Posts Tagged ‘Ph.D.’

The Ongoing American Marxist Revolution: H.R. 1 “For The People Act”!

March 20, 2021

I know that the following is a lot of reading and it is time-consuming. But, we also remember that hundreds of thousands of our citizens have died to protect our precious and unique, in all the world, American Constitutional Republic. It is essential that all citizens realize what the H.R. 1 bill, if it passes the Senate, will do to destroy America.

The Ongoing American Marxist Revolution perpetrated against us by the radicalized Democrat Party has devised the perfect plan to “TRANSFORM” America. This is the one that they have promised since the election of their President Obama. This democrat administration began the process of inflaming citizen conflicts based upon identity politics (I.e., race, religion, value systems, and LGBTQ issues, etc.). They also opened our borders to a flood of unvetted illegal invaders, dismantled our military,  and circumvented our Constitution limitations on the growth and power of our Federal Government. 

The American Marxist Revolution has long simmered in our political system.  But Obama kicked it into high gear. Our propagandistic public schools, universities, news and entertainment media, along with judicial and governmental Marxist operatives have finally reached the TRAFORMATIONAL TIPPING POINT that we are at now.

Of course, many smart Americans recoil from what they identify as conspiracy theory paranoia. It is smart and adaptive to carefully do one’s reality-testing before forming important belief systems. This is essential to do to  make adaptive decisions in a constantly changing crazy society and world. 

This is no easy task, but as voting citizens of the greatest nation ever on planet earth, it is our responsibility to bring intellectual rigour to our efforts to save and perpetuate our ways of life. That is, to protect individual freedoms from excessive governmental control while securing the greatest good for the greatest majority of our citizens.

And just as importantly, to do all of this while protecting our aged and variously infirmed citizens from the ravages of poverty and disease.

No other nation on earth has ever done a better job of approaching these goals.

But all of this is now on the verge if destruction. The following is the Marxist Revolutionary Bill to be voted on by the American Senate. This is a Marxist bullet shot into our Founding Father’s American Constitutional Brain. 

If approved, the Unconstitutional changes outlined in this Bill solidifies the death of the American Dream. 

It is our citizens’ duty to understand this bill and to then ACT accordingly.

I have placed the first two short summarizing paragraphs of this document at the end of this article without changing a word. It is a good summary of this document.  

It is imperative all citizens read this entire H.R. 1 summary! Please send this H.R. 1 summary to everyone you know.

V. Thomas Mawhinney, 3/20/21

The Facts About H.R. 1: The “For the People Act of 2021”

Report
February 21, 2021 6 min read Download Report

The Heritage Foundation

The Issue

H.R. 1 would federalize and micromanage the election process administered by the states, imposing unnecessary, unwise, and unconstitutional mandates on the states and reversing the decentralization of the American election process—which is essential to the protection of our liberty and freedom. It would implement nationwide the worst changes in election rules that occurred during the 2020 election and go even further in eroding and eliminating basic security protocols that states have in place. The bill would interfere with the ability of states and their citizens to determine the qualifications and eligibility of voters, to ensure the accuracy of voter registration rolls, to secure the fairness and integrity of elections, to participate and speak freely in the political process, and to determine the district boundary lines for electing their representatives.

