Cathy Keim – Page 3

Islam: A totalitarian ideology spreading destruction globally

By Cathy Keim

Enough about Islam being a religion of peace. Islam means submission, not peace. Islam is a totalitarian ideology that demands that all people be brought into submission to Sharia, the immutable law handed down from Allah to Mohammed. Mohammed is the perfect man and all Muslims look to him as their example in every area of their lives.

Our Western elites pretend that they understand Islam better than the adherents to Islam. They lecture us on how this religion of peace is not the reason for the terror attacks even as the jihadists scream “Allahu Akbar,” which translates to “Allah is Greater.”

At this very moment, while survivors of the jihadist terror bombings in Belgium are still screaming in their pain and the families of the dead are crying in their sorrow, our brilliant elites continue to castigate anyone who says stop the influx of Muslims into this country as bigots and stupid.

We are bringing in our own destruction. Every country that has tried to coexist with Islam has eventually become an Islamic country or has fought a bloody war to cast them out. It may take years and generations, but countries like Turkey that were Christian eventually became Muslim and stamped out the last few Christians with episodes like the Armenian genocide. Spain fought for 770 years to oust the Moors from the Iberian Peninsula.

Instead of listening to our elites, it is time for them to listen to Americans who are concerned that our country, founded on our Judeo-Christian heritage, is being sabotaged from within by the increasing number of Muslims being brought in as refugees, students, family reunification schemes, lottery visas, and simply overstaying their tourist visas.

The FBI is overwhelmed with the need to monitor so many people that are legally in our country. They know that ISIS is working to radicalize Muslims that are already here, as well as slipping jihadists in amongst the refugees.

Here is a simple plan: stop bringing in Muslims. Since we cannot know which ones are of a jihadist persuasion or will become radicalized, then just don’t bring any Muslims into the country.

This is not as “radical” a concept as it might sound at first. As stated previously, Muslims are expected to support sharia. Sharia is incompatible with our Constitution. Sharia does not allow for freedom of speech, freedom of religion, equality of women, equality of people that are not Muslims, and on and on. We should not be bringing into our country people who cannot assimilate because their core beliefs are antithetical to our core beliefs.

Sadly, our elites are convinced that our core beliefs do not matter and are not worth defending anymore. If you try to defend the Constitution, then you are mocked as stupid, racist, and the worst insult of all: a patriotic jingoist.

However, we can go back to World War II to see that our country knew how to face down a totalitarian ideology not that long ago. The Nazis were a supremacist ideology that taught that the Aryan race was superior and all others were inferior. The USA had no problem identifying this horrific ideology as worth defeating completely. Nazism was named and defeated.

Then came the Cold War against communism. Once again, the USA named communism as the evil that it is and fought to contain it and eventually we saw the Berlin Wall come down.

Communism was not as thoroughly defeated as Nazism was, though, so the communist threat lives on in countries like China and Cuba and continues to spread its false promises in Central and South America.

Indeed, we have the Democratic Party presidential nomination contest being fought between Bernie Sanders, an avowed socialist who honeymooned in the USSR, and Hillary Clinton, a radical progressive. When you study their positions, you cannot find a hair breadth’s difference between them and communist ideology.

It would seem that the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave has become the Land of the Entitled and the Home of the Blind.

The Progressives (Communists) have a long history of deception and using other groups to achieve their means. At the moment, it seems that the Progressives have joined hands with the Muslims to weaken America from within. Hillary Clinton’s top aide, Huma Abedin, has worked for Islamic organizations that promote Islamic ideology. Her parents moved to Saudi Arabia when she was a child. Her father is deceased, but her mother still teaches at an Islamic Women’s College in Saudi Arabia and her brother is in Islamic leadership in London.

If we elect Hillary Clinton as our president, we will be installing Huma Abedin at the right hand of power, just as she was while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State.

The rioters that are currently disrupting Donald Trump’s political rallies consist of anarchists, Black Lives Matter, Islamic groups that are supporting the Black Lives Matter movement, La Raza, and other disaffected troublemakers.

We have imported the seeds of our own destruction in the form of La Raza which means the Race. The more militant of the Hispanic activists use the motto: “For the race, everything, outside the race, nothing.” Unite that toxic brew with Black Lives Matter and now add in the Islamic groups that are joining ranks and you have a completely anti-American mix of racial supremacy and grievances boiling over. Never mind that their ideologies would have them at each other’s throats if they ever came to power. For now, like all good Communist pawns, they will work together to disrupt and fray the American fabric even more.

Sadly, they cannot see that the uniting principles of the American experiment were to bring all people together through the God given rights of Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Any person embracing the American principles can assimilate and become an American, but people that refuse to embrace these principles and who seek to destroy them and replace them with totalitarian ideologies have no place in this country.

At this time, we need to stand for our principles and defend our country by placing a moratorium on immigration. Let us work together to assimilate the millions of immigrants that we have accepted in the last fifty years. Let us embrace our national heritage and work to ease the mounting tensions fed by the race baiting tactics and economic disruptions foisted upon us by our “leaders” who use these lies to manipulate us while they stay in power.

It will take time and effort to wrench back our institutions from the elites who despise us and our American principles. The first step is to be willing to state the facts instead of being shut down by the fear of being called a racist, bigoted jingoist.

Start reading history and learn your facts. Do not be cowed by the media and the elites. Closing our borders to assimilate our current immigrants is perfectly legal and constitutional. Continuing to overwhelm our society with indiscriminate immigration, both legal and illegal, is what is anti-American.

Immigration: where are the Cinderella Men?

By Cathy Keim

Editor’s note: This piece began life as a comment to the Refugee Resettlement Watch blog which eventually became a post there. Cathy has taken this opportunity to revise and extend her remarks, adding it to her occasional series on immigration.

The (slightly reworked) title comes from Refugee Resettlement Watch‘s Ann Corcoran.

When I talk to people about the hit that American citizens are taking by companies hiring immigrants, both legal and illegal, they always come back with the statement that the American citizens do not want to work, have a poor work ethic, are not dependable, etc. My guess is that this might well be the case because we have paid people to not work, making it an option with no stigma attached.

In the past, it was terrible to be on welfare or unemployment. Remember the movie “Cinderella Man”? The lead character, heavyweight boxing champion James J. Braddock, returned to the government office and paid back the welfare money when he could finally earn enough money to feed his family. That was during the Great Depression less than one hundred years ago.

My fear is that the government has done such a good job of destroying the working class family by introducing welfare which required that the man not be in the household that we now have a deeply embedded culture of single parent families, drifting children, and no concept of a work ethic. The result is employers using the lack of work ethic as an excuse to not hire Americans, but to go for hard-working foreigners.

Remember that the employers have tax benefits involved in hiring foreigners. Also, the foreigners cannot argue with the employer because if they lose their job, then they must go home if they are here on the H-1B or H-2B visas. If they are illegal, they have no recourse. This makes for a diligent, compliant workforce.

