Tommy Starling and Jeff Littlefield say they’ve slowly been changing minds of people in their community when it comes to what a family looks like.

The gay couple from Pawleys Island, South Carolina, traveled to the nation’s capital with their 5-year-old daughter, Carrigan, to share their story and help members of Congress understand the issues they face.

“Everything is a gradual process,” Starling said. “Now that we have Carrigan in our lives, people’s minds are changing. They see her; they see us in the PTA functions; they see us in the community, going to the school, so we have a different group of friends, and everybody’s hearts and minds are opening to seeing that we are a family just like theirs.”

The family joined other lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender parents and their children from across the country to lobby for marriage equality on Capitol Hill on Thursday and to discuss other issues of concern like safe schools, adoption and foster care. The families scheduled meetings at the offices of about 50 representatives and senators from their home states.

CONTINUED at CNN. Video at link.

Congressman wants safeguards for privacy; targets NDAA.

The House of Representatives has approved an amendment to the draconian National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that will limit the Department of Defense from using data collected by unmanned spy drones against Americans.

The Amendment, introduced by Congressman Landry (R-LA), will prohibit information collected by DoD drones without a warrant from being used as evidence in court.

The amendment, was approved early Thursday afternoon along with 19 other en bloc amendments, reads:

“Notwithstanding any other provision of law, information acquired by an unmanned aerial vehicle operated by the Department of Defense may not be admitted in a Federal court, State court, or court of a political subdivision of a State as evidence against a United States citizen unless such information was obtained by such unmanned aerial vehicle pursuant to a court order.”

Landry’s amendment is an important one given that a recently uncovered Air Force documentcontends that the Pentagon can use drones to monitor the activities of Americans.

CONTINUED at Prison Planet.

Defense Secretary re-affirms Obama administration’s unconstitutional stance.

Following controversy over his assertion that seeking “international permission” from the UN to launch wars trumps the authority of Congress, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta re-affirmed this premise during recent testimony in which he again stated that Congress would play second fiddle to the international community.

Asked by Congressman Walter Jones, who has launched a resolution re-affirming the limits to Presidential power by making the launching of war without Congressional approval an impeachable offense, whether President Obama would seek authorization from Congress before attacking Iran or Syria, Panetta stopped short of answering in the affirmative.

“We will clearly work with Congress if it comes to the issue of the use of force,” said Panetta, backing away from comments made in March when he told a Senate Armed Services Committee, “Our goal would be to seek international permission. And we would come to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this, whether or not we would want to get permission from the Congress.”

However, Panetta later told Congressman Randy Forbes during the House Armed Services Committee meeting, “The commander in chief has the authority to take action that involves the vital interests of this country,” adding that the President would have to “take steps” to get Congressional approval under the War Powers Act.

“Would the approval be required before you could take military action against Syria?” asked Forbes.

“The President could in fact deploy forces if he had to if our vital interests were at stake,” said Panetta.

“So you get the support of Congress after you began military operations?” asked Forbes.

“In that particular situation, yes,” said Panetta, re-affirming that Congressional authorization would not be needed.

CONTINUED at Prison Planet.

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., has a status update for Facebook co-founderEduardo Saverin: Stop attempting to dodge your taxes by renouncing your U.S. citizenship or never come to back to the U.S. again.

In September 2011, Saverin relinquished his U.S. citizenship before the company announced its planned initial public offering of stock, which will debut this week. The move was likely a financial one, as he owns an estimated 4 percent of Facebook and stands to make $4 billion when the company goes public. Saverin would reap the benefit of tax savings by becoming a permanent resident of Singapore, which levies no capital gains taxes.

At a news conference this morning, Sens. Schumer and Bob Casey, D-Pa., will unveil the “Ex-PATRIOT” – “Expatriation Prevention by Abolishing Tax-Related Incentives for Offshore Tenancy” – Act to respond directly to Saverin’s move, which they dub a “scheme” that would “help him duck up to $67 million in taxes.”

