Post Scripts

Posted by Tina

The White House has posted the complete text of the Presidents recent speech at the U.N.

The speech stands as a complete embarrassment for America from my perspective.

I post this link so that you may read it and comment if you are so inclined.

Posted by Tina

This is disturbing on so many levels…where to begin!

Fox News reports the contents of an email sent from William Dorland, the director of the Honors College at the University of Maryland. After a welcoming sentence to new and returning students Dorland’d email becomes a political rant:

“This year, we learned that it is legal to hunt down and kill American children in Florida,” it reads, in a reference to the trial of George Zimmerman, who was cleared of all charges in the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. The email went out to all students in the Honors College.

The political language continued:

“This year, the most activist Supreme Court in the history of the United States and radical factions of gun owners, gun manufacturers, and marijuana users are challenging the very fabric of the nation…”

Dorland then invites students to attend a lecture by former NAACP chairman Julian Bond.

The email comes on the heels of a host of allegations of bias on college campuses around the country this fall — from a case at UNC Chapel Hill in which funding was cut for two conservative speakers to appear on campus, to an incident at the University of Kansas, where a professor said he hoped the next shooting victims would be children of NRA members.

Disgraceful…unprofessional…adolescent…dangerous!

by Jack

This is a local hot button topic and it deserves to be aired, but it’s not to judge the officers. This is only to clear up any confusion or misunderstanding the public may have over exactly when an officer can (and should) use deadly force.

To recap this story from the news and a police spokesperson, Chico police received a late night report of someone tampering with vehicles off E. 8th Steet. They responded and observed a vehicle attempting to flee the scene. During the pursuit and attempt to stop the vehicle the fleeing driver took evasive action, failing to yield and at some point losing control, striking a utility pole, then she backed up and attempted to drive away. As officers attempted to approach the vehicle the driver accelerated and swerved towards an officer in an apparent attempt to run him down. It was clear to officers at the scene the driver was making a deliberate attempt to hit the officer and as a result they simultaneous fired an the driver. This was deadly force used in an attempt to save the life of a fellow officer.

As it turned out the driver was a 19 year old female that had a history clashes with the law. She was driving a stolen vehicle and is believed to have been in the process of stealing another vehicle when police arrived at the scene.

The US Supreme Court limited the use deadly force back in 1985 when the reversed the fleeing felon rule. “Where a suspect poses no immediate threat to the officer and no threat to others, the harm resulting from failing to apprehend him does not justify the use of deadly force to do so,” Justice Byron R. White wrote for the court.

In this case the police are saying, a life was immediate danger because the driver was attempting to run over a police officer.

There’s no question that such a deliberate action is likely to cause great bodily harm or death.

The litmus test in California on the use of deadly force by police or private citizens is simeply, whenever a prudent person has a right to believe they are in danger of great bodily harm and/or death or that another is in danger of great bodily harm and/or death, then the use of deadly force is lawful. Anything less than that is technically unlawful.

The burden of proof now falls on police to show that this shooting meets the guidelines for a good shoot.

The Shooting Team: This of course will involve all evidence at the scene, such as, but not limited to, shell casings, photographic evidence, bullet holes and bullet trajectories, and eventually the relevant items will be put on a crime scene diagram. This will help show the positions of officers at the moment of the shooting in relationship to the deceased and all other relevant data will be noted, including the toxicology reports on the deceased as well as all officers who fired their weapon. This diagram may also note the lighting and the weather conditions or it will be on a seperate report. The witness statements will be taken and evaluated against the evidence, the photos, the diagram and officer statements. This takes a lot of time, but if it all matches reasonably well, the shooting team will issue their findings.

It’s typical that the Sheriff’s Office or some combination of area law enforcement conduct an officer involved shooting investigation. Investigation generally falls on the coronor’s office, which is part of the Sheriff’s Office, but it’s not unusual to have a multi-agency response team. However, whenever there is a conflict of interest this part could be handed over to the Dept. of Justice team in Sacramento.

At this early stage of the investigation the public should simply be aware there is a process and they should understand the law. It’s premature to make a definitive judgement call, but we hold that officers ought to be treated the same respect as anyone else, that they are innocent of wrong doing until proven otherwise.

