington DC district court to challenge this absurd dictate.  Legal precedent is on South Carolina’s side.  The Supreme Court has already ruled in favor of a voter ID law in Indiana, and the Justice Department in the last administration upheld Georgia’s voter ID law which is the same as South Carolina’s.

The issue of voter ID laws drives the Left into spastic tantrums.  The completely bogus claim that voter ID laws equal a return to “Jim Crow” is wailed from the rooftops.  They have no legitimate argument against this common-sense protection of our elections, so they, as always, resort to the flimsiest of lies and false accusations to defend their indefensible position.  The Left, as a chorus, takes up the worn-out chant of “racist discrimination” in the hopes of drowning out the voices of truth.

One typical example of lunatic, leftist lying comes from a writer at the Daily Kos.  In reporting on a Heritage Foundation article by Hans von Spakovsky, whom he calls a “joker,” the author wraps up his column with this gem of leftist “logic,”

“The shorter version: Spakovsky’s claims are [BS]. Suppression of the votes of vulnerable citizens—the poor, the elderly, students, historically discriminated against people of color—is an ongoing, relentless campaign of right wingers. If one thing doesn’t work, they try another. Attorney Gen. Holder has justifiably slipped a stick into their spokes. It’s no surprise to hear them squealing about it.”

So, what does this Daily Kook writer regard as “squealing” by Mr. von Spakovsky?  Let’s take a look at a few parts of Mr. von Spakovsky’s well-written Heritage Foundation report,

“Attorney General Eric Holder put a lump of coal in South Carolina’s Christmas stocking on Dec. 23 when he objected to the state’s new voter ID law. By ignoring inconvenient facts and clear legal precedent, Holder showed once again that politics and ideology—not the rule of law—drive his law enforcement decisions. Given the power of the Justice Department and its potential for abuse, this should worry all Americans, particularly when that abuse has the potential to affect the outcome of next year’s election.

… This new ID requirement is a common-sense reform that can easily be met by voters regardless of their race, ethnicity, or economic status. However, South Carolina is one of the few states still covered under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, a civil rights-era law that requires the state to get ‘preclearance’ of any voting change from the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division at the U.S. Justice Department or a federal court in the District of Columbia. Section 5 was originally passed in 1965 as a five-year emergency provision to remedy widespread, systematic discrimination in the South. Yet it has been frequently renewed—most recently in 2006—even though the official discrimination it was intended to stop has long since disappeared except for isolated incidents.

South Carolina made the grievous error of submitting the state’s new voter ID law to the Justice Department for review, rather than going straight to federal court where it would get an impartial hearing. The history of this Justice Department over the past three years, from the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case to the refusal to defend the Defense of Marriage Act, has been one in which raw politics and ideology are driving law enforcement decisions.

… DOJ apparently wants to prevent common-sense election reforms—which are supported by an overwhelming majority of Americans and would help guarantee the security and integrity of the election process—from being in place for next year’s election. This objection reveals both the character of this Attorney General and the lengths to which he is willing to go to abuse the power and authority of the federal government in order to meet the political demands of the Left.” 

I suppose that to those on the communist Left, that sounds like the ravings of a madman, but to those of us who love America and want to preserve our Constitution, our freedoms and the nation as founded, those are words of plain truth.

An ironic idea occurs to me.  If voter ID laws were enacted in all states, it is likely that overall voter turnout would be lower, mainly on the Democrat side, of course.  That is simply the result of all those dead and otherwise illegal voters not being able to cast their lawless Democrat votes.  In the event of a lower voter turnout, you can take it to the bank that the Left would screech, “See?!  We told you minorities would be prevented from voting!  Look at the lower turnout of Democrat votes!”  Liberalism is not nearly as popular as the Left would have us believe, and they know darned well that without their fraudulent votes, they would have a much harder time gaining and keeping power.

Dead voters remain on the voter rolls in every state.  Purging of voter rolls of dead people and otherwise ineligible voters (as in those who have moved out of the district or state) is part of what needs to happen on a very regular basis to further prevent voter fraud.  Of course, the Left fights any kind of effort to clean up the election process, and purging voter rolls is another thing the Left detests. 

