American Kiwi Endorses Donald Trump for President

Donald Trump could have done better in this debate. He nailed Hillary twice on her emails, but could have done it three more times very easily: (1) When she spoke of things that could be hidden in Donald's taxes (which the law does not require him to release) he could have suggested there must have been evidence of criminal behavior in the 33,000 emails she had destroyed after our House of Representatives ordered the records be preserved; (2) When she made her pitch for respect for the law, he could have questioned why she violated the Public Records Act by setting up a private email server as SECSTATE; (3) and on the question of cyber security he could have asked "How can we keep our most sensitive government secrets safe when you like to put them on unclassified networks?" However, I'm not voting for a debater, I'm voting for a president who constitutional conservatives can best expect to honor our Constitution. I see only one choice: Donald Trump.

As reported in the Washington Post, “Phyllis Schlafly, the 91-year-old icon of the conservative movement, endorsed Trump” from the very beginning saying “I think he has the courage and the energy -- you know you have to have energy for that job -- in order to bring some changes. To do what the grass roots want him to do because this is a grass-roots uprising. We’ve been following the losers for so long — now we’ve got a guy who’s going to lead us to victory.”

Mark Levin is now on the Trump Train, "I'm gonna vote for Donald Trump. I'm gonna wind up voting for Donald Trump on Election Day.”

Ted Cruz, whom I campaigned for in the Primary, has also now endorsed Trump. 

To my family and friends who say they are appalled at Trump let me offer the following rationale. We have clear evidence that the leaders of the Democrat party are waging war against our Constitution of individual liberty. I cite President Obama who, while swearing to uphold the Constitution, has made it clear that he believes it is a “seriously flawed document” because it does not give sufficient power to the federal government and he has done all in his power to run an Imperial presidency regardless of the constitutional laws of the land. I cite his attempt to circumvent immigration law and his tolerance of sanctuary cities that set at defiance our nations laws on immigration. I cite President Obama's participation in Hillary's illegal unclassified network that evaded the Public Records Act by hiding their pay-for-play system from the people's constitutional oversight. We now know from files released by the FBI last week that President Obama participated in this network using a codename. These Democrats have placed themselves above the law.  They are a law unto themselves and control the prosecutorial power that ignores their unconstitutional conduct. Therefore you and I have lost the liberty that is protected by the constitutional laws we passed - we are being governed by tyrants from the Democrat Party. That Party must be removed from the Presidency. 

While there are a number of organizations fighting to protect the Constitution, the most effective has been the conservative movement within the Republican Party. In the last few election cycles we have been able to get more conservatives into the House and into the Senate. It is crucial that we now get a Republican president to set the country back on its Constitutional footing. 

The leader that Americans have picked to fight against this Democrat Party tyranny is Donald Trump. This is where the battle is. That is where I will join the fight. Siding with Gary Johnson is like sitting on the sidelines.

To my Mormon friends, those who can’t stand Trump and have wished Romney president, I ask: why didn't Romney step into this race? When we needed his leadership where was he? Are you now going to be like the millions of conservative Christians who (in 2012) would not vote for a Mormon. By your failure to vote for Trump, you will give the election to the enemy of our Constitution, just as anti-Mormon Christians gave the election to Obama! You look for a time when the Prophet Joseph Smith said the Constitution “will hang by a thread” - surely this is that time! War is waged on our Constitution.  Don't stay on the sidelines and don't join a General who has no chance of winning the battle. It is time to make America great again. It is time to preserve the greatest gift God has bestowed on his children - liberty - and the Constitution He established to preserve that liberty.

The point is we must unite against the enemy of our Constitution. United we stand, divided we fall. God give us the strength to succeed!

South Carolina is Critical

South Carolina, we are having fun watching the Republican campaign in your State. It's clear that Trump is desperately trying to knock Bush out of the race in South Carolina. He's challenging our thinking about the Bush legacy. He is correct that 9/11 occurred during George Bush's presidency - how can you therefore say he kept us safe? He kept us safe AFTER 9/11 but key intelligence pieces leading up to 9/11 were missed such as Saudi's learning to fly but not being interested in learning how to land aircraft. 

Trump is a brash and angry construction worker off one of his many hotel projects - guys who have strong opinions and are totally frustrated with the political class and want you to know it! Trump is saying that Jeb Bush is just more of the same political elite that have screwed up the country.

Rubio is now being criticized for an Ad that has images from Canada rather than the USA. I recently sent an email to his campaign suggesting they not use the red Lower 48 symbol in their campaign imaging. It suggests that Marco is not campaigning for president of all of the United States. He is leaving out Hawaii, Alaska, and the territories. I suggested they make the "i" in Rubio the Statue of Liberty. This would portray his political views and his family history. I've had no response from them and Marco’s failure to observe and correct this is astounding.

Dr. Cason had the greatest line in the last debate. He was invited to offer another politically incorrect observation. He obliged by saying that free college will not be free but will simply put us into much greater debt, and that the cause of our economic problems is not the rich but big Federal government interference in the economy.

So how would I advise South Carolinians to vote? Since it is an open primary, Republicans, Independents, Democrats, everyone can vote! I encourage South Carolinians to vote for somebody who is not a career politician, who will represent we the people and not Special-Interests. In this regard I think of Donald Trump, and Dr. Ben Carson. Senator Cruz, by definition a politician, has clearly stood up against the Washington establishment as a representative for the people and against Special-Interest, so I also consider him an outsider. Next I ask which of these outsiders will fully support the Constitution of the United States? This will be even more critical if Obama succeeds in getting another liberal onto the Supreme Court to replace conservative Antonin Scalia - God rest his soul and comfort his family. For me the answer is Ted Cruz, followed by Dr. Ben Carson, followed by Donald Trump, followed by Marco Rubio. Marco made the mistake of siding with the establishment in the immigration debate, but otherwise he is fine. 

