A week off and a #FightGoneBad

A couple of weeks ago I planned to take a week off from working out to just give my body time to recuperate. Doing CrossFit three times a week and then adding in two or three rowing sessions for the last two months on top of volunteering as a server at the local VFW Friday night dinners was taking a bit of a toll on me. Plus, I had several things happen that required repairs around the house so needed to be home and ready to deal with service calls.

Monday we did Michael (Time), in honor of Navy Lieutenant Michael McGreevy, 30, of Portville, NY, who was killed in Afghanistan June 28 2005.

3 Rounds for time of:
800m Run
50 Back Extensions
50 Sit-ups

Of course I always modify the workouts due to some physical limitations. Rowing instead of a run, I do Good Mornings using a 15# bar and an Ab-Mat for Sit-ups. Even with modifications, my time was pretty good for me after a week off of eating, sleeping, and being a bum. I finished in 33:27 with enough energy to row an additional 1000m for a cool down.

But then there was today. It was an AccuWeather.com RealFeel of 81F with 95% humidity. My 500m warm-up row felt like it would never end. The stretches and movements to prep for the workout felt like I was moving in a dream. You know, that slo-mo thing in the brain? It was like my body was moving long before my brain caught up to what I was doing. And it was like that the entire morning. Worst FGB since I started CrossFit.

Three rounds of:
Wall-ball Shots (Reps), 20#
Sumo deadlift high-pull (Reps),  75#
Box Jumps, 20″  (Reps)
Push-press (Reps), 75#
Row (Calories)
1-minute rest

Yeah. Mine did not look like video linked above. (Not even close.) Still, I fought my way through it, m-o-d-i-f-i-e-d. That’s my style. I’m the #ModifyTheWodifyGirl. I used a 10# WB and a bench because I still do not have full range of squat motion. My SDLHP and PP were merely 25# even though I can go 35# on a SDLHP. The Box Jumps are not there yet so I do 16 inch step ups. The Row, well, that turned out fairly well in the end as my saving grace.

Truly today was the ugly WoD. It definitely was my #FightGoneBad. But I am glad I stayed the course for it was an effectual struggle.

God is Great. Life is Grand. No struggle is in vain. It’s all good.

9.12 Grassroots Summit: Holding Congress Accountable

Thank you FreedomWorks for the 9.12 Summit yesterday. It was a great opportunity to hear from candidates on their positions. It was really great to hear first hand accounts of how badly the Mitch McConnell and John Boehner Cartels are treating junior colleagues, how they punish colleagues for challenging the way things are being done in Washington, D.C. and especially when those members choose to stand against Obama and Progressive Agendas.

And I wonder: Why was Bill Posey conspicuously absent from the 9.12 Summit? I thought he considered himself a Libertarian Leaning Republican so seriously, why did he not attend?

Thank you Reverend C.L. Bryant for the rousing, powerhouse war cry to keep up courage to fight for freedom and hold Congress accountable. Thank you for the thunderous passion of your heartfelt sermon driving home the points that 1) WE are the People, 2) Congress works for us, and 3) WE must constantly TELL THEM, REMIND THEM so they feel accountable to us.

My takeaway from Reverend Bryant in three hashtags: #RallyTheTroops ==> #DefeatRINOs ==> #FreedomWorksWithWeThePeople. (Yeah, the last one is a bit long.)

So before talking about the great experience yesterday, I am going to stick to HOLDING CONGRESS ACCOUNTABLE in this post because Reverend C.L. Bryant threw down that call to A-C-T-I-O-N!

Below are the names of those who spoke at the 9.12 Summit. Be sure to check out Conservative Review Scorecards and Heritage Action Scorecards. I choose these two scorecards because I feel #CReview and #HAction reflect my conservative values best. Candidates that I donate to must rate 90% or better on those scales before I invest my money into their campaigns. Here is the link to the FreedomWorks Scorecards as a courtesy but do not be fooled by it. Compare the Bills tracked between all three links to really get an accurate picture regarding what IS is on those scorecards. (An example would be Bill Posey voted for the 500 Billion debt with the DC Cartel which makes him a far cry from the 2015 #FWorks 100% in my book.)

Again for emphasis: Compare the bills tracked between all three links before you buy into FreedomWorks grading system alone. All of these members of Congress should be at 90% or better across all three scorecards. 

