Notice: This website may or may not use or set cookies used by Google Ad-sense or other third party companies. If you do not wish to have cookies downloaded to your computer, please disable cookie use in your browser. Thank You.


Friday, May 31, 2013

All This For A Damn Flag

Uploaded on October 1, 2011 on YouTube this is video evidence concerning the Obama's true beliefs over this Country and what it stands for, and certainly needs to be shown again,..and again...evident by the Administration's numerous scandals showing they have little regard for the Constitution and therefore this Country and it's symbol the Stars and Stripes.

Yes, folks, that is what she said, according to an instructor at a School for the Deaf and Blind who watched the video. The video is shown at normal speed, 3/4 speed, and 1/2 speed with no banners obstructing her lips.

It should come as no surprise that she and Barack have no clue about America's reverence for, nor reference to, our flag, or that both want to eliminate all memorials and ceremonies commemorating the 9/11 attacks.

Thursday, May 30, 2013

Obama Scandals - Which Is Worst?

Few leaders have amassed a record of defending state sovereignty like Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott.  He has filed close to two dozen lawsuits filed against the illegitimate power grabs of the Obama Administration. He has taken on burdensome EPA regulations and succeeded. He fought ObamaCare all the way to the United States Supreme Court. He has stood on the solid ground of the 10th Amendment to protect local classrooms, and individual freedom.

Now from Greg Abbott's website you can vote on which Obama Scandal is the worst.

President Obama’s friends in the mainstream media are running out of rugs to sweep his scandals under. They may not want to talk about this culture of corruption, but Texans will spread the word and demand justice.

VOTE: which of the Obama Administration’s scandals is the most shocking?

1. IRS targeting conservative and religious groups

2. Benghazi

3. Fast and Furious

4. AP wiretapping

5. Solyndra boondoggle

I voted for Benghazi being the biggest scandal as lives were lost and Obama broke the covenenat that any competent Commander in Chief must have with those he sends in harm's way. However, there are even more scandals that did not make the short list:

6. HHS Scandal - Allowing Secretary Seilbelius to ask for donations from the medical industry and insruance companies in order to fund Obamacare.

7. Allowing the EPA to enact regulation after regulation when they do not have the Constitutional power to enact laws with penalities.

8. Allowing terrorists from the Muslim Brotherhood to visit the White House - Are you kidding me!!!

Wednesday, May 29, 2013

U.S. Military: We Could Have Saved Ambassador Stevens

An article on American Thinker by By Jonathon Moseley. This article is absolutely clear on the issue. We had forces that could have responded to Banghazi and in time to save lives. Every senior military leader knows this as well as does thousands of service members. The Politicians lied. Obama, Panetta, Dempsey, etc., THEY ALL LIED.

Elite U.S. troops were completely capable of saving Ambassador Chris Stevens during the Benghazi Consulate attacks on September 11, 2012. Elements of the highly specialized Combatant Commanders In-Extremis (CIF) units are always on alert, on forward deployment, ready to respond. Their job description is to hit the ground in 3 to 5 hours. CIF elements are ready to engage in active combat anywhere in their region, 3 to 5 hours after the call.

Leon Panetta, Secretary of Defense at the time, either misled the U.S. Congress or was incompetent. Panetta testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee on February 7, 2013 that the U.S. military could not have responded in less than 9 to 12 hours.

Obama's first secretary of defense, Robert Gates, told CBS's Face the Nation on May 12, 2013 that "[w]e don't have a ready force standing by" in that region.

But we absolutely do "have a ready force standing by" to reach any trouble spot in a few hours. Insider reports previously revealed that CIF elements were training in Croatia and could have been in Benghazi in three and a half hours.

Although rotating out of the United States, some CIF elements are always forward-deployed within each military command region, always on stand-by. Their training includes expertise within each local region. Some of each region's unit is always ready. They don't need to pack. Being ready to go -- immediately -- is their job description. It's the reason they exist.

The U.S. military has developed a range of capabilities, from CIF teams to the Navy SEALs, to Rangers, to Green Berets. But now many in the special forces/special operators community feel betrayed. Commanders in Extremis units are so highly trained and expert that even elite Green Berets wash out of the highly demanding CIF training in large numbers.

Standard military doctrine is to activate all such resources immediately, even if they are ultimately not used. Military's plans require getting such teams in the air and on the way, not waiting to see if they will be needed.

So Panetta's and Gates's statements to the public violate standard military protocol. Leon Panetta telegraphed to our enemies an image of incompetence of U.S. forces. Panetta's testimony was an insult to the U.S. military. Elite forces go through constant, grueling training to be able to do what Panetta and Gates say they cannot do. One of the purposes of "special operators" is deterrence. Panetta and Gates undermined that deterrence.

The U.S. military perfected capabilities after the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, the attack on the USS Cole in Yemen in 2000, the 2008 U.S. Embassy bombing in Yemen, and similar events. Gates emphasized the need for planning; Commanders in Extremis forces plan constantly for all contingencies.

CIF units answer directly to the general for each regional command to eliminate delay. Therefore, if AFRICOM -- the U.S. military's regional command for matters involving Africa -- had actually wanted to rescue Ambassador Stevens -- and the classified secrets in the Consulate -- the AFRICOM general would have communicated directly with the CIF team on forward deployment in the region.

Panetta testified that the U.S. military could not react because they didn't know the situation on the ground in Benghazi. In fact, two unmanned drones were overhead, sending real-time video, including infrared and night-vision cameras, back to the national command authority. Everyone but Panetta seems to know how dumb Panetta's statement was.

Panetta testified that we should not send in aircraft without knowing what is happening on the ground. Au contraire. You send in the correct aircraft to find out what is going on. It's called reconnaissance. The U.S. Air Force has been conducting reconnaissance since World War I (then as part of the U.S. Army). Unless maybe our leaders don't want to know.

In fact, it is reported that CIF elements assigned to AFRICOM were already mobilizing and preparing to respond in Southern Europe. But they were ordered to stand down. It is believed they were mobilizing at a U.S./NATO air base in Sigonella, Italy, near Naples.

Sigonella air base is only 475 miles from Benghazi. Fighter jets from Sigonella could have been above Benghazi in 20 minutes from takeoff at the F-16's maximum speed of 1,500 miles per hour. Transports and gunships could have reached the Consulate in 90 minutes from take-off.

F-16s can carry fuel for a flight of 2,000 nautical miles. So the 475-mile flight from Sigonella would have left enough fuel for an hour of operations over the Consulate in Benghazi plus a flight to Andravida Air Base in Greece, only 405 miles away, to land and refuel. Greece is a NATO partner. Later waves could have refueled first in Andravida, 405 miles away.

Meanwhile, the aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis and its battle group were within range to assist the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette was relieved of command and flown back to the States on undisclosed allegations of inappropriate judgment, as reported in the military's Stripes magazine. It is widely believed within the U.S. military that Admiral Gaouette was mobilizing a response to come to the aid of Ambassador Stevens but was ordered to stand down. The allegation of "inappropriate judgment" was that Admiral Gaoutte insisted on mounting a rescue, leading to sharp words being exchanged.

Gregory Hicks, Deputy Chief of Mission in Libya, immediately tasked his embassy defense attaché with calling for help from the U.S. military. According to Hicks's testimony on May 8, AFRICOM told the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli that the U.S. airbase in Aviano, Italy could have F-16s over Benghazi in 2-3 hours but that there were no aerial tankers in the area to refuel the F-16s.

That excuse rings false. Throughout Europe, U.S.-compatible standard refueling tankers are always available. That's why they exist. NATO exists so that all NATO countries will come to the aid of any of their fellows when

Furthermore, why Aviano? Sigonella was roughly half the distance. Sigonella's F-16s could have reached Benghazi in 20 minutes from wheels up, conducted action above the Consulate, and returned to Italy or Greece with fuel to spare. Remember: a "spotter" from the Benghazi CIA annex was on the roof of the Consulate, "laser designating" the attackers' mortar team and reporting by radio.

Gates also commented that U.S. F-16s could not have simply buzzed the Benghazi Consulate to scare away the attackers because of the risk of anti-aircraft missiles. Hogwash. For months the year before the U.S. Air Force and NATO jets had strafed and bombed the Libyan military and decimated its anti-aircraft weaponry. And since when are members of the U.S. military afraid to come to the defense of civilians because someone might hurt them?

Even liberal columnist Maureen Dowd commented: "The defense secretary at the time, Leon Panetta, insisted, 'We quickly responded.' But they responded that they would not respond." Dowd sums it up: "All the factions wove their own mythologies at the expense of our deepest national mythology: that if there is anything, no matter how unlikely or difficult, that we can do to try to save the lives of Americans who have volunteered for dangerous assignments, we must do it."

Tuesday, May 28, 2013

Wisdom (and Warning!) From The Dutch

This is by Geert Wilders, a Member of the Dutch Parliament. In a generation or two, the US will ask itself: "Who lost Europe ?" Here is the speech of Geert Wilders, Chairman, Party for Freedom the Netherlands , at the Four Seasons in New York , introducing an Alliance of Patriots and announcing the Facing Jihad Conference in Jerusalem.

Dear friends,

Thank you very much for inviting me.

I come to America with a mission. All is not well in the old world. There is a tremendous danger looming, and it is very difficult to be optimistic. We might be in the final stages of the Islamization of Europe. This not only is a clear and present danger to the future of Europe itself, it is a threat to America and the sheer survival of the West. The United States as the last bastion of Western civilization, facing an Islamic Europe.