Ted Cruz has clearly demonstrated both qualifications as a constitutional lawyer arguing cases before the Supreme Court, and as a Senator from Texas who defied the Washington establishment. No one questions this. It is well-established. It is well known. As Rush Limbaugh says, he is the only true conservative in the field. What about the other outsiders?

Having completed Dr. Ben Carson’s book, A More Perfect Union, What we the People Can Do to Reclaim our Constitutional Liberties, it is clear that he is a Constitutionalist. A Neurosurgeon’s profession does not demonstrate a constitutional stand, but as a Presidential candidate, Dr. Carson clearly stands for the Constitution. 

The candidate I've been concerned about is Donald Trump. Is the National Review correct that he's not a conservative and perhaps a liberal in sheep's clothing? Is Jimmy Carter correct that Trump is “… completely malleable (and) … he has (no) fixed opinions that he would really go to the White House and fight for”? As CNN reported, “By contrast, Mr. Carter said, ‘Ted Cruz is not malleable. He has far right-wing policies, in my opinion, that would be pursued aggressively if and when he would become president.’” - a great endorsement for Ted Cruz.

I read Donald Trump’s book Crippled America, How to Make America Great Again, and found it very interesting. He does talk about the importance of the Constitution and he identifies the problems of a dictator-in-chief who governs by Executive Orders, and the Judicial branch legislating from the bench. 

I suspect many of you have not read Trump's book. I noted in an earlier blog that I consider his tax plan to be a great solution for us but also unconstitutional.  I agree with Dr Carson that any tax plan that has different rates of taxation for different citizens is in violation of the 14th Amendment requirement for equality under the law. Apart from that objection are there other indications he will follow the Constitution? Here are some quotes from his book that may help you determine if he will uphold the Constitution and cripple Special-Interests.

1. His “Angry Trump” book cover reflects the mood of most Americans:

“I wanted a picture where I wasn't happy, a picture that reflected the anger and unhappiness that I feel … we are not in a joyous situation … we have to go back to work to make America great again. All of us.”

2. Trump teaches us how he plays the Media to his, and our, benefit. This explained a lot for me, and why I find myself laughing at how Trump plays  the elitist mainstream media:

“I use the media the way the media uses me - to attract attention. Once I have that attention, it's up to me to use it to my advantage ... to inspire people to think that our country can get better and be great again and that we can turn things around ... I have a mutually profitable two-way relationship with the media - we give each other what we need. And now I am using that relationship to talk about the future of America.”

“Begging for attention really sums up the problem we face in this country with our media. There is such a competition that they're more interested in entertaining their audience then educating them. They like me because I help them attract more viewers. They hate me because they know I don't need them. (Is this the point he reinforced by dumping a Fox debate?) I learned a long time ago how to talk directly to the people who matter - to regular Americans who are fed up with the career politicians.”

"I always draw a large crowd of journalists who are like sharks, hoping I'll put some blood in the water.”

   I try to oblige.”

In this regard I say “Go Trump - Go!” But how will he govern? We know he is a highly successful builder, so I can assume that he will run the country well. But will be be a Constitutionalist?

3. The Constitution. I don’t think Trump is a Constitutional expert like Cruz or that he has analyzed it like Carson has. He is more like a regular guy who knows it has worked for America and for him, and he supports it. The fact that his tax plan is contrary to the 14th Amendment’s requirement for equality under the law he probably has not considered - most candidates (except Cruz and Carson) have not. He is concerned about judicial and presidential dictatorship and the influence of Special-Interest:

“… our lawyers and judges … have been stepping all over the US Constitution, the bulwark of our democracy. They have recklessly appointed themselves to be policy makers, because our actual elected officials are paralyzed by partisanship.”

“I support a tight interpretation of the Constitution, which means judges should stick to precedent and not write social policy.”

“We need to appoint justices - not just on the Supreme Court, but throughout the entire federal system - who will leave lawmaking to the legislators, as specified in the Constitution.”

“The Supreme Court has decided in their infinite wisdom to fill a breach (of leadership) by making social policy rather than defending our most precious historic assets, the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.”

   We have three branches of government, but the trunk of that tree is rotting away.” 

“The free market works - it just needs leadership, not dictatorship. Our government needs to employ a strong adherence to the Constitution ….”

"We need leadership in the White House that will keep government functioning while getting the feds out of all the areas where they don't belong. If the government is properly sized and properly focused we won't need to go from crisis to crisis.”

It sounds to me like he loves the Constitution in general and will most likely honor it in specifics after he swears to defend it against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

4. Political Corruption:

“For years I gave money - lots of money - to candidates from both parties who made personal pleas for my support for their campaigns. They promised to change things with new ideas and bring government back to its original, more limited purpose of protecting our country and putting our people first. Candidate after candidate made all kinds of pledges like this, and very little, if anything, was done.” Isn't that our experience - magnified even more by the little attention our small donations demand?

"To hear our left-wing critics tell it, we need socialism to make this country move forward, and we need a president who can make up the rules as he goes along. If he can't get Congress to do something, he needs to rule by executive order.”

   I say that's complete nonsense.”

   The free market works - it just needs leadership, not dictatorship. Our government needs to employ a strong adherence to the Constitution and maintain social programs that inspire and reward achievement and that are constantly accountable for their spending and outcomes ... I am concerned for the people who can't buy into the American dream because the financial programs of this country is so tilted in favor of the rich."

"Making America Great Again means taking our country back from the big-money interests. We have a country where the big problems can't be solved by consensus because the small-minded lobbyists and special interests are clogging the halls of Congress with their ‘special access.’”

   Everyone talks about listening to the voice of the people. But how can you hear that voice when no one represents that voice? I am listening.”

“No one is paying me to say these things. I am paying my own way, and I'm not beholden to any special interests and lobbyists.”

