Socialized Food Program done… Now on to Guns!

Posted by on Jul 23, 2013 in 2nd Amendment, Agenda 21, Education, Family, Lisa's Personal Insights, National News | 0 comments

"Please, sir, I want some more." - Oliver Twist by Charles Dickons

“Please, sir, I want some more.” – Oliver Twist by Charles Dickons

First Lady Michelle Obama has successfully gone after the breakfast and lunches given to our school children via the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010. Smaller portions, healthier choices and yet our children come home starving, running straight for the refrigerator and pantry. Are your children healthier, happier and wise? Socialism is making that promise as specifically laid out in the declaration below.

And now that the food in the schools has been taken care of, today it was announced that Mrs. Obama is moving on to gun control. According to the Washington Post “First lady Michelle Obama, with tears in her eyes and her voice cracking, spoke out for the first time here Wednesday about the gun violence afflicting young people in cities across the nation.” Oh can you feel that empathy? Its just oozing out! While Obama is claiming that he could have been Trayvon Martin, 35 years ago, nothing is mentioned how 2013 is out pacing 2012 in the number of murders in Chicago, or that Detroit is 11 times more violent than New York City. ( I’m going to pause for a moment to share some inconvenient facts: In Obama’s book “Dreams from My Father” he admitted to taking drugs and that high school was a “blur.” Trayvon Martin’s body was found to have traces of marijuana in his blood and urine. If those are the only two comparisons between the two than the President may have a point, hence the empathy from Mrs. Obama. Also, both Chicago and Detroit are being managed by Democrats. Just sayin’.)

Another thought: if Mrs. Obama’s crusade to help kids be healthy and hunger free are producing the opposite affect, wouldn’t her new project to keep kids safe with gun control kill more children thru the hands of criminals who don’t acknowledge moral laws? The Federal government would have you believe otherwise, because they say so. Time will tell, unless you study history and human nature.

July 11, 2013

The Honorable Debbie Stabenow
The Honorable Thad Cochran
Ranking Member
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry
United States Senate

The Honorable John Kline
The Honorable George Miller
Ranking Member
Committee on Education and the Workforce
House of Representatives

Subject: Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service: National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program: Nutrition Standards for All Foods Sold in School as Required by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010

Pursuant to section 801(a)(2)(A) of title 5, United States Code, this is our report on a major rule promulgated by the Department of Agriculture (USDA), Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), entitled “National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program: Nutrition Standards for All Foods Sold in School as Required by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010” (RIN: 0584-AE09). We received the rule on June 28, 2013. It was published in the Federal Register as an interim final rule on June 28, 2013. 78 Fed. Reg. 39,068.

The interim final rule amends the National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program regulations to establish nutrition standards for all foods sold in schools, other than food sold under the lunch and breakfast programs. Amendments made by section 208 of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 (HHFKA) require the Secretary of Agriculture to establish nutrition standards for such foods, consistent with the most recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans, and directs the Secretary to consider authoritative scientific recommendations for nutrition standards; existing school nutrition standards, including voluntary standards for beverages and snack foods; current state and local standards; the practical application of the nutrition standards; and special exemptions for infrequent school-sponsored fundraisers (other than fundraising through vending machines, school stores, snack bars, à la carte sales, and any other exclusions determined by the Secretary). In addition, this interim final rule requires schools participating in the National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program to make potable water available to children at no charge in the place where lunches are served during the meal service, consistent with amendments made by section 203 of the HHFKA, and in the cafeteria during breakfast meal service. This interim final rule is expected to improve the health and well-being of the Nation’s children, increase consumption of healthful foods during the school day, and create an environment that reinforces the development of healthy eating habits. The stated effective date for this final rule is August 27, 2013, and state agencies, local educational agencies, and school food authorities must implement the potable water provisions no later than August 27, 2013, and all other provisions of the interim final rule must be implemented beginning on July 1, 2014.