The employer doesn’t have to pay higher wages, so the taxpayer picks up the additional social costs due to low-paying jobs. The schools have to educate in many languages, the hospital ER takes care of the sick, and subsidized housing is swamped. The costs of absorbing huge numbers of foreign workers are not small.

When a school system has to hire scores of ESL teachers to handle the influx of non-English speaking children, the taxpayer is paying for that. When the hospital has to hire translators to be able to understand their patients, then the citizen absorbs that cost. When the city zoning codes are overwhelmed with twenty or more unrelated people living in a house, then the neighborhood suffers. When remittances are sent back to the homeland to the tune of millions of dollars, then our economy suffers.

When Mexico and other countries send us their poorest, they remove the pressure to improve their own society by exporting their problems to us.

In addition to all of these problems, the local community suffers the double hit of paying unemployment/welfare to their own citizens and all the social costs associated with reducing people to a dependent class.

The employer pockets the extra earnings gained by paying lower wages and collecting tax benefits. In the case of hiring refugees, the employer gets to feel good about himself for helping people fleeing oppression. Perhaps some of our employers should try to feel good about helping fellow Americans have a job that will enable them to break out of the cycle of dependence.

We can thank our elites in DC for the many bad decisions that have led to this disaster that has taken several generations to reach its current epic proportions. A final blow is that the lack of worth that comes with being a non-working dependent class leads to additional social problems.

My hypothesis is that the current heroin epidemic that the government is trying to stem can be linked back to the broken family and jobless lifestyle of our formerly working-class citizens. I know that heroin is ravaging children from all classes, but it is particularly bad on the people that have no hope and see no way out.

Being hungry is a powerful motivator to work. Our Pilgrim forefathers tried to use the community approach when they first arrived in the New World. They almost starved. Once they switched to each family having their own land and raising their own crops, they were much more successful.

I realize that the switch to using our own citizens to work instead of being unemployed would be a painful transition for the employers and the employed. The government would have to remove itself from the process and let people in the local community work this out.

The minimum wage laws forced upon us by the government reduce the entry-level jobs that teenagers once used to learn how to work. In fact, we are going to lose more fast food entry-level jobs as the industry moves to automated ordering to bypass the minimum wage laws.

The H-2B visa workers have reduced the summer jobs for our teens. Something as simple as starting school after Labor Day weekend could enable more teens to fill the summer job needs of the tourist industry.

We have sedentary teens that could use some lawn work to build muscle and slim down. Instead, we import foreigners to cut grass.

The short-term benefits are obviously working as we increase our visa limits and bring in more refugees, despite not being able to vet them for safety issues. But what are the long term issues?

We should be preaching the joys of independence, not depending on the government to support us. We should be encouraging our youth to work hard rather than think that college is going to provide a cushy job. That expensive degree is more likely to be a weight around their neck due to the loans they took out than to help them have access to a good job.

The need for limited government intervention is never more obvious than in our current skewed employment numbers. Crony capitalism is not free enterprise. The UN choosing refugees for us and big business depending on cheap labor that is essentially a new form of indentured servitude is not what America needs.

The easy fix of importing cheap labor may seem like a good idea, but the price we are paying as a nation is not cheap and not easy. It is time for a moratorium on immigration across the board while we sort out these issues.

A coalition of agitators

By Cathy Keim

The cancelled Trump rally in Chicago last week has caused many people to worry about what lies ahead in the months leading up to the Presidential election. As one friend put it, “It has that 1968 feeling.”

For their part, Cleveland police are preparing for a contentious GOP convention:

Both parties’ conventions are eligible for $50 million in federal spending for event safety. The news website Cleveland.com reported that the city’s police will call on suburban forces to boost staffing to about 5,000.

(snip)

City officials on March 9 opened bidding for the purchase of 2,000 sets of riot-control gear, including batons, upper-body and arm protectors, shin guards and reinforced gloves.

A look at Craigslist job ads in Cleveland today showed this interesting new employment opportunity:

Cleveland screen shot

That sounds like somebody in Cleveland is getting ready for political action.

Next we have Breitbart’s Aaron Klein reporting on “Democracy Spring”:

With little fanfare and almost no news media attention, some of the same radical groups involved in shutting down Donald Trump’s Chicago rally last week are plotting a mass civil disobedience movement to begin next month.

Klein adds that “the group is backed by numerous organizations, including the George Soros-funded groups MoveOn.org, the Institute for Policy Studies, and Demos.” The Democratic Socialists of America and the AFL-CIO also support the group.

In addition, CAIR and other Muslim Brotherhood affiliated groups are jumping on the bandwagon by pledging to join Black Lives Matter, Hispanics, and other people of color. Watch this video clip to see Khalilah Sabra, the Executive Director and Project Developer for Muslim American Society Immigrant Justice Center, ask the audience why can’t we have that revolution in America?

The protests that started with the Occupy movement morphed into the Black Lives Matter protests in Ferguson, Missouri. Now we are seeing protests coalescing around the Trump rallies. While Donald Trump has been more vocal in his comments about immigration than other candidates, it is probably his position as front runner that is adding to the attention he is receiving. If Cruz is able to grab the lead from Trump, I believe that the protests would just shift to Cruz rallies. Indeed, no matter who wins the position of Republican candidate for President at the convention in Cleveland, he will be faced with ongoing protests as long as the groups feel that it is worth their while to stir up trouble.

Sheriff David Clarke of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, makes the case that:

Friday night in Chicago, at the site of the Donald Trump rally, we were awakened to what America will be like if we continue to kowtow to the radicalized left and their violent intimidation tactics to shut down Constitutionally protected speech. Theirs is not a protest movement. It is pure anarchy.

Please read his whole piece as it is right on target with what we need to do to stand our ground. The protestors in Chicago were jubilant when they succeeded in shutting down the Trump rally. It is not surprising that many of the protestors were students from the University of Illinois at Chicago on whose campus the rally was scheduled to be held.

Haven’t the students at universities across the nation been shutting down guest speakers that they disagreed with by screaming and interrupting them until they gave up trying to give their speech? Even better, they have protested and successfully forced their college administrators to cancel the speakers before they could even get on campus.

Our First Amendment rights to free speech have already been seriously curtailed on colleges across the country. The students at elite universities have to have safe spaces where they are protected from hearing anything that might upset them.

Political correctness is causing people to self-censor for fear of retribution or social alienation (shunning). If that is not sufficient, then there are also classes offered by employers to re-educate the employees into the correct attitudes. If an employee is sufficiently contrary, they can be forced into anger management remediation to help them overcome their anti-social behavior.

The most violently enforced censorship is that of sharia where a joke about Mohammed can result in your execution. While we are not at that point in the USA, there are plenty of groups pushing for speech codes about all things Muslim.

Our right to freedom of speech is only there if we continue to exercise it. Sheriff Clarke adds:

Law-abiding Americans must not and cannot back down to these freedom-squashing goons. It is time for all of us to understand just what our enemies want to achieve – chaos and fear — and to rally around the fundamental truths of the Constitution.