I have not heard former Trump employees speak bad of him, so I presume we can expect the same kind of loyalty from him as President, as his employees do.

5. The Wall. Trump was laughed at for saying he would have Mexico pay for the Wall. Here’s how he envisions it:

“Let me repeat that, one way or another: Mexico will pay for (the Wall). 

   How? We could increase the various border fees we charge. We could increase the fees on temporary visas. We could even impound remittance payments derived from illegal wages ... “

   If necessary we could pay for the wall through a tariff or cut foreign aid to Mexico or simply make it clear to the Mexican government that it is to the benefit of their very profitable - for them - relationship with the United States to pay for it.” 

   But one way or another, they are going to pay for it.” 

   I don't mind putting a big beautiful door in that wall so people can come in and out ... LEGALLY.”

Trump has also said that savings from Federal services to illegal aliens alone would be sufficient to pay for the Wall.

6. Our Schools. It is obvious to us all that Trump despises political correctness - and he sees it harming our children:

“The politically correct crowd has taken over our schools, and as a result we are failing out children. And out children will fail America if we don't do something about it.”

   Competition is why I am very much in favor of school choice. Let schools compete for kids ... Those schools that weren't good enough to attract students would close, and that's a good thing.”

7. Health Care. Trump admits to supporting a single-payer system 15 years ago but now he talks of competition between private insurance companies: 

"I'd like to see a private insurance system without artificial lines drawn between states. We need to get rid of those lines and let people and companies cross state lines to purchase the best plan for them. The government should get out of the way and let insurance companies compete for your business.”

In the free-enterprise system that Trump says he favors, doctors can also compete for our business.

8. Closing Quotes:

“You can believe what I say, because to see what I've accomplished, all you need to do is take a nice walk through the greatest cities of the world - and look up. Look up, and you'll see the Trump buildings rising skyward.”

“We are at a critical turning point in our history, not only for you and for me but for our children as well. America may be struggling, it may be crippled, but we can rise again. Our time has not passed, it is here, and the potential is amazing.”

So who do I support and who do I hope that you in South Carolina will support in the Republican Primary? If you feel to go out for Trump, who I think can be good for the country, then include in your assessment your feelings as to whether or not he will in fact uphold the Constitution. He says he will. Do you feel that he can be believed? That's your call for now and you have the opportunity to meet and greet the Donald in person along with the other candidates. My preference is Cruz, Carson, Trump, and Rubio (as a mainstream politician) in that order. You in the Palmetto State will winnow the field before I get to vote, so please - vote with our Constitution of individual liberty in mind. 

Will Iowans Select Donald J. Trump as the Republican Nominee?

Those of us who are not Hawkeyes know that Iowans take very seriously being first in the nation to consider who will be presented by the Republican Party for President of the United States. Iowans get to vote first. That might not seem fair to the rest of us but it is a reality that we deal with.

How would I advise Iowans? As a Constitutionalist I want a candidate who will uphold the Constitution of the United States and reject Special-Interest control over our representatives. Ted Cruz has clearly demonstrated both qualifications. What about the other “outsiders?”

I encourage Iowans to vote for somebody who is not a career politician, who will represent we the people and not Special-Interests. In this regard I think of Donald Trump, and Dr. Ben Carson. Senator Cruz, by definition a politician, has clearly stood up against the Washington establishment as a representative for the people and against Special-Interest, so I also consider him an outsider. Which of these outsiders will fully support the Constitution of the United States? 

Ted Cruz, as a constitutional lawyer arguing cases before the Supreme Court, is a demonstrated Constitutionalist. No one questions this. It is well-established. It is well known. As Rush Limbaugh says, he is the only true conservative in the field. 

What about Dr. Ben Carson? Having completed his book, A More Perfect Union, What we the People Can Do to Reclaim our Constitutional Liberties, it is clear that he is a Constitutionalist. A Neurosurgeon’s profession does not demonstrate a constitutional stand, but as a Presidential candidate, Dr. Carson clearly stands for the Constitution. 

The candidate I've been concerned about is Donald Trump. Is the National Review correct that he's not a conservative and perhaps a liberal in sheep's clothing? I read Donald Trump’s book Crippled America, How to Make America Great Again, and found it very interesting. He does talk about the importance of the Constitution and he identifies the problems of a dictator-in-chief who governs by Executive Orders, and the Judicial branch legislating from the bench. 

I suspect many of you have not read Trump's book. I noted in an earlier blog that I consider his tax plan to be a great solution for us but also in my view unconstitutional.  I agree with Dr Carson that any tax plan that has different rates of taxation for different citizens is in violation of the 14th Amendment requirement for equality under the law. Apart from that objection are there other indications he will follow the Constitution. Here are some quotes from his book that may help you determine if he will uphold the Constitution and cripple Special-Interests.

1. His “Angry Trump” book cover reflects the mood of most Americans:

“I wanted a picture where I wasn't happy, a picture that reflected the anger and unhappiness that I feel … we are not in a joyous situation … we have to go back to work to make America great again. All of us.”

2. Trump teaches us how he plays the Media to his, and our, benefit. This explained a lot for me, and why I find myself laughing at how Trump plays  the elitist mainstream media:

“I use the media the way the media uses me - to attract attention. Once I have that attention, it's up to me to use it to my advantage ... to inspire people to think that our country can get better and be great again and that we can turn things around ... I have a mutually profitable two-way relationship with the media - we give each other what we need. And now I am using that relationship to talk about the future of America.”

“Begging for attention really sums up the problem we face in this country with our media. There is such a competition that they're more interested in entertaining their audience then educating them. They like me because I help them attract more viewers. They hate me because they know I don't need them. (Is this the point he is reinforcing by dumping the Fox debate tonight?) I learned a long time ago how to talk directly to the people who matter - to regular Americans who are fed up with the career politicians.”