For that matter, those on the Left routinely claim that election fraud does not even occur, this despite the fact that it most certainly does.  Mr. von Spakovsky, in a column at National Review had this to say about the spurious claims by the Left,

“Once you get past the race-baiting, you will find that opponents of voter ID generally rely on two arguments, equally specious: 1) There is no need for photo ID, because there is no voter fraud in the United States; 2) This is a deliberate effort to suppress the turnout of minority voters, who often don’t have photo ID. Liberals keep repeating these false claims despite the fact that they have been disproved both in the courtroom and at the polling place.

The claim that there is no voter fraud in the U.S. is patently ridiculous, given our rich and unfortunate history of it. As the U.S. Supreme Court said when it upheld Indiana’s photo-ID law in 2008, ‘Flagrant examples of such fraud . . . have been documented throughout this Nation’s history by respected historians and journalists.’ The liberal groups that fought Indiana’s law didn’t have much luck with liberal justice John Paul Stevens, who wrote the 6–3 decision. Before being named to the Supreme Court, Justice Stevens practiced law in Chicago, a hotbed of electoral malfeasance.” 

Yes, election fraud does occur, and Democrats desperately try to deny its existence.  After all, if it does not exist, then there is no reason to combat it, right?  Yeah, right.  I applaud South Carolina for taking this fight to court—this fight to preserve its perfectly correct voter ID law from the baseless assault by the lawless Obama “Justice” Department, a department of this administration that makes a shameful mockery of its own name.

Originally from Texas, Gina is a graduate of William Carey College in Gulfport, MS, with a Bachelor of Fine Arts. Gina currently presents an audio blog on News Radio 104.9 FM in Biloxi, MS. Her blogs can be heard twice weekly on the Kipp Gregory morning show.

The following was written by Gina Miller. Her opinions don’t necessarily reflect those of ScottFactor.com, but because they’re here, they probably do.

Barack Obama must be stopped.  Never in my life would I have dreamed that America would see a man in the United States presidency who is distinctly at odds with this country.  Never could I have imagined that an enemy of America and the American people would be wormed into the highest position of power in the free world.  At this awful point we can dispense with all niceties and undeserved respect for this man who is clearly a danger to the survival of this great nation as it was founded. 

To say that he is a communist enemy of America is not only correct, but it may even be an understatement.  Communism draws all power to a central government, commandeers the means of production, industry, business—all of the private sector comes under the iron-fisted, micro-managing rule of “central planners.”  The freedom of the people is squashed.  That is exactly what Obama is about, and he is already far down the road of forcing a communist “utopia” on America. 

Anyone who can not or will not see the menace that Obama is can only be described as ignorant at best and a fellow traveler at worst.  The Obama administration’s egregious shredding of the Constitution goes on unchecked, so my question is who will stop Obama?  Who has the courage to put this despicable man on the road to impeachment?  It is well past time that he is reined in, but to our dismay, we do not see anyone in a position of power willing to give this man anything more than tepid criticism, if any criticism at all.

Last week really took the cake.  The seemingly endless list of outrages committed by Obama and his buddies in the administration and Justice Department continues to grow longer by the day.  And now we see more clearly than ever that this man has no regard for the limits placed on his power by the Constitution.  This man is behaving as a dictator.  I have a newsflash for Barack Obama.  America does not have dictators, and we the people will not stand for it.  But, what can we do?  Ten months until November is a terribly long time to wait to get this dangerous criminal out of our White House, and Heaven help us if we have to see what he will do as a lame duck president between November and next January!

What we saw last week was one of the most flagrantly illegal moves Obama has made.  He made four recess appointments when the Senate was not in recess.  This man believes he can do what he likes and get away with it.  As of now, I do not see how he will not get away with it, since our Congress seems to be made up of a hoard of shrinking violets.  It is maddening to know that he should be impeached, but we do not see those with the power to impeach him even hinting that they will do so.

Obama illegally appointed former Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray to a newly created governmental department—as if we need yet another level of bureaucratic power over the people—the so-called Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.  As usual with tyrannical government regimes, the name of this new bureaucracy is deceptive.  It is nothing more than yet another intrusive government power grab over private sector finance-related businesses, ostensibly tasked with enforcing consumer finance laws for the benefit of the people.  What it will do instead is gather even more power over the private sector into the hands of government central planners and cost private businesses even more money to be in “compliance” with their definition of “fairness.”

