Flags, Freedoms, and a Cup of Tea

A note: minor correction to my previous post, "Commentary coming longly." Sorry for the wait, peeps.

Our rights are inherent, that is, God-given, therefore the Bill of Rights gives us nothing but a guarantee that there are boundaries which the federal government will not cross. That guarantee stands to this day, whether those who now sit in the very offices which facilitated the creation of the greatest document of representative government in the world, the United States Constitution, will honor it or not.

As President Soetoro might say, with thumb and index finger firmly joined, "let me be clear": the Constitution is valid, the Bill of Rights is valid, the Second Amendment is valid, and they are valid as written.

We now approach the two hundred and thirty-fifth anniversary of the battles of Lexington and Concord; the nineteenth of this month will probably be remembered with greater significance than in previous years due to the unmistakable tension of all domestic political and economic issues coming to a head. This strife has been thrust upon the Freedom-loving people of America to an extent unparalleled in the known history of the western hemisphere.

Historically speaking, the menial enslavement of Africans overshadows the brutality capable by governments in the modern day, but the requirements and strangleholds of this government over the whole people, not secluded to one group, presents a far more dangerous form of slavery over a man's well-being and individuality, as it is undeclared, misunderstood, and invisible to many of its own victims. It causes no scarring beyond that of generational theft, and incurs no suffering beyond that of endless debt; like a virus, it is invisible yet deadly if left untreated. I have heard all too often, "America is still the greatest country in the world, and nothing can change that, so enjoy the freedoms you still have." Blind and irresponsible.

The American Revolution was said at the time to not be for light or transient causes. The conditions the U.S. government now places over its subjects are much more injurious to our lives, liberties, and pursuits of our own definitions of happiness than the British monarchy could have reasonably conceived at the time of its rule over this continent.

Our collective answer to this usurpation has been lackadaisical and disrespectful to those who fought and died in the Revolution, and it is disrespectful to God, whom I would suspect is disappointed that a country, which was an impressive embassy to the world for His Kingdom, is now in such a state of disrepair and sinfulness.

Indeed, what is our current course of action in reaction to the hardcore tyranny now upon us? Tea parties - the original namesake of which had means far different from the modern rallies across America. Modern tea parties require you to stand outside with people who are more or less agreed that the country is in ruin (or "about to be", in the case of many who know little of what the state of our country truly is), but the first tea party was protesting a particular tax on tea, an exorbitant and unreasonable tax, so the Boston Tea Party involved the active destruction of British shipments of tea in Boston Harbor.

Take a moment to think about the comparisons between the first tea party and the tea parties of today.

The reasons are the same, more or less, the goals are pretty close, but the method is the biggest difference. It was an impressive, economic blow to the monarchy and merchants of Britain to destroy their valuable property, and it was quite effective, as the despotic reaction from Britain further galvanized the people against Britain, and eventually, though quite belatedly, caused the repeal of the tax. Modern tea parties in the major cities, the ones with all the press, usually involve standing, sign holding, chanting catchy slogans and puns, making YouTube videos, and inviting career politicians to come speak and use all manner of patriotic key-phrases and key-terms to snatch as many votes as possible to ride on the unpopular coattails of the Democrats. There are no solutions or remedies in that, my friends.

Now, as you know, the legislature of my state of Kansas has just passed their version of the Firearms Freedom Act, which states any firearm made in Kansas is exempt from federal authority. This is good, but it is also somewhat humorous that no one makes firearms in Kansas. Reasonable gun laws are now within reach for Kansans, as the more locally minded Kansan legislature may now establish our own laws that will specify the regulatory authority of the government's place in the people's right to keep and bear arms

The Second Amendment is a big issue today, and there is currently a drive on the parts of many people right now to send Gadsden flags to President Soetoro and others to warn them that the people will not give up their guns willingly. This, in my opinion, is pointless. If we could have sent King George III a million Gadsden flags back in 1775, do you suppose he would have stopped his reign of terror? No, because tyrants only understand force. I think President Soetoro and his company are overjoyed that their grand scheme of subversion of all things American is being resisted by tea parties and mail-in campaigns. What a coup, indeed.