Ron DeSantis 

John Fleming   

Thomas Massie 

Mark Meadows

Ted Yoho




Senator Bill Nelson: A Sheeple or Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing?

It is difficult to take Bill Nelson seriously. Look at his F voting record here and his 9% scorecard here. Pathetic. Worse than pathetic. Totally not representative of his constituents.

No one in the United States Senate has read the non-transparent Iran Nuclear Agreement and yet here is Mr. Nelson moving his soup coolers like a turtle on valium. Here is the link to his video published August 4, 2015. I posted the transcript below if you can not bear or go slow enough to listen to him.

Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, I rise to announce my decision on the Iranian nuclear agreement, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

This decision of mine comes after considerable study of the issue–as have our colleagues in the Senate taken this quite seriously. I have talked with folks on all sides of the issue. These include colleagues as well as constituents. It includes experts on the Middle East and Central Asia, arms control experts, foreign allies, and, as we say in my constituency, it includes just plain folks. I want to say that Secretary Moniz, a nuclear physicist, has been especially helpful.

Needless to say, I wish that the three Americans jailed in Iran and Bob Levinson, a former FBI agent missing in Iran for 8 years, had been a part of an agreement–of this agreement–to return them. The Levinson family in Florida is anxious for information and help to return Bob. This is personal for me.

I am a strong supporter of Israel, and I recognize that country as one of America’s most important allies. I am committed to the protection of Israel as the best and right foreign policy for the United States and our allies.

I am blessed to represent Florida, which also has among our citizens a strong and vibrant Jewish community, including many Holocaust survivors and Holocaust victims’ families, some of whom I have worked with to help them get just compensation from European insurance companies that turned their backs on them after World War II and would not honor their insurance claims.

In our State we are also proud to have a Floridian, a former U.S. and Miami Beach resident, as the Israeli Ambassador to the United States. Ambassador Ron Dermer grew up in Miami Beach. His father and brother are former mayors. He is someone I have enjoyed getting to know and have had several conversations with over the years and recently spent time talking to him about his opposition to this joint agreement.

I acknowledge that this has been one of the most important preparations and will be one of the most important votes that I will cast in the Senate because the foreign and defense policy consequences are both huge for the United States and our allies.

Unless there is an unexpected change in the conditions and facts before the vote is called in September–and it will be called on the very first day that we return in September–unless there is an unexpected change, I will support the nuclear agreement between Iran and the P5+1–which are the United States, the UK, France, Russia, China, and Germany–because I am convinced it will stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon for at least the next 10 to 15 years. No other available alternative accomplishes
this vital objective.

The goal of this almost 2-year negotiation–culminated in this deal–was to deny Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. This objective has been fulfilled in the short term. For the next 10 years, Iran will reduce its centrifuges–the machines that enrich the uranium–by two-thirds. They will go from more than 19,000 centrifuges to 6,000. Only 5,000 of those will be operating, all at Natanz, all the most basic models. The deeply buried Fordow facility will be converted to a research lab. No enrichment
can occur there, and no fissile material can be stored there. For the next 15 years, Iran’s stockpile of low-enriched uranium–which currently amounts to 12,000 kilograms; enough for 10 bombs–will be reduced by 98 percent, to only 300 kilograms. Research and development into advanced centrifuges will also be limited. Taken together,
these constraints will lengthen the time it would take for Iran to produce the highly enriched uranium for one bomb–the so-called breakout time. It will lengthen it from 2 to 3 months that they could break out now to more than 1 year. That is more than enough time to detect and, if necessary, stop Iran from racing to a bomb.

Iran’s ability to produce a bomb using plutonium will also be blocked under this deal. The Arak reactor–which as currently constructed could produce enough plutonium for one to [Page: S6265]
two bombs every year–will be redesigned to produce no weapons-grade plutonium. And Iran will have to ship out the spent fuel from the reactor forever.

Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1968, in which they agreed they would not pursue nuclear weapons. Iran has reaffirmed this principle in this joint agreement. Iran also says they want to eventually make low-grade nuclear fuel, as other NPT-compliant nations do, in order to produce electricity. If they comply, they will eventually be allowed to do so under this joint agreement. Our expectation is that in 15 years, when Iran can lift the limit of 300 kilograms of low-enriched
uranium, if they have not cheated, they will continue to abide by their NPT obligations and use their fuel only for electricity and medical isotopes. If they deviate from those civilian purposes, then harsh economic sanctions will result, and, very possibly, U.S. military action.