What H.R. 1 Would Do

  • Seize the authority of states to regulate voter registration and the voting process by forcing states to implement early voting, automatic voter registration, same-day registration, online voter registration, and no-fault absentee balloting.
  • Make it easier to commit fraud and promote chaos at the polls through same-day registration, as election officials would have no time to verify the accuracy of voter registration information and the eligibility of an individual to vote and could not anticipate the number of ballots and precinct workers that would be needed at specific polling locations.
  • Hurt voter turnout through 15 days of mandated early voting by diffusing the intensity of get-out-the-vote efforts; it would raise the cost of campaigns. Voters who vote early don’t have the same information as those who vote on Election Day, missing late-breaking developments that could affect their choices.
  • Degrade the accuracy of registration lists by requiring states to automatically register all individuals (as opposed to “citizens”) from state and federal databases, such as state Departments of Motor Vehicles, corrections and welfare offices, and federal agencies such as the Social Security Administration, the Department of Labor, the Federal Bureau of Prisons, and the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services of the Department of Health and Human Services. This would register large numbers of ineligible voters, including aliens, and cause multiple or duplicate registrations of the same individuals and put federal agencies in charge of determining a person’s domicile for voting purposes (as well as that individual’s taxing state).
  • Constitute a recipe for massive voter registration fraud by hackers and cyber criminals through online voter registration that is not tied to an existing state record, such as a driver’s license. It would make it a criminal offense for a state official to reject a voter registration application even when it is rejected “under color of law” because the official believes the individual is ineligible to vote. It would also require states to allow 16-year-olds and 17-year-olds to register; when combined with a ban on voter ID and restrictions on the ability to challenge the eligibility of a voter, this would effectively ensure that underage individuals could vote with impunity.
  • Require states to count ballots cast by voters outside of their assigned precincts, overriding the precinct system used by almost all states that allows election officials to monitor votes, staff polling places, provide enough ballots, and prevent election fraud.
  • Mandate no-fault absentee ballots, which are the tool of choice for vote thieves. It would ban witness signature or notarization requirements for absentee ballots; force states to accept absentee ballots received up to 10 days after Election Day as long as they are postmarked by Election Day; and require states to allow vote trafficking (vote harvesting) so that any third parties—including campaign staffers and political consultants—can pick up and deliver absentee ballots.
  • Prevent election officials from checking the eligibility and qualifications of voters and removing ineligible voters. This includes restrictions on using the U.S. Postal Service’s national change-of-address system to verify the address of registered voters; participating in state programs that compare voter registration lists to detect individuals registered in multiple states; or ever removing registrants due to a failure to vote no matter how much time has elapsed. It also would substantially limit the public release of voter registration information, making it almost impossible for nonpartisan organizations to verify the accuracy of registration rolls, and prohibit states from using undeliverable election mail as a basis for challenging a registrant’s eligibility.
  • Ban state voter ID laws by forcing states to allow individuals to vote without an ID and merely signing a statement in which they claim they are who they say they are.
  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.
  • Expand regulation and government censorship of campaigns and political activity and speech, including online and policy-related speech. H.R. 1 would impose onerous legal and administrative compliance burdens and costs on candidates, citizens, civic groups, unions, corporations, and nonprofit organizations. Many of these provisions violate the First Amendment, protect incumbents, and reduce the accountability of politicians to the public; its onerous disclosure requirements for nonprofit organizations would subject their members and donors to intimidation and harassment—the modern equivalent of the type of disclosure requirements the U.S. Supreme Court in NAACP v. Alabama (1958) held violated associational rights protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
  • Reduce the number of Federal Election Commission members from six to five, allowing the political party with three commission seats to control the commission and engage in partisan enforcement activities.
  • Prohibit state election officials from participating in federal elections and impose numerous other “ethics” rules that are unconstitutional or unfairly restrict political activity, eliminating the ability of the residents of specific states to make their own decisions about what rules should govern their state government officials.
  • Require states to restore the ability of felons to vote the moment they are out of prison regardless of uncompleted parole, probation, or restitution requirements. Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment gives states the constitutional authority to decide when felons who committed crimes against their fellow citizens may vote again. Congress cannot override a constitutional amendment with a statute.
  • Transfer the right to draw congressional districts from state legislatures to “independent” commissions whose members are unaccountable to voters. H.R. 1 would make it a violation of federal law to engage in “partisan” redistricting and mandate the inclusion of alien population, both legal and illegal, in all redistricting. This is an anti-democratic, unconstitutional measure that would take away the ability of the citizens of a state to make their own decisions about redistricting.
  • Authorize the Internal Revenue Service to engage in partisan activity. H.R. 1 would permit the IRS to investigate and consider the political and policy positions of nonprofit organizations before granting tax-exempt status, thus enabling IRS officials to target organizations engaging in First Amendment activity with disfavored views.
  • Limit access to federal courts for anyone challenging H.R. 1. The bill would prohibit the filing of any lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of H.R. 1 anywhere except in the District Court for the District of Columbia and would allow the court to order all plaintiffs and intervenors, regardless of their number (such as all 50 states), “to file joint papers or to be represented by a single attorney at oral argument,” severely limiting the legal representation and due process rights of challengers.
  • Establish a “Commission to Protect Democratic Institutions” that would threaten the independence of the judiciary. H.R. 1 defines “democratic institutions” as those that are “essential to ensuring an independent judiciary, free and fair elections and the rule of law.” The commission would be given the authority to compel judges to testify and justify their legal decisions, threatening their independent judgment and subjecting them to political pressure and harassment.

