We keep hearing this term “fair share” nearly every day from Progressives believe businesses and the rich must pay their fair share of taxes. So what is the fair share for the wealthy?

According to Progressives, it’s simply more — more than the 42.6 percent in federal taxes being paid by those in upper income brackets. It’s apparently entirely ‘fair’ that 50 percent of Americans now pay zero federal income tax, and some even enjoy what’s called a ‘negative tax rate.’

As it stands now in the U.S, the top one percent of wage earners, those who are continually disparaged by the left in America, bring home nearly 18 percent of the nation’s income. But they pay 35 percent of all federal income taxes.

Study after study has shown that when taxes are lowered, it stimulates the economy and brings in more revenue. For example, during the Roaring Twenties, tax rates were slashed dramatically, dropping from over 70 percent to less than 25 percent.

Personal income tax revenues increased from $719 million in 1921 to $1,164,000,000 in 1928, an increase of more than 61 percent. Increasing taxes also hurts the tax base, as oftentimes people and businesses flee higher tax states for lower tax states.

In 2012, French President Francois Hollande, proposed a massive 75 percent income tax on the wealthiest citizens. The tax revenue from the super tax was down significantly from the first year to the next, while the deficit skyrocketed another $97 billion.

In January 2015, the French government quietly killed the tax. It seems that unfortunately, historic lessons once learned are being willfully ignored.

Our so-called Department of Homeland Security is constantly advising American’s, “If you see something, say something.” But what if it’s the government that’s acting suspicious?

Questions remain about the origin of a mysterious box on a utility pole near 21st and Glendale Avenues in Phoenix, Arizona. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives (ATFE) finally came forward, admitting that a box spotted and removed from a Salt River Power (SRP) pole belonged to them and was part of an ongoing investigation.

Witnesses say that the crew who installed the box came in a truck marked “Field Pros.”  A Google search of that name does not return any utility or surveillance company.

ATFE officials refused to elaborate on the investigation, if any and would not say if they were conducting surveillance in the area. At first, SRP claimed they had no idea the box was installed on their power pole – later stating there “were indications that law enforcement was connected to the box.”

What those indications were – the company hasn’t said.

They said ATFE has to let know them or work with them if they have an object on their property. The ATFE, on the other hand, claims that depending on the investigation and security priorities, they can put such equipment in place without permission.

Meanwhile, the agency didn’t hesitate to claim that in this case they “acted within their bounds.”

There are homes, a high school, an apartment complex and a strip mall in the area. The strip mall has a salon, pet grooming store, alterations business, a barber shop and an ammunition store.

Note that last one: an ammunition store. It is self-evident that the ATFE is spying on people and activities surrounding this business, which is a violation of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which reads, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

It’s obvious that the U.S. Constitution isn’t within the ATFE’s boundaries and this folks, is how tyranny starts!

The Air Force is supposedly conducting an investigation after a video surfaced of retired Senior Master Sgt. Oscar Rodriguez being forcibly removed from a ceremony at Travis Air Force Base, near Sacramento in California. The incident took place on April 3 during, the retirement ceremony of Master Sergeant Chuck Roberson.

A spokesman from the base said that the confrontation stemmed from “an unplanned participation” at the event.

“Rodriguez ignored numerous requests to respect the Air Force prescribed ceremony and unfortunately was forcibly removed,” a Travis official said. “We will continue to investigate the situation fully.”

As the American flag is unfurled next to Rodriguez on stage he begins is statement: “Our flag is known as the stars and stripes. A union consists of white stars and a blue field above it.

“Each star represents one individual state,” Rodriguez continued. “Together they stand united in the visible.”

But as he does, the two men push him off stage and eventually out of the room.

An Air Force Reserve statement release following the incident took the insult to a higher level by openly claiming it “respects and defends the right to free speech and religious expression.”

However, the incident is actually a result of “bad blood” between Rodriguez and the current commanding officer of the 749th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron. That commander is said to have barred Rodriguez from the ceremony, and ordered that he be removed after showing up anyway.

As of September 2013, Colonel Jeffrey Pickard is commander of the 349th Maintenance Group at Travis. As group commander, it is his duty to oversee the activities of the squadron commander of the 749th.

According to Air Force tradition a retiree can invite and have anyone speak at his or her own retirement. If the commanding officer does not like someone’s ceremony, he doesn’t have to attend.

I think the commanding officer in this case needs to be relieved of his duties and issued an official written reprimand.

At first Joe Hornick of West Long Branch, New Jersey, was pleased to see police when they came to his home. He’d been complaining of vandalism to his flag.

“Here I am looking for the cops to capture these people and instead, here they come and give me a ticket for my freedom of expression,” Hornick said of the officers standing on his front porch.

He now faces a $2,000 fine and up to 90 days in jail for flying a flag reading “Trump Make America Great Again” in front of his home. He flies his flags 24 hours a day.

Acting borough administrator Lori Cole said a local law bans political signs until 30 days prior to an election. New Jersey’s presidential primary is June 7.

Hornick, who has a court date April 20, is not taking the flag down.

“I feel my constitutional right has been violated. I have the right to express myself,” he stated.

But this battle isn’t over a political candidate or a flag. It’s about free speech and the First Amendment which states: “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech,” thus the ordinance is unconstitutional.

Furthermore, the Fourteenth Amendment states in Section 1, that, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

It’s too bad we’ve been rendered near-ignorant of our God-given liberties as laid out in the U.S. Constitution.

Please allow me to share with you my belief in God…

While pray nightly and have my favorite Bible verses, I am not by any means a religious man – instead I walk by faith, which to try and simply explain means my God is with me at all times and though I am a fallen man, I do my best to keep my eyes (remaining mindful of and) on Him at all times. For me faith doesn’t come with a set of hard and fast rules like religion.

My belief system is by no means one in which I insist you follow, to the contrary – I want you to explore your beliefs in a manner consistent with your personal values. For myself, my belief in God means an adherence to the broad concept of Judeo-Christian faith, which includes justice, virtue, fairness, charity, community, and duty.

Each of these concepts means different things to different people. For instance, under duty – my personal belief includes defending the U.S. Constitution up to an including my death. I hold that document as close to my heart as any member of my family or my friends, for whom I would gladly trade my life – and it is okay that you might not see ‘duty’ in the same light.

The reality of a ‘supreme transcendent authority,’ higher than any Earthly authority, naturally limits the legitimate authority of the State. No government can demand absolute obedience or legitimately attempt to control every aspect of our lives.

Thus, while I strongly disagree with such actions as abortion, I find it repulsive to limit a woman’s right to seek such a procedure through the force of law. Rather, I prefer to leave that between the medical professional, the patient and their God, reducing the State’s ability not only to interfere but to publicly fund.

Nor should the State be in the business of marriage, from enforced blood-testing to licenses and all the financial rewards the agencies benefit from. And while I may not be in favor of same-sex marriage, that again should remain between those getting married, their faith, their church, the venue and their God.

Again my belief in God does not conflate faith and politics, and it does not mean that religious disputes are necessarily political disputes, or vice versa. Nor does it mean you must believe in God, or that I have a monopoly on faith.

It does mean that there is a moral order that lies behind political order, and that order establishes the natural limits of all human authority. Finally, man is fallible and because this is so we must be a nation of virtues and values over rules and regulations, work over welfare, law over litigation, morals over money and liberty over security.

Many times throughout our lives we’ve heard the term ‘rule of law.’ It sounds simple enough but what does it really mean?

But first, we should correct our vernacular – it isn’t jus’ ‘rule of law,’ rather we should always say it correctly, ‘Constitutional rule of law,’ as the U.S. Constitution is a contract between the citizens and the State. Over the years, whether on purpose or out of laziness, ‘Constitution,’ has been redacted from the phrase.

Constitutional rule of law of insists that a predictable and consistent legal system is necessary for an ordered liberty. A lawful society consists of a government of laws, not men, in which people know what the rules are, and in which rules are enforced uniformly for all citizens.

It also means that the government itself, along with the governed, is subject to those laws. For Constitutional law to function, by contrast, even the administrators of the law must be subject to its provisions. That also means that ALL people are to be equally protected by the law.

When such a condition exists then the rule of law is present. Placing Constitutional law on a firm and decisive basis is a necessary step for assuring such a situation and in the end a Constitutional rule of law promotes prosperity and protects our liberties.

In 1962, the Supreme Court ruled that praying in school was unconstitutional, setting the stage that began the assault on America’s religious freedom. Interestingly, children saying prayers in school does not and cannot qualify as Congress making a law to establish religion.

But it certainly could be interpreted as prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Yet, that somehow was not the determination made by the Earl Warren-led Supreme Court.

How the SCOTUS drew this conclusion is still beyond my understanding. Did none of them read The Federalist #10, in which James Madison writes, “By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.”

No wonder we are so divided — we are each part of a faction that developed from this 1962 ruling. But is it really unconstitutional or simply an ‘impulse of passion,’ as Madison describes?

It’s as if our president is simply looking for a friend anywhere in the world. It’s like a child on the playground looking to find someone, anyone who’ll pay attention to them…

“I actually welcome President Castro commenting on some of the areas where he feels that we’re falling short, because I think we should not be immune or afraid of criticism or discussion as well.” — President Obama

I’d feel bad for Obama if it wasn’t so calculated.

Okay, okay, okay…time and again I’ve been asked to explain what I find wrong with Donald Trump’s candidacy. To be candid – absolutely nothing – as he has every right to run for the presidency of this country.

But what he says – well, that’s a whole other thing – but you have to really listen and get beyond his ‘rough-and-tumble’ ad-libs and rhetoric. Yes, he has people stirred up throughout the political spectrum, especially those of us who’ve endured these nearly-eight years of astutely-executed Progressive ideologies.

But jus’ because he appears to be saying the ‘right’ thing – doesn’t mean he isn’t couching his actual policies in amongst those bombastic words. Take for instance his comments on January 21, where he literally stated:

“And you know what, there’s a point at which, let’s get to be a little bit establishment, because we gotta get things done, folks, okay? Believe me, don’t worry, we’re gonna get such great deals, but at a certain point, you can’t be so strident, you can’t not get along, we gotta get along with people.”

A ‘little bit’ of establishment,’ is too much establishment. What is need is less government, less professional, life-time politicians and less lobbyists — not more establishment.

Then there are these little gems from February 2016, “We’re going to repeal and replace the horror known as Obamacare, it is a horror,” and, “I want to get rid of Obamacare and get you something great.”

It worries me that a man who’s made so much money wouldn’t want us to return to the free market system of healthcare. Instead he wants to continue the pattern the Obama Administration began of forcing so-called ‘free’ health care down our throats.

And no, I am not telling you who to support or how to vote. All I’m doing is pointing out some glaring inconsistencies within Trump’s campaign speeches – the rest is up to you.

Nevada Senator Harry Reid wants the Obama’s administration to grab a stretch of land in Southern Nevada near the Bundy Ranch, now that many in the Bundy group are in federal custody. Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, his sons Ammon and Ryan, and several supporters, are facing federal charges stemming from two standoffs with the federal government.

Emboldened by this, Reid took to the Senate floor Thursday to renew his push to preserve the scenic Gold Butte area northeast of Las Vegas by attacking the Bundy’s and the 2014 Bunkerville showdown.

“Because of this legislation and now the fact that the Bundys’ are all in jail, I’m going to reach out to the White House, no guarantee we’ll get it done, that’s for sure, to see if President Obama will protect this area,” Reid said in a speech from the Senate floor.

Reid argued protections are needed to preserve Gold Butte’s tribal sites and its “stunning” Joshua trees. He displayed photos of petroglyphs he said had been drawn over, shot at and stolen.

Obama “has the authority, as any president does, to stop this sort of destruction and stop it now,” Reid said. “Congress created the Antiquities Act to empower the president to protect our culture, our historic and natural resources when and where Congress cannot or will not.”

Obama has used the act 22 times to set aside 265 million acres of federally administered lands and waters, more than any other president and has confiscated nearly four million acres of Western land, more than all other presidents except Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.

Meanwhile, Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, et. al., and all the national talk shows are mesmerized by the circus-jerk-us of presidential politics, and while we are being deceived by the ‘DNC verses the GOP’ false paradigm, a rogue federal government is targeting our liberties.