The world will be a very different place in 10 to 15 years. If we can buy this much time, instead of Iran developing a nuclear bomb in the near future, then that is reason enough for me to vote to uphold this agreement. If the United States walks away from this multinational agreement, then I believe we would find ourselves alone in the world with little credibility, but there are many more reasons to support this agreement.

The opponents of the agreement say that war is not the only alternative to the agreement. Indeed, they, as articulated by the Israeli Ambassador, say we should oppose the agreement by refusing to lift congressional economic sanctions, and the result will be that the international sanctions will stay in place, that Iran will continue to feel the economic pinch, and therefore Iran will come back to the table and negotiate terms more favorable to the United States and our allies.

If the United States kills the deal that most of the rest of the world is for, there is no question in this Senator’s mind that the sanctions will start to erode, and they may collapse altogether. We just had a meeting with all the P5+1 Ambassadors to the United States, and they reaffirmed that exact fact. Sanctions rely on more than just the power of the U.S. economy, they depend on an underlying political consensus in support of a common objective. China, Russia, and many other nations eager
to do business with Iran went along with our economic sanctions because they believed they were a temporary cost to pay until Iran agreed to a deal to limit their nuclear program. That fragile consensus in support of U.S. policy is likely to fall apart if we jettison this deal.

I think it is unrealistic to think we can stop oil-hungry countries in Asia from buying Iranian oil, especially when offered bargain basement prices. It is equally unrealistic to think we can continue to force foreign banks that hold the Iranian oil dollars–banks in China, India, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan that have sequestered Iranians’ oil dollars–it is unrealistic to expect that they will hold on to that cash simply because we threaten them with U.S. banking sanctions. How will such
threats be taken seriously when these countries, taken together, hold nearly half of America’s debt, making any decision to sanction them extraordinarily difficult. Killing this deal by rejecting it means the sanctions are going to be weaker than they are today, not stronger, and the United States cannot simply get a better deal with Iran,
with less economic leverage and less international support. That is a fact we are having to face. Of course, if we rejected it and if the sanctions crumbled, all of this would probably happen while Iran would be racing to build a bomb. Without this deal, Iran’s breakout time could quickly shrink from months to a handful of weeks or days.

It is reasonable to ask why Iran would agree to negotiate a delay in their nuclear program that they have advanced over the years at the cost of billions of dollars. The simple answer is they need the money. The Iranian economy is hurting because of the sanctions, and Iran’s Supreme Leader needs to satisfy rising expectations of average Iranians, who are restless to have a bigger slice of the economic pie with more and better goods and supplies.

So they have an interest in striking a deal, but does that mean we trust Iran’s Government? No, not at all. The Iranian religious leadership encourages hardliners there to chant “Death to America” and “Death to Israel.” Therefore, this agreement can’t be built on trust. We must have a good enough mechanism in place to catch them when and if they cheat; in other words, don’t trust but verify.

I believe the agreement sets out a reasonable assurance that Iran will not be able to hide the development of a bomb at declared or undeclared sites. The International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors will have immediate access to declared sites–the Arak reactor and the enrichment facilities at Natanz and Fordow.

For the next 20 to 25 years, inspectors will also have regular access to the entire supply chain, including uranium mines and mills, centrifuge production, assembly, and storage sites. That means inspectors will catch Iran if they try to use the facilities we know about to build a weapon or if they try to divert materials to a secret program. To confirm that Iran is not building a covert bomb, this agreement ensures that inspectors will have access to suspicious sites with no more than a 24-day
delay. I know there has been a lot of conversation about that. It is broken off into days. At the end of the day, it must be physical access. Now, would this Senator prefer they get in instantaneously? Of course. Could Iran hide some activities relevant to nuclear weapons research? Possibly. But to actually make a bomb, Iran’s secret activity would have
to enrich the fuel for a device–and they couldn’t cover that up if they had years, let alone do so in a few weeks. Traces of enriched uranium or a secret plutonium program do not suddenly vanish, and they can’t be covered up with a little paint and asphalt. So I am convinced that under the agreement, Iran cannot cheat and expect to get away with it.

On top of the unprecedented IAEA inspections established by this deal is the vast and little understood world of American and allied intelligence. This Senator served on the Intelligence Committee for 6 years and now has clearances on the Armed Services Committee. I can state unequivocally that U.S. intelligence is very good and extensive and will overlay IAEA inspections. Remember, we discovered their secret activities in the past, even without the kinds of inspections put in place by this joint
agreement. So if Iran tries to violate its commitment–its commitment not to build nuclear weapons–and if the IAEA doesn’t find out, I am confident our intelligence apparatus will.