Get Inside Information on the Policies Shaping America

Each week, The Heritage Foundation publishes a limited-release newsletter with all of the latest news and updates on the critical policy issues being discussed on the Hill. Stay in the know when you sign up today.

Authors

The Heritage Foundation

The Facts About H.R. 1: The “For the People Act of 2021”

Report
February 21, 2021 6 min read Download Report

The Heritage Foundation

Summary

H.R. 1 would federalize and micromanage the election process administered by the states, imposing unnecessary, unwise, and unconstitutional mandates on the states and reversing the decentralization of the American election process—which is essential to the protection of our liberty and freedom. It would (among other things) implement nationwide the worst changes in election rules that occurred during the 2020 election; go even further in eroding and eliminating basic security protocols that states have in place; and interfere with the ability of states and their citizens to determine the qualifications and eligibility of voters, ensure the accuracy of voter registration rolls, secure the fairness and integrity of elections, and participate and speak freely in the political process.

Key Takeaways

H.R. 1 would federalize and micromanage the election process, imposing unnecessary, unwise, and unconstitutional mandates on the states.

It would reverse the decentralization of the American election process—an essential protection of our liberty and freedom.

It would implement nationwide the worst changes in election rules that occurred in 2020 and further damage or eliminate basic security protocols.

Another Tribute: Memorial Day 2020

May 25, 2020

Another Tribute: Memorial Day 2020

The following wonderful dedication was sent to me by my friend and fellow patriot, John Plume.

I hope you will enjoy this moving tribute to those who have sacrificed to defend our freedoms and way of life.

https://lp.hillsdale.edu/memorial-day/?utm_campaign=memorialday2020&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=88373679&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_yMRjVmShvmZPdjJZRLgoMjZCv4Q4ZJmkbfi6BVpE-0YjPE54oixqkRnLuAPTeFTfpFKSSHu1EcRO73SGBUIXLu9WiVg&_hsmi=88391672

V. Thomas Mawhinney, 5/25/20

Impeach Pie or Cowpie?!

January 19, 2020

Impeach Pie or Cowpie?!

VTM, 1/19/20

A.F. Branco · Jan. 16, 2020

Laughter Not Best Medicine…Try Conservatism!!

September 2, 2019

Laughter Not Best Medicine…Try Conservatism!!

 

Cartoons: Michael Ramirez for August 30, 2019

 

 

 

 

It’s A Laughing Shame!

April 11, 2019

It’s A Laughing Shame!

VTM, 4/11/19

 

Mike Lester · Apr. 6, 2019

U.S. Immigration Issues #1

February 16, 2019

U.S. Immigration Issues #1.

The following is about a very important PragerU video about the need to redesign America’s failed immigration policies.

Redesigning this self-destructive system is essential to the survival of the long-diminishing personal freedoms that our amazing Founding Father’s bequeathed to us all. 

America’s immigration policies must be amended to strengthen our ability to survive and prosper in this increasingly dynamic and hostile Post-Modern world. 

To fail in this great challenge, will be to fail as the world’s last and greatest hope: A highly successful Constitutional Republic dedicated to the preservation of all citizen’s individual freedoms, opportunities, and equality before our laws.

Wake-Up America!

Please see this video and then vote accordingly.

https://www.prageru.com/videos/america-wants-legal-immigrants

V. Thomas Mawhinney, Ph.D., 2/16/19

Is Socialism Good For America?!

August 9, 2018

Is Socialism Good For America?!

 

 

Now for a real education about socialism, watch Ben Shapiro tell us why it is immoral and evil!

If we cannot explain why this is the truth, we are part of America’s great undoing.

Shapiro makes us put our “thinking caps” on!

V. Thomas Mawhinney, Ph.D., 8/9/18

Celebrate the Real Reason for America’s Fourth of July!

July 4, 2018

Celebrate the Real Reason for America’s Fourth of July!

A heart-felt 4th-of-July message from out President!

V. Thomas Mawhinney, 7/4/18

Why Not the Popular Vote?

June 14, 2018

Why Not the Popular Vote?

