Allen West “It’s time to stand up for our future” Join Us at Next Generation TV

Watch the video here: Allen West: Fiscal Economic Freedom Crucial for the Next Generation

Col. Allen West explains the importance of the Next Generation project, especially for his own family. Hear why he wants to deliver both fiscal and economic freedom to his daughters and the next generation.

awpjtv

Why Does the Left Despise Valor? by Kevin McCullough

by Kevin McCullough for TownHall

There is a pretty reliable predictor in America today. If someone says something nice about our military, the need to support them, or show demonstrative appreciation for them outright–that person is likely a person of the political and theological right.

I’m not sure why that’s the case, but it is so dog gone accurate in the circles of punditry, media, and entertainment, I have to think it’s not much different in other places where hard core partisan ranks exist.

This weekend is the perfect example.

One of the most important films to be made in such a long time–honoring our military–reinforces the love of family, the honor of sacrifice, the love of country, and most importantly deep appreciation for men who do things most of us would shrink from. Yet almost universally in media, punditry, and entertainment circles it is being panned as pro-war-mongering-propaganda-responsible-for-all-that-is-wrong. They base these arguments on everything from video games, to perceived war crimes.

They lay these charges at the feet of Act Of Valor, an independently produced film debuting this weekend.

But what I want to know more specifically is why?

Why were there repeated articles on GAWKER and HUFFINGTON POST this week–prior to the film’s release and in a couple of instances complete admission by the person writing the critique that admitted they hadn’t seen more than the trailer–that included denouncements of danger, lies, and propaganda that this film contained?

FINISH THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE: TOWNHALL.COM

Can Congress Steal Your Constitutional Freedoms? – by Judge Napolitano

by Judge Napolitano

Can the president use the military to arrest anyone he wants, keep that person away from a judge and jury, and lock him up for as long as he wants? In the Senate’s dark and terrifying vision of the Constitution, he can.

Congress is supposed to work in public. That requirement is in the Constitution. It is there because the folks who wrote the Constitution had suffered long and hard under the British Privy Council, a secret group that advised the king and ran his government. We know from the now-defunct supercommittee, and other times when Congress has locked its doors, that government loves secrecy and hates transparency. Transparency forces the government to answer to us. Secrecy lets it steal our liberty and our property behind our backs.

Last week, while our minds were on family and turkey and football, the Senate Armed Services Committee decided to meet in secret. So, behind closed doors, it drafted an amendment to a bill appropriating money for the Pentagon. The amendment would permit the president to use the military for law enforcement purposes in the United States. This, of course, would present a radical departure from any use to which the military has been put in the memory of any Americans now living.

The last time the federal government regularly used the military for domestic law enforcement was at the end of Reconstruction in the South, in 1876. In fact, the deal to end Reconstruction resulted in the enactment of federal laws forbidding the domestic use of American military for law enforcement purposes. This has been our law, our custom and our set of values to which every president has adhered for 135 years.

It is not for directing traffic that this legislation would authorize the president to use the military. Essentially, this legislation would enable the president to divert from the criminal justice system, and thus to divert from the protections of the Constitution, any person he pleases. And that person, under this terrifying bill, would have no recourse to a judge to require the president either to file charges against him or to set him free.

COMPLETE THIS ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE: TOWNHALL