Get ready for a long, hot campaign season. Brace yourself for what is coming. The anarchists, CAIR, unions, Black Lives Matter, and assorted other groups will not back down unless forced to do so. If we equivocate and wobble, then the next step to losing our freedom of speech will be taken.

David Horowitz explains:

Battles over rights and other issues, according to Alinsky, should never be seen as more than occasions to advance the real agenda, which is the accumulation of power and resources in radical hands. Power is the all-consuming goal of Alinsky’s politics. This focus on power was illustrated by an anecdote recounted in a New Republic article that appeared during Obama’s presidential campaign: “When Alinsky would ask new students why they wanted to organize, they would invariably respond with selfless bromides about wanting to help others. Alinsky would then scream back at them that there was a one-word answer: ‘You want to organize for power!'” In Rules for Radicals, Alinsky wrote: “From the moment an organizer enters a community, he lives, dreams, eats, breathes, sleeps only one thing, and that is to build the mass power base of what he calls the army.” The issue is never the issue. The issue is always building the army. The issue is always the revolution.

We had better get this concept in our minds, because our opponents most certainly have.

The chicken wars

By Cathy Keim

Your worldview shapes how you see everything about you, and a great deal of that is shaped by your parents and the times in which they lived. I do not think it’s unfair to say that for older Americans our baseline assumptions about animals, food, and farms were less idealized than today’s vision of the family farm – particularly as much of the population had a rural background. My father grew up plowing behind mules and was eager to get away from the hard work by becoming a civil engineer. His mother told of plucking feathers from geese and chickens to make pillows. She was hilarious in her description of how mean the geese were and how they scared her when she was little. She also explained that during the Depression the only food they had to eat some days was what they got from her garden. There was genuine food insecurity in the everyday lives of average Americans less than one hundred years ago.

Since those days the explosion of technology has propelled the farmer into a world where the mule is replaced by mechanized equipment and the actual crops are genetically modified to produce many times the yield that my grandmother would have expected. Gone are the chickens pecking in her backyard for bugs, replaced by the much-maligned concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO). Where she enjoyed a Sunday dinner of a tiny chicken that took weeks to mature, we now have massive chickens weighing in at 8 pounds or more after a few weeks in a CAFO.

Americans have been so blessed with abundant food and are so far removed from the actual process of producing their food that we have begun to see a number of trends that are only possible due to our blessed abundance.

The demand for organic fruits and vegetables, locally sourced produce, heirloom tomatoes, and free range beef and chicken is all well and good for a financially independent society. However, a vast number of Americans with less financial flexibility are quite pleased to obtain their food at the local megastore at lower prices made possible by those terrifying “factory” farming methods.

It is rather amusing to see the same progressive crowd that is demanding that global warming deniers be shut up for their “anti-science” beliefs are the same progressives pushing to shut down the science-intensive, high-tech “factory” farms. The progressives loudly proclaim themselves to be the defender of science against the barbarians, i.e. conservatives. However, in the case of farming, they appear to be the ones who want us to retreat to archaic farming methods.

They show the same cognitive disconnect that the animal rights zealots exhibit. Their claims are correct, no matter the evidence against them, and other people are wrong. (They often dismiss the evidence as being bought and paid for by the agricultural mega-corporations, such as ADM or Monsanto. In their minds only the activists have pure motives.) Both groups ascribe to the time-tested progressive method of push as far as you can to achieve your goal, making any temporary alliances you need to succeed, drop back if the goal is unachievable, and then attack again at the next opportunity.

Thus we arrive at the current Chicken Wars on the Eastern Shore. Family farms are redefined as factory farms, which has a connotation better suited to rouse the troops. The new chicken houses that are being proposed are larger than older chicken houses. This is due to several reasons.

Maryland is a highly regulated state and those regulations cause people to change their behavior. Due to stormwater regulations, it may now be more advantageous to build several very large chicken houses together. Consider the local case of proposed chicken houses outside Salisbury, which is raising the ire of local neighbors and environmentalists:

The family considered permitting the two farms separately, (owner spokesman Basit) Zulfiqar said. But that would have doubled the amount of mandated stormwater structures and buffers areas, reducing the number of buildings they could put on the property.

Also, the demand to reduce the use of antibiotics in the poultry industry results in the need for additional space per chicken, thus larger chicken houses. Farmers, whether the family that lives down the lane or a person that is investing their life savings into their new venture, have to make a profit or they go out of business just like everybody else. You can be sure that farmers are looking to maximize their production and minimize their risk just like every other businessman, so if it is in their best interest to build larger chicken houses they will.

Their choice as to how to run their business on their own property and to feed hungry people in the process has been recast into a horror story of wicked businessmen abusing chickens in warehouses and polluting the earth. It is not to any farmer’s benefit to pollute his own property, nor is it beneficial for him to raise chickens in an environment that would not ensure the best growth with the best outcome.

Why are some groups so eager to impugn farmers with evil motives? Could it be that there is a larger agenda?

Progressives are infamous for using people to achieve their goals. In this case, the families that are protesting the building of the new chicken houses near their property are helping the progressives in their agenda. These families are using whatever “data” they can get to declare their concern for the paleochannel, their children’s health, and so forth. This really comes down to the “not in my back yard” argument dressed in the best clothes they can find.

Rather than grasping at these arguments, perhaps they should reflect on their decision to live next to zoned farmland. If we remove all farmland from use because somebody builds a house next to it, then we have two choices: we make people move into the city core, or we starve. Either of these two choices are in line with the progressive plans.

Take a look at Agenda 21 approved by the United Nations and our own elites and you will find that all the current rage to build in the city core so that no citizens will need a car is really the beginning of insisting that all citizens live in the city core and cannot have a car. Only those deemed worthy of having their own transportation, such as government workers, will be allowed to.

The push for organic sustainable farming works into their plans also since they wish to decrease the world’s population significantly. If we turn back from using the GMO crops we will rapidly revert back to the food insecurity that is not such a distant memory.

But back to the Eastern Shore Chicken Wars of today. For those who believe that this is only about stopping mega-sized chicken houses next to family houses, just think back to the unsuccessful but prolonged attack on the Hudson family and their farm a few years ago. The same entities that are joining in this attack were there to drag the Hudson family through the mud for years.

Kathy Phillips and the Assateague Coastal Trust, John Groutt and the Wicomico Environmental Trust, and others will continue to agitate against farmers on the Eastern Shore even after this incident is settled.

Take some time to look at the principles involved and find out the facts rather than depending on the emotional arguments being presented. There will be an informational meeting on March 22, 2016, at 6pm at the Wicomico Youth and Civic Center. Radical Green will be there – will you?

Report: immigrant share outstripping population growth

A fascinating study from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) came across my e-mail the other day.

We all know there has been a massive influx of immigrants (both legal and illegal) in recent decades, but the numbers CIS reports are astounding: approximately 61 million immigrants and their young American-born children now live in the United States. Of that group, 45 million are legal immigrants and their children.

