Don’t Blink Again

Flanders

ARCHCONSERVATIVE
Sep 23, 2010
7,628
748
205
If you blinked you probably missed Hussein signing an EXTENSION of VAWA (Violence Against Women Act). My guess is that the MSM is so ashamed of dear leader they wanted the story to go away so Americans would not be reminded of what the law contains.

Before getting to the meat and potatoes let me offer Jack Minor’s guideline:


The renewal of the Violence Against Women Act sounds noble enough based on the title of the bill. However an actual reading of the bill reveals its truth.

Next

The Violence Against Women Act is NOT like Pelosi’s Affordable Care Act:


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV-05TLiiLU&feature=player_detailpage]Pelosi: "We Have to Pass the Bill So That You Can Find Out What Is In It" - YouTube[/ame]​

The VAWA is has been around a long time; so nobody who voted for it can say they did not know what was in it. Just about every piece of big name Democrat garbage has been associated with it. Then-Senator Biden drafted the bill and Clinton signed it. For years, everybody who pays attention knew what was in it.

In 2000 the Supreme Court struck down part of the law, but left VAWA’s program funding intact —— supporting my contention that the High Court will never, never, never, strike down a law that reduces the government’s income. (Funding starts with collecting taxes.) On top of justification for funding only fools believe the Nifty Nine will ever chop off a powerful arm of the parasite class.

For years, Phyllis Schlafly has been exposing the VAWA for the fraud it is. A few days ago she said this about the very VAWA funding the High Court let stand:


"In its 17 years of operation," Phyllis Schlafly explains, VAWA "has done little or no good for real victims of domestic violence, while its funds have been used to fill feminist coffers and to lobby for feminist objectives and laws. Although every spending bill should be subject to rigorous auditing procedures in order to curb waste and fraud, VAWA has somehow ducked accountability for the [$660 million] a year it doles out to radical feminist organizations."

Phyllis Schlafly Says Violence Against Women Act Promotes Divorce And Hatred of Men
By Sam Levin
Published Thu., Feb. 7 2013 at 1:20 PM

Phyllis Schlafly Says Violence Against Women Act Promotes Divorce And Hatred of Men - St. Louis - News - Daily RFT

You can bet your ass sequestration will not touch funding. If VAWA is touched at all the reduction won’t amount to more than two or three million dollars. Worse still, not one parasite is going to get bounced out of the public purse.

NOTE: Your tax dollars fund political causes you might NOT believe in. To me, that’s no different than forcing me to support a religion not of my choosing.

What’s next?

With so many Republicans rolling over for VAWA there is a real fear the Senate will ratify CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women). Jimmy Carter signed CEDAW in 1980 before many of today’s adult Americans were born, but it was never ratified.

UN treaties never die; so there is a good chance Hussein will bring it up again. Sixty-seven votes are needed to ratify. Even if establishment Republicans get control of the Senate in 2014 there is a good chance enough RINO will join with Democrats and ratify. I base my opinion on the number of Republicans who voted for an extension of VAWA. House Republicans could have stopped it but they didn’t.

Here’s the link to Jack Minor’s great piece for those who are not up to snuff on VAWA:


Conservative icon blasts GOP as cowards
Schlafly says Republicans 'afraid of the feminist lobby'
Published: 19 hours ago
by JACK MINOR

Conservative icon blasts GOP as cowards
 
If you blinked you probably missed Hussein signing an EXTENSION of VAWA (Violence Against Women Act). My guess is that the MSM is so ashamed of dear leader they wanted the story to go away so Americans would not be reminded of what the law contains.

Before getting to the meat and potatoes let me offer Jack Minor’s guideline:


The renewal of the Violence Against Women Act sounds noble enough based on the title of the bill. However an actual reading of the bill reveals its truth.

