"When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic." - Benjamin Franklin;
"And when politicians find that honor and character matter less than buying votes and a constituency, that too will herald the end of the Constitution. When that happens we must work tirelessly to change their minds, or their occupation!" - Hoping The Blind Will See

Saturday, October 2, 2010

Don't Cave, Arizona!

Here's one more Sheriff out of Arizona calling out the government, and particulalry obama, for not dealing affectively and forthrightly to address and eliminate the border security problem threatening our citizens on the southern border.

Ariz. Border Sheriff: Obama’s ‘Got His Hands Wrapped Around Our Throat'

By Terence P. Jeffrey

Sheriff Larry Dever of Cochise County, Ariz. told CNSNews.com that President Barack Obama has “got his hands wrapped around our throat” as his administration sues the state of Arizona for trying to enforce the immigration laws that the federal government itself will not enforce.

Dever also said he has “zero confidence” Obama will secure the border before his presidential term is up in two years and that the president is putting the people who live and work in Cochise County at risk by willfully failing to secure that border so that he can maintain political leverage for his goal of winning an amnesty for illegal aliens.

CNSNews.com videotaped an interview with Dever on Aug. 13, the same day Obama signed a $600 million bill to provide 1,000 additional Border Patrol agents. When asked whether he believes Obama actually wants to secure the border, Dever said that Obama did not want to do so.

“No. He’s as much as said so,” said Dever. “He’s playing the border security card, holding that, his trump card, to get immigration reform. And he’s basically said, you’re not going to get the kind of border enforcement you want, you’re asking for, unless you give me immigration reform.”

Cochise County is one of four counties in the state of Arizona that is contiguous with the Mexican border. Dever, a native of the county, was first elected sheriff in 1996 and has worked in local law enforcement in the county for three decades.

When CNSNews.com asked Dever if he was saying that President Obama was putting ranchers, other people in his county and the even Border Patrol agents who worked there at risk by holding off on securing the border while trying to win an amnesty for illegal aliens, Dever said: “If that’s what it seems like I’m saying, let me just make it perfectly clear, as the president likes to say: That’s exactly what I’m saying.”

Asked how much confidence he has that President Obama will eventually secure the border before his term of office ends in two years, Dever said: “I have zero confidence in that.”

“While this new funding is welcome, it’s still far short,” Dever said of the bill the president signed that day. “It’s an improvement, and we welcome that. But what really irritates me, really irritates me, is that while throwing out all this money in the government, he’s suing us on the other hand.”

Dever was referring to the lawsuit brought against Arizona by the U.S. Justice Department seeking to block an Arizona law enacted earlier this year that requires local law enforcement officers in Arizona to determine the immigration status of someone they stop for another reason and then have a reasonable basis for suspecting may be an illegal alien. In July, a federal judge issued an injunction blocking enforcement of key provision of the Arizona law, and it is now on appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

“So, he’s got his hands wrapped around our throat—to use a Gulf oil—his foot on our throat, to use a Gulf-oil-spill metaphor, and, holding out a few crumbs in his hand and saying eat this,” said Dever. “Lift the lawsuit, Mr. President, and drop that thing. Let Arizona take its leadership role like it’s willing to do. We’ll help. We’ll do more good with that than anything else that’s going on right now. Other states are getting on board. And then give us the resources we need to get this thing done.”

Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!

Legal Immigration Continues To Tax Our System; Can You Imagine What Illegal Immigration Is Doing?

The US government continues to turn a blind eye toward illegal immigration. At the same time, we take in approximately 1 million legal immigrants per year, with no end in sight. The cost of legal immigration to our social fabric, our culture, our social services, our resources is taxing our ability to provide the necessary things immigrants are looking for when they come here - a job, the American Dream, a life outside of poverty. And then we have the illegal immigration problem, which threatens to overwhelm the law enforcement system, the judicial system, the jail system, ICE, and the entitlement systems. How long do you think we can continue to sustain this influx of people and still maintain some semblance of the standard of living we have come to expect in America? Watch this...

Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!

Friday, October 1, 2010

Looks Like You Can Thank The Democrats For This Too!

As you read through this article, ask yourself if this could be accomplished without the knowledge and consent of the president of the United States. I doubt they could. As you read the dates involved, know that the Guatemalan tests were conducted under Democrat Harry S. Truman, while the tests on 399 poor black men in a program dubbed the "Tuskegee Experiment" in Macon County, Alabama occurred over a period of 39 years  - 28 of which saw a Democrat President in office - FDR being one for 12 years at the early stages of these tests, but also including Harry Truman, JFK, and Lyndon Johnson. Those years were broken up only by Dwight Eisenhower in the 50's. The test were eventually stopped during Nixon's 1st term in office. So, do you still believe the propaganda that the Democrats are the friend of blacks and other minorities? Given my posts over the past couple of days, how much more evidence do you need? The black community has been artfully bamboozled by the Democratic machine, and most blacks haven't got a clue. If you know any blacks voting Democrat in November, clue them in, and ask them to vote Republican!

U.S. apologizes to Guatemalans for secret STD experiments
By Brett Michael Dykes – Fri Oct 1, 2010

U.S. scientific researchers infected hundreds of Guatemalan mental patients with sexually transmitted diseases from 1946 to 1948 -- a practice that only came recently to light thanks to the work of an academic researcher. On Friday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius issued a formal apology to the Central American nation, and to Guatemalan residents of the United States.

"Although these events occurred more than 64 years ago, we are outraged that such reprehensible research could have occurred under the guise of public health," said Clinton and Sebelius in a joint statement. "We deeply regret that it happened, and we apologize to all the individuals who were affected by such abhorrent research practices."

The discovery of the long-ago experiments stems from another, far better known episode of federal tampering with test subjects to study sexually transmitted diseases: the long-running "Tuskegee experiment," studying 399 poor black men from Macon County, Ala., who had been diagnosed with syphilis but never informed of their condition. Federal scientists simply told the men they had "bad blood" and researchers compiled a four-decades-long study monitoring "untreated syphilis in the male Negro." Researchers never treated the illness over its usually fatal course, even after the simple remedy of penicillin was shown to be an effective syphilis treatment; participants received only free meals and medical exams, together with federal funding of their funeral expenses after they died. The study began in 1932, continuing right through to 1972, when it was exposed in media reports.

One of the better-known experts on the Tuskegee scandal is Susan Reverby, a professor of women's and gender studies at Wellesley College who has published two books on the subject. As she was researching her most recent book, Reverby learned of the Guatemalan project, in which researchers from the U.S. Public Health Service conducted experiments on 696 male and female patients housed at Guatemala's National Mental Health Hospital. The scientists injected the patients with gonorrhea and syphilis -- and even encouraged many of them to pass the disease on to others.

"It was done in conjunction with the Guatemalan government," Reverby told The Upshot in a phone interview Friday morning. "They had permission from the Guatemalan government."

Reverby explained that she learned of the Guatemala study purely by accident.

"I was in the archives of the University of Pittsburgh looking at the papers of the surgeon general at the time," Reverby said. "And the papers there were also the papers of a man named John Cutler, who had also been involved in the Tuskegee study. When I opened the boxes of the Cutler papers, there was nothing in it about Tuskegee, but there was everything about this Guatemala study."