The senators will call Saverin’s move an “outrage” and will outline their plan to re-impose taxes on expatriates like Saverin even after they flee the United States and take up residence in a foreign country. Their proposal would also impose a mandatory 30 percent tax on the capital gains of anybody who renounces their U.S. citizenship.

The plan would bar individuals like Saverin from ever reentering the United States again.

“Eduardo recently found it more practical to become a resident of Singapore since he plans to live there for an indefinite period of time,” Tom Goodman, Saverin’s spokesman, told Bloomberg News in an email.

Last year 1,700 people renounced their U.S. citizenship.

Source: ABC News.

Opponents of a U.S. law they claim may subject them to indefinite military detention for activities including news reporting and political activism persuaded a federal judge to temporarily block the measure.

U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest in Manhattan yesterday ruled in favor of a group of writers and activists who sued President Barack Obama, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and the Defense Department, claiming a provision of the National Defense Authorization Act, signed into law Dec. 31, puts them in fear that they could be arrested and held by U.S. armed forces.

The complaint was filed Jan. 13 by a group including former New York Times reporter Christopher Hedges. The plaintiffs contend a section of the law allows for detention of citizens and permanent residents taken into custody in the U.S. on “suspicion of providing substantial support” to people engaged in hostilities against the U.S., such as al-Qaeda.

“The statute at issue places the public at undue risk of having their speech chilled for the purported protection from al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and ‘associated forces’ – i.e., ‘foreign terrorist organizations,’” Forrest said in an opinion yesterday. “The vagueness of Section 1021 does not allow the average citizen, or even the government itself, to understand with the type of definiteness to which our citizens are entitled, or what conduct comes within its scope.”

CONTINUED at Bloomberg.

Four US representatives introduced an amendment to the Justice Department appropriations bill, House Resolution 5326, which would bar the agency from spending funds to attack medical marijuana operations in states where it is legal. The bill was being considered Wednesday, before failing on a voice vote Wednesday evening.

A roll call vote was taken later, with the amendment failing 163-262 — 50 Democrats opposed it and 28 Republicans supported it. While the total number of “ayes” was almost identical to the last time the amendment was offered several years ago, that reflects the larger number of Republicans in the House. Both Democrats and Republicans voted for the amendment in greater percentages than in the past. [Ed: We will publish analysis of the voting breakdown this week.]

The House heard Reps. Barney Frank (D-MA), Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), Jerold Nadler (D-NY), and Steve Cohen (D-TN) speak in favor of the amendment, while the most notable opposition came from committee Chairman Frank Wolf (R-VA).

Hinchey was a cosponsor of the amendment, as was Rohrabacher, of Huntington Beach, and his California colleagues Reps. amie Farr (D-Carmel) and Tom McClintock (R-Auburn).

As a presidential candidate, then-Senator Obama said his administration would not use its resources to undermine state medical marijuana laws, especially if people were following their state’s law. At first, the administration lived up to his word. Shortly after he was elected president, the Department of Justice issued a memorandum to US Attorneys urging them not to waste taxpayer dollars and law enforcement resources arresting and prosecuting people following their state’s medical marijuana law.

CONTINUED at Stop the Drug War.

Colombia’s Chamber of Representatives has approved a bill that would legalize the cultivation of drugs that grow as plants, bringing to fruition the start of more legislative drug reform efforts to come, as promised by South American leaders during the recent Summit of the Americas.

Colombia’s drug crop legalization bill would make growing marijuana, opium, coca and poppies legal, but drug trafficking, including sales, would remain a severe crime, according to Colombia Reports.

The U.S. is a strong ally of Colombia’s and the Obama administration has provided military support to the country, even going so far as to station U.S. soldiers and drone aircraft at Colombian military bases, ostensibly to help combat drug trafficking networks. The country has historically been a key U.S. asset in the region, so much that they’ve even accepted prior U.S. administrations sending aircraft over Colombian poppy and coca fields to spray the indigenous population with herbicide.

CONTINUED at The Raw Story.