First, I will describe the situation on the ground in Europe . Then, I will say a few things about Islam. To close I will tell you about a meeting in Jerusalem .

The Europe you know is changing.

You have probably seen the landmarks. But in all of these cities, sometimes a few blocks away from your tourist destination, there is another world. It is the world of the parallel society created by Muslim mass-migration.

All throughout Europe a new reality is rising: entire Muslim neighborhoods where very few indigenous people reside or are even seen. And if they are, they might regret it. This goes for the police as well. It's the world of head scarves, where women walk around in figure less tents, with baby strollers and a group of children. Their husbands, or slaveholders if you prefer, walk three steps ahead. With mosques on many street corners. The shops have signs you and I cannot read. You will be hard-pressed to find any economic activity. These are Muslim ghettos controlled by religious fanatics. These are Muslim neighborhoods, and they are mushrooming in every city across Europe . These are the building-blocks for territorial control of increasingly larger portions of Europe , street by street, neighborhood by neighborhood, city by city.

There are now thousands of mosques throughout Europe . With larger congregations than there are in churches. And in every European city there are plans to build super-mosques that will dwarf every church in the region. Clearly, the signal is: we rule.

Many European cities are already one-quarter Muslim: just take Amsterdam , Marseille and Malmo in Sweden . In many cities the majority of the under-18 population is Muslim. Paris is now surrounded by a ring of Muslim neighborhoods. Mohammed is the most popular name among boys in many cities.

In some elementary schools in Amsterdam the farm can no longer be mentioned, because that would also mean mentioning the pig, and that would be an insult to Muslims.

Many state schools in Belgium and Denmark only serve halal food to all pupils. In once-tolerant Amsterdam gays are beaten up almost exclusively by Muslims. Non-Muslim women routinely hear 'whore, whore'. Satellite dishes are not pointed to local TV stations, but to stations in the country of origin.

In France school teachers are advised to avoid authors deemed offensive to Muslims, including Voltaire and Diderot; the same is increasingly true of Darwin . The history of the Holocaust can no longer be taught because of Muslim sensitivity.

In England sharia courts are now officially part of the British legal system. Many neighborhoods in France are no-go areas for women without head scarves. Last week a man almost died after being beaten up by Muslims in Brussels , because he was drinking during the Ramadan.

Jews are fleeing France in record numbers, on the run for the worst wave of anti-Semitism since World War II. French is now commonly spoken on the streets of Tel Aviv and Netanya , Israel . I could go on forever with stories like this. Stories about Islamization.

A total of fifty-four million Muslims now live. San Diego University recently calculated that a staggering 25 percent of the population in Europe will be Muslim just 12 years from now. Bernhard Lewis has predicted a Muslim majority by the end of this century.

Now these are just numbers. And the numbers would not be threatening if the Muslim-immigrants had a strong desire to assimilate. But there are few signs of that. The Pew Research Center reported that half of French Muslims see their loyalty to Islam as greater than their loyalty to France . One-third of French Muslims do not object to suicide attacks. The British Centre for Social Cohesion reported that one-third of British Muslim students are in favor of a worldwide caliphate. Muslims demand what they call 'respect'. And this is how we give them respect. We have Muslim official state holidays.

The Christian-Democratic attorney general is willing to accept sharia in the Netherlands if there is a Muslim majority. We have cabinet members with passports from Morocco and Turkey .

Muslim demands are supported by unlawful behavior, ranging from petty crimes and random violence, for example against ambulance workers and bus drivers, to small-scale riots. Paris has seen its uprising in the low-income suburbs, the banlieus. I call the perpetrators 'settlers'. Because that is what they are. They do not come to integrate into our societies; they come to integrate our society into their Dar-al-Islam. Therefore, they are settlers.

Much of this street violence I mentioned is directed exclusively against non-Muslims, forcing many native people to leave their neighborhoods, their cities, their countries. Moreover, Muslims are now a swing vote not to be ignored.

The second thing you need to know is the importance of Mohammed the prophet. His behavior is an example to all Muslims and cannot be criticized. Now, if Mohammed had been a man of peace, let us say like Ghandi and Mother Theresa wrapped in one, there would be no problem. But Mohammed was a warlord, a mass murderer, a pedophile, and had several marriages - at the same time. Islamic tradition tells us how he fought in battles, how he had his enemies murdered and even had prisoners of war executed. Mohammed himself slaughtered the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza. If it is good for Islam, it is good. If it is bad for Islam, it is bad.

Let no one fool you about Islam being a religion. Sure, it has a god, and a here-after, and 72 virgins. But in its essence Islam is a political ideology. It is a system that lays down detailed rules for society and the life of every person. Islam wants to dictate every aspect of life. Islam means 'submission'. Islam is not compatible with freedom and democracy, because what it strives for is sharia. If you want to compare Islam to anything, compare it to communism or national-socialism, these are all totalitarian ideologies.

Now you know why Winston Churchill called Islam 'the most retrograde force in the world', and why he compared Mein Kampf to the Quran. The public has wholeheartedly accepted the Palestinian narrative, and sees Israel as the aggressor. I have lived in this country and visited it dozens of times. I support Israel . First, because it is the Jewish homeland after two thousand years of exile up to and including Auschwitz; second because it is a democracy, and third because Israel is our first line of defense.

This tiny country is situated on the fault line of jihad, frustrating Islam's territorial advance. Israel is facing the front lines of jihad, like Kashmir, Kosovo, the Philippines , Southern Thailand, Darfur in Sudan , Lebanon , and Aceh in Indonesia . Israel is simply in the way. The same way West-Berlin was during the Cold War.

The war against Israel is not a war against Israel . It is a war against the West. It is jihad. Israel is simply receiving the blows that are meant for all of us. If there would have been no Israel , Islamic imperialism would have found other venues to release its energy and its desire for conquest. Thanks to Israeli parents who send their children to the army and lay awake at night, parents in Europe and America can sleep well and dream, unaware of the dangers looming.

Many in Europe argue in favor of abandoning Israel in order to address the grievances of our Muslim minorities. But if Israel were, God forbid, to go down, it would not bring any solace to the West It would not mean our Muslim minorities would all of a sudden change their behavior, and accept our values. On the contrary, the end of Israel would give enormous encouragement to the forces of Islam. They would, and rightly so, see the demise of Israel as proof that the West is weak, and doomed. The end of Israel would not mean the end of our problems with Islam, but only the beginning. It would mean the start of the final battle for world domination. If they can get Israel , they can get everything.

So-called journalists volunteer to label any and all critics of Islamization as a 'right-wing extremists' or 'racists'. In my country, the Netherlands , 60 percent of the population now sees the mass immigration of Muslims as the number one policy mistake since World War II. And another 60 percent sees Islam as the biggest threat. Yet there is a greater danger than terrorist attacks, the scenario of America as the last man standing. The lights may go out in Europe faster than you can imagine. An Islamic Europe means a Europe without freedom and democracy, an economic wasteland, an intellectual nightmare, and a loss of military might for America - as its allies will turn into enemies, enemies with atomic bombs. With an Islamic Europe, it would be up to America alone to preserve the heritage of Rome , Athens and Jerusalem ...

Dear friends, liberty is the most precious of gifts. My generation never had to fight for this freedom, it was offered to us on a silver platter, by people who fought for it with their lives. All throughout Europe , American cemeteries remind us of the young boys who never made it home, and whose memory we cherish. My generation does not own this freedom; we are merely its custodians. We can only hand over this hard won liberty to Europe 's children in the same state in which it was offered to us. We cannot strike a deal with mullahs and imams. Future generations would never forgive us. We cannot squander our liberties. We simply do not have the right to do so.

We have to take the necessary action now to stop this Islamic stupidity from destroying the free world that we know.

Please take the time to read and understand what is written here, Please send it to every free person that you know, it is so very important.

Sunday, May 26, 2013

Farrahkhan - Making You Sick To Your Stomach

Louis Farrahkhan is a racist pure and simple.  Anyone who follows or believes anything this ass clown of a nut says is an idiot.  It is very troubling that many so called Christian Pastors support Farrahkhan and very telling as these local reliogious leaders put the color of their skin before God's word.

Farrakhan Talks of ‘Satanic Jews’ and ‘Synagogue of Satan’ at Detroit Church Speech — but Wait Until You Hear Who Was in Attendance - from The

The Anti-Defamation League is criticizing Louis Farrakhan for delivering blatantly anti-Semitic statements, using terms such as “Satanic Jews” and the “Synagogue of Satan,” during a speech at a Detroit church last week. The Jewish group is also asking why public figures who attended the Nation of Islam leader’s event have remained silent.

According to the ADL and the Detroit Free Press, those present at the May 17th Fellowship Chapel event included the church’s leader, Rev. Wendell Anthony, who also serves as President of the Detroit branch of the NAACP, Rep. John Conyers (D-Michigan) and Detroit City Councilwoman JoAnn Watson. According to the Detroit Free Press, “Conyers and Watson nodded in agreement during some of Farrakhan’s remarks”; however, the paper did not specify during which parts of the speech they nodded.

The ADL provided the following details about the speech, which included classic anti-Semitic characterizations of Jews’ allegedly being engaged in conspiratorial efforts at world domination (typical of many Farrakhan speeches):

Farrakhan referred to “Satanic Jews” and the “Synagogue of Satan” controlling America’s government and other sectors, reportedly stating that President Barack Obama “surrounded himself with Satan…members of the Jewish community.”