Reverby -- who was instrumental in getting former President Bill Clinton to offer an apology for the Tuskegee experiment in 1997 -- told us that she informed Dr. David Sencer, the former head of the Centers for Disease Control; Sencer then passed the discovery up the chain of command in the U.S. government.

"As with many of these things, it was just pure serendipity," Reverby said. "I was the right person in the right place at the right time."

Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!

Thursday, September 30, 2010

1840: A Tale Of Two Parties - The Parasitic Host

This is all due to the Democratic Party eliminating that history from the textbooks. In my opinion, the Democrats have stolen the honor of the Abolitionists, Republicans and America by revising the history books in favor of political gain. - by Frantz Emmanuel Kebreau. You can read his article here

Perhaps reading this will give some young liberals a perspective on the brainwashing that has occurred in their lifetimes (and for generations prior to their lifetimes), and how America really is no longer the Land of the Free, but instead has morphed into the Land of Entitlement. Why we, our parents, or our grandparents were unaware of this is a problem in and of itself. But that can't be said any longer, provided this information is shared. So share; make everyone aware!

One Hundred and seventy years ago, approximately, the Democratic Party learned that they had no future if American history was allowed to be portrayed accurately. And so they changed it. And in doing so, they not only corrupted the thinking of Black America, who they continue to use for political leverage even to this day, but they have corrupted the minds of countless other Americans of every other ethnicity and nationality. This will make you wonder how, once the decision was made to propagandize the public school system, and the implementation of that decision was enacted, anyone could grow up conservative.

It's also interesting to note that only four years after this article was published, in 1844, a Democrat - James Polk - won the White House. And while in the subsequent 41 Presidential Elections, the Democrats have won only 17 elections, the Republicans 22, in the past 76 years (since 1932), the Democrats have won the Presidency 11 times, the Republicans only 9 times. During that same 76-year period, the Democrats have owned the Congress more than half the time (30 out of 40 sessions in the Senate, and 21 out of 40 sessions in the House) - usually with super majorities which have allowed them free reign - something the Republicans seldom had. And with that power, they controlled the laws and regulations, the huge expansion of government through entitlement programs, and the loss of liberty America has experienced - all while revising history to co-opt the young voters of America, and the minorities.

And people actually like the Democratic Party? Really?

Published: November 14, 1880
Copyright © The New York Times

The Democratic Party's Downfall
The Curse Of Slavery And Of The Secession Rebellion Pursuing It To its Grave
From Chicago Times, Nov. 7

The recent Presidential election has shown that there is an invincible reason why the Democratic Party can never win a national victory. It is that the youth of this Republic is not Democratic. The sons of Democratic fathers have grown up Republicans. So long as slavery and the war linger within the memory of Americans, the youth of the Republic will continue to grow up Republicans; and slavery and the war will be remembered as long as the public school system exists. The public schools have slain the Democratic Party with text-books.

It is vain for statesmen to claim that there were as many Democrats as Republicans in the Union Army. It is vain to affirm that the war for the preservation of the Union could not have been carried to a successful close without the assistance of the Democratic Party. It is idle for philanthropy to suggest that the attitude of that party toward the war in the beginning was a humane one; that it was inspired by a higher and better wish that the cause of the conflict should be peaceably removed, and the spilling of brothers' blood by brothers' hands avoided. The Democratic Party has been ideally identified with slavery and slave-holding. The Republican Party is ideally identified with emancipation and the war. Therefore the Democratic Party can never win a national victory. Its old men are dying away. The boys who catch the ballots that fall from their stiffened hands are Republicans.

This fact can not be denied. It will do no good to quarrel with it. All other causes that have operated to diminish the number of Democrats and increase the number of Republicans are insignificant beside the one tremendous and invincible fact. The curse of slavery has poisoned the blood and rotted the bone of the Democratic Party. The malediction of the war has palsied its brain...

...The children go to school. There is not a Democrat on its benches. The first reader contains the portrait of Abraham Lincoln; that kind and sturdy face never made a Democrat. In its simple pages, in words of one and two syllables, is told the story of his birth and death. That story never made a Democrat. In the pranks of the playground  the name silences the frolicsome and makes the jolliest grave. That name never made a Democrat. In the pictures that light up the geography are the firing on Fort Sumter and the death of Ellsworth. These pictures make no Democrats.The first page of the history contains a representation of the surrender of Lee at Appomattox. No boy gazes on that and ever after avows himself a Democrat.

In the higher grades the same subtle and unresisted influence is at work. The textbooks contain extracts from patriots' speeches during the war. These speeches make no Democrats. Sketches of the great Generals are given; their great deeds arouse the enthusiasm of the lads, but there is no Democrat among them. The horror and suffering of the slaves is told; the maddened blood that mounts the boys' cheeks is not Democratic blood.  The curse of slavery has pursued the Democratic Party, and has hounded it to its death. Therefore, let it die; and no lip will be found to say a prayer over the grass on its grave.

The late defeat need no be attributed to any other cause. Other causes were at work, but they were only incidental... The result was accomplished because the youth of the country is not Democratic. That party is, therefore, without a future and without a hope. the malediction of the war has palsied its brain. the curse of slavery has poisoned its blood and rotted its bone. Let it die. - (Author unknown)

And yet, this writer could not have been more wrong in his assessment of the Democratic Party's demise! Was it because of this article that a Democratic battle cry was sent throughout the land? Did this article have influence over the Democratic/Progressive plan to reshape history in our public schools? Did the Progressives of the day see an opportunity in this writer's observations that took devious root in the minds of those individuals which then led to the usurpation of the Democratic Party by the Progressives, and the propagandizing of generations of Americans through revisionist history?

Perhaps that's so. Likely, it is. But we have the opportunity now, because we know the truth, to change our textbooks back to more accurately reflect our nation's history. To more accurately reflect that the Democrats/Progressives have never been the friends of Black America, that indeed the Democrats have only been using Black America much as a parasitic host uses a body, and then discards it when there is no longer a use for that body.

Lot's of work ahead of us, but there is good news! We are uncovering more and more truth bit by bit, week after week, and enlightening person after person of it's existence. The truth, indeed ,shall set us free!

Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!
Posted by Picasa

The Scariness Of Government Elitests Who Truly Believe They Are Superior To The Masses They Represent

How far would they go? You probably have heard about obama's current White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (Regulatory Czar), Cass Sustein, who has stated, "No institution in the executive branch, moreover, is currently responsible for long-range research and thinking about regulatory problems. It would be highly desirable to create such an office under the President, particularly for exploring problems whose solutions require extensive planning, most notably the environment. Nor is there an office charged with acting as an initiator of as well as a brake on regulation. Some entity within the executive branch, building on the ombudsman device, should be entrusted with the job of guarding against failure to implement regulatory programs. Such an entity would be especially desirable in overcoming the collective action and related problems that tend to defeat enforcement." --Cass R. Sunstein, After the Rights Revolution: Reconceiving the Regulatory State, Harvard University Press, 1990, p. 108.

And obama's Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (Science Czar), John Holdren, has said, "Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock."  