"I always draw a large crowd of journalists who are like sharks, hoping I'll put some blood in the water.”

   I try to oblige.”

In this regard I say “Go Trump - Go!” But how will he govern? We know he is a highly successful builder, so I can assume that he will run the country well. But will be be a Constitutionalist?

3. The Constitution. I don’t think Trump is a Constitutional expert like Cruz or that he has analyzed it like Carson has. He is more like a regular guy who knows it has worked for America and for him, and he supports it. The fact that his tax plan is contrary to the 14th Amendment’s requirement for equality under the law he probably has not considered - most candidates (except Cruz and Carson) have not. He is concerned about judicial and presidential dictatorship and the influence of Special-Interest:

“… our lawyers and judges … have been stepping all over the US Constitution, the bulwark of our democracy. They have recklessly appointed themselves to be policy makers, because our actual elected officials are paralyzed by partisanship.”

“I support a tight interpretation of the Constitution, which means judges should stick to precedent and not write social policy.”

“We need to appoint justices - not just on the Supreme Court, but throughout the entire federal system - who will leave lawmaking to the legislators, as specified in the Constitution.”

“The Supreme Court has decided in their infinite wisdom to fill a breach (of leadership) by making social policy rather than defending our most precious historic assets, the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.”

   We have three branches of government, but the trunk of that tree is rotting away.” 

“The free market works - it just needs leadership, not dictatorship. Our government needs to employ a strong adherence to the Constitution ….”

"We need leadership in the White House that will keep government functioning while getting the feds out of all the areas where they don't belong. If the government is properly sized and properly focused we won't need to go from crisis to crisis.”

It sounds to me like he loves the Constitution in general and will most likely honor it in specifics after he swears to defend it against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

4. Political Corruption:

“For years I gave money - lots of money - to candidates from both parties who made personal pleas for my support for their campaigns. They promised to change things with new ideas and bring government back to its original, more limited purpose of protecting our country and putting our people first. Candidate after candidate made all kinds of pledges like this, and very little, if anything, was done.” Isn't that our experience - magnified even more by the little attention our small donations demand?

"To hear our left-wing critics tell it, we need socialism to make this country move forward, and we need a president who can make up the rules as he goes along. If he can't get Congress to do something, he needs to rule by executive order.”

   I say that's complete nonsense.”

   The free market works - it just needs leadership, not dictatorship. Our government needs to employ a strong adherence to the Constitution and maintain social programs that inspire and reward achievement and that are constantly accountable for their spending and outcomes ... I am concerned for the people who can't buy into the American dream because the financial programs of this country is so tilted in favor of the rich."

"Making America Great Again means taking our country back from the big-money interests. We have a country where the big problems can't be solved by consensus because the small-minded lobbyists and special interests are clogging the halls of Congress with their ‘special access.’”

   Everyone talks about listening to the voice of the people. But how can you hear that voice when no one represents that voice? I am listening.”

“No one is paying me to say these things. I am paying my own way, and I'm not beholden to any special interests and lobbyists.”

I have not heard former Trump employees speak bad of him, so I presume we can expect the same kind of loyalty from him as President, as his employees do.

5. The Wall. Trump was laughed at for saying he would have Mexico pay for the Wall. Here’s how he envisions it:

“Let me repeat that, one way or another: Mexico will pay for (the Wall). 

   How? We could increase the various border fees we charge. We could increase the fees on temporary visas. We could even impound remittance payments derived from illegal wages ... “

   If necessary we could pay for the wall through a tariff or cut foreign aid to Mexico or simply make it clear to the Mexican government that it is to the benefit of their very profitable - for them - relationship with the United States to pay for it.” 

   But one way or another, they are going to pay for it.” 

   I don't mind putting a big beautiful door in that wall so people can come in and out ... LEGALLY.”

Trump has also said that savings from Federal services to illegal aliens alone would be sufficient to pay for the Wall.

6. Our Schools. It is obvious to us all that Trump despises political correctness - and he sees it harming our children:

“The politically correct crowd has taken over our schools, and as a result we are failing out children. And out children will fail America if we don't do something about it.”

   Competition is why I am very much in favor of school choice. Let schools compete for kids ... Those schools that weren't good enough to attract students would close, and that's a good thing.”

7. Health Care. Trump admits to supporting a single-payer system 15 years ago but now he talks of competition between private insurance companies: 

"I'd like to see a private insurance system without artificial lines drawn between states. We need to get rid of those lines and let people and companies cross state lines to purchase the best plan for them. The government should get out of the way and let insurance companies compete for your business.”

In the free-enterprise system that Trump says he favors, doctors can also compete for our business.

8. Closing Quotes:

“You can believe what I say, because to see what I've accomplished, all you need to do is take a nice walk through the greatest cities of the world - and look up. Look up, and you'll see the Trump buildings rising skyward.”

“We are at a critical turning point in our history, not only for you and for me but for our children as well. America may be struggling, it may be crippled, but we can rise again. Our time has not passed, it is here, and the potential is amazing.”

So who do I support and who do I hope that you Iowans will support in the Republican Primary? You will make that decision shortly and I hope that you will emphasize the importance of the US Constitution in your decision. If you feel to go out for Trump, who I think can be good for the country, then include in your assessment your feelings as to whether or not he will in fact uphold the Constitution. He says he will. Do you feel that he can be believed? That's your call for now and you have the opportunity to meet and greet the Donald in person along with the other candidates. My preference is Cruz, Carson, Trump, and Rubio (as a mainstream politician) in that order. You Iowans will winnow the field before I get to vote, so please - vote with our Constitution of individual liberty in mind. 

God bless Iowans!

NATO Must Destroy ISIS and, A Strategy to Defeat Radical Islamists

Today I am French. Vive la France! The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) attack on Paris, France, is an attack on the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). France is a member of NATO along with other Western European countries, Turkey, the US and Canada. I encourage France to invoke the NATO treaty, just as the US invoked the NATO treaty immediately after 9-11 when NATO E-3 AWACS flew over the United States to help protect our skies. Similarly NATO is in Afghanistan because of 9-11. NATO needs to declare war on ISIS and it’s allies and destroy them - quickly - not withholding any of our combined capabilities other than Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). NATO is already engaged against ISIS in Afghanistan.

NATO should use all National capabilities to accomplish the destruction of ISIS.  

Specifically:

A. Political Power - Assemble a broader alliance of the willing to augment NATO and strengthen freedom of thought and religion in the Middle East. 

1. Invite Russia (already in Syria) to participate, but do not allow them to constrain NATO in any way. Require Russia to contain themselves and their allies (Syria, and Iran) in Syria. Working with Russia recognizes its own threat from Islamic terrorism and it’s long alliance with Syria. It also sends a strong deterrent message that NATO will stand up for the security of it’s member states if Russia continues it’s expansion into Western Europe.
2. Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf States will assist, as well as Egypt. 
3. Muslim states in the Middle East who are unwilling to assist, should suffer economic consequences. 
4. The destruction of ISIS will send a strong deterrent message to Iran, an Islamist state that supports terrorism and sees ISIS as a competitor to its own global Caliphate agenda.
5. At end state, return conquered territories to representative Republics that will guarantee freedom of thought and religion.
6. Stop the flow of refugees to Europe by establishing a safe zone for refugees in northern Syria and Libya to be administered by the UN until political agreements are complete to return such territory to an appropriate sovereign state.

B. Economic Power - Cut the flow of cash to ISIS and any supporting state. Seize the assets of any entity supporting ISIS.

C. Military Power - Except for WMD, use unconstrained military power to cut off ISIS’ ability to wage war and destroy (not capture) its fighters.

1. Conduct an intensive air and land campaign to destroy ISIS and it’s allies in Syria, Iraq, and beyond. Rules of engagement should be very limited so that NATO forces can be effective in accomplishing their mission. ISIS forces should be attacked until they are destroyed - not captured. 
2. If Russia and its allies do not effectively engage ISIS in Syria, perform the mission in their place and retain conquered territory until political agreements are complete to return such territory to an appropriate sovereign state.
3. Remove the oil fields in northern Iraq as a source of revenue and fuel for ISIS. Retain them for NATO use until political agreements are complete to return them to an appropriate sovereign state.
4. With Egypt as an ally, destroy ISIS in Libya and retain conquered territory until political agreements are completed to return such territory to an appropriate sovereign state.
5. Work with Egypt to destroy ISIS in the Sinai.
6. Support Saudi Arabia going into Yemen to destroy Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and restore regular governance in Yemen.

I believe these actions will destroy ISIS, but they will not destroy the larger threat of the radical Islamist Movement. The strategy to accomplish that is much broader and long term and involves what I call a Free State Coalition.

The Strategy to Defeat the Radical Islamist Movement.*

*Any Islamic entity (Shi’a or Sunni) that seeks to (1) deny individual liberty, (2) overthrow free institutions, (3) institute the rule of Sharia to replace constitutional law, and (4) establish the global Islamic Caliphate. Examples of such entities are ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood, Iran and its surrogates such as Hezbollah.

The Challenge:

Islam, like Christianity, calls for all to repent and convert to their faith. The Radical Islamist takes this to the extreme of declaring war against the “unbelievers” - this is considered their religious duty (Jihad). The Islamists pursue a global Islamic State (or Caliphate) through force of arms and the killing of all who oppose them or will not convert to their brand of Islam. Radical Islamists do not promote freedom of religion, speech, or thought. The question we must ask is: Shall we give up our liberty to an Islamic dictatorship, and secondly, should we allow a significant percentage of the world population to be enslaved to their ideology? 

As the Islamists recruit soldiers from within free societies, governments that support individual liberty will be forced to stand against this threat and defeat it, or be destroyed from within. Free citizens must call Free States to action. It is a time to preserve individual liberty and to free those under the rule of radical Islamists, indeed it is a war for the liberty of all men and women, not initiated by us, but by the Islamists who wish to enslave us to their religion.

The Strategy:

The principles of liberty unite Free States, including freedom-loving Muslims, against radical Islam. The US Declaration of Independence is the source of the Free States unifying principle: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The United Nations (UN) is not a coalition of Free States, therefore the United States of America, as the most capable Free State, must form and lead a Free States coalition, perhaps through an adaptation of the Proliferation Security Initiative, a coalition of more than 100 States, that currently works to stop the spread of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). The Free States Coalition defeats the Islamist cause by (1) liberating and thereby strengthening their own economies; (2) promoting liberty and tolerance to counter radicalization; (3) destroying Islamist fighting elements; and (4) liberating populations enslaved under Islamist ideology.

Name:

The Free State Coalition

Alternate:

Liberty Coalition

Principle:

All men are Created equal, with the unalienable Rights of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Banner:

LIBERTY FOR ALL 

Mission:

United Free States preserve and expand liberty 

Essential elements of the Free State strategy include:

1. Strengthening Liberty at home:

Liberty must not be confused with license. For example the license to abort terminates life and liberty for the unborn. The license of anything-goes sexual relations leads to justification for the license to kill infants. These two licenses are signifiant recruiting tools for the Islamist. They represent a significant threat to their society that places greater value on the process of creating and giving life to the unborn than the West. 

Liberty of economy is also significantly constrained by government regulation, or license, that favors special interests over individual economic liberty.

We need to increase our birth rates to counter the demographic shift to a predominant Muslim population in Europe and elsewhere. Muslim men with up to four wives are out populating the West. Returning to more traditional values of marriage and large families is crucial to countering the Muslim demographic wave.