As Vice-President for Policy of Americans for Prosperity, Phil Kerpen, had to say in a column at Fox News,

“The CFPB has the power to interfere with every consumer financial transaction in the economy. It is housed in the Federal Reserve and funded out of Fed operations, not congressional appropriations, avoiding effective congressional oversight.

All power is vested in one individual – now, presumably Cordray – with no board or commission.  None of this was part of Elizabeth Warren’s original design, which included a five-member commission that was funded and overseen by Congress.  Senate Republicans have correctly called for reforms to make the new agency accountable before confirming a nominee and allowing it to begin writing rules that could have a major negative impact on the economy.

Obama doesn’t care.  He’s making [this] up as he goes along.”

The other non-recess recess appointments are three people to the National Labor Relations Board.  In a different column which was published at the Daily Caller, Phil Kerpen wrote,

“Obama’s tightly choreographed media blitz around the historic non-recess appointment of Richard Cordray was designed to disguise a reckless, lawless and unconstitutional action — a purported ‘recess appointment’ while the Senate is clearly still in session — into a virtuous, bold move. And to the president’s far-left supporters, surely it will be seen as just that.

But another special interest in the Democrats’ corner was served later in the day, more quietly. Union bosses won a big victory when the president made even more outrageous non-recess appointments to pack the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with union lawyers. That action deserves the same scrutiny as the Cordray move, if not more.

Republicans never obstructed the two Democrats Obama installed on the NLRB. They couldn’t have even if they wanted to; Obama only named them as nominees on December 15, less than three weeks before he made the move. The nominees never even filed the normal paperwork with the Senate Health, Education, Labor, & Pensions (HELP) Committee. They didn’t undergo background checks. They didn’t submit questionnaires. They didn’t meet with a single Senate Republican.” 

Alan Caruba, writing at Right Face, had strong words about Obama’s illegal behavior.  In a column titled, “Barack Machiavelli,” Mr. Caruba lays it on the line as he writes,

“The Founding Fathers, authors of the Constitution, were obsessed with any form of government that could become too powerful, too willing to use force to oppress citizens. They had cause. They had fought a long war against the greatest power of their age, ruled by a king with nearly absolute power. They fashioned an instrument designed to ensure that the President could not rule by edict and defused power among three branches of government.

We have a President currently running for reelection against Congress, Wall Street, Republicans, and the right of citizens to be free of an overly intrusive government.

Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution says: All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in the Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

All appointments of the President must be approved by the Senate while it is in session and the Senate, even over the Christmas and New Year’s vacation has remained in session, if only in a pro forma, technical manner. Every three days it has been convened to assert its powers.

Even so, President Obama has announced several ‘recess’ appointments, all clearly a challenge to the Senate and all clearly a tyrannical power grab. He appointed Richard Cordray as the first director of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a new function that puts government between the lender and the citizen. In theory, all loans in the future will be subject to government approval. This is Communism, not Capitalism.

In addition, he appointed three members to the National Labor Relations Board, intended to arbitrate disputes between unions and corporations. None of them have appeared before a Senate committee for vetting. It was this board that demanded Boeing shut down its new factory in South Carolina, one of many ‘right to work’ states that empower workers with the right to determine whether they want to join a union or not.

Neither Obama, nor any president who preceded him can make appointments without the ‘advice and consent’ of the Senate. (Article II, Section 2). As recently as the first week of the year, referring to the Senate, Obama asserted that ‘I have an obligation as President to do what I can without them.’ He has no such obligation. Those are the words of an incipient tyrant.”

Barack Obama is at war with the United States Constitution and the American people.  It is imperative that those in power begin the process of removing Obama from the presidency.  Do not tell me this can not be done.  Obama is a clear and present danger to our great Republic, and his traitorous actions have shown beyond a doubt that he has no business in the highest office in our land.  He belongs in prison where his criminal actions merit his presence.

Impeach Obama now!

Originally from Texas, Gina is a graduate of William Carey College in Gulfport, MS, with a Bachelor of Fine Arts. Gina currently presents an audio blog on News Radio 104.9 FM in Biloxi, MS. Her blogs can be heard twice weekly on the Kipp Gregory morning show.