So, could the reported use of the vans described in the story below, be different than the actual use? What if Holdren has found a different way to accomplish his goals? Is it possible that the government, currently run by arguably the most radically left administration in our history, and whose agenda is to move America towards socialism at any cost and by any/all means available, will use the vans in areas of the country that have high-densities of more conservatively ideological inhabitants in an effort to change the ideological composition of the country by "sterilizing" whole cities/communities/states to slow the growth of Conservative ideology, thus allowing progressive ideology to catch up, and maybe even surpass it, thus giving that agenda an artificial advantage that will drive the direction of the country for generations to come? Given what we have learned about the power involved, and the agenda sought by this administration, would you agree the government may possibly have such nefarious goals in mind? History shows us that other men, other governments and authorities seeking power, have done much worse. Granted it was with technologies and weapons of their day, but what makes you think America is immune to such acts? Just thinking...

'Feds radiating Americans'? Mobile X-ray vans hit US streets

Patrik Jonsson – Wed Sep 29, 2010

Atlanta – For many living in a terror-spooked country, it might seem like a great government innovation: Use vans equipped with mobile X-ray units to scan vehicles at major sporting events, or even randomly, for bombs or contraband.

But news that the US is buying custom-made vans packed with something called backscatter X-ray capacity has riled privacy advocates and sparked internet worries about "feds radiating Americans."

"This really trips up the creep factor because it's one of those things that you sort of intrinsically think the government shouldn't be doing," says Vermont-based privacy expert Frederick Lane, author of "American Privacy." "But, legally, the issue is the boundary between the government's legitimate security interest and privacy expectations we enjoy in our cars."

American Science & Engineering, a Billerica, Mass.-company, tells Forbes it's sold more than 500 ZBVs, or Z Backscatter Vans, to US and foreign governments. The Department of Defense has bought the most for war zone use, but US law enforcement has also deployed the vans to search for bombs inside the US, according to Joe Reiss, a company spokesman, as quoted by Forbes.

On Tuesday, a counterterror operation snarled truck traffic on I-20 near Atlanta, where Department of Homeland Security teams used mobile X-ray technology to check the contents of truck trailers. Authorities said the inspections weren't prompted by any specific threat.

The mobile X-ray technology works by bouncing narrow X-ray streams off an object like a car and then analyzing the scatter rate of the returning rays. Operators can then locate less-dense objects that could be bodies or bombs.

Backscatter X-ray is already part of an ongoing national debate about its use in so-called full body scanners being deployed in many US airports. In that case, US officials have said they will not store or share the images and will use masking technology to avoid revealing details of the human body. Nevertheless, information security advocates have filed suit to stop their deployment, citing concerns about privacy.

Security experts say expanding the X-ray technology for use on American streets is a powerful counterterror strategy. They also point out the images do not not offer the kind of detail that would be embarrasing to anyone. Moreover, law enforcement already has broad search-and-seizure powers on public highways, where a search warrant is often not needed for officers to instigate a physical search.

But others worry that radiating Americans without their knowledge is evidence of gradually eroding constitutional protections in the post-9/11 age.

"Regardless of where you fall on the spectrum of national security … you have to be realistic that this is another way in which the government is capturing information they may lose control over," says Mr. Lane. "I just have some real problems with the idea of even beginning a campaign of rolling surveillance of American citizens, which is what this essentially is."

Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!

Voter Fraud Alive And Well This November?

So, is this the catalyst this administration is looking for that will drive people to the streets in riotous revolt? Is this the plan to create the crisis that will finally allow them to declare martial law, and take other unprecedent oppressive actions against the free citizens of this country. Is this the straw that will ultimately lead to the chaos the left needs in order for the country to implode upon itself whereby they can create a "new government" out of the ruins? Be wary. I don't trust this bunch at all. None of this may come to pass, and that is a good thing, but they have plans that do not include us. They are not going to willingly step back or stand down because we want them to. They have come too far, and have shown too much of their hand, to fold now. Like us, they are all in. So again I say, be wary...

DOJ Whistleblower: Obama Administration is Planning November Vote Fraud

Christian Adams says the DOJ has a mandate not to enforce the law that ineligible voters must be taken off registration rolls.

This from Undercoverage.net:

Organized and intentional voter fraud is what we have suspected of the “community-organizer-in-chief” Barack Obama and now the proof. A very brave former employee who was working under Obama political appointees has quit his job and is spilling the truth to Fox News and Pajamas Media. Tea parties and Republican party organizations around the country should take note, clean up those voter rolls in every county and organize volunteers to monitor each and every polling place in this country.

Former Department of Justice attorney and now whistleblower J. Christian Adams keeps lobbing more “political grenades” at the Obama administration.

Adams has now testified under oath to the U.S. Civil Rights commission that the “motor voter” registration records will not be purged for ineligible voters (dead, illegal aliens) in time for the November 2010 election, per orders from the Obama adminstration.

Pajamas Media says it has even more Department of Justice employees who are willing to step forward and support Adams.

John Fund of the Wall Street Journal, who has written extensively on voter fraud over the years, asks today in his column:

“Who Will Investigate the Investigators?” Who, indeed? What will become of this democracy if our election is stolen? - End

Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!

It's Not Just A Case Of Us Losing Our Way...

we're also in quicksand up to our ears! Our moral, social, political, and national security compasses are all showing wacky readings as the country continues to head south! And to top it ALL off, the brainiacs we have in Washington, along with their counterparts in various Homeland Security agencies, including the FBI, have lost their collective minds. The sheer scope of what these amateurs have become privy to, and the magnitude of their ineptness, has them mentally running for the hills and shirking any responsibility for leadership. Instead they push that role onto the American people, who I might add, have responded admirably so far. Will it be enough to drag ourselves out of the progressive quicksand we find ourselves in? Time will tell, but the secret of glory is never giving up! Get out and vote every one of these morons - both sides of the aisle, if that's where we find them - out of office. Be prepared to do the same for the next several election cycles as we purge the culture of entitlement, arrogance, contempt, corruption and socialism from our government institutions. Let The Cleansing begin!

FBI Escorts Known Hamas Operative Through Top-Secret National Counterterrorism Center as “Outreach” to Muslim Community

Posted by Patrick S. Poole Sep 27th 2010 in Featured Story, Islamic extremism

Sheikh Kifah Mustapha (third from left) touring the National Counterterrorism Center
(Photo: FBI)

A known Hamas operative and unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism financing trial in U.S. history – Kifah Mustapha – was recently escorted into the top-secret National Counterterrorism Center and other secure government facilities, including the FBI’s training center at Quantico, during a six-week “Citizen’s Academy” hosted by the FBI as part of its “outreach” to the Muslim Community. The group was accompanied by reporter Ben Bradley of WLS-Chicago (ABC), who filed a report on the trip to Washington D.C. on Sunday, who observed:

Sheik Kifah Mustapha, who runs the Mosque Foundation in Bridgeview, asked some of the most pointed questions during the six week FBI Citizens’ Academy and trip to Washington. He pushed agents to fully explain everything from the bureau’s use of deadly force policy to racial and ethnic profiling. “I saw a very interesting side of what the FBI does and I wanted to know more,” Sheik Mustapha explained after returning from D.C. He hopes the FBI’s outreach runs deeper than positive public relations.

Yes, I bet he wanted to know everything about the FBI’s policies.