CIS took the data set back to 1970 to find that the share of immigrants and their children in this country has increased from 13 million to 61 million in that timeframe. As a percentage of population, this group has surged from 6.6% to 18.9%, although you may notice CIS concedes there may be an undercount in the number of immigrants.

While CIS has valid reasoning to exclude more recent census counts (because they did not ask about place of birth), 1970 is also a good demarcation line because it came shortly after the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 went into effect. Prior to that, immigration had been limited for four decades so the 1970 census was the nadir for immigrants’ share of the population.

A key cultural difference, however, seems to permeate the most recent wave of immigration. My ancestors came over in the late 19th century, along with millions of others, in order to better their lives with the opportunities America provided for them. But they also chose to be part of a “melting pot” where, if the initial immigrants didn’t assimilate, their children were eager to conform with American culture.

Now we have more of what is described as a “salad bowl” mentality where we are supposed to honor whatever culture comes along – good, bad, or indifferent. This more recent wave of immigrants, at least anecdotally, is content to live as they did in the old country and raise their children as foreigners. Granted, American culture still has its pull but as time goes on we seem to be losing that which makes us exceptional.

CIS asks a number of valid questions:

While the national debate has focused on illegal immigration, the enormous impact of immigration is largely the result of those brought in legally. These numbers raise profound questions that are seldom asked: What number of immigrants can be assimilated? What is the absorption capacity of our nation’s schools, health care system, infrastructure, and, perhaps most importantly, its labor market? What is the impact on the environment and quality of life from significantly increasing the nation’s population size and density? With some 45 million legal immigrants and their young children already here, should we continue to admit a million new legal permanent immigrants every year?

It’s a series of questions that can’t just be answered with a wall, whether Mexico pays for it or not. Border security can be part of the solution, but 40% to 50% of the illegal immigrants had permission to be here initially – they chose to overstay their visas. That’s a challenge a wall won’t address.

My cohort Cathy Keim proposed a pause on immigration last year, which would address some of the problem. Although her point was more with bringing a halt to Syrian refugees and accepting student visas from particular nations, hopefully the mess that is the current system will be among the first things addressed by a new administration.

America is, as always, a welcoming nation. But it’s up to those who come here not to wear out their welcome by insisting that things be just like where they came from – otherwise, what was the point in coming here?

Small bits of good news in evil times

By Cathy Keim

It is great to receive good news when the Maryland General Assembly is in session. Too often one opens the morning emails to find a call to arms to fight off the newest horror that our Delegates and Senators are perpetrating on us. So it was with great pleasure that I read this announcement from Maryland Against Physician Assisted Suicide:

We had to share this exciting news with you as soon as we could. Today, the physician assisted suicide bill, SB418, was withdrawn from consideration by its lead Senate sponsor, Sen. Ron Young. Sen. Young stated that he didn’t believe the bill had enough support in the Senate Judicial Proceedings committee to pass, and he’d rather withdraw it than have it voted down.

This bill was cross-filed with HB404, sponsored by Delegate Shane Pendergrass, so there is still a small (but unlikely) possibility that it could proceed from the House side. Sadly, it can be assumed that the bill will be reintroduced again next year since the progressives never, never give up no matter how bad the idea.

In fact, the Washington Post reports that:

Kim Callinan, chief program officer for the advocacy group Compassion & Choices, said her organization will continue to push for passage of such legislation in Maryland and elsewhere. “From our experience, it takes multiple times,” she said. “This is not uncommon.”

Compassion and Choices was formerly known as the Hemlock Society. You have to give the progressive groups credit for advancing their cause by changing their language to fit the times.

Nor was this their first bite at the apple. I covered the issue last year when it was called Death with Dignity. This year they tweaked the bill and called it the End of Life Option Act. We will just have to wait and see what new name it appears under next year.

I took the time to watch the committee hearings for the House bill a couple of weeks ago and wanted to mention some thoughts I had on the newest attempt to push the Culture of Death in Maryland. First of all, the many citizens that came to testify against the bill were articulate, compassionate, and informed. They included doctors, nurses, pharmacists, caregivers, social workers, and family members.

Advocates for the disabled made a particularly poignant argument for not passing this bill because people with intellectual and developmental disabilities are already discriminated against by the quality of life argument.

“Not Dead Yet, The Resistance, is a national, grassroots disability rights group that opposes legalization of assisted suicide and euthanasia as deadly forms of discrimination.” I found them while reading up on the issues. I do not know if they participated in the testimony at the Maryland hearings, but their website is a great resource for information and facts such as:

Although intractable pain has been emphasized as the primary reason for enacting assisted suicide laws, the top five reasons Oregon doctors actually report for issuing lethal prescriptions are the “loss of autonomy” (89.9%), “less able to engage in activities” (87.4%), “loss of dignity” (83.8%), “loss of control of bodily functions” (58.7%) and “feelings of being a burden”(38.3%). (Death With Dignity Act Annual Reports, PDF download) These are disability issues.

Many people are so afraid of being disabled that they would rather kill themselves than suffer the ignominy of being disabled. However, their demand for death puts all disabled people at risk. Once it is deemed acceptable to kill people to end their suffering – since poor quality of life is considered suffering – then all disabled people are one step closer to being denied care and the ultimate form of discrimination: euthanasia.

I have generally thought about life issues in term of Judeo-Christian ethics, which are more than sufficient for me to oppose abortion, suicide, assisted suicide, and euthanasia. The concept of Imago Dei, that we are formed in the image of God, which gave us the basis for our Declaration of Independence and the foundation of our whole system of government based on the God-given rights of the individual, is what I base my principles on.

However, in this present age of post-Christian thought, it is not bad to have some principled arguments from others that come alongside the Church to make the stand for life to an unbelieving culture.

One moment of the testimony that I found revealing was when a physician who works with elderly patients and helped craft the Maryland patient rights law told the Delegates that HB404 was poorly crafted and would cause many problems legally and ethically if they passed it. The Delegate who was questioning him declared that they had taken a lot of time and care to write the bill. Despite his testimony pointing out flaws, she was unwilling to admit that there might be problems in the offing should the bill pass.

The hubris of this Delegate was a picture of what we are up against when our politicians get together for ninety days to wreak havoc on our state to please their advocacy groups. Their lack of understanding of the basic issues at hand is readily evident and their lack of concern for what the laws will unleash is disconcerting. Single party dominance of our state has not enhanced our legislative experiences.

The second piece of good news that I saw this week concerns SB868 which would require that all students have three doses of the HPV vaccine prior to entering ninth grade. Senator Shirley Nathan-Pulliam, the sponsor, pulled the bill after receiving more information about the vaccine.

The American Academy of Pediatricians stated in January:

It has recently come to the attention of the College that one of the recommended vaccines could possibly be associated with the very rare but serious condition of premature ovarian failure (POF), also known as premature menopause.

They call for additional testing to be done to ensure the safety of the vaccine.