Farrakhan also said that the Jewish people “have mastered the civilization now, but they’ve mastered it in evil… Who’s the owner of Hollywood that creates images and makes the people think that what is created on the screen is the way we should live? That’s Satan…Satan has devoured much of humanity.”

“The people that own Hollywood,” Farrakhan added, are “the same people that control your press, the same people that control your media, the same people who are the publishers the same people who are the distributors, the same Synagogue of Satan, and they put you before the world in this disgraceful matter.”

.The Detroit Free Press led its report on the church speech with Farrakhan’s allegation that former Detroit Mayor, Kwame Kilpatrick, would have been treated more forgivingly had he been white. Farrakhan said he planned to visit Kilpatrick in prison over the weekend.

The paper quoted Farrakhan as saying that while white politicians are also often found to be corrupt, “they hide their crap under the rug” and protect each other.

“But anything (blacks) do, (whites) expose to destroy your love and confidence in one another.”

Referring to Kilpatrick’s prosecutions, Farrakhan said, “The enemy that charged him is a liar from the beginning.”

The Detroit Free Press reported that during the speech, “Farrakhan attacked fast-food restaurants, white images of Jesus Christ, gay marriage, and black-on-black violence in cities like Detroit.”

He also used the opportunity to push his idea that African-Americans pool their resources in order to purchase property in Detroit, and thus save the city.

“Arabs got money, they’re buying,” he said according to the Detroit Free Press.

“Our Mexican families buying. You, who are the majority population, you’re not buying,” he added.

The ADL compiled some of the praise that was heaped on Farrakhan, as reported in the Nation of Islam’s Newspaper The Final Call. That praise reportedly included:

Rev. Horace Sheffield, III of the New Destiny Baptist Church said, “We need someone to give us direction. I believe we have a leader here that can organize us.”

Sheffield also added, “They want to silence people who tell us the truth, and we know why this is happening and who is doing it, but we need some help with how to overcome it.”

Rev. David Bullock of Greater St. Matthew Baptist Church stated that Farrakhan’s message was “impactful,” “timely,” and left him “inspired.”

While TheBlaze was unable to find video of Farrakhan’s controversial statements at the Fellowship Chapel, video can be found here of his appearance at the Detroit City Council on the same day, at which he is greeted by a standing ovation.

Saturday, May 25, 2013

Crushing National Debt

Just Explain It: How Long Will It Take To Pay Off The U.S. Debt? An article by Zelkadis Elvi on Just Explain It.

America’s debt now tops $16 trillion, and the meter never stops running. The national debt increases by about $35 million an hour, and around $2 billion every 24 hours.

Cowboy's and Tea Parties note:  As I post this, the National debt is $16.8+ trillion. 

As the country’s debt skyrockets, politicians and pundits are debating how to get it under control. If nothing is done, we could be $17 trillion in the hole later this year.

But for the first time in six years, the federal government said it would make a small down payment on the national debt – about $35 billion worth. They say higher tax receipts and recent spending cuts helped raise the money.

Which brings us to the topic of this Just Explain It.

What exactly is the debt? And how long would it take to pay it off?

First, here’s some history.

Before President Reagan took office, the national debt was $1 trillion. By the time President Clinton left the White House, it reached $5.6 trillion. Eight years later, the debt had almost doubled. And today it stands at $16.8 trillion.

So… where did all of this debt come from?

It is the amount of money the U-S government has borrowed to pay its bills. It exists because the government’s expenses exceed its revenues. So to pay the bills, the government borrows money from countries like Japan, China, Brazil and other places.

But surprisingly enough, we owe most of the money to ourselves. 66% of the national debt is owned by U-S entities like, the Federal Reserve, Social Security, various pension plans, banks and individual investors.

To understand just how much $16 trillion is…here are some fun facts.

Actor Tom Cruise reportedly made $75 million last year. Now most of us would agree that’s a lot of money. But for him to earn just $1 trillion, he would have to make $75 million a year for 14,000 years.

For those of you who like to shop…you’d have to spend $5 million a day for the next 546 years.

And if you laid a trillion one-dollar bills end-to-end, they would wrap around the equator over 380 times and you’d still have 17 laps to go.

Our $16 trillion debt could be paid off in a year. But in order for that to happen, the government would have to stop spending completely and raise taxes at least 10% across the board. The money generated would go directly to paying down the debt.

Thursday, May 23, 2013

Make No Mistake About it - War on the Border, War on our Second Amendment

War on the border from Mexican Cartels,...war on our firearms freedoms from our own Government. This should be watched by everybody that values their freedom.

Warning, graphic scenes.

Border Security - do not shy away from this video please, despite the warning and despite the fact that it is nine months old. Felipe Calderon, butt clown #1 is no longer President of Mexico. In his place is Enrique Nieto aka butt clown #2 from the PRI (progressive party) which are known as Cartel Appeasers.

This is a powerful video produced by the NRA (National Rifle Association), but you need to be aware of this as a citizen of the U.S.A.

For those of you who may not know, Sheriff Larry Dever, white cowboy hat and blue/white checkered shirt is the long time sheriff of Cochise County, Sierra Vista , where I live, is the largest town in Cochise County. Cochise County is huge and borders Sonora, Mexico. Unfortunantly Sheriff Dever died in a vehicle accident this past September.

The bald-headed guy is Sheriff Paul Babeau of Pinal County, North of Tucson , AZ.

This video doesn't say so, but there are videos taken on Hwy 8, going from I-10 north of Tucson, thru Gila Bend and on to CA has a sign warning drivers not to stop or pick up hitchhikers because so many are illegals who have illegally come across the border from Mexico. They can be Mexican or of any other foreign country, but are usually Mexican nationals working for the Sinaloan Cartel.
Powerful!! And absolutely factual!

Wednesday, May 22, 2013

Obama Administration - Law Is Irrelevant

Well of course the Law is Irrelevant when it comes to the law getting in the way of the Obama Administration doing what they want to do. Here it is the latest episode of pulling back the curtain. Make no mistake about it the Obama Administration is the most arrogant, corrupt and constitutional destructive administration in the history of the United States.

Please watch White House Advisor, Dan Pfeiffer, be the one to let the cta out of the bag this time and show us once again to what levels of arrogance and power grabbing this administration is about.

Tuesday, May 21, 2013

Remember This Quote?

As we approach 17 Trillion in National debt it is time for some reflection.  Then Senator Barack Obama,....five years ago he was not ready for Prime Time, and five years later all we have for his efforts are a demonstrated leadership failure and an inability to be fundamentally honest, not to mention even remotely competent,...........unless you consider all his efforts a deliberate attempt to destroy this country.

Remember when this clown said the following:

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America 's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that, 'the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."  ~ Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006

Well, about the only truth this disgrace of a President has ever said was "Americans deserves better".

Monday, May 20, 2013

Judge Jeanine on the Benghazi Coverup

Judge Jeanine Pirro, who attended this week's Congressional hearing on Benghazi, says the testimony she witnessed proved President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are lying and she pull no punches about it.

Wow! Imagine being in front of Judge Jeanine Pirro as a defendant, thanks. I'd rather gouge my eye out with a spoon.

Sunday, May 19, 2013

Benghazi, the Growing Voice for Answers

We are seeing, albeit very slowly, a growing concern by mainstream media sources over getting to the facts surrounding Benghazi,.....from the non response to Americans under fire, to the lying to the American people,....and the cover up. Below is a respresentative list on chronologcial order of headlines and not just from Fox News the only honest news organization, but from mainstream media sources as well:

Hacker Distributes Confidential Memos Sent to Hillary Clinton on Benghazi Attack, Libya, March 18, 2013

First Alleged Excerpts From Hacked Hillary Clinton Benghazi Memos Revealed — Do They Explain the Video Story? March 20, 2013

‘It Matters’, Why were those Americans abandoned by their nation? A question of trust that still matters. April 5, 2013

700 Retired Spec Ops Professionals to Congress: Form a Select Committee to Investigate Benghazi. April 7, 2013.

Special Forces group presses for truth on Benghazi attack, April 11, 2013

Mother of Benghazi Victim Pleads for Answers, Calls for Full Probe Into Terror Attack April 11, 2013.

New Benghazi Report Faults Clinton for Security Lapses, Claims White House Changed CIA Talking Points to Avoid Criticism. April 23, 2013.

GOP Rep. Promises ‘Explosive’ Benghazi Hearings Are Coming. April 27, 2013.

State Department Preventing Benghazi Whistle-Blowers From Getting Legal Representation, April 29, 2013.

Explosive Report Contradicts the Obama Administration’s Benghazi Story in a Big Way. April 29, 2013.

Obama on Allegations Benghazi Whistleblowers Have Been Blocked From Testifying: ‘I’m Not Familiar With it’. April 30, 2013.

From Health Care to Benghazi: Here’s What President Obama Discussed During Today’s Presser. April 30, 2013

Benghazi Mastermind Identified — But We’re Not Arresting Him. May 1, 2013.

Is Obama covering for Benghazi bullies? May 1, 2013.

Jay Carney’s Response When Asked About Benghazi Whistleblowers: Those Attacks Were a ‘Long Time Ago’. May 1, 2013

FBI Wants to Talk to These 3 People About the Benghazi Terror Attack. May 1, 2013.

Allen West joins call for congressional investigation of Benghazi attack. May 2, 2013.

Al Qaeda fighters involved in Benghazi attack. May 3, 2013.