Curiously, Bradley’s report on the Citizen’s Academy fails to make note of Mustapha’s extensive terrorist ties and support for Hamas, including his former employment with the Holy Land Foundation, which was listed as a specially designated terrorist group by the U.S. government in December 2001, and whose executives were convicted of terrorism support in 2008 and sentenced to lengthy prison terms. Mustapha was personally named unindicted co-conspirator (#31) in the case and employment records submitted by federal prosecutors during the trial showed that he received more than $154,000 for his work for the Holy Land Foundation between 1996 and 2000. During the trial, FBI Special Agent Lara Burns testified that Mustapha also sang in a band sponsored by the Holy Land Foundation that regularly featured songs dedicated to killing Jews and glorifying Hamas. In a deposition he gave in a civil trial concerned with the murder of a Chicago teenager killed by Hamas while waiting for a bus in Israel, Mustapha admitted that he was the registered agent for the Holy Land Foundation in Illinois, and also to his involvement with other Hamas front groups, including the Islamic Association for Palestine. He was later hired as an imam by the Mosque Foundation in Bridgeview, which the Chicago Tribune reported in 2004 has long been a hotbed of Hamas support.

Bradley’s omission of this information about Kifah Mustapha in his report on Sunday is all the more curious since his own station aired an extensive investigative report of Mustapha’s terrorist ties earlier this year.

The WLS investigation into Mustapha’s terrorist ties was prompted by a report published by the Investigative Project on Terrorism in January, which noted that Mustapha had been selected and trained as a chaplain by the Illinois State Police despite his documented terrorist support. The State Police eventually withdrew Mustapha’s appointment as chaplain and just last month he filed a lawsuit against the agency claiming discrimination aided by the Council on American-Islamic Relations, another FBI-identified Hamas front group.

There are several obvious problems with this episode, the first being the FBI’s “outreach” to a known Hamas operative (identified as such by federal prosecutors) and walking him through some of our country’s most sensitive counter-terrorism facilities. Why should terrorist operatives have to covertly case potential targets when the FBI will happily escort them and taken them into areas they would never be able to reach on their own? Who’s next on the FBI’s “outreach” calendar, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his fellow GITMO detainees?

This ongoing “outreach” to terror-linked individuals and leaders of known terrorist front groups by senior leaders of our national security, homeland security and law enforcement agencies is the kind of behavior criticized by my colleagues and I in the Team B II’s report released earlier this month, “Shariah: The Threat to America“. As I observed last week here at Big Peace, Matt Duss of the Center for America Progress and ThinkProgress.org demands that we continue this insane national policy of embracing the same individuals and organizations who have been caught openly cheerleading for Islamic terrorists and have called for the destruction of the U.S. and Western Civilization.

The other glaring problem is that a reporter working in one of the largest media markets in the country can travel to such an event and be unaware of or unwilling to mention his own station’s reporting on his travel partner’s terrorist support activities. Such is the state of the establishment media today.

Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!

Posted by Picasa

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

An Inquiry Of My Rep Regarding His Vote; Do You Know How Yours Voted?

Dear Congressman Posey,

I just read this news item: The House has approved a bill to give up to $7.4 billion to workers sickened during the cleanup of World Trade Center site after the Sept. 11 attacks. The 268-160 vote on Wednesday came after passionate floor debate.

How did you vote on that bill? While I believe that Americans should be compassionate - particularly towards fellow American citizens, I believe this appropriation of tax money is Unconstitutional. I base my beliefs on the following historical event(s). As you read through it, ask yourself : If it wasn't Constitutional back then, when the intent of the Constitution was more widely understood than it is today, then how could it possibly be Constitutional today? And ask your peers the same question for me, I'd love to know their answers. The story is a wonderful one, but the 1st paragraph of Davey Crockett's speech is all you really need to know.

From "The Life of Colonel David Crockett", by Edward S. Ellis
(Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1884)

CROCKETT was then the lion of Washington. I was a great admirer of his character, and, having several friends who were intimate with him, I found no difficulty in making his acquaintance. I was fascinated with him, and he seemed to take a fancy to me.

I was one day in the lobby of the House of Representatives when a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support—rather, as I thought, because it afforded the speakers a fine opportunity for display than from the necessity of convincing anybody, for it seemed to me that everybody favored it. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose. Everybody expected, of course, that he was going to make one of his characteristic speeches in support of the bill. He commenced:

"Mr. Speaker—I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it.

We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him. This government can owe no debts but for services rendered, and at a stipulated price. If it is a debt, how much is it? Has it been audited, and the amount due ascertained? If it is a debt, this is not the place to present it for payment, or to have its merits examined. If it is a debt, we owe more than we can ever hope to pay, for we owe the widow of every soldier who fought in the War of 1812 precisely the same amount.

There is a woman in my neighborhood, the widow of as gallant a man as ever shouldered a musket. He fell in battle. She is as good in every respect as this lady, and is as poor. She is earning her daily bread by her daily labor; but if I were to introduce a bill to appropriate five or ten thousand dollars for her benefit, I should be laughed at, and my bill would not get five votes in this House. There are thousands of widows in the country just such as the one I have spoken of, but we never hear of any of these large debts to them. Sir, this is no debt.

The government did not owe it to the deceased when he was alive; it could not contract it after he died. I do not wish to be rude, but I must be plain. Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity.

Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much of our own money as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week’s pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks."

He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and, of course, was lost.

Like many other young men, and old ones, too, for that matter, who had not thought upon the subject, I desired the passage of the bill, and felt outraged at its defeat. I determined that I would persuade my friend Crockett to move a reconsideration the next day.

Previous engagements preventing me from seeing Crockett that night, I went early to his room the next morning and found him engaged in addressing and franking letters, a large pile of which lay upon his table.

I broke in upon him rather abruptly, by asking him what devil had possessed him to make that speech and defeat that bill yesterday. Without turning his head or looking up from his work, he replied:

"You see that I am very busy now; take a seat and cool yourself. I will be through in a few minutes, and then I will tell you all about it."

He continued his employment for about ten minutes, and when he had finished he turned to me and said: "Now, sir, I will answer your question. But thereby hangs a tale, and one of considerable length, to which you will have to listen."

I listened, and this is the tale which I heard:

SEVERAL YEARS AGO I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast as we could. When we got there, I went to work, and I never worked as hard in my life as I did there for several hours. But, in spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made homeless, and, besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them, and everybody else seemed to feel the same way.

The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done. I said everybody felt as I did. That was not quite so; for, though they perhaps sympathized as deeply with the sufferers as I did, there were a few of the members who did not think we had the right to indulge our sympathy or excite our charity at the expense of anybody but ourselves. They opposed the bill, and upon its passage demanded the yeas and nays. There were not enough of them to sustain the call, but many of us wanted our names to appear in favor of what we considered a praiseworthy measure, and we voted with them to sustain it. So the yeas and nays were recorded, and my name appeared on the journals in favor of the bill.

The next summer, when it began to be time to think about the election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up, and I thought it was best to let the boys know that I had not forgot them, and that going to Congress had not made me too proud to go to see them.

So I put a couple of shirts and a few twists of tobacco into my saddlebags, and put out. I had been out about a week and had found things going very smoothly, when, riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came to the fence. As he came up I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but, as I thought, rather coldly, and was about turning his horse for another furrow when I said to him: "Don’t be in such a hurry, my friend; I want to have a little talk with you, and get better acquainted."
He replied: "I am very busy, and have but little time to talk, but if it does not take too long, I will listen to what you have to say."