This bill is also cross filed with HB1178. I called Delegate Angela Angel’s office to inquire if she would pull her bill also. Her office responded that there was discussion between the bill sponsors to decide what to do. The hearing is currently scheduled for March 10, so we will have to continue to watch that bill.

Just a word on the inconsistencies of the human mind. It is in vogue to eat hormone free meat and to avoid all sorts of food that is deemed not healthy, but at the same time we push young women to be on hormonal birth control and try to mandate that all students be vaccinated against human papilloma virus (HPV).

No one questions whether it is healthy for our girls to be on hormonal birth control for years, but you won’t eat a chicken breast from a chicken that is fed hormones?

Furthermore, while HPV is a sexually transmitted disease that does cause cancer, young people can avoid sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy by not having sex! Perhaps we need to spend more time teaching our youth about the dangers of promiscuous sex rather than subjecting them to hormone manipulation and vaccines which may cause premature menopause.

Editor’s note: In verifying the websites (as I always do to check the links) I read what Cathy sent and then found this from the Patients Rights Action Fund:

Maryland – This week assisted suicide proponents withdrew legislation noting to the Associated Press, “it became clear the measure did not have enough votes…” The bill author further mentioned that it is unlikely a new bill will be reintroduced next year due to the strong opposition. The Maryland Senate includes 35 Democrats and only 12 Republicans, and the House of Delegates holds 98 Democrats and 43 Republicans. (Emphasis mine.)

So we will see if they keep to their word or try it again under yet another name. They could also be saving it to make it an election-year issue in 2018.

Adding another voice

Ask and you shall receive.

You might recall that I said in my latest odds and ends piece:

Finally, if there were a third person I would like to add to monoblogue (at least on a weekly basis) it’s this lady.

“This lady” is energy columnist and commentator Marita Noon, and beginning next week she will indeed be a third voice for monoblogue. Right now the plan is for me to run her weekly columns in this Thursday morning timeslot.

When I brought Cathy Keim on board last year, I did so with the hope to increase the number of posts and readers. The situation changed when I began working again full-time so I’m definitely not complaining about having Cathy in the fold – she has been a Godsend in terms of keeping this website full of daily content and even covering some events I couldn’t get to. Moreover, Cathy brings a passion and expertise in several key conservative areas such as immigration and abortion – she makes the site more well-rounded since I focus on different areas of the political world such as legislation and electoral races and prospects.

In that same way, I expect Marita to bring a very similar perspective to mine when it comes to energy issues. She understands that using the resources we were blessed with is one ticket to the prosperity we’re able to achieve in a capitalist system. Yet rather than just an armchair quarterback like me she’s a recognized expert in the field, so she will be a valuable contributor to monoblogue. I’ve dabbled in the arena for awhile, but I thought Noon could make some definite improvements in making energy more of a staple topic here.

I’m going to quote her short bio from the website called Energy Makes America Great. (I’m certainly sure it helps.)

Marita Noon is the executive director for Energy Makes America Great Inc. and the companion educational organization, the Citizens’ Alliance for Responsible Energy (CARE). Together they work to educate the public and influence policy makers regarding energy, its role in freedom, and the American way of life. Combining energy, news, politics, and the environment through public events, speaking engagements, and media, the organizations’ combined efforts have made Marita “America’s voice for energy.”

Marita is also a columnist for Breitbart.com and a regular contributor to many online commentary sites including The American Spectator, RedState.com, Canada Free Press and NetRight Daily. Additionally her writing can be found in numerous newspapers and websites. (Next week this one will be included.)

Yet there’s also a sneaky reason I’m putting her on Thursday – come April, I will have a website that can grab two very diverse audiences that aren’t necessarily nuts-and-bolts political observers. Marita will come along in the morning and my Shorebird of the Week will return for the evenings. Since I write SotW on Wednesday nights for Thursday posting, I have a free day to work on other things – I’m not promising anything, but maybe there’s a book for the post-Trump world in the making. So We May Breathe Free just begs for a sequel.

So I hope you’re looking forward to the addition as much as I am.

Exploiting the weakest link

By Cathy Keim

Michael and I have both written about the Planned Parenthood (PP) undercover videos that showed that PP was selling baby body parts for profit. At first it seemed that the sheer horror of the videos might spur our politicians to defund PP, but that soon fizzled when Democrats blocked it. The Republicans punted since nothing is worth the risk of shutting down our government, not even the dehumanizing practice of selling baby parts.

Instead, David Daleiden and another pro-life activist, Sandra Merritt, who were posing as buyers of fetal tissue in the undercover investigative videos, were indicted by a Texas grand jury for this spurious offense:

(O)ne felony related to tampering with a governmental record and a misdemeanor count related to buying human tissue. The felony charge was in reference to the use of a fake ID. If convicted, Daleiden faces 20 years in prison while Planned Parenthood officials face no legal consequences for their actions.

So how can Daleiden be charged for pretending to buy fetal tissue, but Planned Parenthood is not charged when they clearly admit on the videos that not only do they sell fetal tissue, but that they alter the abortion procedures to obtain more valuable baby parts?

Pro-life groups, led by Senior Vice President of Operation Rescue Cheryl Sullenger, are asking that a special prosecutor be appointed to investigate because:

“There is now a pattern in Houston of District Attorney Devon Anderson’s office covering up abortion-related crimes,” she told LifeNews.

“In 2013, another Anderson-controlled grand jury failed to indict Houston abortionist Douglas Karpen, who was accused by three of his former employees of murdering babies born alive during shoddy late-term abortions by twisting their heads or slashing their throats. Photographic evidence provided to me showed injuries to large aborted babies that was consistent with those claims. Operation Rescue has good reason to believe that evidence was never presented to that grand jury,” Sullenger explained.

In addition, Lauren Reeder, a prosecutor in the Harris County District Attorney’s office, has been identified as “a non-compensated ‘Director’ on the 990 Tax Form for 2014 filed by Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast,” according to Steven Ertelt, writing at LifeNews.com.

While it has not been verified whether Reeder participated in the case, it still shows a potential bias in the department.

Finally, it was revealed that attorney Chip Lewis, who represented Houston abortionist Douglas Karpen before the grand jury, donated more than $25,000 to District Attorney Anderson’s re-election campaign.

I will certainly be keeping an eye on this investigation and perhaps the voters in Harris County, Texas, might want to consider voting out Anderson the next time they have a chance.

But what can we do in the meantime? I am glad you asked because I received this email today from Eric Scheidler, one of the organizers of Protest PP, which explains the “weak link” in the abortion industry.

Among the hundreds of hours of undercover footage that David Daleidan and his team released last summer, there was one bit of footage that didn’t get the publicity it deserved. At a National Abortion Federation conference in 2013, abortion provider Renee Chelian was caught on tape discussing the problem of disposing of aborted babies’ bodies. Chelian told the story of how her abortion facility was thrown into disarray when she lost her contract with a medical waste company. She tried everything to dispose of the remains of the babies she was killing, including duping a pet crematory to burn them up. At one point she had 5 months worth of fetal remains in rented freezers! Her takeaway? “We are all one incinerator away, or one incinerator company away from being closed.”

