The Social Conservative

Don Browning Is Not A Pro-life Candidate

2010-08-20T18:17:00.000-07:00

Don Browning Does Not Support Pro-Life Position

Claims, “I am a scientist.”

Dear fellow conservative:

Don Browning is a candidate for Congress and as such was asked by the Florida Family Policy Council to complete their candidate questionnaire. I was appalled when I read his response to the question "Do you support the prohibition on embryonic stem cell research that requires the destruction of a fertilized human embryo?" The Pro-Life and Pro-Family response is "YES" but Browning said he was "Undecided" and further said, "I am a scientist and need more information on the fertilized issue..."
This statement raises two major red flags for me:

1) First flag; Browning is "undecided" on embryonic stem cell research. The National Right to Life Committee tells us that human embryonic stem cells have not yet successfully treated any diseases. Furthermore, NIH says that any therapies based on the use of human embryonic stem cells are still "hypothetical and highly experimental." Any layman, serious Pro-Life candidate should know this. Never mind someone who claims to be a scientist.
2) Second flag; Browning claims "I am a scientist." This is not true. He is not a scientist. He is a photographer from Weirsdale. Why would he mislead the voters, and especially Pro-Family voters in this manner? Of course, earlier this week the Florida Times-Union reported that Browning faked an NRA endorsement and the NRA told Browning that he was not endorsed and to remove the NRA logo from his website.

This candidate falsifies an NRA endorsement, is undecided on an important Pro-Life issue and claims he is a scientist. Browning can't be trusted and should not receive the vote of a single Pro-Family voter!

Attached is the Florida Family Policy Council's voter guide with Browning's responses for your review.

Thank you for your attention to this matter,

Sandi Trusso
Pro-Life Volunteer

Marion County School Board Candidate, Nancy Thrower, Endorsed by Gay Activist Group

2010-08-10T15:53:00.000-07:00

School Board elections are non-partisan races that become very difficult to identify where the candidates stand on moral issues. If you go to Nancy Thrower's WEB site you can not tell where she stands on issues. In fact she has had pictures taken with very conservative Christian politicians, as well as attending numerous Tea Party events. However, after researching who is contributing to her campaign, it is alarming to find organizations endorsing her and contributing to her campaign. One of these organizations is Equality Florida, which is a gay activist organization with a mission, to infiltrate the school systems with a pro-Homosexual agenda. In addition, this organization is fighting to overturn Florida's Gay adoption laws as well as fighting to overthrow Florida's Marriage amendment. The following link is a flyer from Equality Florida PAC that has been recently sent to absentee and early voters. http://eqfl.org/pac/

Our records indicate that you have requested an absentee ballot for the August 24th Primary election - thank you for voting by mail!

The August 24th Primary Election will be hotly contested and incredibly important for Florida's gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community. Below you can find a short list of candidates Equality Florida Action PAC strongly recommends for the primary. We are very selective in who we recommend, and everyone on this list is a champion for our community.

Please take a moment to review the list below and then be sure to fill out and mail your ballot today!

IMPORTANT
We have not completed our endorsement process and will be endorsing more candidates. However, we wanted to share our current list of recommended candidates with you right now, so you will have them when filling out your absentee ballot.

Remember: If you choose to vote at an early vote or election day polling site you MUST present precinct workers with your absentee ballot. We recommend you use your voice NOW and fill out and mail your absentee ballot today!

Equality Florida Action PAC

August Primary Recommendations

STATEWIDE
Attorney General	Dan Gelber

NORTH FLORIDA
Leon County Commission District 1	John "Corri" Byrne
Leon County Commission District 5	Bob Rackleff
Leon County Commission At Large	Cliff Thaell

Alachua County School Board District 1	Rick Nesbit
Alachua County School Board District 3	Gunnar Paulson

Marion County School Board District 4	Nancy Thrower

CENTRAL FLORIDA
House District 55 (parts of Hillsborough, Manatee, Pinellas & Sarasota Counties)	Darryl Rouson
House District 60 (parts of Hillsborough, & Pasco Counties)	Russ Patterson

Kissimmee City Commission District 4	Cheryl Grieb

Orange County School Board District 1	Joie Cadle

Pinellas County School Board District 2	Terry Krassner
Pinellas County School Board District 6	Linda Lerner
Pinellas County School Board District 7	James Jackson

Hillsborough County School Board District 6	April Griffin
Hillsborough County Commission District 1	John Dingfelder
Hillsborough County Commission District 5	Linda Saul-Sena