I began: "Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and…"

"'Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.’

This was a sockdolager… I begged him to tell me what was the matter.

"Well, Colonel, it is hardly worthwhile to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it in that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the Constitution to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you. I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for my rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest. But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the more honest he is."

"I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, for I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any constitutional question."

"No, Colonel, there’s no mistake. Though I live here in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true?"

"Certainly it is, and I thought that was the last vote which anybody in the world would have found fault with."

"Well, Colonel, where do you find in the Constitution any authority to give away the public money in charity?"

Here was another sockdolager; for, when I began to think about it, I could not remember a thing in the Constitution that authorized it. I found I must take another tack, so I said:

"Well, my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did."

"It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government.

So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other.

No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week’s pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life. The Congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give.

The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution."

I have given you an imperfect account of what he said. Long before he was through, I was convinced that I had done wrong. He wound up by saying:

"So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you."

I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go talking, he would set others to talking, and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, and the fact is, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him:

"Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it full. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said there at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot."

He laughingly replied:

"Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote, and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and, perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way."

"If I don’t," said I, "I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say, I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbecue, and I will pay for it."

"No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbecue. This is Thursday; I will see to getting it up on Saturday a week. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you."

"Well, I will be here. But one thing more before I say good-bye… I must know your name."

"My name is Bunce."

"Not Horatio Bunce?"


"Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before, though you say you have seen me; but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend. You must let me shake your hand before I go."

We shook hands and parted.

It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence and incorruptible integrity, and for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.

At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before.

Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept him up until midnight, talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before.

I have told you Mr. Bunce converted me politically. He came nearer converting me religiously than I had ever been before. He did not make a very good Christian of me, as you know; but he has wrought upon my mind a conviction of the truth of Christianity, and upon my feelings a reverence for its purifying and elevating power such as I had never felt before.

I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him—no, that is not the word—I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if everyone who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.

But to return to my story: The next morning we went to the barbecue, and, to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted—at least, they all knew me.

In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying:

"Fellow citizens—I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only."

I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation as I have told it to you, and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:

"And now, fellow citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error.

"It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit of it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so."

He came upon the stand and said:

"Fellow citizens—It affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today."

He went down, and there went up from the crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before.

I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the honors I have received and all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress.

"NOW, SIR," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday. I have had several thousand copies of it printed and was directing them to my constituents when you came in.

"There is one thing now to which I will call your attention. You remember that I proposed to give a week’s pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men—men who think nothing of spending a week’s pay, or a dozen of them for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased—a debt which could not be paid by money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $10,000, when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it."


Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

What Will November 3rd Bring?

We've all been watching the polls, the economic indicators, and all the obamarats as they abandon the sinking ship one after the other with some interest. Most conservatives think they'll be in  a better position after the elections. Many liberals are disgusted with obama and his cronies, have buyers remorse, and just hope the nightmare ends soon and they don't lose too big in November.

But I've seen the future, and I know what it brings. Here it is - a picture of every poor liberal believer when they wake up on November 3rd and realize their dream of "utopia" is shattered. That American Liberty was able to withstand the progressive assault. That freedom will continue to shine from America's shores for the foreseeable future. That the Constitution, though battered and bruised, ripped and scarred, is a resilient document and stands firmly at the center of this battle. And that the struggle for America's soul is no longer tipping in their favor.

Kind of makes you feel sorry for the poor lost souls, doesn't it?

Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!
Posted by Picasa

Is Alan Grayson Certifiable?

Grayson gets pushback for ‘Taliban Dan’ attack

By Rachel Rose Hartman

U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson has compared Republicans to "Nazis," likened Dick Cheney to a vampire, and stated that Rush Limbaugh was "more lucid when he was a drug addict." So it's no surprise that the Florida Democrat is now lobbing insults at his current Republican challenger, Dan Webster.

But critics say that Grayson's latest ad labeling his opponent "Taliban Dan Webster" not only goes too far, but is misleading.

"Religious fanatics try to take away our freedom in Afghanistan, in Iran and right here in central Florida," the ad's narrator begins. The commercial then plays a clip of Webster stating, "wives submit yourself to your own husband" and "she should submit to me, that's in the Bible."

The ad then outlines several positions it claims Webster holds on issues related to women.

Watch the ad here:

But the full text of Webster's "submit to me" comment shows a much different context.

Webster, the former state Senate majority leader, released a video of his complete comments in which he can be heard stating: "Don't pick the [Bible verses] that say, 'She should submit to me.'"

"Grayson's 'Taliban Dan' ad takes Webster's words out of context, twists meaning," reads a headline in the Orlando Sentinel, one of the congressman's hometown newspapers.

The nonpartisan, nonprofit FactCheck.org wrote of Grayson in its analysis: "He's using edited video to make his rival appear to be saying the opposite of what he really said."

Grayson spokesman Sam Drzymala told FactCheck that "the campaign interpreted Webster's remarks to mean that he believes wives should submit to their husbands."

Really? That's the story you want to stick with? How old are you Sam? Out of High School I'd presume? Oh yes, folks, Alan Grayson may not be mentally competent to serve in our Congress. Be objective. The only conclusion you can come to? Vote Him Out!

Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!

CodePink Treasonous Actions Connected To Obama

Retired USAF Lieutenant Robert "Buzz" Patterson, and a former Senior Military Aide to President Bill Clinton claims that obama is destroying the military and endangering our Security. He goes on to tell us that Jodie Evans, co-founder of the radical anti-military group CODEPINK, which raised more than $600,000 for the insurgents fighting U.S. soldiers in Iraq, and who personally delivered the money to those insurgents, was also obama's key fund-raiser in California during the campaign. Petterson claims the conduct of Evans is treasonous, and she has only skated thus far because the MSM has not made it an issue. Really? Where's Congress? Where's the Senate? Where is the hue and cry connecting this woman to obama? Here's the video!

Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!

Lou Holtz - An Inspiration, A Patriot; Let's Be Happy For A Lifetime!

Please share this! This message was an endorsement for LTC Alan West in Florida, but the message should be taken to heart by ALL patriotic Americans looking to reclaim and restore our country. I have seen Lou Holtz speak before, he is phenomenal. His message is awesome!

Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!

Where Have The Cowboy's Gone?

As you know from my profile, I was born in the late '50's and grew up in the sixties! I watched TV and movie cowboy heroes and shows like "Bonanza", "The Big Valley", have Gun Will Travel", and  "Lassie." These shows were often based in morality, and often times there was a back-drop element of good versus evil, and if someone did something wrong, there were consequences. Parents, or anyone else, weren't blamed. It was the choice made by the individual and there was often punishment for those actions. Back then we were taught to respect our elders, to obey our parents, to help those in need, and many other good traits. Compare that to the shows that kids are exposed to today. The use of profanity, rudeness, disrespect for parents/siblings, and disrespecting authority is the norm. I prefer the lessons we learned relative to morals and principles during the 50's and 60's.