President Barack Obama has compiled a handy to-do list for Congress that, “if acted upon quickly, will create jobs and help restore middle class security,” according to the White House’s blog. And it’s about time. This is most certainly not, as cynics might suggest, another transparent political scheme. After all, these initiatives, the White House claims, enjoy bipartisan support—which, I gather, is meant to impress you, even if it’s not exactly true.

Regrettably, the sentiment of the to-do list does garner bipartisan support and illustrates how cheap populism leads to bad policy and why Washington shouldn’t be in the business of “creating jobs” in the first place.

Obama says passing his to-do list would help create “an economy built to last—one that creates the jobs of the future and makes things the rest of the world buys—not one built on outsourcing, loopholes, and risky financial deals.” History tells us that when government “creates” an economy, it won’t be much of an economy to speak of—but here’s the new plan:

“Reward American Jobs, Not Outsourcing.” Hey, let’s play on the genuine frustration of struggling Americans. Most politicians will latch on to this protectionist notion to some extent. But need it really be repeated that outsourcing, by generating more productivity, creates more wealth and more jobs? On this point, most economists actually agree.

CONTINUED at Reason. Written by David Harsanyi.

The Congressional Progressive Caucus has announced it will introduce legislation designed to strip Americans of the right to defend themselves. Called “Stop Shoot First Laws,” the amendment to the Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations bill under consideration in the House would deny states federal funding allocated under section 505 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 if they continue to allow citizens to defend themselves.

“Shoot first laws have already cost too many lives,” said Progressive Caucus co-chairs Keith Ellison and Raul Grijalva upon introducing their amendment. “In Florida alone, deaths due to self-defense have tripled since the law was enacted. Federal money shouldn’t be spent supporting states with laws that endanger their own people. This is no different than withholding transportation funds from states that don’t enforce seatbelt laws.”

“The message here is if you have this kind of law that your federal funding is going to take a hit because they make states less safe,” Adam Sarvana, communications director for Grijalva, toldPolitico.

In other words, the Democrats will force states to choose between putting their citizens at the mercy of violent criminals or taking federal largess.

Because the House does not have an open amendment process, the amendment will likely not see a vote on the floor. Ellison and Grijalva introduced the amendment in and effort to further politicize the Trayvon Martin case and increase pressure on the Second Amendment.

Democrats are using “Shoot First” instead of “Stand Your Ground” in an effort to portray self defense as homicide.

“Stand Your Ground” is a legal extension of the Castle doctrine stating that a person has a right to defend himself against an intruder. “Stand Your Ground” laws state that one can use deadly force in any location one is legally allowed to be and removes the requirement that the threat must occur on one’s own property.

The Congressional Progressive Caucus is the largest caucus within the Democratic caucus in Congress. It is supported by the Institute for Policy Studies, MoveOn.org, the NAACP, National Council of La Raza, Hip Hop Caucus, and other liberal and so-called “progressive” organizations.

Source: Infowars. Written by Kurt Nimmo.

*Written by Rob Rimes.

I barely have time to write this essay or whatever you want to officially call it, just as I haven’t had much time to write anything lately. Right now I am trying to finish up a few projects for work while packing and prepping for my long weekend trip to Gainesville. I’m going up there to visit my cousin and his college aged friends – some in school, some not. The booze will be aplenty and the party atmosphere should be monolithic, as that wild college town never fails to disappoint in the realm of pure debauchery and substance-enchanced frenzies. Between the usually free-spirited and good-hearted college kids encompassing downtown and the campus areas to the good ol’ boys on the outskirts of the concentrated action, trouble is something hard for one to avoid when the ante is upped and the whiskey is flowing. The only thing that can stop such fun-filled insanity is one of those damned Sunday nights when you are ill-prepared and find yourself out of alcohol in a county that decides to go dry for twenty-four hours during the Deep South’s weekly church day. Last trip, I found myself and a few of my cousin’s friends driving frantically through the dark North Central Florida wilderness in an effort to cross the county line and find anywhere that might have any sort of alcohol available for purchase. It was also a race against the clock as it was about closing time for most liquor stores in the state. Luckily, the mission was accomplished and we left with some fanciful artistic vanity beers, some PBR and a couple bottles of various 80 proof (or higher) swill.