America’s Founding Fathers knew the popular vote alone would too easily lapse into the abuse of minorities by the majority. This has occurred  in simple democracies throughout history.

Therefore they designed the poorly understood, but essential Electoral College for America.

I recently had a debate with a smart individual who appeared to have no understanding of the value of the Electoral College. Therefore, I am posting this primer on this topic as evidence of the genius of our Founding Fathers and the benefits of the Electoral College to America.

Please see this very good explanation:

https://www.prageru.com/playlists/most-popular#1

V. Thomas Mawhinney, Ph.D.

Will Liberals Let Us Institutionalize The Dangerously Mentally Ill? No.

February 19, 2018

Will Liberals Let Us Institutionalize The Dangerously Mentally Ill?   No.

Well, there has been another mass killing at a school and it makes me want to vomit.

The following is a republication on this horrifying topic. I published it on my blog on 9/20/13, 10/2/15, and now on this day, 2/19/18.

Why publish the same article three times? First, not everyone read  my articles on mass shootings when they have been published in the past. Second, I can’t really think of anything new to say about these murderous events that I, and others, have not already said!

Please consider the following: It is meant to address all such shootings; past, present and, so sadly, the ones yet to come.

______________________________________________________

I do not know if this guy was a Islamic Terrorist, or a severely mentally ill man on the loose. Someone has reported that he had ties to a white supremacist group, though the logical connection from there to this shooting is yet unexplained.

Whatever is the case, of course Obama immediately blamed guns. It is essential for him to do so because a comprehensive and intelligent analysis of the many real and interacting causes of America’s tragic decline into behavioral chaos will go straight to his own liberal/progressive ideology. An ideology that has steady grown in America over the past decades and has culminated in his own Presidential Marxist regime, as well as our current bloated, ineffectual and corrupted system of government.

The result of this spiritual/political/psychological/sociological spiral of death is  modern America: A stunningly diminished and grotesque shadow of its former self.

If you have read my other blogs on America’s decline, you will know exactly what I am referring to. There are now over 1200 (currently nearly 1700) of my articles. Please enter any search term: Mass Murder, America’s Decline, Socialists, Progressives, etc., and see the truth, as best I can know it. My search box is on the upper right side of this page.

God’s Blessings to you and your loved ones. Please vote and remonstrate with your political  representatives accordingly.

Now, please see my blog, originally published on 9/20/13, below.

V. Thomas Mawhinney, Ph.D., 10/2/15, now 2/19/18

_____________________________________________________________________________________

As a psychologist, with over 40 years of experience, I endorse Ann Coulter’s article below. She speaks the truth on this issue.

Please search my site for former blogs on the “mentally Ill”. simply enter that term in the search box to the upper right and click return.

Thanks to Joe Grunert for forwarding  Ann Coulter’s article to me. Please take time to read it.

VTM, 9/20/13 

There’s been another mass shooting by a crazy person, and liberals still refuse to consider institutionalizing the dangerous mentally ill.   The man who shot up the Washington Navy Yard on Monday, Aaron Alexis, heard voices speaking to him through the walls. He thought people were following him. He believed microwave ovens were sending vibrations through his body. There are also reports that Alexis believed the Obamacare exchanges were ready to go.  

Anyone see any bright red flags of paranoid schizophrenia? (Either that, or Obama’s NSA is way better than we thought!)   But Alexis couldn’t be institutionalized because the left has officially certified the mentally ill as “victims,” and once you’re a victim, all that matters is that you not be “stigmatized.”

But here’s the problem: Coddling the mentally ill isn’t even helping the mentally ill. Ask the sisters of crazy homeless woman “Billie Boggs” how grateful they were to the ACLU for keeping Boggs living on the streets of New York City. Ask the parents of Aaron Alexis, James Holmes (Aurora, Colo., movie theater shooter), Jared Loughner (Tucson, Ariz., mall shooter) or Seung-Hui Cho (Virginia Tech shooter) how happy they are that their sons weren’t institutionalized.  

Tellingly, throughout the last three decades, the overall homicide rate has been in free fall, thanks to Republican crime policies, from 10 per 100,000 in 1980 to 4 per 100,000 today. (You might even call them “common sense” crime policies.) But the number of mass shootings has skyrocketed from 4 per year, between 1900 and 1970, to 29 per year since then.   Something seems to have gone horribly wrong right around 1970. What could it be? Was it the introduction of bell-bottoms?  

