According to Politics1, there are nine Republicans running for the open Senate seat in Georgia including three current Congressmen. I was going to sit this primary out and let the voters of Georgia decide their candidate. I am not going to officially give support to any one candidate. That being said, Congressman Paul Broun is the only candidate that routinely sends me e-mails. His website is http://www.paulbroun.com/ From what I can tell, he is a true conservative. I received an e-mail from his campaign yesterday that linked this great campaign ad! I had to share it!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tO5uuN2viA&list=UUJoW9_yUBzC_Ye5UqOft0ig?rel=0
Donate: https://secure.donationreport.com/donate.html?key=L5AQMC3NDWSU
This is a bonus video on Dr. Broun and the MURDER of unborn babies
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlHkM0bXdUg
—
From: http://www.cfact.org/2014/02/06/cfact-to-epa-proposed-power-plant-regs-nothing-less-than-industrial-sabotage/
“CFACT to EPA: Proposed power plant regulations nothing less than industrial sabotage
by CFACT Ed
February 6, 2014
CFACT testified today at EPA’s hearing on proposed emissions regulations for new power plants. These regulations will make it nearly impossible to create a new coal-fired electricity plant in the United States at a time when China, India and even Germany are expanding their use of coal.
CFACT senior policy analyst Bonner Cohen, Ph. D. presented CFACT’s testimony today at the Clinton Building in Washington D.C.
Comments on Proposed Carbon Pollution Standards for New Power Plants Submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Bonner R. Cohen, Ph. D.
On Behalf of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow
February 6, 2014
My name is Bonner Cohen and I am taking this opportunity to comment on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed carbon-pollution standards for new power plants.
There are two reasons why the agency’s proposal is ill-advised. One is scientific; the other is regulatory. EPA’s primary target is carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted from new coal-fired power plants. Current concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere are 400 parts per million (ppm). Human activities in all their forms account for 4 percent of that total. The United States is responsible for 3 percent of that 4 percent. All the rest of the CO2 in the atmosphere (96 percent of the total) comes from purely natural causes, such as volcanos, undersea venting, animal fluctuation, etc. The total U.S. contribution to atmospheric CO2 is one-tenth of one percent, or 0.01 percent (EPA: We must attack and bring that high number down to save the planet! We must save the planet. [And increase our control in the process!] All we do or ever hope to do is for the good of the children and the good of the planet. [As determined by us!]—my addition).
This 0.01 percent includes the CO2 that is emitted every time one of the approximately 315 million Americans opens his or her mouth to speak, cry, or engage in any other verbal activity. The contribution of coal-fired power plants to the U.S., much less global CO2 emissions, is so miniscule that it cannot be measured with any degree of accuracy (Minor detail to the EPA! The attempt must be made particularly if it gives the EPA and the Left more control over industry and people’s lives!—my addition). And the contribution of those entities targeted by EPA to the Earth’s climate also cannot be measured. Thus, EPA has absolutely no way of saying how its proposed regulations will affect the climate (Does not matter to the EPA!—my addition).
Furthermore, in justifying its regulatory action, EPA accepts the theory of anthropogenic (human-induced) global warming driven by the burning of fossil fuels. The theory, however, provides NO explanation for the extended periods of warming and cooling that predated the widespread use of fossil fuels to produce energy (Of course not! Nor can it! They do not care about science! They care about advancing their agenda at any cost!—my addition). Nor can it explain the confirmed lack of any warming over the past 15 years, a time when fossil-fuel use throughout the world has increased (Global warming caused the stall. Cannot explain it but know it is true! Wait! They are LIARS just as their President is a LIAR!—my addition).
In keeping with political fashion, EPA constantly refers to ‘climate change (By definition, climate ALWAYS changes over time! ALWAYS! The EPA and the Obama Administration think we are idiots. Maybe they are right since he got elected to the Presidency twice! And once was probably even legally!—my addition),’ as opposed to ‘global warming.’ This is a tacit admission on the part of the agency that the ‘global warming,’ so confidently predicted by the climate models on which EPA relies, has failed to take place. Indeed, even the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its latest report had to acknowledge that global temperatures have shown no warming since 1998 (Do not bother us with facts! We know what we know!—my addition). I would remind the agency that science is based on observation and not on ‘consensus,’ much less on mathematical models that can be, and are, easily constructed to produce the desired result (Indeed! Which is what occurred! Garbage in! Garbage out!—my addition). And the climatological observations provide NO justification for what EPA is proposing to do.
The proposal also makes no regulatory sense. China has already surpassed the U.S. as the world’s greatest emitter of greenhouse gases, and India will shortly do so. The governments of those two countries have said repeatedly over the past 20 years that they will not be a part of any scheme aimed at reducing their emissions of greenhouse gases. They have no intention of denying their citizens and businesses the affordable energy that fossil fuels provide (And limiting the emissions would have NO benefit!—my addition).
For EPA to impose carbon-pollution standards that by design will make the introduction of new coal-fired power plants all but impossible is to adopt a policy that by design will drive up the cost of electricity by limiting America’s sources of power (And Barack Hussein Obama while running for President in 2008 said that very thing! His plan to limit emissions would greatly increase the cost of electricity! And he did not care! Could this be a “War on the Poor?” —my addition). This will be done under the justification that it will have a positive effect on the climate (whatever that is). In doing so, EPA is engaging in a complete fabrication (Complete LIE!—my addition), one that will put an end to an industry that supplies the U.S. with 37 percent of its electricity. This, of course, is exactly what the proposed regulations are meant to do. It is nothing less than industrial sabotage by regulatory means (Yes it is! The Obama Administration wants to completely end coal production in the United States! Do you think it is because he worked in a coal mine? No wait! He never has worked in a coal mine. Has he ever done hard physical labor?—my addition).
Bonner R. Cohen, Senior Policy Analyst
Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow
Arlington, Virginia”
Barack Hussein Obama’s “War on Energy!” War on America!
—
This is my two part suggestion to Tea Party groups, social conservatives, Constitutionalists, and anyone else who wants to save our Republic from the approaching destruction.
1) Run as many conservative candidates in as many Republican primaries as possible.
2) Then, run as many independent and/or third party candidates as possible in as many races as possible where we did not win the primary.
That is why I am working to get the Constitution Party on the ballot in Texas. If we get on the ballot, we will have two Congressional House candidates running and two State candidates running. Getting on the ballot is the first step. Winning elections is the second. Winning elections will grow the Party. The Constitution Party is much more in line with the Tea Party movement than is the Republican Party. And I have been involved with all three!
—
The Constitution Party of Texas website: http://cptexas.us/home/
—
If elected to Congress, I will not, under any circumstances, vote for present Speaker of the House John Boehner to be Speaker of the House. I call on every Republican primary candidate running in Texas Congressional District 19 to publicly (in writing) make the same pledge. It would not be a bad idea for every Republican candidate running for the House of Representatives to give the same pledge. See my post at http://christiangunslinger3.blogspot.com on December 16, 2013 entitled “Speaker of the House John Boehner Attacks the Tea Party Again for Being Fiscally Responsible!”
—
If I am elected to the House, I will use the Constitution, as written, to do everything in my power to stop judicial tyranny! Will the other candidates pledge the same? I know our present Representative has NOT done everything possible to stop judicial tyranny! Why is that?
—
Competition is good for the economy and competition is good for the Republican Party!!! Competition keeps Congressmen committed to we the people!!! Primary Republicans who do not support the Constitution as written.
—
The Constitution Party of Texas website: http://cptexas.us/home/