Volusia County Council At Large	Joyce Cusack
Volusia County School Board District 5	Diane Smith

SOUTH FLORIDA
House District 86 (part of Palm Beach County)	Lori Berman
House District 88 (part of Palm Beach County)	Mark Pafford
House District 90 (parts of Palm Beach & Broward Counties)	Irv Slosberg
House District 92 (part of Broward County)	Justin Flippen
House District 114 (part of Miami-Dade County)	Millie Herrera
House District 118 (part of Miami-Dade County)	Dwight Bullard

Senate District 35 (parts of Broward & Miami-Dade Counties)	Kevin Burns

Broward County Commission District 4	Ken Keechl
Broward County Commission District 6	Sue Gunzburger
Broward County School Board District 6	Phyllis Hope
Broward County School Board District 8	Jennifer Gottlieb

Oakland Park City Commission District 4	John Adornato III

Miami-Dade County Commission District 8	Annette Taddeo

Paid political advertisement, paid for by Equality Florida Action PAC, P.O. Box 13184 Saint Petersburg, Fl 33733.

Don Browning misinformed...or lying ...again?

2010-08-09T12:43:00.000-07:00

In a recent Don Browning, a local resident of Marion County Florida and a Republican Candidate for Congressional House District 6 has begun his attack game. It has become apparent his campaign has lacked traction with his lack luster platform and performance. Mr. Browning's new attack has accused his opponent Cliff Stearns "was using paid congressional staffers for campaign purposes- a possible violation of House rules prohibiting such activity".1 Either Don Browning is misinformed or he has attempted to launch intentional false claims against his opponent. Let's look at the House Rules regarding staff members campaigning:

Campaign Work by House Employees Outside the Congressional Office and on Their Own Time

Once House employees have completed their official duties, they are free to engage in campaign activities on their own time, as volunteers or for pay, as long as they do not do so in congressional offices or facilities, or otherwise use official resources. Executive branch personnel are subject to restrictions on partisan political activity by the Hatch Act (5 U.S.C. § 7321 et seq.), but those restrictions do not apply to congressional employees.16

It should be stressed that although House employees are free to engage in campaign activities on their own time, in no event may a Member or office compel a House employee to do campaign work. To do so would result in an impermissible official subsidy of the Member’s campaign.17 The prohibition against coercing staff or requiring staff members to do campaign work is quite broad. It forbids Members and senior staff from not only threatening or attempting to intimidate employees regarding doing campaign work, but also from directing or otherwise pressuring them to do such work.

What Is an Employee’s “Own Time”?

What constitutes a staff member’s “own time” is determined by the personnel policies that are in place in the employing office. Time that is available to a staff member, under those policies, to engage in personal or other outside activities may instead be used to do campaign work, if the individual so chooses. This free time may include, for example, a lunch period, time after the end of the business day, and annual leave. However, a Member may not adjust the work requirements of the congressional office, or add unpaid interns during the campaign, in order to create more “free” time for staff to do campaign work. To help ensure compliance with the rules, office policies on employee leave and other free time should be in writing and distributed to all employees.

For Don Browning to attempt to stop staff employees of campaigning would be a direct attack on the First Amendment. When any candidate has to use unwarranted attacks and falsehoods to attempt to win a campaign their lack of integrity is so loud I can't hear what they're saying.

Quote from The Jacksonville Observer August 8, 2010

Pam Bondi for Attorney General...really?

2010-07-26T09:24:00.000-07:00

The year 2010 has become one of the most critical election years in the history of our nation. The very existence of this democratic Republic and the US Constitution is at stake. Candidates from every reach of the spectrum have been diligently campaign for every vote. In return, we as responsible citizens must diligently research our choices and make wise decisions based on our value system. I noticed in the past few weeks a small number of "social conservative voters" have thrown their support behind Pam Bondi for Attorney General. Lets look a Pam Bondi through the lens of a social conservative.

In a review of Pam Bondi campaign website I could not find her views on items such as her position on abortion, marriage, adoption, or what was the basis for her decision making process. If these are views a candidate is passionate about, should they not be present somewhere in their literature or website? I was able to find in a press release on her website that she supports the temporary ban on oil drilling. Onward to the web-searches... here is what we found:

Endorsement by Susan B. Anthony List- A pro-life women's organization that support pro-life women running for office. If two pro-life candidates are running for the same office and one is a woman, they will normally endorse the woman candidate.