This is probably what awaits me over the course of the next few days and I do need to get my shit together for the small vacation. However, I couldn’t resist sitting down at my temperamental Apple computer to type up my thoughts on the events of today. Hell, it isn’t even noon yet but the news is full of stories about the Paul Family. It’s a good day to be a Ron and Rand Paul supporter, as things are seemingly looking up in a few different ways.

To start, the Paul Revolution v2.0 is underway! Sure, I am really looking way ahead here but the younger Dr. Paul is doing all the right things and going against the grain so successfully that the media cannot ignore him. He is sticking out like a sore thumb against a backdrop of middle fingers. He isn’t playing the party politics game and isn’t succumbing to the Beltway bullshit while the vast majority of all the other Tea Party darlings have auctioned off their souls. In fact, Rand Paul probably pisses the Tea Party people off as they are really just grassroots establishment stooges at this point in the game. He is the antithesis to their heroes Marco Rubio, Michele Bachmann, Col. Allen West, Herman Cain, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich and now Mitt Romney. Rand Paul recognizes the tyranny that is running rampant due to the PATRIOT Act and NDAA. He knows that the Department of Homeland Security is an over-inflated branch of the government that assaults our constitutional rights. He doesn’t try to convince himself that he must surrender his principles to fear and embrace the ever-expanding police state. As a senator and a direct victim of the TSA’s special brand of tyranny, he knows all too well how far their big brother fingers reach into the heart of liberty.

Rand Paul has officially made it his mission to end the TSA and to free the heart of liberty from their death grip. Like most Americans, Rand is tired of the harassment and horrible treatment of American citizens at the hands of these tyrannical bottom-feeders. Ultimately, he is sick and tired of the horrendous violations against our constitutional rights. To combat the tyranny, he has come forward with new legislation simply called the ‘END the TSA Bill’. You can actually sign a petition in support of the bill at ChooseLiberty.org.

In a nutshell, this law would forcibly privatize the TSA. What that means is that the government would not be able to put their hands on airport security. By privatizing the TSA, it doesn’t end airport security, it opens up competition from all over to come in and compete for the job. In order for the TSA to survive, it would have to adapt to the will of the people and the business owners (i.e. the airports and airlines) or else it would be swallowed up by a competitor that would. This brings the free market into airport security and therefore allows a company that is willing to find the balance between actually effective security practices and respecting the rights of those who pass through their gates. It is a win/win scenario for the citizens, the airports, the airlines and the company that is able to provide the absolute best service. If this scares you than don’t worry, I’m sure your other war-mongering fear turtle Tea Party darlings will strike it down. Ultimately, that is the real problem here and until we get other men and women in Congress who have the sense of Dr. Paul Sr. and Dr. Paul Jr., championing freedom back into our lives will be futile. However, it’s not all bad as the Paul Family message is growing larger everyday.

The second thing worth mentioning is the fact that even though it is pretty clear that Mitt Romney is going to go head-to-head with Obama in November, Ron Paul is still in this thing – making the GOP side of things very interesting. It is a two-man race between Ron Paul and Mitt Romney as every other candidate in this thing has dropped out to sign book deals and television contracts. The two-man race between Paul and Romney was made official today, as even Fox News couldn’t continue their blackout. Nope, Fox News announced that Ron Paul has officially qualified to be able to be the Republican nominee for president, if they decide to choose him over Romney (they won’t). This pivotal point in the race will take place at the Republican National Convention coming up in a few months in Tampa, FL.

Ron Paul has stayed in through thick and thin and has now met all the requirements for his name to be put up there alongside frontrunner Mitt Romney. I guess his delegate-hunting tactic has worked and paid off. This is great news, not because he has a chance of winning at this point – I firmly believe he doesn’t, but because he will be at the convention – in front of the world and will have the opportunity to spread his message further into the minds of all the Americans preparing for the big race between two big government progressive hyenas laughing at those who believe that there is some sort of difference between the two of them: there isn’t.