Names of 3 Whistleblowers Set to Testify on Benghazi Revealed. May 4, 2013.

Democrat Congressman: Susan Rice’s Benghazi Talking Points ‘Absolutely’ False. May 5, 2013.

Former Top U.S. Official: I Thought Benghazi Was Terrorism ‘From the Get-Go’. May 5, 2013.

Benghazi Whistleblower to Allege Clinton Tried to Cut Out Anti-Terror Bureau. May 6, 2013.

Benghazi whistleblower confirms: Special Forces told to ‘stand down’ Report. May 9, 2013.

Libya: The Truth? Ambassador Stevens’ Former Deputy: Special Forces Were Told ‘You Can’t Go' May 11, 2013.

Plus the excellent interview of former Govermor Huckabee with retired Lt. Gen Jerry Boykin on "Just Who Gave the Order to Stand Down the Response to Americans Under Terrorist Attack?"  Congress needs to get Defense Secretary Panetta and Joint Chiefs Chairman Martin Dempsey in front of them to answer this most important question. 

Saturday, May 18, 2013

Real Jobless Rate Still Above 10% In Most States

From an article by Jeff Cox, CNBC, titled "Real" Jobless Rate Still Above 10% In Most States

GDP growth is in the midst of its longest sub-3 percent annual growth rate since 1929, the beginning of the Great Depression, according to Bespoke Investment Group.

The economy hasn't topped 3 percent since 2005—before Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke took over—and is unlikely to do so this year.

While the government said the GDP revisions will present a more encompassing look at the economy, critics are howling that the changes are an attempt to mask weak growth and rationalize more debt.

"It shouldn't come as a surprise they are going to change the way this number is reported," said Michael Pento, founder of Pento Portfolio Strategies.

Cowboys and Tea Parties comment:  Just like when this Administration changed the way unemployment numbers are calculated to make it seem like less people are out of work. 

"When GDP numbers are chronically bad [averaging just 1.45 percent in the last two quarters] and the labor force participation rate is perpetually falling, our government will do the same thing they did for the inflation data—tinker with the formula until you get the desired result."

Under the new math, the government will add research and development spending, as well as the capital value of all books, movies, records, television programs and plays produced since 1929. You watch and see the GDP growth numbers go up and Obama taking credit.

Friday, May 17, 2013

Four Scandals - by Newt Gingrich

Newt Gingrich, as always, presents articulate and analytical verbiage on problems confronting America. The problem this time is that the people elected a corrupt and arrogant President who, in turned, hired a dishonest administration who both are now caught up in scandal after scandal,.... undeniabley so. You can go to Gingrich Productions and sign up for this e-mail newsletter. Read Newt's article below:

When I started writing this it was called "three scandals".

There was the Benghazi Scandal, the IRS Scandal, and the little covered but equally alarming Secretary Sebelius scandal.

Then as I was writing we learned that the Justice Department had secretly obtained two months worth of phone call records for more than 100 Associated Press reporters. This is the largest violation of the First Amendment in modern times and so we now have four scandals in the Obama Administration.

The White House wants Americans to believe the four scandals are all, in one way or another, the rogue acts of insignificant subordinates.

They want us to believe that a few misguided but well-meaning IRS agents in regional offices took the initiative to persecute and harass conservatives in an election year.

They want us to believe that repeated requests for more security at the Benghazi compound were ignored by fourth-tier bureaucrats at the State Department, never making it to the Department’s leadership. That the talking points were altered by unknown analysts at the CIA, rather than senior administration officials as evidence suggests. That the explosive allegations of a senior diplomat are really just the ramblings of a disgruntled employee.

They want us to believe that the White House was completely unaware that the Department of Justice secretly grabbed two months of phone records from Associated Press reporters who cover the administration, in an effort to identify their sources.

And no doubt we will soon discover that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’s shakedown of insurance companies for money which Congress refused to appropriate was really the initiative of some unfortunate functionary deep in the bowels of the Department.

But in truth, these scandals are not the random acts of a few bureaucrats who got out of hand.

These scandals are in fact the natural manifestations of Obamaism.

Unaccountable power, untethered from law or the Constitution, and employed for political gain is standard operating procedure in an administration which seeks to make government bigger and bigger. It is the Chicago machine transplanted to the federal government.

And they continue without shame, lying about what they’ve done, then lying about lying, and finally lying about the people who are telling the truth until everyone forgets what they lied about in the first place.

When the President blamed the terrorist attacks in Benghazi on a protest that never happened, anyone who dared challenge the official story was smeared as a crazy extremist or a bitter partisan.

When the Secretary of State vowed to prosecute the creator of an obscure anti-Islam Internet video, those who doubted the explanation were intolerant.

When the U.N. ambassador said on five Sunday talk shows that the violence arose from a spontaneous demonstration against the video, people who questioned the claim were politicizing a tragedy.

It is now obvious to everyone that the Obama Administration was deliberately dishonest. And so the White House tells Americans to forget about it, “Benghazi happened a long time ago.”

The subordinates have been punished. The whistleblowers have been demoted. Move along, nothing to see here.

The administration took the same approach to the IRS scandal. Apparently beginning in 2010, the IRS singled out groups with “tea party” or “patriot" in their name (presumably assuming that groups on the Left don’t describe themselves as “patriotic”), as well as organizations “involved in limiting/expanding Government, educating on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, social economic reform movement[s],” or making statements which “criticize how the country is being run.”

The IRS asked many of these groups to provide lists of their donors, the amount of each donation, and lots of details about the organizations’ activities. Here is an example of one appalling letter from the IRS to a Tea Party group which was targeted.

When the IRS confessed to some of this on Friday in advance of an investigation made public yesterday, it tried to blame low level IRS employees in a Cincinnati office. But it is already being widely reported that senior IRS officials in Washington knew for almost two years that the agency was targeting conservative organizations, even though they testified before Congress more than a year ago and claimed the IRS was doing no such thing.

So they lied to Congress, then lied to the press when caught, and now once again they’re lying about lying. This is the agency which is integral to implementing Obamacare.

How would you like the IRS bureaucrats deciding your health treatments?

Chilling isn't it?

Meanwhile, the White House maintains it had no idea the IRS was abusing power to target the administration’s political enemies, although the Presidential spokesman, Jay Carney, has admitted some people in the White House knew something at a recent press briefing.

Carney's comment begins to move toward Senator Howard Baker's famous Watergate question, "What did you know and when did you know it?"

Speaking of abuses of power, the White House also says it was unaware the Department of Justice secretly obtained two months worth of phone records for more than 100 Associated Press reporters, many of whom cover the Obama administration.

The DOJ is trying to discover the source of unauthorized and damaging national security leaks which informed an AP story on al Qaeda last year.

That is in contrast with the damaging national security leaks which supported the President’s reelection last year: they have not shown much interest in discovering who told the New York Times about President Obama’s “kill list” or his administration’s work on the Stuxnet virus that set back Iran’s nuclear program, or who granted Hollywood filmmakers unprecedented access to officials who divulged details of the bin Laden raid.

Of course, two months worth of phone records are likely to reveal communications with AP sources on hundreds of other stories about the administration in that period of time. But the White House says it is not involved.

Finally, we learned this week that Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius has been shaking down the health care companies for donations to fund implementation of Obamacare. When Congress refused to appropriate more money to set up the health insurance exchanges, Secretary Sebelius began asking these companies to contribute to Enroll America, a nonprofit organization created to promote Obamacare. It is headed by a former White House official.

As Senator Lamar Alexander said, “Such private fundraising circumvents the constitutional requirement that only Congress may appropriate funds. If the secretary or others in her department are closely coordinating the activities of Enroll America...then those actions may be in violation of the Anti-Deficiency Act.”

Senator Alexander points out the Secretary’s activities are functionally no different from those which led to the Iran-Contra scandal, in which the executive branch attempted to continue supporting a program Congress had not authorized using private donations. Fourteen officials were indicted in Iran-Contra.

Among all these lies and abuses of power from senior administration officials, how can the White House credibly continue to blame low level subordinates? And if he’s not responsible for the State Department, the Department of Justice, the IRS, or the Department of Health and Human Services (all of which were carrying on activities transparently to his political advantage) is President Obama responsible for anything at all in the executive branch?

Thursday, May 16, 2013

Eric Holder Still Trying to Hide "Fast and Furious" Documents

From Red Flag News

One scandal after another.  I submit that if any previous administration even had one of the Obama-Holder-Clinton scandals, then that administration would have been gone - like Nixon.  Instead we have the Obama Administration which gets away with lying to the American people on a daily basis, ruling through executive fiat since most of his radical agenda cannot be enacted through laws,....and surviving scandal after scandal.  There will be another one tomorrow or the next day, I assure you. 

This Red Flag news report is how Obama denied knowing anything about Fast and Furious, yet is able to place his papers and e-mails concerning Fast and Furious under Executive Priviledge, and how Holder is trying to protect this travesty from seeing the light of day.   It is simple:  If Obama knew nothing of Fast and Furious then he would not have any e-mails or correspondance to place under Executive Priviledge! 

Attorney General Eric Holder and his Department of Justice have asked a federal court to indefinitely delay a lawsuit brought by watchdog group Judicial Watch. The lawsuit seeks the enforcement of open records requests relating to Operation Fast and Furious, as required by law.

Judicial Watch had filed, on June 22, 2012, a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking all documents relating to Operation Fast and Furious and “specifically [a]ll records subject to the claim of executive privilege invoked by President Barack Obama on or about June 20, 2012.”