Would not answer whether she supported the "gay adoption ban" in the state of Florida, whereas, both of her opponents clearly supported this ban. (Suncoast Tiger Bay Club event Tampa FL).

Did not vote in 84, 86, 88, 90, 92, 02 & 08 elections. Not voting in the 2002 and 2008 elections are very troubling.

In her personal life, she has been married twice and is now living with her 60 year old boyfriend. Yes, morality matters.

Changed parties from Democrat to Republican in 2000. When asked why, she stated that she could not recall why she became a republican when she did. Could it be her democratic boss committed suicide and the State Attorney's office was on it's way to becoming controlled by a Republican?

Pam Bondi appears to be anything but conservative when it comes to social issues. You only have one vote...make it count.

"VOTE THEM ALL OUT" Was Their Battle Cry

2010-07-20T14:46:00.000-07:00

As I sat intently at a local tea party event, I was thrilled with the excitement and passion the group had for changing our government. However, one of the rhetorical comments I heard time and time again was "Vote them all out", along with a roar of applause.

I then thought back a few years ago about Venezuela, a beautiful mineral rich country to which I have traveled on business a few times. I saw the rise of a socialist president, President Chavez, that was voted into office. Indeed, a democratic socialist that won the popularity of the people through extreme campaign promises. I then watched in horror as this want-to-be dictator methodically "for the people" began the nationalization/takeover of the private sector of the country. As the discomfort began to brew, and as the economy continued to tank in Venezuela; and as the people became more and more disillusioned, a campaign would ensue... "Vote them ALL out" was their battle cry. During this period of time, many conservative politicians were defeated as a result of this philosophy being used. Now Venezuela has turned into a socialist state on the brink of communism.

Now, in our own country, some politicians are using this philosophy as their campaign strategy, such as Don Browning for Congress District 6 Florida. Early in his campaign he was only using the "we need a change" platform. Now he is attempting to associate his opponent, Cliff Stearns, with Nancy Pelosi! Wow! How is Cliff Stearns like Nancy Pelosi? The fact is, they are nothing alike!

When Don Browning was asked if he would cut defense spending, he answered, "...Lincoln was losing the war so he sent Grant in...he was a heavy drinker ..so he (Grant) sent in extra whiskey..and solved the problem and won the war..." Don, I don't think sending in extra whiskey is going to help you win your election bid.

Candidate Trumped by Teen?

2010-07-15T19:03:00.000-07:00

In a recent question and answer time by a local Marion County Florida Candidate running for County Commission, a teen asked the question "What are the core values on which you base your decisions" The Republican candidate replied "my work ethic". Hmmm, do criminals work hard? Is one's work ethic relative? My work ethic may not be your work ethic. President Obama appears to have a great work ethic. He has given more speeches than most presidents and has created a vast amount of policy as president. There must be a basis one governs by. Our founding fathers, as a nation based their decision making process on the Holy Scriptures. Yes, the Bible. The first Continental Congress spent over three hours in prayer and studied 4 Chapters of God's Word.

Another question was asked by a 14 year old teen at the same meeting to the same candidate, "What is your definition of justice?" His answer, "Well, I think everybody should have justice," (laugh) "next question."

Every single elected office is important. It is critical that we as voters carefully evaluate our candidates...and yes, our decisions should be made on character first and foremost...then experience.

Jihadists in Florida? by Sandi Trusso

2009-01-02T08:26:00.000-08:00

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024156.php#comments

Please click on above link to watch video of roughly 200-300 Palestinian Islamic Jihadists protesting against Israel in a Ft.Lauderdale rally, Dec 30, 2008. There were roughly 50 Pro-Israel people on the other side of the street. (This video, along with my thoughts, are being sent to Bill O'Reilly, and Sean Hannity as well)

Publish Post

These Palestinian Jihadists were calling the 50 Pro-Israel people "cowards"... The 50 Pro-Israel people were standing quietly and peacefully facing the 200 to 300 Palestinians. The Jihadists were directing other comments to the 50 Pro-Israel people (again, who were standing quietly and peacefully on the other side of the street, such as: "Nuke, nuke Israel", "There is no Israel", "Go to hell ", "Looser", "Your mothers were whores", "Go back to the oven, You need a big oven... that's what you need" ... This was the most disgusting and frightening display I've seen, and all because after a number of recent years of being under attack by Palestinians, Israel finally fights back to try to stop the murder of so many Jews, once and for all! --- At one point one of the Palestinian leaders stated that they "need to educate people as to the beauty of Islam". Well, honey, I think this video is quite educational!... and I saw no beauty here, it is absolutely frightening! (By the way, we had a Palestinian protest (of about 40 people) right here in little Ocala, FL, Marian County on the same day, Dec. 30, 2008... I wonder how many other cities experienced these disgusting protests?)