What about the part of the joint agreement that allows the conventional arms embargo to be lifted in 5 years and missile technology to be lifted in 8 years? I understand it was always going to be tough to keep these restrictions in place, and I don’t like that those restrictions are not there. Fortunately, even when the arms embargo expires, five other U.N. resolutions passed since 2004 will continue to be in force to prohibit Iran from exporting arms to terrorists and to militants. These have
had some success, albeit limited, as in the case of the U.S. Navy stopping arms shipments to the Houthis in Yemen. These same U.N. resolutions will stay in place to block future Iranian arms shipments to others. We also have nonnuclear sanctions tools we can–and we must–continue to use to go after those who traffic in Iranian arms and missiles.

Will this agreement allow Iran to continue to be a state sponsor of terrorism? Yes, but they now have the capability to develop a nuclear weapon within months and still be a state sponsor of terrorism. I believe it is in the U.S. interest that Iran is not a nuclear power sponsoring terrorism.

As dangerous a threat that Iran is to Israel and our allies, it would pale in comparison to the threat posed to them and to us by a nuclear-armed Iran.

Would I prefer a deal that dismantles their entire program forever and ends all of Iran’s bad behavior? Of course I would. But how do we get a better deal that the opposition wants? We don’t have that opportunity if the sanctions fall apart, and that is exactly what would happen if we reject this deal. Iran will emerge less isolated and less constrained to build a nuclear weapon. [Page: S6266]

Under the deal, we keep most of the world with us. That means, if the Iranians cheat, they know we can snap back the economic sanctions and cut off their oil money. This joint agreement declares that Iran will never ever be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon. If they break their agreement, even in 10 or 15 years, every financial and military option will still be available to us, and those options will be backed by ever-improving military capabilities and more and better intelligence.

So when I look at all the things for the agreement and against the agreement, it becomes pretty obvious to me to vote in favor of the agreement.

I yield the floor.

He yields much more than the floor. #Disgraceful.

Port Canaveral RAIL vs Country Residents

Tonight I attended the Brevard County Commissioners meeting where many wonderful citizens came out to vehemently voice opposition to the proposed Rail Extension Service. (See an earlier article Port Canaveral: Discover the Networks here.)

Commissioner Jim Barfield proposed a resolution and then citizens who will be greatly affected by the Rail Extension were invited to make their remarks. I used Periscope to broadcast LIVE some of that meeting and have linked the segments here:

Part 1: Brevard County Commission on Port Canaveral Rail 

Part 2: Brevard County Commission on Port Canaveral Rail or 2 

Part 3:  Brevard County Commission on Port Canaveral Authority Rail part 3

I learned tonight that TedLund.com is a great place to read up on the sore problems with the Port Canaveral Authority and the Rail issues, that seem more than severe, expensive, and has left residents wondering who is paying for all of the pie in the sky.

Bill Posey’s Big Three Votes and 5 Questions, Still.

On September 1, 2015 the Conservative Review announced the indomitable Mark Levin as their new Editor-In-Chief! That is absolutely fabulous news as Levin is a hard core #NOTProgressive. Not a drop of #RINO in him. You can learn more about him at the Mark Levin Show and you can read Chapter 7 of his latest book Plunder & Deceit.

Turning from that note to my Florida Congressman, Bill Posey, I say as I always say, I hear Bill Posey is a nice guy. I have spoken to him once. He seems to come across as a polite, slow talking Southern man. He has repeated, often enough, that he is there for his constituents and even offers us a poll on issues from time to time, which is also nice. At a recent Brevard Republican event I heard he claims that he “loves RINOs.” That is nice. After all, a nice guy loves everyone, right?

Therefore in light of the well established Nice Guy, it seems that the right question to ask Bill Posey this election cycle is: Where does he, as a nice guy, place enmity between those he loves and RINO, or PROGRESSIVE, tax and spend policies?

Perhaps it is possible to gauge where Posey stands in a Republican-Libertarian Window by referring to HertitageAction.com’s Scorecard where Posey has a LIFETIME score of 78% (which is a C grade in case you were wondering). To know what that means take a look at how the scores are calculated (my emphasis added):

How scores are calculated

Scores are calculated using both votes and bills. Voting with the Heritage Action position earns percentage points, voting against our position earns nothing, and missing a vote doesn’t affect the score. Co-sponsoring bills earns percentage points, while not co-sponsoring bills earns nothing.