The administration has refused to comply with Judicial Watch’s FOIA request, and in mid-September the group filed a lawsuit challenging Holder’s denial. That lawsuit remains ongoing but within the past week President Barack Obama’s administration filed what’s called a “motion to stay” the suit. Such a motion is something that if granted would delay the lawsuit indefinitely.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said that Holder’s and Obama’s desire to continually hide these Fast and Furious documents is “ironic” now that they’re so gung-ho on gun control. “It is beyond ironic that the Obama administration has initiated an anti-gun violence push as it seeking to keep secret key documents about its very own Fast and Furious gun walking scandal,” Fitton said in a statement. “Getting beyond the Obama administration’s smokescreen, this lawsuit is about a very simple principle: the public’s right to know the full truth about an egregious political scandal that led to the death of at least one American and countless others in Mexico. The American people are sick and tired of the Obama administration trying to rewrite FOIA law to protect this president and his appointees. Americans want answers about Fast and Furious killings and lies.”

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

New York Dems Face More Scandals in State Senate

From the Washington Free Beacon Staff, on May 7th, 2013.  The arrest of New York State Democratic Sen. John Sampson is the latest scandal to rock the Democratic caucus in the state Senate, reports the New York Times:

The arrest on Monday of Senator John L. Sampson of Brooklyn, who was charged with embezzlement and other crimes, was the second time in barely a month that a former leader of the Senate Democratic caucus was accused of corruption by federal prosecutors. The senator whom Mr. Sampson succeeded in 2009 as Democratic leader, Malcolm A. Smith of Queens, was charged last month with trying to bribe his way onto the ballot for mayor of New York City.

But his arrest is another embarrassment for the scandal-plagued Senate Democratic caucus, and it appears likely to provide additional ammunition to Republicans, who have argued in past campaigns that Democrats cannot be trusted to run the chamber.

Several former Senate Democrats made news in the past for scandals involving the use of taxpayer money to pay for takeout sushi and shopping trips.

What the hell is up with New York Democrats?  Oh I get it, they are setting the standard for the rest of the Democrats in the State Legislatures!

Tuesday, May 14, 2013

Gun Related Comapnies Leaving Colorado

As reported by the Free Beacon, two Colorado Companies making gun parts or accessories are moving or going to move from Colorado following the passing of draconian anti-gun legislation.

HiViz Shooting Systems, a gun-parts manufacturer in Fort Collins, Colo., will move its operations up the road to Laramie, Wyo., making good on its threat to pull up its Colorado roots after Gov. John Hickenlooper signed into law several controversial gun control measures earlier this year.

Of the businesses planning to leave the state for the same reason, HiViz is the first to announce its new home.

“The decision to relocate the company was difficult, and choosing the proper location was essential to our continued growth within the industry,” said president and CEO Phillip Howe in a press release. “We look forward to settling into our new home in the firearm friendly state of Wyoming.”

Wyoming was chosen not just for its gun-friendly atmosphere, but also its tax advantages and because Laramie is less than an hour from its current location, allowing existing employees the option of commuting.

Construction on HiViz’s new headquarters is expected to start operations this summer.

The most high profile of the companies defecting from Colorado is Magpul Industries, which makes 30-round rifle magazines in small-town Erie, Colo.

One of the bills Hickenlooper signed bans magazines that hold more than 15 rounds of ammunition. The new law goes into effect July 1.

Magpul is expected to announce the location of its new headquarters after the National Rifle Association meeting this weekend in Houston. Wherever its new home, it’s already in operation: The company wrote on its Facebook page this week that gun sights and standard 30-round magazines (called PMAGs) are now being manufactured outside Colorado for the first time.

Magpul employs about 200 people and has been courted by Texas, Wyoming, South Carolina and Utah, to name just a few states eager for its business. Texas Gov. Rick Perry even made a personal appeal to the company.

Now lets get Beretta and LWRC out of Maryland; Remington out of New York; Colt out of Connecticut; Ruger and Springfield Armory out of Illinois.

Monday, May 13, 2013

Obama Uses IRS to Target Political Opponents

If this ain't one of the scummiest tricks ever pulled by a President, even this one. And of course the main stream media, which are Obama supporters,.....there I go again being redundant,.....anyway, the mainstream media is much more interested in reporting the Jody Arias murder trial than the criminal acts on the Benghazi coverup or Obama's use of the IRS to target political enemies. Thanks to Business Insider for posting this.

The Internal Revenue Service admitted Friday to targeting conservative and Tea Party groups with additional scrutiny during the 2012 campaign, the Associated Press first reported.

IRS spokesperson Lois Lerner said at a conference in Washington that the agency apologized for the special emphasis and scrutiny in applications for tax-exempt status.

According to the AP, she said that organizations containing the words "Tea Party" or "patriot" were targeted for additional review, blaming that on "low-level" workers in Ohio.

Here is the full statement the IRS released later:

Between 2010 and 2012, the IRS saw the number of applications for section 501(c)(4) status double. As a result, local career employees in Cincinnati sought to centralize work and assign cases to designated employees in an effort to promote consistency and quality. This approach has worked in other areas. However, the IRS recognizes we should have done a better job of handling the influx of advocacy applications.

While centralizing cases for consistency made sense, the way we initially centralized them did not. Mistakes were made initially, but they were in no way due to any political or partisan rationale. We fixed the situation last year and have made significant progress in moving the centralized cases through our system. To date, more than half of the cases have been approved or withdrawn.

It is important to recognize that all centralized applications received the same, even-handed treatment, and the majority of cases centralized were not based on a specific name. In addition, new procedures also were implemented last year to ensure that these mistakes won’t be made in the future. The IRS also stresses that our employees - all career civil servants -- will continue to be guided by tax law and not partisan issues.

In a conference call later Friday with reporters, the IRS reiterated that it was not engaging in any political attacks by targeting groups with "Tea Party" and "patriot." But it couldn't point to other non-conservative or political-sounding words.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) called for a government-wide review.

"Now more than ever we need to send a clear message to the Obama administration that the First Amendment is non-negotiable, and that apologies after an election year are not an sufficient response to what we now know took place at the IRS. This kind of political thuggery has absolutely no place in our politics," McConnell said in a statement.

At one point last year, 16 tea party groups joined together in claiming harassment by the IRS, something the agency denied at the time. The IRS said that roughly 75 groups were targeted.

One of those groups, the Tea Party Patriots, called on President Barack Obama to apologize and demanded that Congress investigate.

“The IRS has demonstrated the most disturbing, illegal and outrageous abuse of government power,” said Jenny Beth Martin, the group's national coordinator.

“This deliberate targeting and harassment of tea party groups reaches a new low in illegal government activity and overreach. It is suspicious that the activity of these ‘low-level workers’ was unknown to IRS leadership at the time it occurred. ... We reject a simple apology that does nothing to alleviate the danger of this happening again. Only immediate and public actions on the part of the IRS and the president will suffice.

Certain tax-exempt charitable groups can conduct political activities, but it cannot be their primary activity.

Sunday, May 12, 2013

Property of the State

Here is an article at the American Thinker, published on 1 May 2013 by Timothy Birdnow that that examines the relationship between the citizen and the State. It does so from looking at the individual as Property - either of yourself or as property of the State.  

Mr. Birdnow correctly separates the base views of the liberals versus the conservatives.  This is an excellent article. 

May 1, 2013
The Individual as Property

By Timothy Birdnow

In 2011 a woman named Sharrie Gavan beat a man with a baseball bat. Now, this is not all that unusual, as domestic disputes, home invasions, and overheated arguments sometimes end with an act of assault, but this particular case is different. In this instance the woman took a baseball bat to the drug pusher who was gleefully destroying her 20-year-old son with heroin. Mrs. Gavan was recently convicted of the assault and faces up to a year in prison.

This story seems destined to die a dull death, although there are locals in the St. Louis area who have cheered the actions of this woman. But when looked at in a larger context this story speaks volumes about the fundamental changes that have occurred in our culture and in our thinking.

What is the nature of the relationship between the citizen and the State? America was founded on principles found in the Bible and in the writings of 17th century philosophers such as John Locke.

John Locke pointed out in his First Treatise on Government:

Though the Earth... be common to all Men, yet every Man has a Property in his own Person. This no Body has any Right to but himself.

So, all men have first and foremost the right to own themselves.

This is of critical importance because it is this most fundamental principle that the modern Left and Right part company over. Liberals do not believe this basic assertion, preferring to believe that we as a collective own each other. This distinction is absolutely critical, because it informs our beliefs in terms of actions.

The English Philosophers Hobbes and Hume argued that property was a creation of the State, and were not held in high regard by the Founders of the United States. If property is a creation of the State, then one can argue that the State has sovereignty over the individual.

And of course later philosophers came to dismiss the view of self-ownership as illusory. Rousseau believed individuals enter voluntarily into a social contract which creates a "sovereign", a sort of group entity, a collective. Rousseau was extraordinarily influential on later leftist thinking, as was Karl Marx who disdained the concept of personal sovereignty, as did Benito Mussolini. As in communism and fascism, the entire undercurrent of modern liberalism is anti-individualism. Even the Anarchists, though they may seem to be radical individualists, ultimately seek the ollectivization of property as a means to grant themselves the individualism they seem to believe in -- making them as statist as any other leftist branch. Without property rights one cannot have individual rights.

It is no surprise that the general degradation of property rights should coincide with the rise of statism and the devaluing of the individual. Either we own property -- including ourselves - or we do not.

From such a belief system comes abortion; the right to life is subject to the granting of permission by the collective.

Gun control is another example; the Left hates guns because they empower the individual over the collective. A man with a gun does not need the protection of the State but can deal with violations of his rights by himself. The man with a gun can, if need be, do without the collective. This chafes at liberal sensibilities, as they are absolute in their determination to make us all not just our brother's keeper but his master. There can be no right to self-defense in a world where one does not own even himself. The State is master and it is a usurpation, an act of rebellion, to defend yourself. It is even more an act of treason to defend yourself against the State. This is why there is such anger in the Progressive community against "bitter clingers" holding onto their guns; what right does any individual have to take the power of the State?

It affects religion, too. The Judeo-Christian religions believe in the duty of the individual to govern himself first and foremost. The Progressive thinking is that nobody has a right to govern himself, so Christianity and Judaism are rebels, antithetical to the cause of community and the idea that "it takes a village". Islam, on the other hand, is both a handy tool to use against them and is a system where there is no division between the State and the Faith, and the individual must submit to the larger collective.

Almost any position held by the Progressive Left can be understood if one thinks about it in terms of property rights.

The liberal view has largely emerged triumphant in our modern era. The case of Mrs. Gavan is illustrative of that.

Not sixty years ago Mrs. Gavan would not have been arrested, nor tried, nor convicted. She had gone to the police like any good citizen and was told there was nothing that could be done, so, in desperation, she took very modest steps to protect her family. Please note the pusher was not seriously harmed -- merely warned away with a couple of bruises. The Founders would have shrugged at that.

But not the modern python state; laws have become nooses around the necks of the citizenry while leaving the predators (who follow no law but their own) free rein. Society will not allow a person to defend himself. Now if a crime victim shoots an attacker he is the person in trouble (ask George Zimmerman). Now any action outside of official channels is punished because it is considered an act of rebellion. It is the reason why the Obama administration keeps pushing this "right-wing domestic terrorist" shibboleth; they are frightened of anybody outside of their control, outside of the Borg Collective.

And so a decent woman protecting her family may go to prison for the sake of upholding the right of the State over the individual. This is not just an elitist-Progressive thing, either; ordinary citizens and minor officials in Jefferson County, Missouri pursued, charged, tried, and convicted this woman. This mindset is now a part of the American psyche.

And it won't change, not without enormous social, educational, and informational changes in this country. We have to remember who we once were, and that means the schools need to teach, the arts need to remember, movies and television need to change, an entire culture has to be revamped. The prognosis for a restoration is grim.

But not impossible. As long as there is a spark of liberty in the individual there remains hope. We have to teach our children. We have to remember who we once were.

Timothy Birdnow is a St. Louis-based writer. Read more from Tim and friends.

Saturday, May 11, 2013

What Difference Does It Make?

"What Difference Does It Make?", the statement that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton so infamously made during her appearance before Congress on what hapended in Benghazi.

So now that question can be answered, at least in part due to the testimony from three State Department employees this past week in front of Congress. And despite Democrat Congress members attempts to make this look like a political witch hunt, the truth is starting to emerge,....and it paints a very bad picture, criminally negligent and incredibly incompetent to be sure, of the Obama Administration including the President, Secretaries of State and Defense and through misfeasance, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and elements the military chain of command.

We now know that the CIA issued warnings of an impending attack months before it happended. We know that despite repeated requests by Ambassador Stevens for additional security measures and personnel, Hillary Clinton approved and/or ordered a REDUCTION of 20+ State Department security personnel in Libya.

We know that someone in the Military Chain of Command ordered the four Special Forces (Green Berets) personnel in Tripoli NOT to respond. This is one of many incidents where the military misfeasance comes in. These four soldiers had the means and capability to make a difference, requested repeatedly to go to the aid of the Benghazi consulate, but were ordered to stand down - the big question is where that order originated from.

We also now know that the initial assault on the Benghazi consulate by 60 some odd terrorists was initially repelled by six Americans, until the terrorists brought mortar rounds onto the consulate and the resulting fires, toxic smoke and casualties took it's toll on the defenders.

We know that as the attack unfolded Deputy Ambassador Hicks reported several times to the State Department National Operations Center as well as spoke to the loathsome Hillary Clinton about the terrorist attack and there can be no denial,...THERE CAN BE NO DENIAL, that anyone thought the events in Benghazi starting on September 11th, 2012, were anything but a deliberate and well planned terrorist attack.

We know that the CIA Talking Points provided to the State Department were revised 12 times, removing any mention that the Al Qaeda-affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia terrorist organization conducted the attack as well as references to CIA warnings about terrorist threats in Benghazi in the months preceding the attack. We know that Hilliary Clinton's spokeswoman, Victoria Nuland, was the evil hench wrench in this whole deal and could not have accomplished this without full approval by her direct boss, that wrinkled old hag, Hillary Clinton.

We know that the final edited talking points came out of a White House meetings just prior to UN Ambassador Rice's first of five talk shows on the Sunday following the attacks. Rice's appearance on five,...count them, FIVE talk shows show just how desperate the Adminstration was at weaving this lie about a video causing a popular riot. Note to the low order American voter,.....popular demonstrations turned riots don't usually come with AK-47 armed 60 Muslim terrorists, nor mortars and rocker propelled grenades.

Obama cannot deny that he knew from the get go it was a terrorist attack and secondly he cannot deny that he approved this massive lie to the American people with the assumption that he thought the truth would hurt his re-lection chance.

And the motive for General Petraeus, then head of the CIA ,who at first backed up Obama's assertions that the final edited talking points were the truth? Privately he was angry about the radically changed talking points, but now it is he time for him to separate himself from the liars and regain some degree of honor.  It is a pretty good asumption that someone threatened disclosure of his affair, which made him play ball.  He is another one violating their oath. 

There should be massive resignations across the board. President Obama, Press Secretary Carney or whatever that ass clown's name is,.......and practically the entire upper management of the State department needs to go. Hillary Clinton should be charged for lying to Congress. And once this is accomplished we need to clean house on the military side and fire anyone who disapproved the response of any military assets np matter if they were 2 hours or 9 hours away. The facts show that Americans were still under fire at least 8 hours after the initial attack. Plus, the lack of a response emboldened all terrorists the world over. 

Friday, May 10, 2013

Warning from Canada on Gun Control

Brian Lilley gives an important warning to his American friends: Registration of firearms will lead to the confiscation of firearms.

Most of the American people don't get it, perhaps over whelmed by the Democrat talking points on how the evil Republicans shot down the latest gun control legisitation in the Senate, but is was all about a vehicle for gun registration as well as draconian restrictions on private property which would have set a precedence for practically every other commodity.  Remember, every country in history which confiscated firearms from law abiding citizens firt had to have a registration of firearms.

BTW - check the vote.  Harry Reid, who has many firearms owning voters in Nevada, voted against the bill. 


Thursday, May 9, 2013

What's up with the Air Force?

A couple of recent news items brings to the surface some issues with the Air Force.

The Air Force stripped an unprecedented 17 officers of their authority to control — and, if necessary, launch — nuclear missiles after a string of unpublicized failings, including a remarkably dim review of their unit's launch skills. The group's deputy commander said it is suffering "rot" within its ranks.

"We are, in fact, in a crisis right now," the commander, Lt. Col. Jay Folds, wrote in an internal email obtained by The Associated Press and confirmed by the Air Force.

The tip-off to trouble was a March inspection of the 91st Missile Wing at Minot Air Force Base, N.D., which earned the equivalent of a "D'' grade when tested on its mastery of Minuteman III missile launch operations. In other areas, the officers tested much better, but the group's overall fitness was deemed so tenuous that senior officers at Minot decided, after probing further, that an immediate crackdown was called for.

The Air Force publicly called the inspection a "success."

But in April it quietly removed 17 officers at Minot from the highly sensitive duty of standing 24-hour watch over the Air Force's most powerful nuclear missiles, the intercontinental ballistic missiles that can strike targets across the globe. Inside each underground launch control capsule, two officers stand "alert" at all times, ready to launch an ICBM upon presidential order.

Not the first time the Air Force has crapped the bed when it comes to Nuclear issues. Remember that in 2008, then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates sacked the top civilian and military leaders of the Air Force after a series of blunders, including a bomber's mistaken flight across the country armed with nuclear-tipped missiles. Since then the Air Force has taken numerous steps designed to improve its nuclear performance.

And then we have Lt Col leading the US Air Force anti-sexual discrimination and harassament program who was arrested a few days ago form sexuakl asault or otherwise groping a woman's front and back 3nd in a parking lot. From the looks of Lt Col's booking photo the women didn;t like it one bit and whooped up on him some.

Lt. Col Jeffrey Krusinski was arrested after a woman said he had grabbed her breasts and buttocks in a parking lot in Arlington, VA, in the early morning hours of May 5. She said she was able to fight him off.

Krusinski has been removed from his position as the head of the prevention program, according to a report from Stars and Stripes. He is to be arraigned on Thursday. A judge in Arlington will determine if Krusinski will be tried in a civilian court or by the military. The Air Force has requested that it be allowed to handle the trial.

Wednesday, May 8, 2013

Only in America - Canadian Version

Only in America - Canadian Version of David Letterman's Top 10 and good chance to see what Canadians think of what is going on in this country. Do we look like idiots or what? And this is all true, so let the Liberals explain that!