You may have seen the repeated showings of a clip of Soetoro denouncing Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh for being so "troublesome", saying that they're confusing people about the issues. This was an absolutely classic example of a not so easily recognizable trick for lessening the effects of unrest and dissolution, and that is to falsely prop up the weakest element of resistance as the strongest, thus enticing the people into supporting a failing plan of action. In this instance, Glenn Beck, who recently compared Thomas Paine to himself (no, not the other way around), is paired with Rush Limbaugh, who is the darling of the Spineless Puppet Party Republican Party; with their forces combined, they may take this nation back from those nasty-wasty Democrats and give it back to the freedom-loving, trustworthy, and moral Republicans.

Invisible Empire: A New Tool in the Information War

Found at Tennesee Sons of Liberty. Contains brief footage from Kennedy's assassination, so viewer discretion is advised.



A newcomer to the Information War, Invisible Empire, created by the same people that made Endgame and The Obama Deception, looks to be a very informational and interesting chronicling of our times and how we got here. This preview contains much of a speech by John Fitzgerald Kennedy, who was, I believe, our last true President.

In this Information War, there are many selfless men who have placed their lives and fortunes in harm's way to help our side win, which is the side of goodness and humanity; I feel there is no such thing as a "small part" in this InfoWar. These are the "InfoWarriors".

I am a Christian, and am not so much required as I am compelled by my Faith to warn and help direct my fellow Christians and fellow man toward Saving Knowledge. I am as incapable of saving as I am incapable of leading to that end, as I can merely help. Wretchedly as I do this, I try.

I would see a person as a miserable creature, lower than dust, if they did not grab a man by the arm who did not see the bus speeding down the road, or did not warn that family next door, who had no means of communication, that a tornado had just touched down nearby.

So, too, would I hold equally as miserable a creature that slapped the helping hand off of his arm, or laughed at the man that warned of imminent danger, who, not caring to save his own family, would rather not entertain such an "impossibility".

I make no career of warning the masses; perhaps I should, but I do not. I see well-versed men taking up that role, putting aside their daily lives and lessening their time with their families; being so wrapped-up in saving our nation that they hardly have a life left for themselves. I help these men disseminate information when I can, this blog being a tool of that, and I ask you to do the same.

There was a time, during our country's beginnings, when men would drop their plows and pocketbooks and sign up to fight for a season while their country was at war. Some signed on with the Regulars as a permanent arm of military might; had every man joined the Regulars, though, there wouldn't have been men left at home to create a cultivated, well-kept, plenteous country worth the fight.

I am no InfoWarrior; perhaps, though, I am an InfoMilitiaman.

Why not investigate what you do not know to be fact? Why, instead of saying, "There is no 'New World Order'," do you not look into it for yourself? Why, instead of listening to men on TV tell you to believe or not believe something because you should trust them, do you not question that trust and investigate their claims?

"These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so." ~Acts 17:11

"I Need to See Your ID and Your Freedom Permit."

Land of the free? Only if you have a Freedom Permit.

The young man handled this situation well, and the SWAT goon wasn't as brutish as we're all used to them being, so it was a good day for this group of young Americans. I would have handled it a little differently, though:

POLICE: "OK, can I ask you a question? Who are you with?"

Son3: "Oh, are you from the newspaper?"

SWAT: "You have two options, you can disassemble and leave, or I call those people over here and take you to jail."

Son3: "Take me to jail! I shall wear your handcuffs as a symbol of honor, and I shall stand behind your bars as a man who would not comply with tyranny. The Constitution you swore to uphold guarantees our right to be here, peaceably assembled; I will know for the rest of my life that I was imprisoned for obeying the law, and that you, a law enforcement officer, willfully betrayed that law. Go ahead... make my day!"

Tennessee Firearms Freedom "Superseded " by the Federal's Restrictions

On June 3rd, 2009, Tennessee passed the Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act, nullifying any Federal control over in-state firearms transactions. Now, the Feds, specifically the BATFE, are saying that they have ultimate authority.

(BATFE: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. Previously known by the following names: "Revenue Laboratory", "Alcohol Tax Unit of the Bureau of Internal Revenue", "Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Division", and "Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Division of the Internal Revenue Service".

The BATFE sent letters to gun dealers in Tennessee, proclaiming their continued rule over the Second Amendment.

"Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. Sounds like a convenience store."

I suppose it unecessary to remind my readers of the Constitution's "no tolerance" stance on gun-grabbing by any branch or level of government.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." ~Second Amendment, U.S. Constitution

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." ~Tenth Amendment, U.S. Constitution

"This Constitution... shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding." ~Supremacy Clause, U.S. Constitution Article 6, paragraph 2

No governmental body within the bounds of these United States may regulate or restrict the common man's right to keep and bear arms. Neither federal, state, nor local government is given such power.

Even supposing the Second Amendment did not guarantee the freedom of arms to an individual, though, there is no legitimate argument of this being the case, the U.S. Constitution does not grant to the Federal government the power to regulate arms, as the powers delegated them are all inclusive. In such an outlandish case, the states could regulate them individually.

O, We Privileged Few

According to this news report about public housing in Missouri, "...the House Financial Services Committee adopted an amendment to allow guns in public housing projects."

"Allow"? What do you mean by "allow"? How can a right be "allowed"?

A right cannot be "allowed", but a privilege can; that is exactly what Americans are indoctrinated to believe. Take for example the oft used phrase,"Driving is a privilege, not a right." What makes it a privilege? Why are we required to purchase licenses and permits for so many things? Concealed Carry Permits are supposed to be a hard-won victory by the American gun owner, despite some areas of the country revoking them, yet is it now necessary to buy one's rights from the government?

This fits right along side Sotomayor's confirmation hearing, in which, during the opening remarks by Senators, one Democrat mentioned "the right to bear arms" in a list of laws that are less than clear in their possible interpretations.

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." ~Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

Such ambiguity! There is, for some strange reason, so much debate over this sentence that the same offices that once instated this law, under new management, now reject it.

"On every question of construction [of the Constitution] let us carry
ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect
the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning
may be squeezed out of the text, or intended against it, conform to the
probable one in which it was passed." ~Thomas Jefferson

I have carried myself back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, I have recollected the spirit manifested in the debates, and I have conformed to the probable meaning in which it was passed.

And, in so doing, I hold to be a truth that the Second Amendment does not grant the right for individual, private citizens to keep and bear firearms without government interference on any level; rather, the Second Amendment guarantees it! No legislation can, by definition, grant any right, only declare it; rights lay dormant in every human being; nation, creed, or gender notwithstanding. One merely needs to exercise their rights for them to be made manifest.

Today, the intense corruption in our government has eroded beyond recognition our right to keep and bear arms, and we now subscribe to privileges, that may be regulated at a whim by a majority of non-representatives.

I now refer you to a spewing forth of opinion, left on a newspaper's website by an author unknown, the topic being a local ban on smoking in public. The full quote as written follows:

"It's a privelige.  Most of everything you have and do is not a right... Did anyone in Emporia actually finish school?"

This is the product of over one hundred years of compromising our standards and rights to appease tyrants and their misled progeny. The National Rifle Association, for instance, prides itself on compromise, and its members never question the fact that compromise includes "giving-in" from both sides of an argument.

I would suggest that our supposed privileges are few and far between, yet our rights are so many, that they border on being innumerable. We must stop compromising our freedom away, or we will face the consequences of tyrannies that are already upon us. Privileges are for subjects, but rights are for a free people.

What has it All Wrought?

