And this is the million-dollar question, answered by Rep. Chaffetz… House Speaker Pelosi does not want to give subpoena power to House Republicans, says Fox News contributor Jason Chaffetz, former chairman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee.
Do you understand what the Electoral College is? Or how it works? Or why America uses it to elect its presidents instead of just using a straight popular vote? Author, lawyer and Electoral College expert Tara Ross does, and she explains that to understand the Electoral College is to understand American democracy.
Right now, there’s a well-organized, below-the-radar effort to render the Electoral College effectively useless. It’s called the National Popular Vote, and it would turn our presidential elections into a majority-rule affair. Would this be good or bad? Author, lawyer, and Electoral College expert Tara Ross explains.
You vote, but then what? Discover how your individual vote contributes to the popular vote and your state’s electoral vote in different ways–and see how votes are counted on both state and national levels.
Hillary wants a pure Democracy.
JUMP TO: NET NEUTRALITY
- 2nd Amendment
- Another Republican Claim Proven Right — Census Bureau
- Bacon vs. Bread
- Benghazi Meme ~ Bush vs. Obama/Hillary
- Benghazi Budget Myths
- Big Pharma
- Blaming Republicans, Racism, and Reagan for the Arizona Shooting
- Death Panels & More (Palin)
- Electoral College Purpose
- European vs. American Dental Care
- Fox News Hatred
- Gender-Wage Gap
- GOOD NEWS! Fairness Doctrine No More
- Happiest Countries on Earth
- Hillary Clinton Wage-Gap Hypocrisy
- Hunting Endangered vs. Conserved Species
- Karl Marx Was First In History To Seriously Suggest Genocide on Massive Order
- Koch Brothers
- “I Can See Russia From My Porch” (Palin)
- Mass Shooting and Other Gun Myths!
- Nation Building and George Bush
- Obama’s Recovery Like Reagan’s
- Overpopulation Myths
- Planned Parenthood’s 3% Lie
- Planned Parenthood’s Founder ~ Margaret Sanger
- Rape Culture on College Campuses
- Socialism has Never Been Tried!?
- The Case for Hollywood’s Liberal Bias
- The “Hulk” versus Reality
- The Republicans are the Party of the Rich, Old, White Guys… who like to say “no” all the time!
- The Top Five Feminist Myths of All Time
- What Are the Least Free Places in America? Universities
- What Is Fascism?
RPT Posts (newest to oldest)
- (12/2017) Steven Crowder Explains Net Neutrality | Steven Crowder breaks down Net Neutrality and the ulterior motives behind big corporations like Google and Facebook supporting it!
- (12/2017) Rush Limbaugh Explains Net Neutrality | Rush does a good job in explaining the countering info to all the scare tactics of the Left about “net neutrality.” At about the 10:15 mark Rush starts talking about ZERO RATING, an important factor in the freedom of the market that Leftists want government to control.
- (12/2017) Net Neutrality – Ma Bell | Ajit Pai (Chairman of the United States Federal Communications Commission [FCC]) responds to a challenge by Dennis Prager. Various articles and media — but the main article shows Ma Bell to be a monopoly BECAUSE of government regulation!
- (11/2017) Steven Crowder and Ben Shapiro Discuss “Net Neutrality” | A couple articles and…[Video Description] Back from Thursday night mega show hiatus talking all things Trump Jr./Russia, Net Neutrality, Afghan robotics teams, dating abortionists and more. Special guests Ben Shapiro and Cassie Jaye of “The Red Pill”. Colton Wade makes his debut!
- (11/2017 – UPDATED older post) Net Neutrality Flashback | Various articles and media
- (03/2013) Professor Thomas Hazlett – Net Neutrality | [Video One] “I’m very confident a hundred years from now we won’t have an FCC,” says Thomas Hazlett, Reason contributor and George Mason economics professor. [Video Two] Professor Thomas Hazlett (George Mason University) discusses net neutrality at a lecture given at the Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford.
- (05/2011) Steven Crowder Does Net Neutrality | This week, we asked people at South by Southwest how the felt about Net Neutrality. Everyone supported it, until they found out what it actually is…
- (01/2011) Verizon Suing the FCC-Right On! | Verizon Communications has become the first of what many expect to be many, to sue the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to undo its voting themselves Internet Overlords on December 21st….
- (01/2011) Net Neutrality (Have You Ever Known the Gov to be Neutral? | Net Neutrality is a proposed set of regulatory powers that would grant the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) the ability to control how Internet service providers (ISPs) package their services. Proponents argue that such rules are necessary to ensure that ISPs treat all data on the Internet equally and don’t slow or even restrict access to various websites and other parts of the Internet. However well-intentioned, the practical effect will be to limit consumer choice and grant the federal government unprecedented power over the Internet, all in the name of fixing a problem that doesn’t exist in any meaningful way. Indeed, examples of the behavior that Net Neutrality will combat are few and far between.