The first time I ever noticed what was happening with the Israel/Arab situation, was in 1970, when the Palestinians planned and carried out the murder of the young, innocent, Israeli athletes at the Olympics ! There was no Islamic protest against this outrageous massacre! But when Israel retalliated, these barbaric people pointed accusatory fingers at Israel... "look what Israel did to us"! No one seems to notice that there is a difference between an act of war (defending one's country), where civilians are inadvertantly killed, and a deliberate orchestration of murdering innocent civilians (as with the Israeli athletes, and the "suicide bombers" going into Bar Mitzvah's, or at bus stops, and other Islamic jihad attacks over and over and over again... DELIBERATELY targeting Israeli civilians)! These Palestinians have already clearly stated that they want to wipe Israel off the face of the earth (simply because they are Jews), and their actions have backed up the statements. They obviously feel that Israel has no right to defend herself!

Quite frankly, at this point, I don't even care if every single one of these vicious, violent Palestinians is deported! I don't want to hear about their right to "freedom of speech", especially when the Judeo-Christian community isn't allowed to publicly mention God, Jesus, or the Trinity without negative judicial ramifications. So why are Muslims the only people in the US who seem to have the right to freedom of speech, when the rest of us have to constantly fight over and over for our Constitutional right to Freedom of speech, and Freedom of Religion! It is becoming increasingly obvious to me and many others, that these Islamic Jihadists are taking over our country (what with schools funded by tax dollars which break at certain times of the day for Muslims to go to a prayer room to pray (the same prayer time is not extended to Christians or Jews), and with airports installing foot baths for Muslims, and with our spineless Congress doing nothing, while Christians and Jews aren't even allowed to publicly say the name of God, or publicly celebrate religious holidays without the ACLU taking us to court trying to stop any prayer, hymns or symbols of religious faith dealing with the "prayer hearing God" of our founding fathers, etc. etc., )! The Best is that while these anti-Jew/anti-Christian people are screaming about any religious celebrations (like Christmas, where many businesses count on making enough money to carry them through the rest of the year,... they're trying to eliminate any mention of Christmas, any symbol of the true meaning of Christmas, and yet they're whining about the bad economy!... the secular faction is not enough to continue the Christmas enthusiasm, because even many of those who ignore the true meaning, count on being able to return to it, when they're ready!

It seems as if by the time Americans recognize what is going on, we will be completely under Islamic rule!

Sandi Trusso

Ocala, FL

Fifty Versions of What is Right -by Heather Osborne

2008-11-26T19:02:00.000-08:00

In an interview with FOX News, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee stated, "For those of us for whom [abortion] is a moral question, you can't have 50 different versions of what's right." Well, it sounds simple; but some Americans disagree with the statement made by Governor Huckabee. Some believe that the decision to illegalize abortion should be a law made by each individual state. Because the actual word "abortion" is not found in the Constitution of the United States, some say that making abortion illegal on the Federal level would be unconstitutional. These people also argue their belief that an Amendment to the Constitution concerning the illegality of abortion would be unlikely to pass in both the House and the Senate. Others say that because Roe versus Wade overturned the states' laws concerning abortion, Roe versus Wade should be reversed by giving that power back to the states to decide about abortion laws. Though many of these reasons may sound appealing and logical, some key facts and ideas have been overlooked by those who have come to the conclusion that abortion should be a state issue. After examining the facts, one must conclude that abortion was made a Federal government issue, that abortion is unconstitutional, and that the right to life should be defined only once.

Though abortion has not always been a Federal issue, the Supreme Court's decision about abortion in Roe versus Wade made abortion a Federal issue. It was the Federal government's decision to make abortion legal, and it must therefore be the Federal government's decision to make abortion illegal. The Federal government must not waive the responsibility it has imposed upon itself, but rather right those it has wronged concerning abortion.

The Supreme Court's decision to legalize abortion contradicted the rights given to individuals recognized by the Federal government in the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration of Independence clearly states: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable rights; that among these [rights] are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..." Abortion infringes upon these rights recognized by the Federal government which were given to all human beings by God. According to the Declaration of Independence, when the Supreme Court decided to legalize abortion the government's purpose to "secure these rights" was defeated.

Another reason life should be protected by the Federal government is that abortion clearly violates the Constitution of the United States, a Federal document. The Preamble to the Constitution says that one purpose of the Constitution is to "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity." "Posterity" refers to America's children or offspring. Abortion prevents "the Blessings of Liberty" from being bestowed on our "Posterity," thereby making abortion unconstitutional.

Certain civil rights, guaranteed by Section 1 of the 14th Amendment in the Bill of Rights, would also heavily indicate that abortion is unconstitutional. The 14th Amendment says: "...nor shall any state deprive any person of life, [or] liberty..." Science advocates the idea that individual life begins at conception making the fetus a "person." When the Federal government decided to legalize abortion, they gave their consent for the deprivation of many people's lives and liberties.

Finally, Section 1 of Article 4 in the Constitution says that each state is to recognize and respect the acts and judicial rulings of other states. Therefore, if the decision to illegalize abortion was left up to each individual state, not all states may choose to have the same law regarding abortion. Some states may decide to illegalize abortion; and others may not. Due to the nature of the issue, having varied state laws concerning abortion creates practically incompatible systems, which must be reconciled due to Section 1, Article 4 in the Constitution. To leave the decision to illegalize abortion up to individual states would simply create more problems than solutions.

After one examines the facts, the conclusion that each individual human life should be protected by the Federal government is irrevocable. It is clear that because abortion was made legal by the Federal government, it must be made illegal by the Federal government, as it has made abortion it's self-imposed responsibility. The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights - all of which are Federal documents - guarantee the right to life to individuals with no exceptions. In conclusion, it would be simply unreasonable to expect fifty states to all come to the exact same conclusion about the right to life. In order to inhibit confusion and abide by the Constitution, it would be much more simple and definite to make a Constitutional Amendment clearly defining and advocating a baby's right to life. The right to life is too precious of a freedom to be lost, too valuable of a gift to be taken, and too simple of a phenomenon to be interpreted fifty times!

Florida Judge Legislates Homosexual Adoption: By Sandy Trusso

2008-11-25T17:21:00.000-08:00

We were told by the homosexual community that we didn't need a marriage amendment, because we already had a Florida law prohibiting same sex marriage... Well we also have a Florida law prohibiting the adoption of children by homosexuals (and I would like to know who took it upon themselves to allow homosexuals to become foster parents?)! Their argument to allow gays to adopt children, simply because there is a shortage of heterosexuals willing to adopt them, is disgusting (First of all I find this hard to believe, that the only people who want to adopt, for foster the children, out of the goodness of their hearts, are homosexuals)! Their conclusion is like saying that there aren't enough normal people to watch the hen house, so we must assign this responsibility to the fox!

For roughly 35 years that I know of, until recently, even the male homosexual community admitted publicly that (sexually) they seek out, and recruit, young boys. They even referred to the young boys as the "chickens" and to themselves as the "chicken hawks". However, since the public has become aware of this admission, and the homosexual community realizes that this admission is not politically expedient for their cause (to legitimize this "abomination" by law), they pretend that this isn't true!

The amazing thing is that when the "Priest scandal" became public, it was one of the most horrible things I could've imagined, but as horrible as it was at least the children weren't held legally captive... they could still go home. For a child to be legally adopted by a homosexual, and forced on a daily basis to live in this home, with no escape, is an outrage! In other words, "Let's be more concerned with satisfying the abnormal sexual urges of the homosexual, than we are about the trauma to the child who can't escape!"

Subject: Miami judge to rule on Fla. gay adoption ban

Miami judge to rule on Fla. gay adoption ban

The Associated Press

Published: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 at 5:01 a.m.

A Miami judge is expected to rule on a challenge to a Florida law banning adoption of children by gay people.

A decision was due Tuesday on the request by 47-year-old Martin Gill to adopt two young boys he has been raising as foster children. The state of Florida has fought in court against Gill's petition to adopt the boys.

Florida has one of the strictest bans on gay adoptions in the country. A judge in Key West ruled in September that the ban was unconstitutional, but that ruling has had limited legal impact.

The American Civil Liberties Union has sided with Gill in the case. The ACLU says there is a shortage of parents for adoptions in Florida, where at a given time there are about 1,000 children waiting to be adopted.