2. Denying Islamists WMD:

While we are horrified by the ISIS slaughter across Syria, Iraq, and Libya, we must be careful to not avert our eyes from Iran. This Islamist state has the same goals as ISIS and is on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons technology. This cannot be permitted. A very high priority is to keep WMD, including Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosive (CBRNE) weapons material out of the hands of radical Islamists. For this reason it makes sense to continue the Proliferation Security Initiative and build the Free State Coalition around it. Free States should also support legitimate UN efforts while not being constrained by the UN.

3. Stopping Islamist Proliferation within Free States: 

Islamist inspired attacks within the US and other Free States are on the rise. The Islamist ideology propagates easily across national borders, especially among Muslim populations, as seen by the allegiance given to ISIS by radical elements within an increasing number of nations. The strategy to defeat them must therefore engage all elements of Free State societies. Western Europe is rapidly becoming Muslim due to the very low birth rates among Europeans - this must be reversed. Muslim immigrants and their children must also be taught to value individual liberty and preserve the Free States. Those seeking to overthrow Free States from within must be identified and stopped. The Islamic State and its advocates, wherever they are found must be stopped and destroyed.

4. Recruiting Muslim States to join the Free States Coalition:

Freedom of religion is required of Muslim states for them to be considered a Free State. State institutional proscriptions against religions other than Islam, or penalties for conversion from Islam, support the Islamist movement and cannot be permitted in a Muslim state that desires to be in the Free State Coalition. Muslim states unwilling to support freedom of religion must be considered belligerents and an active political and economic campaign to encourage them to adopt liberty should be pursued. If they permit Islamists to operate within their borders then they are considered a state supporting Islamist movements.

5. Destroying and Overthrowing Islamists in their Home and Supporting States:

9-11 was a strategically significant victory for the Islamists. The successful post 9-11 campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq by the US and its allies are put at risk by not following up with equally committed campaigns against ISIS and Iran, and any other State that harbors the Islamist threat. Misguided US and European policy in the Middle East and Libya during the Obama administration has destabilized Middle East nations and given space for ISIS and other Islamist movements to grow. In addition the democracy movement in Iran was not supported. The full weight of Free State political, economic, and military power must be brought to bear against the threat. United Free States must engage the Islamists economically and militarily in their home and supporting states before they can effectively engage us with WMD in our States. Opposition forces that stand for liberty within these Islamist states must be encouraged and fully supported until full liberty is established.

Hillary's Lack of "Cred" with the People and the President will Undo Her

To be fair, Hillary won the Democratic debate last night on points and style and a lot of Democrats will continue to support her. However, since 60% of Americans believe she is corrupt and dishonest, I give the debate to Bernie Sanders. I think it's fair to say that most Democrats listening to Bernie, would believe that he would honestly try to do everything he talks about. Now Bernie might not "give a dam about (Hillary's) emails" but we do!

I was stunned that Hillary would advocate that Edward Snowden and Wall Street CEOs go to jail for their wrong doing - but not her?! As CEO of the US State Department did not Hillary do exactly as Snowden and Wall Street "gamblers" did? She had her staff in the State Department copy classified information over to her unclassified network - just as Snowden. She accuses Wall Street CEOs of being gamblers with our money, but hasn't she gambled with our national secrets? As a military officer, if I had copied classified information and put it into an unclassified network, I would expect to go to jail. 

State Department staffers moved more than 400 pieces of classified information over to Hillary's unclassified network by one of three methods - all illegal. 

1. Simply reading off information on the classified network and hand jamming it into the unclassified network. 
2. Downloading classified information onto a storage device and transferring it over to the unclassified network as Snowden did. 
3. Hooking an unclassified computer to the classified network. 

She obviously directed that this be done for her convenience - to Hell with national security.

I think it highly likely, if there is any justice in America, that Hillary will go to jail. She has not openly broadcast classified material that she had copied off the secure network, but in all other regards she has done the same as Snowden. At a minimum she should lose her security clearance. She has demonstrated what 60% of us have perceived - she is not trustworthy. 

President Obama is obviously using Hillary's email situation to his advantage. In his 60 Minutes interview, instead of not commenting because of the ongoing FBI investigation, which he has allowed, he expressed the view that she had made a mistake. Through his White House spokesman today, he emphasized his trust in the independent agencies (FBI/Justice Department) to do their job. Through his (corrupt) influence he could have stopped the FBI investigation, as he did the Lois Lerner investigation, but he has not. I think Rush Limbaugh's prediction will turn out to be right, Obama has no intention of turning the Democrat Party back to the Clintons by allowing Hillary to be nominated/elected President. 

I expect Obama to see that Hillary is in serious legal jeopardy, sufficient to cause her to drop out of the race. Bernie Sanders will likely be the Democrat nominee if Joe Biden stays out. 

Donald Trump’s Unconstitutional and Divisive Tax Plan

Donald Trump's tax plan may in fact stimulate the US economy; however, it will continue a form of taxation that is unconstitutional and divisive. 

First, the 16th amendment provides that the federal government can collect income taxes, however; it does not provide for unequal taxation. How can progressive tax rates (0%, 10%, 20%, 25%) be justified under the 14th Amendment requirement that we all be treated equally under the law? How can a tax system constitutionally penalize or discriminate against the rich in favor of the poor? Equality requires the income tax rate be the same for everyone.

Second, we equally share responsibility for our government; however, Donald grants 50% of our citizens who will pay no income taxes, the privilege to vote on tax rates that only the other 50% will pay. This is neither equality nor liberty - it puts the wealthy in bondage to the poor. For those who wish to argue that the rich have a responsibility to the poor I ask, “Where is that found in the US Constitution?” The low income (democracy) mob will clearly steal from the rich through a system of “legal plunder” under the Donald’s tax plan.

A flat income tax rate, as proposed by Ben Carson, is constitutional and will unite us.

Obama or Romney - A Mormon's Doctrinal Choice

The Semi-annual General Conference of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon or LDS Church) has concluded without the Church endorsing Mormon Governor Mitt Romney for President of the United States. Mormon Prophet Thomas S. Monson nor any other Church leader has encouraged Mormons to vote for Romney in any way as far as I (as a Mormon) can determine.  For those not familiar with the Church this is in keeping with the Church's doctrine on individual liberty and choice. 

The face of Mormonism in politics today is probably best reflected in two characters - Senator Harry Reid and Republican Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney. This also reflects a division within Mormonism on politics - Reid, liberal Democrat; Romney, conservative Republican. For the purposes of the presidential race, a Mormon's liberal Democrat choice is President Obama whom Senator Reid supports. The Church does not tell its members how to vote, and there is a strong doctrinal case to be made for that principle; however, the same doctrine supports an individual member voting against President Obama.

The first Presidential debate, 3 Oct 2012, highlighted this doctrinal point. Mormons will seriously consider voting for Governor Romney, not because he is a Mormon, but because he held up "God's" Constitution and President Obama did not. Mormons doctrinally accept that the US Constitution was established by God to protect His children's individual liberty. The Governor specifically referred to these documents and their principles of protecting life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, and a limited Federal government. President Obama made no reference to the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution when asked about the role of government. Even following Governor Romney's direct reference to these documents and the role of government in upholding their principles, President Obama made no statement of agreement. 

President Obama's views on the US Constitution may not be well known, but his expressed views are available for evaluation. He has described the Constitution as "fundamentally flawed from its founding", and advocates for income redistribution through extra-Constitutional legislative and administrative means. From a Mormon doctrine perspective, his views concerning the Constitution are not the same as God's stated view. As a faithful Mormon I believe I cannot stand with God while also standing for Mr. Obama as President. Let me explain.

As a Mormon immigrant to the US and as a US military officer with 33 years of active duty service, I have felt it a great privilege to serve under an oath to defend the US Constitution and I wish to do so here. I will lay out the Mormon case for individual liberty and the Constitution, and then against the President who took the constitutionally-required oath of office to "faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and ... to the best of (his) ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

THE "MORMON" CASE FOR INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY AND THE US CONSTITUTION

As a young New Zealand citizen and Mormon, I read revelations of God to the Prophet Joseph Smith (detailed below) in which God said "Therefore, it is not right that any man should be in bondage one to another. And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land (the USA), by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose .... And that law of  the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me. Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land; and as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil."

Why would God lay claim that He "established the Constitution"? Mormons know that God's greatest gift to His children is individual liberty or "agency." That gift was given in Heaven, before His children came to Earth. God rejected a plan from Lucifer (Satan) who "sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him" and "there was war in heaven" to preserve that sacred liberty. God knew His children would make mistakes with their liberty while on Earth but "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son (Jesus Christ), that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (John 3:16). The Savior was required because God preserved the liberty to His children. Furthermore Mormons believe that God "established the (US) Constitution" to reinstate individual liberty in the world in preparation for the Millennial return of His Son.

MY "MORMON" CASE AGAINST PRESIDENT OBAMA

2016: Obama's America, a documentary movie I highly recommend, is very sympathetic to President Obama. After viewing the movie I can see how he has a genuine interest in the role of government in correcting inequality in society. Many Mormons also seek to see the poor rise and support government redistribution of wealth to achieve this goal. Equal opportunity is empowered by individual liberty as protected by the US Constitution; but equal outcomes are not guaranteed. Doctrinally, care for the poor is accomplished through voluntary contribution by individuals, not through government or even church involuntary taxation or redistribution of wealth. Mormon doctrine teaches that "every needy, naked soul ... their needs and wants" are to be taken care of by "people (who) ... should impart of their substance of their own free will and good desires towards God." Nowhere in scripture is forced care of the poor taught. Equal outcomes through forced redistribution can only be achieved through losses of individual liberty. God allows each of His children to achieve their potential through their own actions and the grace of Christ - the "righteous judge" of their "works."

In a 2001 radio interview, Illinois State Senator Obama made his views clear on the "flawed" Constitution and its obstruction to wealth redistribution (follow these links to various segments of the interview - the full interview is no longer available at WBEX.FM). He describes the Constitution as an "imperfect document ... reflect(ing) the fundamental flaw of this country that continues today." From a Mormon's perspective he did not recognize the divine perfection and establishment of that original Constitution. Slavery could not stand against it, neither unequal rights for women. The foundational principles and processes for change and review established by the Constitution, have corrected error in US society and enthroned individual liberty - as God intended. 

Paul Roderick Gregory in his Forbes article, Why the Fuss? Obama Has Long Been On Record In Favor Of Redistribution, does an excellent job of summarizing Senator Obama's views expressed in that 2001 interview:

QUOTE (with Senator Obama's statements in quotations):

First: “We still suffer from not having a Constitution that guarantees its citizens economic rights.” By positive economic rights, Obama means government protection against individual economic failures, such as low incomes, unemployment, poverty, lack of health care, and the like. Obama characterizes the Constitution as “a charter of negative liberties,” which “says what the states can’t do to you (and) what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf.”

Second, Obama regrets that the Constitution places “essential constraints” on the government’s ability to provide positive economic rights and that “we have not broken free” of these Constitutional impediments. Obama views the absence of positive economic liberties that the government must supply as a flaw in the Constitution that must be corrected as part of a liberal political agenda.

Third, Obama concludes that we cannot use the courts to break free of the limited-government constraints of the Founders. The courts are too tradition and precedent bound “to bring about significant redistributional change.” Even the liberal Warren Court “never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society.”

Fourth, Obama argues that economic rights that the state must supply are ultimately to be established at the ballot box. Those who favor redistribution must gain legislative control through an “actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change.” The electoral task of a redistributive President is therefore to craft coalitions of those who stand to benefit from government largess. The legislature, not the courts, must do this “reparative economic work.”

In sum, Obama views the Constitution as a flawed document from which we must “break free.” We need, instead, a “living” Constitution that refocuses from “negative rights” to requiring income redistribution from the Haves to provide “positive economic rights” to the Have Nots. 

END QUOTE

Heather Higgins also does a good job of describing Senator Obama's interview in her US News and World Report article,  Barack Obama's Poor Understanding of the Constitution, The Founding Fathers were correct in the way they set up the Constitution.

Senator Obama's arguments for wealth redistribution are a fundamental infringement on individual liberty. He is correct that the Constitution does not support redistribution of wealth - therefore he seeks extra-constitutional means to enact his plans. The Obamacare redistribution of health care through the government is an example of this approach. In order to achieve equal outcomes it restricts religious freedom. Multiple Catholic lawsuits against the Affordable Health Care Act (Obamacare) are "to protect the conscience rights of health care providers and institutions that do not want to participate in abortion or assisted suicide ...." The Mormon church is clearly in support of Catholics and these concerns as shown in their official website statements on religious freedom. 

To a Mormon, arguments of equal outcomes is similar to the argument of Lucifer in Heaven. His equal outcome to "redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost" could only be accomplished by "destroy(ing) the agency (liberty) of man, which ... the Lord God, had given him ...." Likewise, President Obama acts to change the Constitution which God "suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles; that every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins (actions) in the day of judgment. Therefore, it is not right that any man should be in bondage one to another" - not the slave in bondage to the rich as in days past, or the rich in taxing bondage to the poor as our President intends.

To put it in Paul Roderic Gregory's words: 

QUOTE:

The Obama administration has given us a taste of an overbearing majority’s “schemes of oppression” (to use Madison’s words) not decided “according to rules of justice and the rights of the minor party:” the blackmailing of Chrysler bondholders, the transfer of property from creditors and shareholders to organized labor in the GM bailout, the attempted destruction of whole industries, such as coal, through regulation rather than legislation, transfers of income from lenders to borrowers under forced loan renegotiations, and the use of unelected and unapproved economic czars to redistribute income and wealth by executive fiat.

END QUOTE

Add to these the redistribution of Obamacare, the individual mandate of which could only pass Supreme Court scrutiny under the governments power to "tax;" the failure to have the Justice Department defend the Defense of Marriage Act in Court; and the failure to uphold immigration laws.

As Americans we have a great blessing and responsibility to exercise our vote this November. "I, the Lord God, make you free, therefore ye are free indeed; and the law also maketh you free. Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn. Wherefore, honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil." 

I see President Obama's actions with respect to the Constitution as "evil" in that they do not support God's Constitution of individual liberty. I balance that statement with the observation that by Mormon doctrine we also know that President Obama is one of the valiant sons of God that upheld the principle of maintaining individual liberty in Heaven - had he not, he would not be upon the Earth with a physical body, with the opportunity to exercise his liberty and learn for himself that "wickedness never was happiness."

May God bless the President of the United States, and may we uphold the Constitution of individual liberty that the current President opposes.

The following quotes on the US Constitution are accepted by Mormons as scripture from God:

Doctrine & Covenants, Section 101: 

77 According to the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles;

78 That every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment.

79 Therefore, it is not right that any man should be in bondage one to another.

80 And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood.

Doctrine & Covenants, Section 98: 

4 And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them.

5 And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me.

6 Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;

7 And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.

8 I, the Lord God, make you free, therefore ye are free indeed; and the law also maketh you free.

9 Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn.

10 Wherefore, honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil.

Doctrine & Covenants, Section 109:

54 Have mercy, O Lord, upon all the nations of the earth; have mercy upon the rulers of our land; may those principles, which were so honorably and nobly defended, namely, the Constitution of our land, by our fathers, be established forever.

The Equal Outcome Argument and Preservation of Liberty in Heaven:

Moses 4:

1 And I, the Lord God, spake unto Moses, saying: That Satan, whom thou hast commanded in the name of mine Only Begotten, is the same which was from the beginning, and he came before me, saying—Behold, here am I, send me, I will be thy son, and I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost, and surely I will do it; wherefore give me thine honor.

2 But, behold, my Beloved Son, which was my Beloved and Chosen from the beginning, said unto me—Father, thy will be done, and the glory be thine forever.

3 Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him, and also, that I should give unto him mine own power; by the power of mine Only Begotten, I caused that he should be cast down;

4 And he became Satan, yea, even the devil, the father of all lies, to deceive and to blind men, and to lead them captive at his will, even as many as would not hearken unto my voice.

Revelation 12:

7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.

9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

Care for the Poor:

Mosiah 18:

27 And again Alma commanded that the people of the church should impart of their substance, every one according to that which he had; if he have more abundantly he should impart more abundantly; and of him that had but little, but little should be required; and to him that had not should be given.

28 And thus they should impart of their substance of their own free will and good desires towards God, and to those priests that stood in need, yea, and to every needy, naked soul.

29 And this he said unto them, having been commanded of God; and they did walk uprightly before God, imparting to one another both temporally and spiritually according to their needs and their wants.

Doctrine and Covenants 104:

14 I, the Lord, stretched out the heavens, and built the earth, my very handiwork; and all things therein are mine.

15 And it is my purpose to provide for my saints, for all things are mine.

16 But it must needs be done in mine own way; and behold this is the way that I, the Lord, have decreed to provide for my saints, that the poor shall be exalted, in that the rich are made low.

17 For the earth is full, and there is enough and to spare; yea, I prepared all things, and have given unto the children of men to be agents unto themselves.

18 Therefore, if any man shall take of the abundance which I have made, and impart not his portion, according to the law of my gospel, unto the poor and the needy, he shall, with the wicked, lift up his eyes in hell, being in torment.