That date happens to correlate precisely with when the country began throwing the mentally ill out of institutions in 1969. Your memory of there not being as many mass murders a few decades ago is correct. Your memory of there not being as many homeless people a few decades ago is also correct.   But liberals won’t allow the dangerous mentally ill to be committed to institutions against their will. (The threat of commitment is very persuasive in getting disturbed individuals to take their medicine.) Something in liberals’ genetic makeup compels them to attack civilization, for example, by defending the right of dangerous psychotics to refuse treatment and then representing them in court after they commit murder.  Liberals won’t even agree to take the most basic steps to prevent psychotics from purchasing guns — yes, GUNS! — because to allow the release of mental health information would be “stigmatizing.” We’re not talking about anorexic girls here. We just need shrinks to tell us if potential gun purchasers are paranoid schizophrenics.  

The disastrous consequences of the deinstitutionalization movement is described in E. Fuller Torrey’s book, “The Insanity Offense: How America’s Failure to Treat the Seriously Mentally Ill Endangers Its Citizens.” Torrey’s book reads like a compendium of America’s most heinous murders since the early ’70s — all of which could have been stopped with involuntary commitment laws, and none of which could have been stopped even with a complete gun ban.   Here are a few:   — “Mary Maloney had decapitated her infant daughter and year-old son. Her husband had tried to have her psychiatrically hospitalized prior to the crime, but she had not met the (legal) criteria for dangerousness.” — “Charles Soper had killed his wife, three children, and himself two weeks after being discharged from Camarillo State Hospital because he failed to qualify as ‘imminently dangerous.'” — “In April 1973… Edmund Kemper (who had been released from a mental hospital a few years earlier when the deinstitutionalization act became law) had been arrested after he bludgeoned his mother to death, then strangled her friend who came to visit. Kemper was also charged with the murders of six female hitchhikers.” Kemper had originally been institutionalized after murdering his grandparents at age 15 because “he tired of their company.”  

In 1972 and 1973, paranoid schizophrenic Herb Mullin went on a killing spree in California that left 13 dead, including a 72-year-old World War I veteran, a college coed, four teenaged campers and a mother with her two little boys, murdered as they played with marbles.   Mullin killed his victims with a baseball bat, knives, his fists, as well as with guns. How’s your “high-capacity” magazine ban going to stop that, Democrats? How would piling on yet more gun control laws have helped the priest whom Herb Mullin beat, kicked and stabbed to death?   What about the elderly boarders that Dorothea Puente — diagnosed with schizophrenia — poisoned and buried in her backyard?   What additional gun restrictions would have helped the group of bicyclists Linda Scates intentionally drove her car into because voices were telling her to “kill the demons”?  

In the decades since the deinstitutionalization movement began, more and more people kept being killed as a result of that movement — including the deinstitutionalized themselves. According to Torrey, between 1970 and 2004, the mentally ill were responsible for at least 4,700 murders in California.   Increasing government spending on mental health programs is not going to stop the mentally ill from committing murder. Like liberals, these are people too sick even to know they need help. As Herschel Hardin, whose son was schizophrenic, wrote in the Vancouver Sun: “If you think you are Jesus Christ or an avenging angel, you are not likely to agree that you need to go to the hospital.”   Liberals will pretend to have missed the news that the Washington Navy Yard shooter was a paranoid schizophrenic. They refuse to acknowledge that the mass murder problem — as well as the homeless problem — only began after crazy people were thrown out of institutions in the 1970s. They tell us crapping in your pants on a New York City sidewalk is a “civil right.” They say that haranguing passersby on the street about your persecution by various movie stars is a form of “free speech.”   Only after a mass murder committed by a psychotic with a firearm do liberals spring to life and suggest a solution: Take away everyone’s guns.   Taking guns away from the mentally stable only makes us less safe: Even psychotics know enough to keep choosing “Gun-Free Zones” for their mass murders.

If Americans are serious about preventing massacres like the ones at the Washington Navy Yard, Newtown, Tucson, Aurora and Virginia Tech, it’s time to review our civil commitment laws.  

After this latest shooting, will the left finally let us do something about the dangerously mentally ill?

 


<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: