Fresh Political View

The Supreme Court this week struck down the Defense of Marriage Act( DOMA ), opening the door to Gay Marriage nationwide.  The 5-4 ruling was not a sweeping ruling that legalized gay marriage across the nation. The ruling simply gave access to at least 1,000 different federal benefits and the ability to file joint tax returns by gay couples who have been married in states that allow gays to marry, by striking down section 3 of DOMA. It might not have been a sweeping ruling, but it opened the door to lawsuits to fight gay marriage bans in the states at the federal level. Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority said DOMA violated gay couples right to equal protection guaranteed by the 5th Amendment.  On the same day the High Court also made a decision on California's Prop. 8, that banned gay marriage in the state. The  Court said the supporters of Prop. 8 had no standing to appeal the earlier ruling and ordered the lower court to reverse the decision th...

Let me set a scene for you, if you will:  Imagine the year is 2006 here in the United States. During the "war on terror" and someone was giving our intelligence on the terrorist we had in our sites to these same terrorists. Then imagine that this person was an American aiding the terrorist with information he stole from NSA computer systems. What would you call this person? Traitor, crook or UN-American? Of what crime would you accuse him? Treason, theft or espionage?  Now say this man was named Edward Snowden. Do the labels from the previous scene still hold? Or does your view change based on your political views of the moment. Sure Mr. Snowden exposed NSA spying on everyday Americans. This is something that has been widely known for many of the last years since 9/11. Still it is understandable that the masses where oblivious to this spying. So it is good to have this out in the open to the entire nation, not just those buried in the political s...

Ted Cruz freshman senator has made waves  on the right. He appeals to a large number of conservatives and is fully supported by the Tea Party. Recently it was revealed he may run for President of the United States. There is only one problem, he was born In Canada. This, unlike Barack Obama's birth brings up a real question of constitutionality of Cruz's potential candidacy. " No Person except a natural born Citizen , or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States." from Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution  Article II of the U.S. Constitution says one must be a "natural Born" citizen in order to run for the office of President of the United States. It has been mentioned that no court h...

Jake's Take: Food Stamp Cuts How many of you rely on SNAP benefits to feed your families? If you are one of the 40 million Americans that need this program to feed your kids and yourself you need to know your very benefits are under attack. The GOP in the US House are aiming to cut yet another $20 billion from the program. This will lead to a cut of about $90 a month for a family of 4 at last check. The SNAP program has seen relentless attacks and cuts since the TEA Party takeover in 2010 in the house. These cuts are real cuts that real Americans feel and they are unacceptable. At a time when congress is cutting funds for school lunch programs families can not provide their kids with nutritious foods for all 3 meals of the day without this program. Sure there are some freeloaders milking the system, but a majority of those on SNAP are hard working Americans who through no fault of their own do not get paid enough to cover rent, bills, kids needs and food. So what ...

Should we let disgraced politicians back into public office, whether it be adultery or some other political scandal? How do family value republicans in South Carolina let a man back into the party after he has made a joke of what they call "the sanctity of marriage" and violated the public trust. Will democrats support Anthony Weiner in his political return. This seems to be an area that democrats and republicans fail to make any sense. In 1998 the GOP and its supporters went after Bill Clinton for an affair and the democrats took a "who cares who he is sleeping with" take on the subject. It appears as of late the tables have turned now if a democrat is caught having an affair or even simply tweeting pictures of themselves in their "tighty whiteys" are cast out of the party such as Anthony Weiner and his twitter scandal a few years back. Now Mr. Weiner is running for Mayor of NYC. It is yet to been seen if voters welcome him back with open arms. ...

Imagine a world where The United States and Russia were both at war with each other, and have sparked World War III. The death and destruction is catastrophic the world over. Then think about how it could have been avoided by our United States Government. Take a moment and contemplate this very scenario, what comes to mind? The Syrian conflict or a fight over global oil supplies? Anything else come to mind? The one issue that could easily led a third World War is not listed above. The culprit could and most likely will be an evil our own government supports without most Americans knowing the truth about it. This evil is known as Monsanto.  Fresh Political View has reported on this evil in the past, but with recent events like the NSA scandal and The now escalating situation in Syria plastered on the mainstream media FPV feels this story is getting lost in the mix. With the passing of the Monsanto Protection Act by the US Congress and President Obama, it is cl...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances" - First Amendment On Thursday the US Supreme Court banned the American people from protesting in or on the grounds of the Court. This flies right in the face of our first Amendment rights of free speech and the right to peacefully assemble.  The regulation states: "No person shall engage in a demonstration within the Supreme Court building and grounds. The term “demonstration” includes demonstrations, picketing, speechmaking, marching, holding vigils or religious services and all other like forms of conduct that involve the communication or expression of views or grievances, engaged in by one or more persons, the conduct of which is reasonably likely to draw a crowd or onlookers. The term...