During a presidential campaign a few years ago a candidate's opponent remarked "He's just a cowboy." Now really, is being a cowboy supposed to be a bad thing? A central Florida veterinarian and author, R. W. Stone, did some research and found some information about the "cowboys" that some of us grew up with - Gene Autry, Wild Bill Hickock, The Lone Ranger, John Wayne, Hopalong Cassidy, Roy Rogers and the Texas Rangers. Doctor Stone has assembled this information into a handout for the customers at his veterinary clinic. An acquaintance of mine was fortunate enough recently to meet Doctor Stone and receive one of his handouts. Here it is. I particularly like the Lone Ranger's Creed.


Gene Autry's Cowboy Code of Honor

1. A cowboy never takes unfair advantage - even of an enemy.

2. A cowboy never betrays a trust. He never goes back on his word.

3. A cowboy always tells the truth.

4. A cowboy is kind and gentle to small children, old folks, and animals.

5. A cowboy is free from racial and religious intolerances.

6. A cowboy is always helpful when someone is in trouble.

7. A cowboy is always a good worker.

8. A cowboy respects womanhood, his parents, and his nation's laws.

9. A cowboy is clean about his person in thought, word, and deed.

10. A cowboy is a patriot.

Wild Bill Hickock Deputy Marshal's Code of Conduct

1. I will be brave, but never careless.

2. I will obey my parents. They DO know best.

3. I will be neat and clean at all times.

4. I will be polite and courteous.

5. I will protect the weak and help them.

6. I will study hard.

7. I will be kind to animals and care for them.

8. I will respect my flag and my country.

9. I will attend my place of worship regularly.

The Lone Ranger Creed

1. I believe that to have a friend, a man must be one.

2. That all men are created equal and that everyone has within himself the power to make this a better world.

3. That God put the firewood there, but that every man must gather and light it himself.

4. In being prepared physically, mentally, and morally to fight when necessary for that which is right.

5. That a man should make the most of what equipment he has.

6. That "this government, of the people, by the people, and for the people," shall live always.

7. That men should live by the rule of what is best for the greatest number.

8. That sooner or later...somewhere...somehow...we (each of us) must settle with the world and make payment for what we have taken.

9. That all things change, but truth, and the truth alone, lives on forever.

10. I believe in my Creator, my country, may fellow man.

John Wayne The Shootist

1. I won't be wronged.

2. I won't be insulted.

3. I won't be laid a hand on.

4. I don't do these things to other people.

5. I require the same from them.

Hopalong Cassidy's Creed for American Boys and Girls

1. The highest badge of honor a person can wear is honesty. Be truthful at all times.

2. Your parents are the best friends you have. Listen to them and obey their instructions.

3. If you want to be respected, you must respect others. Show good manners in every way.

4. Only through hard work and study can you succeed. Don't be lazy.

5. Your good deeds always come to light. So don't boast or be a show-off.

6. If you waste time and money today, you will regret it tomorrow. Practice thrift in all ways.

7. Many animals are good and loyal companions. Be friendly and kind to them.

8. A strong, healthy body is a precious gift. Be neat and clean.

9. Out country's laws are made for your protection. Observe them carefully.

10. Children in many foreign lands are less fortunate than you. Be glad and proud you are an American

Roy Roger's Riders Club Rules

1. Be neat and clean.

2. Be courteous and polite.

3. Always obey your parents.

4. Protect the weak and help them.

5. Be brave, but never take chances.

6. Study hard, and learn all you can.

7. Be kind to animals and care for them.

8. Eat all your food and never waste any.

9. Love God and go to Sunday School regularly.

10. Always respect our flag and country.

Texas Rangers "Deputy Ranger" Oath

1. Be alert.

2. Be obedient.

3. Defend the weak.

4. Never Desert a friend.

5. Never take unfair advantage.

6. Be neat.

7. Be truthful.

8. Uphold justice.

9. Live cleanly.

10. Have faith in God.

Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!

David Vs. Goliath, The Battle Engaged

To be sure, November 2nd is shaping up to be a gang-fight of ideologies:

•On the Left, with their goal of European-Statism threatened, they stand, a Leviathan that is better funded, better organized and in reliance on the legions of jackboots within the state-supported unions to push back on the growing tide of freedom. They have resorted to demonization, violence, intimidation and assault, while their ministers of propaganda spew vitriol and misinformation.

•On the Right, a loose confederation of concerned Americans from across the political spectrum, appalled by what they see as a nation that is nearing bankruptcy in both the literal and figurative sense; their freedoms disappearing under the stranglehold of regulatory edicts and red tape; and their own government attacking them for questioning the path politicians and bureaucrats have chosen. While these Americans are greater in number, they are leaderless, distrusting of their own political leaders, and the organizations many of them founded through commons bonds and fellowship are lacking in tactical resources against a gauntlet of leftist goons.

In some ways, it is a battle that has been fought and won before. But that was over 230 years ago.

This from RedState.com; visit for more info and for links within the article.

GOTV: Can a Leaderless Army Defeat the Leviathan of the Left?

Posted by LaborUnionReport (Profile)
Sunday, September 26th
Countdown to Nov. 2nd: 37 days. (now 35)

Perhaps it is from spending too many years in Chicago; or, perhaps, it is his SEIU/ACORN training. In either case, our President has a fondness for “The Chicago Way,” even going so far as once having used the line: “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.”

In November, many freedom-loving Americans (and their candidates) will be going to a gun fight armed only with their pocket knives.Of course, that was in 2008 and he was talking about his political opponent, John McCain, during the campaign. However, it was a message that has many who have crossed the Obama Administration have come to learn first hand.

Now, though, the President’s political opponents appear to be the American people (or at least those who cling to their guns and religion) and, instead of using the image of weaponry, Obama’s advisors apparently view an all-out assault on Americans who exercise their First Amendment Rights as not only proper, but necessary to preserve their power.

Metaphorically speaking, instead of bringing their guns to a knife fight, Obama’s advisors are apparently considering the use of mustard gas on the American people. And, for what? Simply because Americans have chosen to exercise their basic, constitutional civil liberties of peaceable assemblage and petitioning their government for a redress of grievances.

Apparently, to the Democratic Party apparatchik, along with their entertainment and media pawns, Americans exercising their First Amendment Rights are radical, insane, even crazy.

Over the last two years, however, a growing number of Americans have begun to realize that the entire Washington establishment, currently dominated by the Democrats (but including Republicans), are playing by an entirely different set of rules, that their ethos (and pledges) are questionable at best, and that, plainly speaking, they are Evil just not nice people.

On November 2nd, Americans will have the chance to reject the current track our nation is heading down. It may be the last chance, given a Washington elite that disregards (nay, despises) the Constitution and appears to be on a hell-bound trek towards bankrupting our nation, while enslaving generations of Americans into state servitude.

To be sure, November 2nd is shaping up to be a gang-fight of ideologies:

•On the Left, with their goal of European-Statism threatened, they stand, a Leviathan that is better funded, better organized and in reliance on the legions of jackboots within the state-supported unions to push back on the growing tide of freedom. They have resorted to demonization, violence, intimidation and assault, while their ministers of propaganda spew vitriol and misinformation.

•On the Right, a loose confederation of concerned Americans from across the political spectrum, appalled by what they see as a nation that is nearing bankruptcy in both the literal and figurative sense; their freedoms disappearing under the stranglehold of regulatory edicts and red tape; and their own government attacking them for questioning the path politicians and bureaucrats have chosen. While these Americans are greater in number, they are leaderless, distrusting of their own political leaders, and the organizations many of them founded through commons bonds and fellowship are lacking in tactical resources against a gauntlet of leftist goons.

In some ways, it is a battle that has been fought and won before. But that was over 230 years ago.

Then, as now, it took resolve and it took the coordination of 13 disparate colonies. Then, as now, America was divided between those who fought for freedom and those who chose to live under the yoke of a tyrannical government. Then, as now, there were battles that were won and there were battles lost.

GOTV: Today’s Battlefield

Today’s ideological battle will not be won or lost in armed conflict…at least not now (and, hopefully, not ever). Instead, the battles will be fought at the ballot box, at the polls and on the streets as people Get Out the Vote (GOTV).

However, as Americans ready themselves to beat the Leviathan of the Left, many are underestimating, while others are entirely ill prepared. Young organizations that have only recently emerged are floundering, many of their members wondering what more they could be doing to GOTV. In sum, in November, many freedom-loving Americans (and their candidates) will be going to a gun fight armed only with their pocket knives.

Evening the Odds

Knowing the size and scope of the Leviathan’s reach was largely the reason why the Concord Project was conceived months ago, built over the summer, and launched nearly three weeks ago.

The RedStaters involved (both in front of and behind the scenes) due to their involvement in the fight for freedom know the strengths and weaknesses of where the movement stands today.

The Concord Project is a tool to even the odds in 2010 and beyond. It is free, and it is something that no single group can do alone. In order to preserve America in the face of a regime that is hell-bent on statism and destroying liberty, enough Americans must come together, to engage in the battle.

By providing basic Get Out the Vote tutorials, as well as providing a bridge for individuals, activists and groups to work with one another to coordinate their GOTV efforts, the Concord Project is a tool that can serve that purpose as people take advantage of it.

The most important thing Americans can do right now (before Nov. 2nd) to defeat the Leviathan of the Left is to 1) coordinate their GOTV efforts, 2) build voting blocs, 3) work with or help candidate campaigns, and 4) make plans to get people to the polls on November 2nd.

The Concord Project was built with a facilitation platform.

With its 50 state wiki pages, individuals, activists and groups can use the wiki forums to:

•Post GOTV events

•Coordinate precinct walks

•Ask for phone banking help

•Link to articles you think are of interest to other activists

•Create a discussion on a particular issue

•Post endorsements of candidates

The Concord Project has simple instructions for activists and groups on How to Put the Concord to Work for GOTV.

There are 37 days until November 2nd.

Remember November.


“I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes.” Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776

Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!

More Questions On Obama's Eligibility

Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!

Monday, September 27, 2010

The Difference Between Republicans And Democrats In Congress; This Is All You Need To Know

My rep from Florida, Bill Posey, is asking a simple question. Most 3rd or 4th graders, maybe even 1st or 2nd graders would be able to discern it as such, and be able to respond accordingly. Geithner is such a spineless P.O.S. that he can't bring himself to do anything but provide "political semantics dancing", which Posey calls him out on - at one point asking him to just "man up". This is hysterical. Secretary of the Treasury Geithner has to have Barney Frank rescue him from answering a yes or no questionr! Frank gets so flustered, here declares the hearing over! This is how the Dems, masquerading as knowledgeable politicians, are actually representing (or not) their constituents. This is so embarrassing for Geithner and Frank, but then again, I've come to expect that from the Dems associated with this administration.  Enjoy!

Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!

Always Follow The Money

If this scam is allowed to be perpetrated upon the American people, electric bills - YOUR electric bill - will increase substantially. Obama is quoted as saying that if his plan is implemented, energy costs would necessarily skyrocket! He's TOLD us what will happen, why would we allow it?

Read the entire message. Some financial experts think this could go down as the biggest scam in our country's history.

So . . . You think you know quite a bit about Obama. Read on and see just how little you know. All of this comes together in the last part... a must read. This is an interesting story put together from various articles and TV shows by the British Times paper. It shows what Obama and friends are really all about. It's not hope and change, it is money.

I warn you, the first part is a little boring, but stick with it. The second part connects all the dots for you. The end explains how Obama and his cronies will end up as multi-BILLIONAIRES. It's definitely worth the read. You will not be disappointed.

A small bank in Chicago called SHOREBANK almost went bankrupt during the recession. The bank made a profit on its foreign micro-loans (see below) but had lost money in sub-prime mortgages in the US. It was facing likely closure by federal regulators. However, because the bank's executives were well connected with members of the Obama Administration, a private rescue bailout was arranged. The bank's employees had donated money to Obama's Senate campaign. In other words, ShoreBank was too politically connected to be allowed to go under.

ShoreBank survived and invested in many "green" businesses such as solar panel manufacturing. In fact, the bank was mentioned in one of Obama's speeches during his election campaign because it subjected new business borrowers to Eco-litmus tests.

Prior to becoming President, Obama sat on the board of the JOYCE FOUNDATION, a liberal charity. This foundation was originally established by Joyce Kean's family which had accumulated millions of dollars in the lumber industry. It mostly gave funds to hospitals but after her death in 1972, the foundation was taken over by radical environmentalists and social justice extremists.

This JOYCE FOUNDATION, which is rumored to have assets of 8 billion dollars, has now set up and funded, with a few partners, something called the CHICAGO CLIMATE EXCHANGE, known as CXX. It will be the exchange (like the Chicago Grain Futures Market for agriculture) where Environmental Carbon Credits are traded.

Under Obama's new bill, businesses in the future will be assessed a tax on how much CO2 they produce (their Carbon Footprint) or in other words how much they add to global warming. If a company produces less CO2 than their allotted measured limit, they earn a Carbon Credit. This Carbon Credit can be traded on the CXX exchange. Another company, which has gone over their CO2 limit, can buy the Credit and "reduce" their footprint and tax liability. It will be like trading shares on Wall Street.

Well, it was the same JOYCE FOUNDATION, along with some other private partners and Wall Street firms that funded the bailout of ShoreBank. The foundation is now one of the major shareholders. The bank has now been designated to be the "banking arm" of the CHICAGO CLIMATE EXCHANGE (CXX). In addition, Goldman Sachs has been contracted to run the investment trading floor of the exchange.

So far so good; now the INTERESTING parts.

One ShoreBank co-founder, named Jan Piercy, was a Wellesley College roommate of Hillary Clinton. Hillary and Bill Clinton have long supported the bank and are small investors. Another co-founder of Shorebank, named Mary Houghton, was a friend of Obama's late mother. Obama's mother worked on foreign MICRO-LOANS for the Ford Foundation. She worked for the foundation with a guy called Geithner. Yes, you guessed it. This man was the father of Tim Geithner, our present Treasury Secretary, who failed to pay all his taxes for two years.

Another founder of ShoreBank was Ronald Grzywinski, a cohort and close friend of Jimmy Carter.
The former ShoreBank Vice Chairman was a man called Bob Nash. He was the deputy campaign manager of Hillary Clinton's presidential bid. He also sat on the board of the Chicago Law School with Obama and Bill Ayers, the former terrorist. Nash was also a member of Obama's White House transition team. (To jog your memories, Bill Ayers is a Professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago. He founded the Weather Underground, a radical revolutionary group that bombed buildings in the 60s and 70s. He had no remorse for those who were killed, escaped jail on a technicality, and is still an admitted Marxist).