Enclosed is our assessment of FNS’s compliance with the procedural steps required by section 801(a)(1)(B)(i) through (iv) of title 5 with respect to the rule. Our review of the procedural steps taken indicates that FNS complied with the applicable requirements.

If you have any questions about this report or wish to contact GAO officials responsible for the evaluation work relating to the subject matter of the rule, please contact Shirley A. Jones, Assistant General Counsel, at (202) 512-8156.


Robert J. Cramer
Managing Associate General Counsel

Bold type added for emphasis.

Read More

Senator Mike Lee’s push to infringe gun control laws

Posted by on Mar 26, 2013 in 2nd Amendment, National News, Utah State Headlines | 0 comments

Last Friday, Senator Mike Lee pushed to infringe upon those seeking gun control laws in the Senate. In an amendment to the Senate’s first budget proposal in 4 years, calls for a require super majority vote with any future bills that concern the 2nd Amendment. “It also requires that additional consideration should be given before passing legislation that alters one of our fundamental constitutional rights.

The legislation would have applied to the following:

Bans on so called “assault weapons”
Bans on high capacity magazines
Universal background checks that can only be enforced by a national registry
Establishment of a registry to track firearm purchases
Imposing a de facto ban on gun sales to veterans
This point of order could be waived by a 2/3 majority of the Senate.

In a released statement, Senator Lee made it quite clear that he is still standing with the peoples’ rights to bear arms and the Constitution as it stands.

“Americans are appalled by criminal acts of mass violence,” Sen. Lee said. “However, Americans also recognize that there are limits to the problems that can be solved with new legislation. The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution protects citizens’ rights to defend their own life, the lives of their loved ones, and the lives of the most vulnerable. This right speaks to history’s lesson that government cannot be in all places at all times, and history’s warning that we would not like to live under a government that tried. Government registration of firearms presents a threat to our 2nd Amendment rights. Such a registry would be no less offensive than one monitoring how individual citizens exercise their rights to free speech, association, religion, or any other constitutional right.”

Unfortunately, the following morning, the Amendment was voted down. But don’t assume that has stopped Senator Lee in his fight for Americans 2nd Amendment rights. In the video below Senator Lee answered a caller’s question about what he (Lee), was doing to “block efforts to curtail 2nd Amendment rights?”

Yesterday, media reports spread about a another filibuster that has been planned by Senators’ Lee, Ted Cruz, and Rand Paul, on Senator Harry Reid’s gun control bill that asks for more extensive bank ground checks, interstate gun trafficking, and could limit magazine capacities.

In a letter sent to Reid’s office from the 3 Conservative Senators stated ” We will oppose the motion to proceed to any legislation that will serve as a vehicle for any additional gun restrictions”

Read Latest Breaking News from

Today, the White House shot back to the Senators, to not get in the way, warning them that it would be unfortunate to send that type of message to the victims who have been affected by gun violence.

Apparently the White House and Harry Reid, haven’t received the message that “infringement” on the American citizen’s right to bare arms is not to be crossed. Americans have sent that message loud and clear, with their rights to purchase such tools of freedom.

I strongly support Senators’ Lee, Cruz and Paul as they continue to stand against a bully system that would love to destroy the Constitution!

Read More

Governor Herbert: Sign HB76!

Posted by on Mar 15, 2013 in 2nd Amendment, Lisa's Personal Insights, Utah State Headlines | 1 comment

The 2nd Amendment to the Bill of Rights reads: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
In today’s fight for freedom, states are declaring their sovereignty on every issue including the right for its citizens to bear arms. New York has limited its citizens in how many bullets a single magazine will hold. This law will hinder a single citizen if, heaven forbid, he or she would be surrounded by a group of 5 criminals all with loaded guns. Not only would the citizen be outnumbered by guns, but outnumbered by bullets as well. Any good gun owner knows that it’s not about killing the aggressor, but stopping the aggressor. There is a difference.