Our formula sets each bill to equal one percent of the total, with the remaining percent comprised of votes. For example, if there are eight bills to co-sponsor, the score would be 8% co-sponsorships and 92% votes.

Okay. So looking at his current score of 83% (noting a B grade), which is significantly improved from where he started out earlier in the year, now look at three votes that raise the following three questions:

  1. If Bill Posey believes in the U.S. Constitution, then why did Bill Posey vote YES to RE-Authorize Discriminatory Practices in Hawaii?
  2. If Bill Posey believes that Washington DC is broken and ought to reduce non-defense discretionary spending, reestablish national defense spending to support the military, repeal and replace Obamacare, reform Medicare and Medicaid, safeguard Social Security, and enact pro-growth tax reform, then why did Bill Posey vote NO on the RSC Blueprint for a Balanced Budget?
  3. And why, oh why, oh why did Bill Posey, as a self-proclaimed fiscal conservative, vote YES on the $500,000,000,000.00 Doc Fix Bill?

How does Bill feel about his big three votes now? How does he feel about voting against the RSC BALANCED BUDGET that would have already been implemented versus this insane National Debt problem he tacitly  supported with his NO vote?

Finally, to reference an earlier post and an early earlier post, I again ask Bill Posey Five Questions:

  1. What are you doing as a LEADER to cut taxes and spending and rein in the debt?
  2. What are you doing as a LEADER to limit the size and scope of the federal government and return authority to states and to the American people?
  3. What are you doing as a LEADER to get rid of Obamacare and promote health care solutions based on free enterprise, not government controls?
  4. What are you doing as a LEADER to protect America from foreign threats, secure the border, and develop a robust, principled foreign policy that puts America first?
  5. What are you doing as a LEADER to ensure that our judges and lawmakers uphold the Constitution of the United States, starting by halting executive overreach?

Mr. Posey has many constituents who are extremely frustrated with the #DCCartel. He hears from them in the private meetings attends. I hear it in his Telephone-Townhalls. And I think if he will focus on answering these five questions he will find many of us actively supporting him to affect change.

Sentinel2Sentinel: Working the neighborhood

One thing that was drummed into my head years ago is ALL POLITICS IS LOCAL. Therefore, I decided to take my weblog to the neighborhood for a day and while putting this post together I am printing off a few hundred of these bad boys.

Vol 1 page 1 Chelsea ParkThe next step is to prepare “Current Resident” labels for mailing the approximately 400 homes in my subdivision. i would walk it but I have to prepare for the tropical storm-hurricane coming my way.

Special thanks to the Patriot who allowed me to photograph the back of his truck with this fabulous decal. God Bless you and yours! Meeting you totally rocked my day and I will always be thankful to you for letting me take the shot. (I know, pun intended.)

Note the Vol 1 page 2 Chelsea Parklovely Disclaimer on the newsletter so there are absolutely no misunderstandings that I whole-heartedly support Ted Cruz but:

Opinions hereinare my own and not representative of any Candidate or Organization. Not authorized or paid for by any candidate. This is mine all mine, paid for and distributed by JSWardell Florida knowing All Politics is Local and I have the right to freedom of speech.

There you go. E Pluribus Unim.

Cititus. Altius. Fortius.

Vol 1 Low Res Web Sentinel2Sentinel

5 Questions for Bill Nelson, Ron DeSantis and Bill Posey

  1. What are you doing as a LEADER to cut taxes and spending and rein in the debt?
  2. What are you doing as a LEADER to limit the size and scope of the federal government and return authority to states and to the American people?
  3. What are you doing as a LEADER to get rid of Obamacare and promote health care solutions based on free enterprise, not government controls?
  4. What are you doing as a LEADER to protect America from foreign threats, secure the border, and develop a robust, principled foreign policy that puts America first?
  5. What are you doing as a LEADER to ensure that our judges and lawmakers uphold the Constitution of the United States, starting by halting executive overreach?

   #2A   #ReligiousFreedom   #TermLimits     #SecureTheBorder

#DefundPP   #FullRepeal   #NoIranDeal   #FlatTax   #AbolishIRS     #NoAmnesty

Support Principles of Freedom.