Created Equal, a pro-life group, noticed this weak link and decided to set up #ProjectWeakLink aimed at targeting the waste removal companies that are hired by Planned Parenthood facilities across the nation. The project is starting with Stericycle, the major medical waste service provider for PP. You can go here and sign the petition asking Stericycle to stop working with PP.

Created Equal is also asking that you contact Stericycle CEO Charles Alutto and tell them to stop disposing of medical waste for Planned Parenthood. You can reach Alutto at 847-607-2004 or calutto@stericycle.com.

I had a phone call from a young lady at Created Equal and she also requested that if anyone is near a Planned Parenthood facility and they see a medical waste truck on site, to please take a picture of the truck and send it to Created Equal along with the date and location as they are trying to find out who else is servicing Planned Parenthood facilities.

The culture of death is unrelenting its attack on life, but we can take positive action to resist. Pray for David Daleiden, Sandra Merritt, and their lawyers as they prepare their defense against these charges. Take part in #ProjectWeakLink, and pray that hearts will be changed and lives saved as abortion is exposed for the great evil that it is.

What is The Donald’s attraction?

By Cathy Keim

Editor’s note: Since I had my say on Trump yesterday Cathy decided to follow up.

I think that a lot of people are missing a primary reason many voters are flocking to Donald Trump’s Presidential campaign. They’re concerned about immigration, but not just illegal immigration as in Mexicans and Central Americans flooding our southern border. They also seek answers on legal immigration.

Our country has been bringing in immigrants legally in huge numbers from primarily Muslim countries for years. There are 57 Muslim states in the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), but every time there is a clash and Muslims “need” to be resettled, they are directed not to another OIC country where they could be expected to fit in more easily, but to the West, and by the largest numbers to America.

I have written on the Refugee Resettlement program and its problems, highlighted most recently by the Syrian refugee issues, but that is only one of the vast array of immigration vehicles that our government has been using to flood our country with Muslim immigrants. There are student visas, work visas, tourist visas and the lottery system.

The USA does not have an exit visa tracking system. Once the immigrants arrive, even if it is supposedly only for a ninety-day tourist visit or as a student, no one ever checks to see if they leave!

According to this Breitbart summary of a report from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS):

Overall, the report notes, immigrants made up 13.3 percent of the population in the U.S. in 2014, the highest percentage in more than a century. CIS compared that level to immigrants’ 6.2 percent share of the population in 1980. The Census Bureau projects that the immigrant share of the population will reach its highest level in history in 2023, at 14.8 percent and continue to increase through 2060 if current admissions levels continue.

(snip)

As of 2010, the countries of origin with the highest percentage increase in the number of immigrants in the U.S. were Saudi Arabia, which saw an increase of 93 percent. Bangladeshi immigrants increased 37 percent, Iraqi increased 36 percent, Egypt was up 25 percent and Pakistan, India, and Ethiopia all increased by 24 percent.

The immigrant population is over 42.4 million people out of about 322 million Americans according to best estimates. People are seeing this in their local communities and their schools. Americans are not xenophobic or racists, but they are concerned about the changing landscape around them. The social costs of bringing in so many people so rapidly are staggering.

Many of these immigrants are from Third World countries and are not equipped to function in a modern society. The stress that this causes for the immigrant families and for the community where they live is enormous. Instead of honestly looking at the problems associated with the rapid rate of immigration without time or effort to assimilate them, the elites just label anyone who questions the influx as racist.

Further, most of the immigrants are from countries that have big government and would be heavily inclined to vote for more of the same. This fact makes them an attractive demographic for the Democrats who are building their bloc of “safe” votes while preening publicly as the “nice people” who are concerned for the downtrodden.

The Republicans are no less guilty in keeping the numbers up as they bring in cheap labor, but they are less insightful as they are undermining their own voting base. They are not called the Stupid Party for nothing.

So where does Donald Trump come in?

For all his shrill rhetoric, I have no idea whether Donald Trump will actually do anything about legal or illegal immigration because I have no confidence that anybody can be sure what he will do if elected. He is not running on principles, but on his fame as a celebrity. However, he is the only candidate to bring up the immigration issue initially. If he had not done so, then it would not have been the topic of discussion that it has been.

Trump has addressed directly the problem of Muslim immigration:

“Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what the hell is going on,” he said, adding the word “hell” for emphasis this time.

I believe that this is the primary reason that many of his supporters are going to stick with him no matter how many reckless or crude statements he makes. If you understand the concept of civilizational jihad by hijra, then you just may decide the Donald is worth taking a risk on since he is the only one that is willing to touch the problem.

Monica Crowley writes:

Hijra is a core part of jihad going back to the Prophet Muhammad that involves Islamic conquest through migration. The objective is to overwhelm non-Muslim territories with Muslim populations until they achieve domination through sheer numbers. No weapons necessary — until they gain enough control.

She continues regarding the flood of people arriving in Europe:

Let’s be clear: Some of them may be fleeing war and persecution, but most are not. In fact, only about 10 percent of the new arrivals are from Syria; the other 90 percent are from elsewhere in the Middle East, North Africa and countries like Pakistan and Indonesia who are using the European Union’s open doors-open borders policy to reach the West for social welfare and the longer-term goal of spreading Islam.

The USA has been bringing in floods of people from Muslim countries with no thought to the practice of hijra. Instead of restricting Muslim immigration after 9/11, we have opened the floodgates.

Many thoughtful people see this as cultural suicide and they are willing to risk the Donald to stop this from happening. I acknowledge that this is not the only reason people are supporting Trump, but it is the reason why some exceedingly thoughtful, intelligent people are choosing him.

Next time you speak to a politician about immigration do not let them get away with the meme: Illegal immigration bad/legal immigration good. This is a cheap and easy way to dodge the difficult issues that face our country. Our leaders need to get serious about the problems that are before us and are growing larger with each new immigrant that arrives, whether Muslim or not. If they are not coming here because they want to share in the ideas that made us Americans, then perhaps they should not come.

If immigrants want to come for civilizational jihad or for our generous welfare benefits, then why should we allow that? America is a great country because of the ideas that it was founded upon: Liberty and freedom as God-given rights. We cannot continue to be America if we do not embrace these principles. A desire for big government benefits or for sharia law are not consistent with our Constitution.

Alas, that is why we are in trouble, not just with a potential Trump presidency, but also because half of our population is considering a full-blown socialist candidate in Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton due to their desire for big government.

But that will have to be dealt with in another post.

Senate candidate Wallace speaks before Somerset audience

By Cathy Keim

Editor’s note: While inclement weather kept U.S. Senate hopeful Dave Wallace from making his formal announcement in Salisbury, nicer weather on Saturday allowed him to make an appearance before the Somerset County GOP in Princess Anne. Apprentice reporter Cathy made the trip down there to hear what the candidate had to say.

I was all set to attend the Dave Wallace Announcement Tour event at Salisbury University last Wednesday, but it was cancelled due to bad weather. Instead, I was invited to the Somerset Republican Club breakfast last Saturday morning in Princess Anne where Wallace was one of the guest speakers.

With fourteen Republican candidates for the open Senate seat, ten Democrats running, and the six Green/Libertarian/unaffiliated candidates, there are plenty of choices for every voter. Without the state board’s list I certainly could not name all the candidates and few of them will run a credible campaign putting them in any position to survive their respective primaries.

Since I had not heard of Dave Wallace and there are only ten weeks until the primary election, I was a bit skeptical about whether he was running a serious campaign. In fact, I challenged him on this when we chatted after the event. He noted that he has been working hard on the campaign even though he was just making the public announcement. It was unfortunate that the weather interfered with the announcement tour, he continued, but he didn’t want any campaign workers injured due to the weather as happened to the Ben Carson campaign in Iowa.

Wallace is an enthusiastic speaker and was happy to share his views on many topics. Since the first guests were Sheriff Ronnie Howard and Lt. Patrick Metzger, the Maryland State Police Commander for the Princess Anne Barracks, Wallace began his talk with a nod to law enforcement, in particular the loss of two Harford County Sheriff’s deputies last Wednesday. He quickly moved to the horrific murder rate in Baltimore and to the war that Congressman Chris Van Hollen and President Obama are reputedly waging on law enforcement.

Wallace repeatedly attacked Congressman Van Hollen’s record, which perplexed me at first since he must survive the primary to earn the privilege of facing off against Van Hollen – assuming he wins on the Democratic side. However, this was cleared up when he told me that he had run against Van Hollen for the Eighth Congressional District in the last election. Despite the gerrymandered district, Wallace was able to garner 39% of the votes against the incumbent. (Editor’s note: Wallace carried Carroll and Frederick counties handily but lost by nearly 3 to 1 in Montgomery County, where the majority of the voters reside. Prior to 2010, the Eighth District was almost exclusively in Montgomery County with the Carroll and Frederick portions in the Sixth District, then represented by Republican Roscoe Bartlett.)

As a business owner, Wallace appreciates the burdens that are placed on businesses in Maryland. He is for reducing the regulations that are strangling businesses, for cutting taxes, and reducing government.

He believes in God, family, and the Second Amendment right to defend oneself. He is pro-life and would defund Planned Parenthood. Speaking on immigration, he supports Governor Hogan’s request to not bring any refugees to Maryland that cannot be vetted, backs building a border fence, and would support stopping the practice of granting birthright citizenship to anchor babies.

If you are hoping for a Republican to take the White House and turn back our country from the transformational changes that President Obama is ramming down our throats, then you must also consider which Congressmen and Senators you want to send to Washington to have that new President’s back. If a strong Constitutionalist like Ted Cruz were to win the Oval Office, the question is whether he will be stymied by the incumbent GOP members pf Congress who hate Cruz passionately and would rather maintain the status quo.

The desire for change that is roiling GOP primaries must also extend to the House and Senate races if there is any chance for success in turning our country back from the brink.

Iowa and New Hampshire have already handed first place to Ted Cruz and Donald Trump, respectively, both of whom are loathed by the Republican establishment. This same establishment seems oblivious to the fury that is boiling over in many of their constituents. Just remember that not only do conservatives need a change in the White House, but there must be a change in the “go along to get along” incumbents – or in the case of the Senate race, the open seat cries out for someone who is Constitutionally solid.

Dave Wallace seemed to be a sincere, well-informed Senate candidate with experience in campaigning. Many of his positions are laid out at his website for you to decide for yourself.

(Editor’s note: no endorsement is given or implied by Cathy. That’s my job.)

Draft our daughters: political correctness strikes again

By Cathy Keim

Our elitist politicians show once again why so many Americans are rejecting their cries to “follow me.” At the New Hampshire debate last Saturday night, three Republican candidates for president, Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, and (the now withdrawn) Chris Christie, happily jumped into the PC-constructed world of equality for women by declaring they would support making it mandatory for women to register for the draft.

The other candidates were not asked to respond to that question and only Ted Cruz came out with a statement addressing it after the fact. From Politico:

“I have to admit, as I was sitting there listening to that conversation, my reaction was, ‘Are you guys nuts?'” Cruz said Sunday, speaking at a town hall here. “Listen, we have had enough with political correctness, especially in the military. Political correctness is dangerous. And the idea that we would draft our daughters to forcibly bring them into the military and put them in close combat, I think is wrong, it is immoral, and if I am president, we ain’t doing it.”

No one under sixty years of age has been subjected to the draft, as it has not been used since 1973, so the politicians have the comfort of not having the result of their imprudent statements coming home to haunt them too soon. But do we really want our daughters being forced to register for the draft?

Our mad dash for equality has pushed us over the edge. Our military has been badgered into opening combat roles to women because a few women feel they are being denied their opportunity for advancement in the military. Yet when they have tried to find women that can perform equally with men, the experiment has failed miserably.

Political correctness is staring reality in the face and PC is winning. Just as Bruce Jenner is not a woman, no matter how much makeup or surgery he may submit to, neither are women warriors in the mold of men. While some individual women may outperform some individual men in feats of physical prowess, as a general rule men are far stronger and bigger than women across the board.

PC has made it difficult for people to state the obvious. A man is immediately called a misogynist and a female is condemned to “a special place in hell” for not supporting women. But we must not be deterred from speaking the truth in the face of these lies – remember that the lies only work if we self-censor and refuse to speak the truth from fear of being labeled with the slur of the day.

We must return to some fundamental truths to be able to decide what must be done about our military and draft policies. The feminist movement has been trying for decades to make men and women equal. However, their criteria are incorrect because they are trying to make us equal as in being identical. While we are all created equal before God in that we are created in His image, we are not the same.

Men and women have different roles to play as evidenced by the fact that only women bear children. The current emphasis on transgender identities is just the latest attack on identity and roles in society. I will agree that there are instances where it can work for the man to stay at home with the children and the woman to be the breadwinner – that is their privilege to decide how they will live their lives. However, for the government to decide for every woman in America that she will register for the draft with the implicit possibility that she might be forced to join the military and serve in combat is a whole different category.

In the past women were excluded from registering with the Selective Service because they were excluded from serving in combat roles. That restriction, though, came to an end back in December, 2015:

In a historic transformation of the American military, Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter said on Thursday that the Pentagon would open all combat jobs to women.

“There will be no exceptions,” Mr. Carter said at a news conference. He added, “They’ll be allowed to drive tanks, fire mortars and lead infantry soldiers into combat. They’ll be able to serve as Army Rangers and Green Berets, Navy SEALs, Marine Corps infantry, Air Force parajumpers and everything else that was previously open only to men.”

This is the result of the Obama administration’s order to integrate the military within three years. The obvious next step will be to insist that women sign up for the draft – hence the question at the presidential debate.