When Obama sat on the board of the JOYCE FOUNDATION, he "funneled" thousands of charity dollars to a guy named John Ayers, who runs a dubious education fund. Yes, you guessed it. The brother of Bill Ayers, the terrorist.

Howard Stanback is a board member of Shorebank. He is a former board chairman of the Woods Foundation. Obama and Bill Ayers, the terrorist, also sat on the board of the Woods Foundation. Stanback was formerly employed by New Kenwood Inc., a real estate development company co-owned by Tony Rezko. (You will remember that Tony Rezko was the guy who gave Obama an amazing sweet deal on his new house. Years prior to this, the law firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland had represented Rezko's company and helped him get more than 43 million dollars in government funding. Guess who worked as a lawyer at the firm at the time. Yes, Barack Obama). Obama has since voluntarily surrendered is licence to practice law in 2008; that only happens if you are about to have that license revoked. Incidentally, Michelle, my belle, Obama also surrendered her license, in 1993!

Adele Simmons, the Director of ShoreBank, is a close friend of Valerie Jarrett, a White House senior advisor to Obama. Simmons and Jarrett also sit on the board of a dubious Chicago Civic Organization.

Van Jones sits on the board of ShoreBank and is one the marketing directors for "green" projects. He also holds a senior advisor position for black studies at Princeton University. You will remember that Mr. Van Jones was appointed by Obama in 2009 to be a Special Advisor for Green Jobs at the White House. He was forced to resign over past political activities, including the fact that he is a Marxist. (Self-avowed communist, actually!)

Al Gore (think he's an objective party in all this? Can you say Global Warming Fearmongerer?) was one of the smaller partners to originally help fund the CHICAGO CLIMATE EXCHANGE. He also founded a company called Generation Investment Management (GIM) and registered it in London, England. GIM has close links to the UK-based Climate Exchange PLC, a holding company listed on the London Stock Exchange. This company trades Carbon Credits in Europe (just like CXX will do here) and its floor is run by Goldman Sachs. Along with Gore, the other co-founder of GIM is Hank Paulson, the former US Treasury Secretary and former CEO of Goldman Sachs. His wife, Wendy, graduated from and is presently a Trustee of Wellesley College, the same college that Hillary Clinton and Jan Piercy, a co-founder of Shorebank attended. (They are all friends).

And now the closing...

Because many studies have been exposed as scientific nonsense, people are slowly realizing that man-made global warming is a money-generating hoax. As a result, Obama is working feverishly to win the race. He aims to push a Cap-and-Trade Carbon Tax Bill through Congress and into law. Obama knows he must get this passed before he loses his majority in Congress in the November elections. Apart from Climate Change he will "sell" this bill to the public as generating tax revenue to reduce our debt. But, it will also make it impossible for US companies to compete in world markets and drastically increase unemployment. In addition, energy prices (home utility rates) will sky rocket.

But, here's the KICKER…


If the bill passes, it is estimated that over 10 TRILLION dollars each year will be traded on the CXX exchange. At a commission rate of only 4 percent, the exchange would earn close to 400 billion dollars to split between its owners, all Obama cronies.

But don't forget SHOREBANK. With 10 trillion dollars flowing though its accounts, the bank will earn close to 40 billion dollars in interest each year for its owners (more Obama cronies), without even breaking a sweat. It is estimated Al Gore alone will probably rake in 15 billion dollars just in the first year. Of course, Obama's "commissions" will be held in trust for him at the Joyce Foundation. They are estimated to be over 8 billion dollars by the time he leaves office in 2013, if the bill passes this year. Of course, these commissions will continue to be paid for the rest of his life.

Some financial experts think this will be the largest "scam" or "legal heist" in world history. Obama's cronies make the Mafia look like amateurs. 

The above article was sent to me; I have no idea who actually wrote it, thus I have attributed it to no one. Don't Allow The Scam!
Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!

The Embarassment Of Ineptitude Continues

In the world of international politics, where people are supposedly professional and astute within their own job spheres, how is this possible? This administration just keeps stepping in it, don't they?

US: Inverted Philippine flag was `honest mistake'

MANILA, Philippines – The U.S. government said Sunday it made an "honest mistake" when it displayed an inverted Philippine flag — which wrongfully signified that the Southeast Asian nation was in a state of war — in a meeting hosted by President Barack Obama.

The Philippine flag was displayed upside down behind President Benigno Aquino III when leaders of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations met Obama in New York on Friday.

"This was an honest mistake," U.S. Embassy spokeswoman Rebecca Thompson said in a statement, adding, "the U.S. treasures its close relationship and close partnership with the Philippines."
The American embassy will find out how the "unfortunate" incident happened, she said.

Philippine foreign affairs department spokesman Ed Malaya said the government understood that it was "an honest error" that "should not detract from the true significance of the summit, which showed the unprecedented cooperation between the ASEAN and the U.S."

It was not immediately clear who pointed out the mistake. A photograph of Aquino sitting beside Obama with the inverted flag behind them was displayed on a government website Sunday but its caption did not point out the error.

During the summit, Obama discussed ways of bolstering economic ties between the U.S. and Southeast Asia as well as Asian regional concerns such as territorial disputes in the South China Sea and Nov. 7 elections in military-ruled Myanmar.

Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!

Posted by Picasa

Illegal Search And Seizure? Really, Mr. President?

You can't so this with phone communications without a warrant, why do they think Americans will allow them to do it with Internet communications? This is just a first step to more intrusive policies/regulations!Another attack on our Liberty? I don't think so little "o"!

Report: US would make Internet wiretaps easier

WASHINGTON – Broad new regulations being drafted by the Obama administration would make it easier for law enforcement and national security officials to eavesdrop on Internet and e-mail communications like social networking Web sites and BlackBerries, The New York Times reported Monday.

The newspaper said the White House plans to submit a bill next year that would require all online services that enable communications to be technically equipped to comply with a wiretap order. That would include providers of encrypted e-mail, such as BlackBerry, networking sites like Facebook and direct communication services like Skype.

Federal law enforcement and national security officials say new the regulations are needed because terrorists and criminals are increasingly giving up their phones to communicate online.

"We're talking about lawfully authorized intercepts," said FBI lawyer Valerie E. Caproni. "We're not talking about expanding authority. We're talking about preserving our ability to execute our existing authority in order to protect the public safety and national security."

The White House plans to submit the proposed legislation to Congress next year.

The new regulations would raise new questions about protecting people's privacy while balancing national security concerns.

James Dempsey, the vice president of the Center for Democracy and Technology, an Internet policy group, said the new regulations would have "huge implications."

"They basically want to turn back the clock and make Internet services function the way that the telephone system used to function," he told the Times.

The Times said the Obama proposal would likely include several requires:

_Any service that provides encrypted messages must be capable of unscrambling them.

_Any foreign communications providers that do business in the U.S. would have to have an office in the United States that's capable of providing intercepts.

_Software developers of peer-to-peer communications services would be required to redesign their products to allow interception.

The Times said that some privacy and technology advocates say the regulations would create weaknesses in the technology that hackers could more easily exploit.

Stand With God, Stand For Liberty!