In California currently there are search and seizures of guns and firearms from lawful citizens, without warrants. In Colorado, tough laws of gun control are trying to pass the legislature. Amanda Collins a rape victim from Colorado, asked on record her state Representatives: “How does rendering me defenseless, protect you against you in a violent crime?” Her full story is here:

In order for Utah to remain a free state, Governor Herbert should not follow in the footsteps of his colleagues. The Liberal States that are limiting and taking away guns from legal owners are infringing on their rights.

The word “Infringe” is the most important word in the 2nd Amendment. In the Merriam-Webster Dictionary “infringe” means: 1) to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another 2) obsolete: defeat, frustrate.

Governors who pass gun control laws are in violation of the 2nd Amendment. By restricting the ownership of guns, governments can seize power and control, creating a tyrannical reign over the people. Governors who do this are also violating the natural law to protect one’s self, family, and property from being attacked.

In our great State of Utah, we are known for our self-reliance, and our ability to look after ourselves, our families, and our neighbors. This is a trait we inherited from our Pioneer ancestors! And we celebrate that self-reliant spirit every 24th of July!

Governor Herbert, we ask that you support our heritage, our traditions, our belief in God, and our right to bear and keep arms, by signing HB 76 the “Concealed Weapons Amendment”.

Through your leadership, you will show the nation that the citizens of Utah do not need to be governed by force, and that we can work to secure our rights! It is time for Utah to lead, not just in business, but in Freedom itself. Let us be that beacon unto our nation, shining bright, from our mountains!

Citizens please sign and pass this petition letting Governor Herbert know that we support his decision to sign HB 76 into law!

Read More

Senator Mike Lee responds to the President’s executive actions on gun control

Posted by on Jan 16, 2013 in 2nd Amendment, National News, Utah State Headlines | 3 comments

Today, Senator Mike Lee made the following statement in response to the president’s announcement regarding new executive actions on gun control:

“It is unfortunate that the president is using the tragedy in Newtown to advance a set of proposals that would do little, if anything, to prevent these kinds of shocking events,” said Senator Lee. “Instead, his laundry list consists of demands that Congress limit the rights of law abiding citizens, executive orders that essentially affirm the status quo, and initiatives to increase federal interference into state and local law enforcement and educational institutions.

“Without specific legislative language, it is impossible to evaluate the potential consequences of the president’s proposals. But I am deeply concerned that the president’s approach is inconsistent with fundamental Second Amendment rights and encroaches on the authorities of state and local governments. As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I look forward to this debate and am committed to ensuring that the rights of citizens are not infringed and public safety is not diminished.”

Instead of President Obama issuing the rumored 19 proposals on gun control, 23 executive actions where presented, one of them trumping the Amendment in the Affordable Healthcare Act that would have barred medical personal from recording the answers of patients when asked about guns. In fact the second action states “Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system”

You can read all 23 EA’s here:

And when you have finally calmed down enough to politely use the phone, I’d suggest a call to not only your Congressional reps in Washington, but to your Governor’s office and local sheriff’s departments, asking them to stand up for our Country and citizen’s unalienable rights!

Read More

The Destruction of the Constitution One Amendment at a Time: Part 2

Posted by on Jan 8, 2013 in 2nd Amendment, Lisa's Personal Insights, National News | 0 comments

Continuing with the destruction of the Constitution, one Amendment at a time, I lay out a case that our government is destroying our rights as laid out in the first original 10 Amendments to the Bill of Rights. Starting back up with the 5th Amendment:

5th Amendment: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Last year in the spring contention came about with the latest passing of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). While the NDAA had been passed many times through the years providing the military with their funding, new add-ons to the law raised more than eyebrows. The right for the Congress to deem a citizen worthy of being detained for unspecified crimes, without an attorney, for an undetermined amount of time, for whatever reason they at the time decide is appropriate, is down right tyrannical. And in recent Executive orders, where the President can declare martial law, the part “in time of War or public danger” is now obsolete.