10) Only in America...could politicians talk about the greed of the rich at a $35,000.00 a plate campaign fund-raising event.

9) Only in America...could people claim that the government still discriminates against black Americans when they have a black President, a black Attorney General, and roughly 18% of the federal workforce is black while only 12% of the population is black.

8) Only in America...could they have had the two people most responsible for our tax code, Timothy Geithner (the head of the Treasury Department) and Charles Rangel (who once ran the Ways and Means Committee), BOTH turn out to be tax cheats who are in favor of higher taxes.

7) Only in America...can they have terrorists kill people in the name of Allah and have the media primarily react by fretting that Muslims might be harmed by the backlash.

6) Only in America...would they make people who want to legally become American citizens wait for years in their home countries and pay tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege, while they discuss letting anyone who sneaks into the country illegally just 'magically' become American citizens.

5) Only in America...could the people who believe in balancing the budget and sticking by the country's Constitution be thought of as "extremists."

4) Only in America...could you need to present a driver's license to cash a check or buy alcohol, but not to vote.

3) Only in America...could people demand the government investigate whether oil companies are gouging the public because the price of gas went up when the return on equity invested in a major U.S. oil company ( MarathonOil) is less than half of a company making tennis shoes (Nike).

2) Only in America...could the government collect more tax dollars from the people than any nation in recorded history, still spend a Trillion dollars more than it has per year - for total spending of $7-Million PER MINUTE, and complain that it doesn't have nearly enough money.

1) Only in America...could the rich people - who pay 86% of all income taxes - be accused of not paying their "fair share" by people who don't pay any income taxes at all.

Tuesday, May 7, 2013

More Gun Laws WILL NOT Make Us Safer

I wanted to share this letter sent to me by Roger Stockton, Co-Founder of the Western Representation PAC:

Dear Patriot,

I want to share the following article written by Greg Campbell, one of our writers at The left is not about to let up on their quest to take away the right for law abiding citizens to protect themselves and your support is needed to continue this fight. “We must do something.” That’s what we hear from the left on gun control. “We must do something.” It’s never, “We must pass this bill based on the undeniably sound analysis that shows the effectiveness it would have in reducing gun violence.” No, the left’s argument always seems to begin and end with “We must do something.”

Occasionally, they will throw in for good measure a, “Why do you need an ‘assault rifle?’” But mostly, they stick to the, “Won’t someone please think of the children,” argument. The arguments of gun control have changed over time and we have now reached a point where even the left tacitly admits that gun control doesn’t work. In the 1980’s, discussions of gun control swirled around flimsy stats and counter-factual arguments where both sides of the debate argued that the stats and analysis supported their contentions.

The 1990’s were a dark time for those who valued the Second Amendment as it was the era of the Assault Weapons ban. However, from those dark times emerged a silver lining. In 2004, the effectiveness of gun control was no longer a counter-factual argument; we tried it their way and the assault weapons ban did not work. After a ten-year trial run, the ban died from a want of results and we have the traceable data that highlights the flawed logic of gun control arguments. Now, the left has all but abandoned the notion that their brand of anti-gun zealotry will save lives. Instead, we hear obfuscated rhetoric that calls for the saving of lives and the enactment of gun control measures. However, we don’t hear anything about how the proposed measures would save lives. We only hear, “Well, we’ve got to do something.”

It really is a phenomenon that is unique to government. You don’t really see this kind of inspired leadership in the private sector. Imagine a man at a company going into a board room and saying, “Well, profits are down and something has to change. I’ve drafted up a plan. It’s not good and it doesn’t actually address the third-quarter losses but it’s different and, hell, we’ve got to do something. So, let’s implement this plan and viciously smear anyone who dares to point out that it does nothing to fix the problem.”

Yesterday, liberal gun-grabber Rep. Carolyn Maloney demonstrated her astonishing ignorance on MSNBC as she discussed the need for gun control in the wake of the Boston Marathon bombing. Specifically, she addressed the suspects’ ability to obtain firearms.

“One thing that Congress can do right now is pass the gun-safety laws,” she said. “As it stands right now, the next Tamerlan [Tsarnaev] can go to a gun show and buy all the guns he wants, all the weapons he wants, no problem, no questions asked. I think at the very least Congress should pass sensible gun-safety laws that law enforcement is asking for.

Law enforcement really wants the bill- actually, I authored it several years ago- that would make trafficking guns a felony. I mean, how dumb can we be?

As it stands right now Tamerlan, as we know now, was on the terrorist watch list. So we know a gun check would stop him if there was a background check. But as it stands now, Tamerlan, or the next Tamerlan or the next terrorist can go to any gun show and can buy a hundred round magazine, they can buy all the assault weapons they want, no questions asked. The gun lobby has the upper hand now even though 90% of Americans want gun safety.”

Ignorance of a subject is certainly understandable. I know precious little about many things. But considering that Maloney is a lawmaker who is urging the creation of laws that violate Second Amendment protections, it’s not unreasonable to ask that she do a modicum of research on the subject before running off at the mouth on a subject about which she obviously knows nothing. If she or one of her staffers would have bothered to research the issue, she would have discovered that the gun show loophole is a myth. Gun sellers at gun shows have to perform background checks. Of course, in many states private sales are legal and thus, people who run in similar circles are known to trade or sell guns. However, the dealers at gun shows are required to run background checks and risk prosecution and, at the very least, the revocation of their federal firearms license if they don’t.

Furthermore, the Tsarnaev brothers already broke many laws in obtaining their weapons. Making it “super-duper illegal” won’t deter those who are willing to break a half-dozen firearm laws. And lastly, the admission that Tamerlan wouldn’t have been able to pass a background check only proves the validity of what gun rights supporters have been saying; criminals don’t follow laws. He couldn’t pass a background check so he went elsewhere. Believing that creating a law making it illegal to sell a gun without a background check will keep guns out of the hands of criminals is as naïve as believing that since Marijuana is illegal, people can’t get it.

But hey, we’ve got to something, right?

The left has yet to bring forth a proposition that is both conducive to logic and compatible with the Constitution. While they flail about, declaring that we have got to do something, anything, they reveal their true aims. Liberals are not interested in finding a solution because they know there is no adequate solution; they just figure that while emotions are running high, they might as well make another grab for our Second Amendment rights at which they have been trying to get for decades.

Roger Stockton
Co-Founder Western Representation PAC

Monday, May 6, 2013

Did You Know This About Japan?

This came from an e-mail circulating with the title "I NEVER KNEW THIS ABOUT JAPAN".

The Japanese are not a blended culture or have such a mixed ethnic makeup as the United States does.  This does not make them racist, the Japanese just protect their culture better than most. 

Have you ever read in the newspaper that a political leader or a prime minister from an Islamic nation has visited Japan? Have you ever come across news that the Ayatollah of Iran or the King of Saudi Arabia or even a Saudi Prince has visited Japan?

Japan is a country keeping Islam at bay. Japan has put strict restrictions on Islam and ALL Muslims. The reasons are: a) Japan is the only nation that does not give citizenship to Muslims.

b) In Japan permanent residency is not given to Muslims.

c) There is a strong ban on the propagation of Islam in Japan .

d) In the University of Japan , Arabic or any Islamic language is not taught.

e) One cannot import a 'Koran' published in the Arabic language.

f) According to data published by the Japanese government, it has given temporary residency to only 2 lakhs, Muslims, who must follow the Japanese Law of the Land. These Muslims should speak Japanese and carry their religious rituals in their homes.

g) Japan is the only country in the world that has a negligible number of embassies in Islamic countries.

h) Japanese people are not attracted to Islam at all.

i) Muslims residing in Japan are the employees of foreign companies.

j) Even today, visas are not granted to Muslim doctors, engineers or managers sent by foreign companies.

k) In the majority of companies it is stated in their regulations that no Muslims should apply for a job.

l) The Japanese government is of the opinion that Muslims are fundamentalist and even in the era of globalization they are not willing to change their Muslim laws.

m) Muslims cannot even think about renting a house in Japan .

n) If anyone comes to know that his neighbour is a Muslim then the whole neighborhood stays alert.

o) No one can start an Islamic cell or Arabic 'Madrasa' in Japan

p) There is no Sharia law in Japan .

q) If a Japanese woman marries a Muslim then she is considered an outcast forever.

r) According to Mr. Kumiko Yagi, Professor of Arab/Islamic Studies at Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, "There is a mind frame in Japan that Islam is a very narrow minded religion and one should stay away from it."

Who can blame the Japanese?  Islam is seen by critical thinkers not as a religion but as a culture,....a culture of hate.

Sunday, May 5, 2013

Wayne LaPierre says "NRA members will never surrender guns"

"We will never surrender our guns, never," Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre told several thousand people during the organization's annual member meeting, which is part of the yearly NRA convention being held this weekend in Houston, reported by Juan Lozano of Associated Press published on Yahoo! on-line.

The public face of the National Rifle Association implored members Saturday to never give up their weapons in the wake of recent gun control efforts in Congress that he said will "destroy us and every ounce of our freedom."

A defiant LaPierre said the "political and media elites" have tried to use December's mass shooting at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school and other recent ones "to blame us, to shame us, to compromise our freedom for their agenda."

LaPierre directed much of his criticism at President Barack Obama and his efforts to pass legislation in Congress that would have expanded background checks for gun sales. That bill failed to pass in the Senate last month.

LaPierre said the bill "got the defeat that it deserved."