This could be Ron Paul’s Reagan moment. Like Ronald Reagan’s speech at the 1964 Republican National Convention, where Barry Goldwater won the nomination, Paul’s speech could unleash a tsunami wave of pro-liberty thinking. Sure, it is too little too late for the elder Dr. Paul, as he is walking away from politics after this election, but his son could be set up to take the reigns from his father and push this message forward with youthful vigor and vigilance for decades to come! One can only hope that generations of Pauls continue to follow the path of Ron and Rand and keep giving us a legacy of liberty that isn’t willing to compromise with the beast to save face and further their careers by sacrificing their principles. This brings me to my next point.

Rand Paul has a serious ball that he can pick up and run with. His father has done a fantastic job of laying the groundwork for the next generation to use to their advantage. Maybe this has been the Paul family agenda all along; who knows? The point is, the foundation has been built and it is pretty fucking strong. Guys like Rand Paul, Justin Amash and Gary Johnson could use this to their advantage and really our advantage as well. I don’t think that this is the year for Gary Johnson but the future could be very bright for him as well as the younger Paul and Congressman Amash. In 2016 or 2020, we could have a real pro-constitutional candidate in the mix who has enough steam and power to bulldoze through the establishment competition. If the momentum of the Paul message continues, the people just may be ready to commit and see this thing through. The numbers could very well be to the advantage of truth and for the first time in a very long time, America could move in the right direction. That is, of course, if the current crop of politicians don’t completely burn DC to the ground.

I know that I have come across as overly pessimistic at times in my writings, especially as of late, but it is hard to not give up hope when the hole you are in is so deep that you can’t even see the surface above you anymore. Maybe everything will crash and burn and at this rate, it is the most likely outcome but even if this does happen, we still need the type of leaders that can get us out of all this. Eventually the damage may be so bad that the only thing we can do is rebuild from the ground up. We will all pay for the crimes committed from those we elected and truthfully, we deserve to pay the price of our own ignorance and blindness. Our complete lack of vigilance and our blind faith in political parties has been our downfall. You can continue to point the finger at Washington DC, the Federal Reserve, Wall Street or whoever else but the truth is, American citizens are the ones who are at fault. The longer we assume that government will take responsibility for our lives and our well-being, the longer we will have to live with our heads in the clouds as shivering weaklings unworthy of walking on the same soil as our Founding Fathers. Until we overcome our own denial we won’t overcome our own self-perpetuating tragedy. The bull is staring coldly into our eyes, right in front of our goddamned faces but we aren’t grabbing the fucking horns! Why?!

This isn’t a dose of pessimism, it’s a dose of realism. With that said, to be real, I feel the need to point out that, in this case, the proverbial “beacon of light that guides freedom-loving people everywhere” could just be Senator Rand Paul. An article I came across on Business Insider’s website this morning talks about Rand’s potential 2016 or 2020 presidential run and how he is already working towards building a solid relationship with many of the key people that can help him reach levels greater than his father. Hell, the Evangelical sect of the voting public is taking to the younger Paul even though historically, they have not been too supportive of his father. Christian TV producer Justin Machacek said it best when comparing Rand to his father:

From my perspective, Rand is certainly more popular. I think he’s from a younger generation and I think he speaks a more modern language. He’s easier to understand, so I think his message is much clearer. Not that it’s a different message from a policy standpoint, but I think his communication style resonates much better.

Things are looking up for the Paul legacy, despite whatever the horrible results of the 2012 election will be, and if the right people are won over before the next election cycle and the message of constitutionalism continues to expand, the future could be bright. Of course, playing devil’s advocate, this is assuming that the Republican Party can actually change or that a third party could actually rise to challenge the two party monopoly. As hopeless as it seems, it’s very much possible if we want it badly enough.

Now grab the fucking horns.