Double Jeopardy, seems, on the front, to be on the up and up, however a defendant cleared in a criminal case, can be tried in a civil case for various harms done. The O.J. Simpson case comes to mind.

This next part I am especially aware of. Pleading the 5th! The right to remain silent so as not to be a witness against oneself. Think of this: In the new Healthcare laws, when you visit the doctor’s office, one of the questions that they ask you know is: Are there any guns in the home? You have to be wise about this because if you say “yes” you could be subjected to higher premiums, due to safely issues, your information could and is shared with other government agencies, and you could be discriminated against. So I suggest pleading the 5th! Asking the question of my owning a gun, should in no way harm my right to live, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but answering in the affirmative sure affects my security and my wallet! Could the new laws in the NDAA warrant such an arrest? Possibly, but the real question should be are you willing to risk it?

6th Amendment: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

Certainly the NDAA affects this Amendment as well. “In all criminal prosecutions”… couldn’t be more clear that a citizen of the United States that is accused has a right to a speedy trial by an impartial jury. However with so many laws on the books, and last estimate of 170,000 pages of new regulations, plus Obamacare, who knows how many laws people break on a daily basis. These breaking of laws have caused the clogging up of our jails and courtrooms, ensuring a massive need for more judges. Judges who have come through an education system that no longer promote Constitutional law, but instead teach case law. So the right to a speedy trial has certainly been thrown out the window!

The allowance of the NDAA to be passed is abominable to say the least. It totally shreds the citizens’ right to know what he/she is being detained for, to face their accuser, to obtain counter witnesses, and have council! So while the right to have a speedy trial went out the window, the rest of the clause went down the drain with the rest of the bath water. And notice that this year, when President Obama signed the FY 2013 NDAA into law, he did not say that he would never use it against the people of these United States. He had only made that promise when he signed the FY 2012 NDAA into law. Although, those that have already been detained, surely have something to say to the contrary.

7th Amendment: In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Enter in eminent domain and Agenda 21! While the citizen in a criminal case should be hidden, the citizen in a civil case with the government is dragged through the mud until they are financially depleted in fighting to keep their business, homes, and property. Growth is a given and it is great to see in a community, as long as equal compensation is given to the private owner. However case after case, has shown that government whether it is State or Federal, have bullied their way into settlements, thereby limiting the citizen’s right to a trial. When brave citizens do dare to go up against Goliath and his mammoth take over in the name of a “sustainable development”, in more cases than not, the citizen is left with the few possessions he has, and forced to change his life style.

Agenda 21’s push for environmental laws is forcing citizens off their lands. Home businesses where family farmer’s markets are going under, due to laws that restrict selling of foods that “haven’t been regulated” and are not “FDA approved.” Starting this year a new law to help protect our food. “For the first time, FDA has a legislative mandate to require comprehensive, prevention-based controls across the food supply.” Cities and counties in the State of Utah have already asked citizens to register their gardens with the state, including information on what they are growing and how much.

There is so much information on this that it is hard to limit the content. However just this little bit of information already shows how the 7th Amendment is clearly not an option for most Americans who are being taxed out of business and home, along with the theft of their property.

8th Amendment: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Does anyone being held in the county jail even know this Amendment exists? While I agree that for the most heinous crimes, bail should be revoked, I believe that the Courts have thoroughly usurped this Amendment, and prosecutors have allowed it! We all love watching the various courtroom scenes when the defense attorney supposedly over steps his bounds and the gavel comes out with a resounding “Order in the Court” only to be followed by a contempt of court, because the judge was personally offended! Man, if I could impose I fine for every time my feathers were roughed up, I’d be rich!

As for unusual punishments – could you imagine if our teens found out about this one?! Humor aside, the punishment does need to equal the crime, as that is what is traditionally equal justice!

Read More