"The bill wouldn't have prevented Newtown or Aurora," he said, also referencing last year's shooting at a Colorado theater. "It won't prevent the next tragedy. None of it has anything to do with keeping our children safer in any school anywhere."

Gun control supporters have promised to keep pressing the issue and have made significant strides at the state level, including passing new restrictions on firearms in Colorado and Connecticut.

LaPierre implored lawmakers to direct their efforts not at new gun control legislation but to enforcing current federal gun laws and sending to prison violent criminals who break these laws and rebuilding "our broken mental health system."

 "And for God sakes leave the rest of us alone in this country," he said to loud applause.

More than 70,000 NRA members are expected to attend the three-day convention, which began Friday. Acres of displays of rifles, pistols, swords and hunting gear could be found inside the convention hall.

Friday's highlight was a 3 ½-hour political rally filled with fiery speeches from state and national conservative leaders, among them Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin. They warned attendees that new gun laws are an effort to take away their rights under the Second Amendment.

The presence of protestors has been minimal during the convention. Across the street, the No More Names vigil read the names of gun violence victims since the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in Connecticut. By Saturday afternoon, about 20 protesters were present.

"It's time to move toward global thinking and global peace and solutions that don't require guns," said Tim Campbell, 73, from Houston, who held up a sign that read "No To Arms. No To Force."

Saturday, May 4, 2013

Introducing Gabriel Gomez, Massachusetts Candidate for the Senate

Gabriel Gomez is a new generation of Republican leader with a great American story. His story from his website:

Gabriel, 47, was born in Los Angeles and is the son of Colombian immigrants. With his mother only knowing a few words of English, Gabriel grew up speaking Spanish before learning English. Like so many other new American families, his parents overcame hardships to create a better life for their children. Gabriel’s upbringing in a grateful, first generation American family instilled in him a duty to give back to his country and led him to successfully seek appointment to the United States Naval Academy. Graduating from Annapolis with merit, Gabriel began his Navy service by earning an invitation to flight school and quickly earned his wings. Gabriel served the country flying E2-C Hawkeyes and C2-A Greyhounds off aircraft carriers.

With a growing sense of obligation and duty, and a continuing desire to excel within the Navy, Gomez pursued a transfer into the Navy SEALS, an elite unit where only 20 percent of applicants complete the arduous training. Gabriel was warned that if he failed to make the cut, he would lose his status as a Navy pilot. He succeeded as a SEAL with distinction, becoming the class leader during training and a platoon commander upon completion.

During Gabriel’s first detachment as a SEAL platoon commander, he met his wife, Sarah, who was a Peace Corps volunteer as a special education teacher in the West Indies.

Gabriel Gomez is one of a very small number of Americans who have served as both a Navy aircraft carrier pilot and a Navy SEAL officer. As a SEAL commander working overseas, Gabriel adopted the SEAL’s “team first” ethic as his own.

Leaving the Navy in 1996, Gabriel went back to school, received his MBA from Harvard Business School and put his leadership and teamwork experience to use in the private sector. As a Principal with Boston-based investment firm Advent International, Gabriel helped pension funds, endowments, and retirement systems invest for their members’ retirement. He also helped grow smaller, regional businesses into national, household names – like apparel company Lululemon. He experienced how onerous taxes and excessive regulation are barriers to job creation. He also learned what it takes to help businesses and employees prosper and thrive.

Settling in Cohasset with his wife Sarah and their four children, Gabriel coaches for the Cohasset Youth Baseball and Softball Association. He has also served as a volunteer on a number of town committees, and is the President of the Navy SEAL Foundation of New England.

Gabriel Gomez has spent much of his life giving back to the country that gave him so much. He has actively served to ensure our country’s freedom and seen others make an even greater sacrifice. He has worked to honor the opportunities presented him, and has strived to realize the American dream his parents sacrificed to make possible for him.

Today our country is in trouble. We are deeply in debt, our budget is out of control, and we face numerous global threats. Gabriel sees politicians in Washington more willing to bicker and fight than to listen and learn, and too little gets done. Now more than ever, Massachusetts needs a leader in Washington with Gabriel’s experience working with others to deliver results.

All his life, Gabriel Gomez has been blessed with great opportunity and has fought for, and earned, what he’s achieved. Now he will fight to earn the people’s vote for the opportunity to become the next United States Senator from Massachusetts. 

Note:  Mr Gomez is running against a long entrenched Democrat who has held political office for something like 114 years.   Time for a change.

Friday, May 3, 2013

Free House

Good story sent to me by a Patriot:

I was in my neighborhood restaurant this morning and was seated behind a group of jubilant individuals celebrating the coming implementation of the health care bill. I could not finish my breakfast. This is what ensued: They were a diverse group of several races and both sexes. I heard a young man exclaim, "Isn't Obama like Jesus Christ? I mean, after all, he is healing the sick."

A young woman enthusiastically proclaimed, "Yeah, and he does it for free. I cannot believe anyone would think that a free market wouldn't work for health care."

Another said, "The stupid Republicans want us all to starve to death so they can inherit all of the power. Obama should be made a Saint for what he did for those of us less fortunate."

At this, I had more than enough. I arose from my seat, mustering all the restraint I could find, and approached their table. "Please excuse me; may I impose upon you for one moment?"

They smiled and welcomed me to the conversation. I stood at the end of their table, smiled as best I could and began an experiment.

"I would like to give one of you my house. It will cost you no money and I will pay all of the expenses and taxes for as long as you live there. Anyone interested?"

They looked at each other in astonishment. "Why would you do something like that?" asked a young man, "There isn't anything for free in this world." They began to laugh at me, as they did not realize this man had just made my point.

"I am serious, I will give you my house for free, no money whatsoever. Anyone interested?"

In unison, a resounding "Yeah" fills the room.

"Since there are too many of you, I will have to make a choice as to who receives this money-free bargain."

I noticed an elderly couple was paying attention to the spectacle unfolding before their eyes, the old man shaking his head in apparent disgust.

"I tell you what; I will give it to the one of you most willing to obey my rules."

Again, they looked at one another, an expression of bewilderment on their faces.

The perky young woman asked, "What are the rules?"

I smiled and said, "I don't know. I have not yet defined them. However, it is a free home that I offer you."

They giggled amongst themselves, the youngest of which said, "What an old coot. He must be crazy to give away his home. Go take your meds, old man."

I smiled and leaned into the table a bit further. "I am serious, this is a legitimate offer."

They gaped at me for a moment.

"I'll take it you old fool. Where are the keys?" boasted the youngest among them.

"Then I presume you accept ALL of my terms then?" I asked.

The elderly couple seemed amused and entertained as they watched from the privacy of their table. "Oh yeah! Where do I sign up?"

I took a napkin and wrote, "I give this man my home, without the burden of financial obligation, so long as he accepts and abides by the terms that I shall set forth upon consummation of this transaction."

I signed it and handed it to the young man who eagerly scratched out his signature.

"Where are the keys to my new house?" he asked in a mocking tone of voice.

All eyes were upon us as I stepped back from the table, pulling the keys from pocket and dangling them before the excited new homeowner.

"Now that we have entered into this binding contract, witnessed by all of your friends, I have decided upon the conditions you are obligated to adhere to from this point forward. You may only live in the house for one hour a day. You will not use anything inside of the home. You will obey me without question or resistance. I expect complete loyalty and admiration for this gift I bestow upon you. You will accept my commands and wishes with enthusiasm, no matter the nature. Your morals and principles shall be as mine. You will vote as I do, think as I do and do it with blind faith. These are my terms. Here are your keys." I reached the keys forward and the young man looked at me dumbfounded.

"Are you out of your mind? Who would ever agree to those ridiculous terms?" the young man appeared irritated.

"You did when you signed this contract before reading it, understanding it and with the full knowledge that I would provide my conditions only after you committed to the agreement."

The elderly man chuckled as his wife tried to restrain him. I was looking at a now silenced and bewildered group of people.

"You can shove that stupid deal up your a** old man. I want no part of it!" exclaimed the now infuriated young man.

'You have committed to the contract, as witnessed by all of your friends. You cannot get out of the deal unless I agree to it. I do not intend to let you free now that I have you ensnared. I am the power you agreed to. I am the one you blindly and without thought chose to enslave yourself to. In short, I am your Master."

At this, the table of celebrating individuals became a unified group against the unfairness of the deal.

After a few moments of unrepeatable comments and slurs, I revealed my true intent.

"What I did to you is what this administration and congress did to you with the health care legislation. I easily suckered you in and then revealed the real cost of the bargain. Your folly was in the belief that you can have something you did not earn, and for that which you did not earn, you willingly allowed someone else to think for you. Your failure to research, study and inform yourself permitted reason to escape you. You have entered into a trap from which you cannot flee. Your only chance of freedom is if your new Master gives it to you. A freedom that is given can also be taken away. Therefore, it is not freedom at all."

With that, I tore up the napkin and placed it before the astonished young man. "This is the nature of your new health care legislation."

I turned away to leave these few in thought and contemplation -- and was surprised by applause.

The elderly gentleman, who was clearly entertained, shook my hand enthusiastically and said, "Thank you, Sir. These kids don't understand Liberty ."

He refused to allow me to pay my bill as he said, "You earned this one. It is an honor to pick up the tab."

I shook his hand in thanks, leaving the restaurant somewhat humbled and sensing a glimmer of hope for my beloved country.

Remember... Four boxes keep us free: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box.

"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the American Government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian." – Henry Ford