Next

The Violence Against Women Act is NOT like Pelosi’s Affordable Care Act:


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV-05TLiiLU&feature=player_detailpage]Pelosi: "We Have to Pass the Bill So That You Can Find Out What Is In It" - YouTube[/ame]​

The VAWA is has been around a long time; so nobody who voted for it can say they did not know what was in it. Just about every piece of big name Democrat garbage has been associated with it. Then-Senator Biden drafted the bill and Clinton signed it. For years, everybody who pays attention knew what was in it.

In 2000 the Supreme Court struck down part of the law, but left VAWA’s program funding intact —— supporting my contention that the High Court will never, never, never, strike down a law that reduces the government’s income. (Funding starts with collecting taxes.) On top of justification for funding only fools believe the Nifty Nine will ever chop off a powerful arm of the parasite class.

For years, Phyllis Schlafly has been exposing the VAWA for the fraud it is. A few days ago she said this about the very VAWA funding the High Court let stand:


"In its 17 years of operation," Phyllis Schlafly explains, VAWA "has done little or no good for real victims of domestic violence, while its funds have been used to fill feminist coffers and to lobby for feminist objectives and laws. Although every spending bill should be subject to rigorous auditing procedures in order to curb waste and fraud, VAWA has somehow ducked accountability for the [$660 million] a year it doles out to radical feminist organizations."

Phyllis Schlafly Says Violence Against Women Act Promotes Divorce And Hatred of Men
By Sam Levin
Published Thu., Feb. 7 2013 at 1:20 PM

Phyllis Schlafly Says Violence Against Women Act Promotes Divorce And Hatred of Men - St. Louis - News - Daily RFT

You can bet your ass sequestration will not touch funding. If VAWA is touched at all the reduction won’t amount to more than two or three million dollars. Worse still, not one parasite is going to get bounced out of the public purse.

NOTE: Your tax dollars fund political causes you might NOT believe in. To me, that’s no different than forcing me to support a religion not of my choosing.

What’s next?

With so many Republicans rolling over for VAWA there is a real fear the Senate will ratify CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women). Jimmy Carter signed CEDAW in 1980 before many of today’s adult Americans were born, but it was never ratified.

UN treaties never die; so there is a good chance Hussein will bring it up again. Sixty-seven votes are needed to ratify. Even if establishment Republicans get control of the Senate in 2014 there is a good chance enough RINO will join with Democrats and ratify. I base my opinion on the number of Republicans who voted for an extension of VAWA. House Republicans could have stopped it but they didn’t.

Here’s the link to Jack Minor’s great piece for those who are not up to snuff on VAWA:


Conservative icon blasts GOP as cowards
Schlafly says Republicans 'afraid of the feminist lobby'
Published: 19 hours ago
by JACK MINOR

Conservative icon blasts GOP as cowards


As long as a good portion of government funding for VAWA is used for VAWA, I am okay. I do not support unnecessary wars, but my tax money, from as long as I can remember, goes to fund endless and unjust wars republicans and most of congress authorize.
 
But...but...but...we have sequester...we can't even afford to have children visit the White House...the children.
Seriously though...$410 million a year for an extremist organization? Just another day in Washington.
 
As long as a good portion of government funding for VAWA is used for VAWA, I am okay. I do not support unnecessary wars, but my tax money, from as long as I can remember, goes to fund endless and unjust wars republicans and most of congress authorize.

To LAfrique: World War One is the only unnecessary/unjust war I know of, and that one can be laid at DEMOCRAT Woodrow Wilson’s door.

Defense of the nation is not an unjust war. Every American benefits from every such war whether the country is attacked as it was in WWII, or whether the war is fought to stop an enemy from getting here as in stopping communism and Islam. Americans fought and died in Korea and Vietnam so they wouldn’t have to fight and die in California.

Americans took the war ISLAM STARTED to their soil after they attacked Americans on their soil, yet touchy-feely freaks never call Islam’s jihad an unjust war

Funding political causes with tax dollars benefits only those with an agenda.
 

Forum List

Back
Top