These Republican candidates that are vying to lead the party missed an opportunity to clearly state why the policy to enforce gender neutrality in the military is wrong. They caved to the pressure to appeal to women voters by saying they believed in equality, but they should have pointed out that equality doesn’t mean being exactly the same.

If men and women were the same we would not have male and female competitions in sports. When money speaks, as in the world of professional football, baseball, and basketball, the fake equality falls away and men are hired by how fast they can run, how far they can throw, and how hard they can hit. Women are not hired because they cannot produce the same results. (Editor: Note that the one major professional sports league for women, the WNBA, has their brief season during the off-season for the NBA rather than competing directly.)

Now ask yourself why we are putting women in combat in trucks where they cannot lift the tires to change them, where they cannot carry a fellow soldier to safety if needed, and where the need to carry a 100-pound backpack could slow them down and endanger everybody?

The fact that women have stayed behind while the men went to war has never meant that women are weaker. Indeed, they have shouldered the responsibilities of maintaining the home front, raising the children, and praying for their loved ones on the battle field. They have dealt with losing husbands, fathers, and sons. They have coped with the adjustments from their injured loved ones returning from war.

The difference in roles doesn’t mean that women are weak and men are strong, but means that women and men have their strengths in different areas. We have been forced to swallow “fairness and equality” for so long that we are unable to see what is obvious.

The politicians that want to lead us should be bold enough to state the obvious rather than falling all over themselves to be politically correct.

The Smigiel 2A townhall

By Cathy Keim

Editor’s note: While I was off on my honeymoon, Cathy Keim took the lead and attended Congressional challenger Mike Smigiel’s Second Amendment townhall meeting Saturday. She filed this report on the proceedings.

I dropped by the 2A Townhall on Saturday, February 6, at Headquarters Live here in Salisbury. Former Delegate Mike Smigiel, who is running for Congress as a Republican in the First Congressional district, is holding 2A Townhall meetings around the district to address the ex post facto confiscation of guns for old offenses prior to the passage of the Firearm Safety Act of 2013 (SB 281).

First to speak at the Smigiel event, though, was Justin Trader, a former Marine who now runs D. I. Strategic, LLC, here in Salisbury. “The Second Amendment is the ultimate safeguard to protect our rights,” said Trader, adding that it is not just about hunting or collecting guns; instead the amendment’s main purpose is to safeguard us from tyranny amongst us. He quoted Abraham Lincoln that the enemy which destroys America would not be from far away, but from amongst us. Justin also believed that today we are under the government that our founders warned us about.

Next up was retired Maryland State Police (MSP) Captain Jack McCauley, who was the former commander of their Licensing Division. That agency is the one which oversees background checks for firearms in the state. McCauley spoke about being asked to testify before the House Judiciary Committee about SB281 back when it was being debated in 2013. Smigiel, who was a Delegate at the time, asked him if the ban of certain guns would have an effect on crime. But when McCauley tried to answer the question, Governor O’Malley’s lawyer advised him not to. McCauley was shocked because he thought the whole purpose of his appearance was to answer questions.

The hearing erupted in arguments, but Captain McCauley did not answer the question in order to obey the direct order of an agent of the governor’s office. Later, after the hearing, the agent told him that she directed him not to answer because the bill was “not about policy – it is just votes.”

This served as the wakeup call for McCauley, who realized the Firearm Safety Act was all politics and had nothing to do with the safety of the citizens. The Governor’s office was only interested in the number of guns seized, so it really didn’t matter whether manpower was wasted doing work that would not increase safety or decrease crime.

Had McCauley answered Smigiel’s question at the committee hearing, McCauley would have answered that the law would not decrease crime at all. For one thing, the banned weapons were rarely used in crimes. Secondly, the restriction on the magazines to only ten rounds would not stop people from buying larger magazines from out of state, but would only restrict which guns and magazines could be bought in Maryland by law-abiding citizens.

The O’Malley administration was only concerned with the political capital to be gained by passing the law, continued McCauley, and not whether it was a good law or whether it would actually achieve any reduction in crime. McCauley contends that by forcing the MSP to do three background checks on every citizen that wants to buy a handgun, valuable manpower is being wasted doing paperwork instead of being out on the streets.

McCauley concluded by noting that he resigned so that he could tell the truth. It was his belief that there was only one legislator working for the people and that legislator was Mike Smigiel.

Once those two speakers set the stage, Smigiel came up to present his concerns about Maryland’s treatment of the Second Amendment. Smigiel revealed that he had come to Headquarters Live at the request of Jeremy Norton, the man who runs both that venue and Roadie Joe’s, the location of the fundraiser that followed the townhall meeting.

Mike explained that Jeremy had contacted him in response to an event which had occurred to Norton, but one which was occurring all across Maryland. As a businessman and a gun owner, Norton was given clearance to own his guns. But after SB281 was passed the MSP began checking the records for prior offenses that would not have precluded legal ownership prior to SB281’s passage, but now would affect their legal right to own a gun. Smigiel alleged that the MSP was showing up at gunowners’ homes, without warrants, and asking for their registered guns.

In Norton’s case, a juvenile conviction for selling a small amount of marijuana was enough to give the MSP reason to confiscate his guns, alleging that under SB281 he was now disqualified. However, since it was a juvenile offense, he will be eligible to reclaim his guns when he turns 30. (Isn’t that just charitable of the state of Maryland?)

This provision of the law also traps those who may have committed a crime decades ago; when the penalty changed to require a longer sentence some were suddenly retroactively determined to be unfit to possess a gun according to the state of Maryland. Needless to say, Mike is concerned that this law will lead to an unnecessary tragedy because the MSP sends plainclothes police to confiscate guns. Smigiel has spoken to Governor Hogan’s office and asked him to intervene before a tragedy occurs.

Mike has also written an article in the Maryland Bar Journal that covers the issue, where he concludes:

In light of the Doe court’s position prohibiting the ex post facto application of the law against convicted sex offenders, it is unconscionable that the Maryland State Police could continue applying gun laws, ex post facto, against citizens who are merely wishing to continue exercising their Second Amendment rights.

Jack McCauley stated in the Q&A that followed that gun confiscation schemes are ineffective in reducing crime, so why waste time harassing law abiding citizens?

Yet the whole mindset of the progressives in their battle to disarm America seems to be their pure-hearted conviction that the only way to make us safe is to disarm everybody. Facts to the contrary do not impinge upon their plans.

Once again we see that the battle for our country is waged in the hearts and minds of citizens that have opposing views of reality. The progressive supporters have embraced the propaganda that is being churned out daily by the media, the leadership, the schools, and Hollywood. Just as they will believe in global warming despite the lack of evidence, they will confiscate guns in spite of the abundance of evidence saying it will not make us safer.

While he’s actively trying to win a Congressional seat, Smigiel really didn’t speak about his campaign at the townhall meeting. But his determination to follow his principles and to fight for our Constitutional rights came through loud and clear. From his record as a Delegate, one can see that he will stand his ground if elected to Congress. Personally I have no doubt that he would continue to be a Constitutionalist despite the pressures of the lobbyists and donor class.