- (12/2010) What is Net Neutrality? And Why Should Someone Oppose It? | Seton Motley talks about the FCC’s upcoming Net Neutrality regulations, which will affect the way you receive your Internet. In his view – negatively. Here’s why, and what else you should be concerned about. (Marxist connections discussed)
Articles (newest to oldest)
- (12/2018) PREDICTIONS ABOUT NET NEUTRALITY DID NOT COME TO PASS |REAL CLEAR POLICY|
- (12/2017) California To Bring Back Net Neutrality… But Only For California | HOT AIR |
- (12/2017) Debunking the Left’s Myths on Net Neutrality | HERITAGE FOUNDATION |
- (10/2017) Millennial Asks for Net Neutrality Explanation | RUSH LIMBAUGH |
- (07/2017) 7 Reasons Net Neutrality Is Idiotic: The government should keep its grubby hands off the Internet | THE DAILY WIRE |
- (04/2017) Why ‘Net Neutrality’ Is a Problem | CATO INSTITUTE |
- (07/2016) Ma Bell Suppressed Innovation for Thirty Grueling Years: In light of this history, so-called net neutrality should give us pause | FOUNDATION for ECONOMIC EDUCATION (FEE) |
- (03/2015) Opinion: The Fcc’S Net Neutrality Victory Is Anything But | WIRED MAGAZINE |
- (09/2014)Limbaugh is Right, Net Neutrality Is An Attack On Free Speech — So Why Is Comcast For It? | FORBES |
- (09/2014) Net Neutrality — or Destroying Internet Innovation and Investment? | CATO INSTITUTE |
- (05/2014) FCC’s Net Neutrality Rules | CATO INSTITUTE |
- (02/2014) Net Neutrality Rules: Still a Threat to Internet Freedom | HERITAGE FOUNDATION |
- (01/2014) Lessons From The AT&T Break Up, 30 Years Later | AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE (AEI) |
- (07/2013) Don’t Blame Big Cable. It’s Local Governments That Choke Broadband Competition | WIRED MAGAZINE |
- (03/2013) “The FCC did not have the statutory authority to do what it did” On Net Neutrality, Says Departing FCC Commissioner | REASON.ORG |
- (08/2012) Thank Goodness We Have Net Neutrality to Save Us From the Threat of People Paying to Video Chat Over Mobile Networks | REASON.ORG |
- (08/2012) The Free Market Doesn’t Need Government Regulation: Bureaucrats regulate by threat of physical force while the market operates peacefully through millions of cooperating participants | REASON.ORG |
- (12/2010) Happy 100th Birthday, Ronald Coase, Nobel-winning Economist & Pathbreaking FCC Critic! | REASON.ORG |
- (12/2010) John Fund: The Net Neutrality Coup (Marxist connections discussed) | ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER |
- (05/2010) The Breakup Of Ma Bell — Let me caveat this article by saying I am NOT a fan of the New American Magazine. They are a John Birch publication, and my understanding of this organization is intimate, and so are my ultimate rejection of many of it’s positions. THAT BEING SAID, I thoroughly enjoyed much of the content (minus the NWO crap!) | NEW AMERICAN MAGAZINE |
- (07/2007) The Comcast Net Neutrality Controversy: A Discussion | HERITAGE FOUNDATION |
- (04/2000) Internet Access Should Be Left to the Free Market: Forced Access Legislation Will Not Achieve Its Intended Goals | FOUNDATION for ECONOMIC EDUCATION (FEE) |
- (04/1984) What Killed Ma Bell? | FOUNDATION for ECONOMIC EDUCATION (FEE) |
Abortion | Pro-Life
- Abortion Debate at Westmont College
- Babies: A Renewable [Green] Energy Source (Utopian “Dreams”)
- Baby Parts [Still] For Sale ~ Democrats Dehumanizing Human Life
- Bullet Points On the Pro-Choice/Pro-Life Argument
- Eugenics: America’s Past Genocide of Poor Minorities (+911 Call)
- Forcing Morality
- Hillary Clinton Admires Nazi Eugencist-Rewrites History On Top Of It
- Margaret Sanger and the Racist History of Planned Parenthood (Black Genocide)
- Obama Gives Highest Civilian Medal To Eugenicist
- Same-Sex Marriage Is Far From “Live-n-Let-Live”
- This Day Choose Life (*GRAPHIC* Not Intended For All Audiences)
- When Does Life Begin? (+Potential Life?)
- You Do Not Have To Be Religious To Be PRO-LIFE ~ Just Reasonable
Here are some 2016 Election Mania Responses:
SOME OF MY FAVORITES:
- SOME TRUMP SIZED MANTRAS
- WOMEN APPARENTLY LOVE ALTERNATIVE FACTS
- BLACKS, HISPANICS AND GAYS ARE SEXIST, XENOPHOBIC, HOMOPHOBIC, RACIST
- DEMOCRATS ARE LECTURING ME ABOUT ETHICS AND TRUMP!? PLEASE
- WHAT DOES THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS MEAN? (AN OPEN LETTER)
- Are Democrats Turning Into A Municipal Party? – STATS
- Backfiring Bigotry and Gay Voter Turnout for Trump Explained
- Beware Fake News!