The following was written by Gina Miller. Her opinions don’t necessarily reflect those of ScottFactor.com, but because they’re here, they probably do.

For a couple of months now I have been watching with dread the progress of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA).  The legislation is, as usual, an extremely long, wordy piece of government legalese that takes careful reading to even get an idea of what it contains as the law of the land.   The legislation has 565 pages that would take quite a long time to read and decipher.

The two specific sections which have caused great alarm across our nation and across the political spectrum from left to right are those that deal with U.S. military detention of terror suspects.  You have likely heard that what we now face is the prospect of the President of the United States having full authority to detain American citizens in military custody indefinitely, without trial or representation, if the American citizen is accused of being involved with al-Qaeda, the Taliban or “related forces.”

Apologists for the law argue that the law does not apply to American citizens, but a careful reading and dissection of the wording of the two sections says the opposite.  We also have the words of Barack Obama himself as he signed this piece of legislative tyranny into law on New Years Eve.  In his signing statement, he said,

“Moreover, I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a Nation.”

It would break our most important “traditions” and “values” as a nation?  How about the fact that it would break the laws of our nation in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, schmuck?!  Further, why would he even say this if the legislation did not give him the power to detain American citizens indefinitely and without trial, a power which—by the way—he already has?  Even more, since when is this traitor-in-chief a man who does not lie on a regular basis?  This legislation actually expands the definition of who can be detained, as I will show.

There are plenty of analyses of this tyrannical legislation being published now, and one is by Mike Adams of the Natural News website.  He takes a hard line against anyone who does not apply logical thinking when approaching the meaning of this legislation.  Last Sunday, he wrote,

“In the aftermath of the signing of the NDAA by the traitorous President Obama, some citizens remain completely hoodwinked by the language of the bill, running around the internet screaming that the law ‘does not apply to American citizens.’

This is, naturally, part of the side effect of having such a dumbed-down education system where people can’t even parse the English language anymore. If you read the bill and understand what it says, it clearly offers absolutely no protections of U.S. citizens. In fact, it affirms that Americans are subjected to indefinite detainment under ‘existing authorities.’

Let’s parse it intelligently, shall we?”

He goes on to do just that by dissecting the wording in the law and demonstrating that it does not, in fact, exclude or protect American citizens.  Later in the piece he writes,

“Get this through your heads, folks: to properly understand the NDAA (or any other bill), you have to learn to think like lawyers and tyrants.

They don’t just put language right out in plain view that says, ‘Americans may never be arrested or detained without due process.’ Instead, they create a web of legalese statements that are cross-referenced, paraphrased and specifically engineered to obfuscate their intended purpose. This is designed to hide their true intentions, not to make them clear.

Furthermore, if the bill actually intended to protect Americans from the NDAA, then it should have contained language saying something like, ‘American citizens are specifically excluded from all the provisions of this bill, in its entirety.’

I’ll bet anyone a thousand dollars they won’t find language like that in the bill. Because it doesn’t exist! And the reason it doesn’t exist is because the NDAA is clearly intended to apply to American citizens.

The writers of the bill have managed to fool a lot of everyday people who seem unable to parse language and read plain English with any depth of understanding. That is as much a failure of America’s public education system as anything else. I find it astonishing that today’s citizens can’t even read and understand the grammatical structure of sentences written in plain English. This alone is a highly disturbing subject that must be addressed another day. For now, it’s enough just to realize that the NDAA really does apply to you, me, and all our neighbors and friends. In signing it, Obama has cemented his place in history as the enabler of government-sponsored mass murder of its own citizens.”

He pulls no punches, does he? 

Hosea’s words from the Lord really hit home nowadays:  My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.  Of course the knowledge Hosea was speaking of is the knowledge of the Lord and through the Lord, but we can loosely apply the importance of awareness and knowledge in general when assessing the actions and motives of our budding communist dictatorship in Washington.