Posted by Tina

Obama had the audacity to say it out loud. His intention was to fundamentally transform the United States of America. But the truth is that has been the exact intention of the Marxist that made the Democrat Party their venue of participation in American politics for seventy years. They bring with them the desire to make America a socialist state wherein the government has ultimate control of all sectors of life…education, energy, healthcare, retirement, food production, manufacturing, even leisure and travel. They have already succeeded to a great degree in indoctrinating young minds in our schools but the implementation of Common Core will ensure that for future generations The United States of America will never again be the land of the free.

Hernado Today reports that education has been controlled at the state level but that language in Common Core would change that to create national standards that include moral and civic indoctrination:

…This program would nationalize education against the constitutional provisions that prescribe this responsibility to the states. The founders realized that giving the function of educating citizens to the federal government would eventually be used politically, to mold the minds of children by defining moral values and beliefs of the populace while enlarging their power.

Control at the local level means that parents can be part of the decision making about how students are taught. An example of federal extremism being foisted on children is noted in the article above:

In Skoke, Ill., fourth-grade classes were taught on work sheet lessons that government is equal to the family, according to the lesson. It sets the rules and takes care of people’s needs such as food, education and health. There have been other schools using students to sing the praise of our current president, preaching acceptance of previously perverted behavior and reciting collectivist slogans to convince students that government exists to take care of them.

Morality should be taught in the home. Our country has always respected the differences in moral standards that our citizens hold and managed at the same time to recognize those differences while establishing tolerance in the schools through the use of the golden rule. This program would replace parents as the ultimate moral authority in their children’s lives and make government controlled schools that authority:

CCSS expedites the process of making government schools a vehicle for propagandizing students. The centralized government would be able to “teach” moral relativism, fairness, political correctness, multiculturalism, tolerance for the progressive agenda and bigotry for the traditional moral values. These Marxist/progressive concepts are changing the culture to welfare dependency.

Citizens with school aged children who object to Marxist indoctrination should consider home schooling or one of the alternatives to public education. If that is not an option make your objections known at the local level. Freedom loving parents, parents who want their children to learn to think for themselves and want to maintain the authority for teaching moral values at home, should know that parents across the nation are winning this fight at the local level.

Whether you currently have children in school or not you do have a dog in this fight. Our beloved country will never be the same if we allow this final takeover of education by radical Marxists education activists to exist as the only educational option for young minds. The fight continues on many levels and in many ways. It is imperative that we keep the flame of liberty alive by preserving the ideal of independent thought in whatever way that we can.

Posted by Tina

One of the biggest scandals of all time is not being reported by the same media that gave itself kudos for bringing down a President just a few decades ago over something a lot less destructive to our nation. Watergate was nothing compared to the IRS making itself a politically supportive agency for the sitting president.

The Christian Science Monitor highlights examples:

“Washington Post columnists accused Tea Party groups of ‘smolder[ing] with anger’ [Colbert King] and practicing a brand of patriotism reminiscent of the Ku Klux Klan [Courtland Milloy],” the memo states. “Another Post columnist opined in late March 2010 that Tea Party rhetoric ‘is calibrated not to inform but to incite’ [Eugene Robinson]. In April 2010, Reuters tied the Tea Party movement to ‘America’s season of rage and fear.'”

The idea that the IRS did the President’s political bidding by proxy has been widely ridiculed by the left, but the idea lives on among conservative critics, who have long chided what they see as Obama’s bully presidency, where friends are rewarded and enemies punished.

“Mr. Obama didn’t need to pick up the phone. All he needed to do was exactly what he did do, in full view, for three years: Publicly suggest that conservative political groups were engaged in nefarious deeds; publicly call out by name political opponents whom he’d like to see harassed; and publicly have his party pressure the IRS to take action,” Ms. Noonan said on “Meet the Press” back in May, as the scandal was breaking.

Americans who believe in freedom would do well to withdraw support from leftist media as well as controlling communitarian politicians who operate by the Marxist credo…the end justifies the means.