- Bill Maher & Joy Reid: 0 | Ann Coulter: 1
- California Proposition Outcomes With Some Commentary
- David Horowitz Discusses the Media Lies About Steve Bannon
- Donald Trump Inspired Hate [Hoaxes]
- Don’t Let The Door Hit You On the Ass On the Way Out!
- From Bannon to Sessions
- Future Babies of the Democratic Party – Pampered Politics
- Get Ready For FOUR Years of This B.S.
- How Leftists Portray Reality
- How Many Non-Citizens Voted in 2016 ~ John Fund
- Ivory Tower Kindergartens – Safe Spaces
- John and Ken Cover Childish Democrats
- Kimberley Strassel’s Interview w/Steve Bannon (Alt-Right Defined)
- Larry Elder Covers Some Aftermath of the Election
- Mindless People on Facebook Continue White Nationalist Mantras
- Putting Democracy At Risk – Dems v. GOP
- President of Largest Teachers Union Calls Trump Hitler
- Remember When Republicans Rioted When Obama Was Elected?
- So, Let Me Get This Straight… – STATS
- Spoiled and Brainwashed Children of the Left Who Hate Democracy
- Steve Bannon And His Despicable Jewish Defenders! [/saracasm]
- The Alt-Left Destroys Families
- The Alt-Left Loses It – No Honkies Allowed
- The Alt-Right ~ Larry Elder Interviews Joel Pollak
- The Blue Wall – Electoral Maps from 1992-2016 – STATS
- The New York Times “Week In Hate” ~ What a Joke! – STATS
- They Weren’t Racists Before They Were
- Three Courses On The Electoral College (Civics 101)
- Time-Line of Trump’s “Mockery”
- Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe Unleashes 200,000 Felons To Vote
- White-Lash ~ A New Leftist Word
- Who Really Voted for the “Racist/Sexist” Trump – STATS
- WOW ~ A Biblical Post-Election “Note”
Most delegates will typically support who their person they supported endorses. So if Rubio endorses Cruz… he would be much closer, much… and this amount of a split in delegates would force — per GOP primary rules — a 2nd ballot at the party convention.
So, right this is the count:
➤ TRUMP: 646
➤ CRUZ: 397
➤ KASICH: 142
RUBIO left the race with 163 delegates. If he endorsed Cruz [like he should… unless he is a weenie and endorses Kasich], That would leave…
➤ CRUZ 560 delegates.
Mind you, these delegates would have a choice to remain uncommitted now and choose who to support at the convention ~ which is July 18–21, 2016.
In-other-words, this will most likely end in a brokered convention, per the already agreed upon rules set for the primaries.
AGAIN, for a “civics 101” lesson on the GOP Primary rules, see the below audio:
- The term superdelegate is used to describe delegates to the Democratic National Convention who are not elected by primary voters but automatically given a voice in the presidential nomination process because of their position in the party.
This comes via The Blaze:
Which do you prefer: Light or dark spirits? As it turns out, your answer may be a good indicator of your political orientation.
According to new research, Democrats prefer clear drinks, while their Republican counterparts would rather enjoy a serving of brown liquor.
Liberals appear to like their Grey Goose and Smirnoff vodkas, while Republicans opt for Wild Turkey and Jim Beam whiskey.
Champagne? That appears to be a drink for individuals on the left.
From video description:
Larry Elder has the unique ability to put side-by-side thesis and antithesis in order to explain [well] two competing ideas. In this example, he answers the question of of what, if any, differences there are in the two competing parties. (Posted by: http://religiopoliticaltalk.com/) There are quotes from Milton Friedman as well as the ineffable Ronald Reagan to drive home these differences. Enjoy, it is Larry Elder at his best.
See also: Two Models: Prosperity or Egalitarianism
For more clear thinking like this from Larry Elder… I invite you to visit: http://www.larryelder.com/
PS, this video took a LONG time to do! Larry Elder’s Producer would mix two differing Reagan speeches, and insert Obama clips, as well as cutting out long pauses in Milton Friedman’s and Ronald Reagan’s clips. So trying to sync up the videos were very time consuming as I literally had to “trim” almost every sentence of Gippers debate close.
I took a small portion from a larger video done by someone else because I think this little bit goes a long way to explain why the West will ALWAYS have problems with Islam. Of course Christ raised the stakes in regards to the “Golden Rule,” but it is interesting to note Islam does not have it. I personally would have chosen some different graphics to have in the background of this presentation… but I am not worried about aesthetics as much as the worldview involved here.