Each new day of this communist Democrat administration confirms our deepest suspicions about the nature of the leftist radicals who run it.  Barack Obama (or whatever his name is) is a tyrant who does not give a rip about the rule of law or the limitations placed on the Executive Branch of our government.  He routinely, illegally bypasses congressional authority to dictate his wishes, or the wishes of his handlers, whoever they may be.  Just yesterday, he announced he will skirt the Senate and make a recess appointment of Richard Cordray to a newly created, so-called “consumer protection” bureaucracy.  The creation of this new agency and the appointment of Cordray are strongly opposed by many in the government and the private sector, but that’s another story.

As for the issue at hand, yes this administration is setting the table for a feast of tyranny.  You may have seen the rumor emails with links to videos and articles about the secretive FEMA camps in every state and the government’s job-recruiting ads for positions to staff the camps in the event that American citizens are “displaced” due to unspecified disasters and must be housed in these camps.  Just do an Internet search for “FEMA camps US,” and your blood will run cold as you peruse the results.

Regarding NDAA, some people may say that the law only applies to members of al-Qaeda, the Taliban or other “related” people.  But, if you actually look at the wording of the legislation, the definition is much broader than that and could easily be interpreted to apply to most anyone.  Here is a relevant passage from the NDAA of who they are targeting,

“A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.”

As you can see, it is not limited to al-Qaeda and the Taliban.  The military could argue that any number of us have committed a “belligerent act.”  Heck, most of these radio blog broadcasts of mine could be considered quite belligerent by this Marxist administration!

You may also remember shortly after Obama usurped office that the manly Janet Napolitano secretly issued a law enforcement memorandum warning of the danger of so-called “rightwing extremism.”  What does that include?  According to the leftist loons under Napolitano, it could include pretty much any conservative.  If you are against abortion, are a returning military veteran, or oppose federal government overreach, you could be considered an enemy of the state!

Mike Adams, in his column at Natural News, laid the chilling facts on the line as he wrote,

“So then, you might be wondering, ‘What kinds of activities could get me accused of being involved in supporting terrorism?’

And here’s the kicker, because all the following activities could cause you to be arrested, detained, interrogated and even murdered all under U.S. law, thanks to Obama:

• Criticizing the federal government.

• Using cash to purchase things.

• Storing food and medical supplies.

• Owning a firearm and storing ammunition.

• Standing still and minding your own business near a government building.

• Writing something down on a piece of paper near a government building.

• Using a pair of binoculars.

• Protesting for animal rights in front of a medical lab.

• Protesting your government (or Wall Street).

• Requesting to take more than a couple thousand dollars out of your bank account in cash.

You see, under existing authority, you could be labeled a ‘terror suspect’ for engaging in any of these activities, and then LEGALLY arrested, detained, interrogated or even killed by the U.S. government, all under Obama’s authority (or whatever next President takes over in Washington and perhaps does far worse things with that power…)

You are already enemy combatants, folks. The NDAA does absolutely nothing to protect you from its provisions. In fact, it openly states that it does not limit existing authorities — authorities which already claim the right to subject you to indefinite military detention merely for being ’suspected’ of involvement with ‘terrorism,’ which could be interpreted to apply in practically any situation.”

If I wanted to be smarty-pants-glib, I could say, “Be afraid.  Be very afraid,” but I know that God’s Word tells us to cast off the spirit of fear, to not give in to it.  I am reporting this to you so you will be aware and informed of what we face in our nation.  The fact is that we are watching our country being taken over by a stealth, communist dictatorship, and our freedoms and liberties will continue to disappear unless we can remove from power those communist Democrats and RINO Republicans who stand against the American people.  The temptation to despair is a powerful one, but those of us who know the Lord understand that these last days will only grow darker as the time ticks down to the Lord’s return, and we must not lose heart but must stand firm until the end.

We should not be surprised to see our nation reaping the harvest of decades of godlessness in our government, institutions and society.  For too long, Christians have stood by silently sleeping as the cancerous minions of hell have set up their power network.  Thankfully, many Americans, Christian and otherwise, are now fully awake and engaged.  We must work like never before if we have any hope at all of pushing back the communist enemies within America.

Originally from Texas, Gina is a graduate of William Carey College in Gulfport, MS, with a Bachelor of Fine Arts. Gina currently presents an audio blog on News Radio 104.9 FM in Biloxi, MS. Her blogs can be heard twice weekly on the Kipp Gregory morning show.