Sanctimonious speeches about sacrificing for freedom fill our ears to the point of madness, mostly from those not willing to sacrifice. They speak many flowery words about freedom and liberty, throwing the words about like the "sunshine patriots" we know they are. They tell us to support our troops in their wretched wars, because they're "fighting for our freedom"; how can they fight for our freedom three-thousand miles from the very place most vulnerable to attack?

Could it be that the "freedom" our nation's finest soldiers are fighting for is the freedom of despots to gain more and more tyrannical power in the name of security here and abroad? There is indeed honor in fighting wars for the maintenance of national sovereignty, but why must they say it is for our freedom? I would suggest there have been hardly four wars truly fought over freedom in this land.

The ever-flowing orations of "love of country" and "freedom" are coming from men who couldn't continue speaking should their paper flutter away in the wind, or their teleprompter shut down, because they themselves don't know what the next line is going to be, as they didn't even write the claptrap they're reading.

And in the course of these speeches, they often dare to utter the names of the selfless men, not to mention the merciful God, that constructed the government offices that they are now corrupting and expanding a thousandfold.

They often -- but not too boldly, lest they offend -- invoke the name of God, but of which god do they ask guidance? Is it of their god of graft, corruption, greed? Or perhaps that of immorality, adultery, and debauchery?

I feel as though God's people, those of strong moral character, are playing the part of Abraham, begging mercy for the "Sodom" of the Senate and the "Gomorrah" of the House of Representatives. We ask God to let us remain alive and free in this land, and not to let us fall altogether, if there be but ten good men in those places.

These wicked men maintain the monuments and memorials to the leaders of the past, keeping the anniversaries, laying the meaningless wreaths, naming parks in their honor, in which one may scarcely enjoy a single freedom for which its namesake fought so valiantly; and placing our country's founders' likenesses on the worthless paper the despots arrogantly call "currency", inscribing below them the men's names, lest we forget them, and above them the words "Federal Reserve", though those very men tried to warn us of the danger of such a beast.

These "civil servants" are quick to claim every whisper of power from the Constitution they swore to uphold, that and more; but how they shriek with terror at the thought of the people holding onto anything more than "privileges" that may be regulated at a whim!

They play games with our minds, pitting "(R)'s" against "(D)'s", when, in truth, there is no difference between them. They claim we have fair elections, but we may only choose the (R) or (D) that they throw at us, like a bone to a dying dog.

They tell us to remember this founder, or this thinker, or this philosopher, reminding us to never give up just because they are taking our very livelihoods from us, rather keep going, never grumbling, like good soldiers.

The sacrifice and words of the legislators and soldiers of our Revolution have brought us many, undeserved years of happiness, but what has it all wrought? Perpetual freedom is unachievable without God, knowledge, might, and vigilance. And we, as a nation, have none of these today.

What do we celebrate on Independence Day? I think we celebrate something that sadly died many, many years ago, but will probably return many, many years from now in a somewhat different form.

How interesting it was, learning about my country, my government, and the individuals who built it, directly or indirectly. What shameless patriotism I felt coming away from that; coming away from all the words that I would only later fully understand, and the historical deeds I would only later appreciate. I cannot look with that same patriotic feeling upon this sin-wracked nation, which seems to me a different world. I feel as though I need not enumerate to you the sins of this different world, but it is, indeed, a different world.

We Shall Soon Want Bread

"I am for a government rigorously frugal and simple. Were we directed from Washington when to sow, when to reap, we should soon want bread."
~Thomas Jefferson

These are prophesied times.

HR 2749 will give power to Washington to micromanage our food producers, something the Constitution doesn't give them power to do. And we all know how well our Congress does at managing things.

A brief lesson in American civics: the U.S. Constitution all inclusively lists the things Congress may regulate and legislate. Food production is not one of them.

Modern Relevance

From the Declaration of Independence:

"The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

... He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

... For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

... He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people."

If you would like, please copy down the Declaration of Independence and do the same thing I've done here, as I'm sure I haven't covered the half of it.

Of States, of Tyrants, and of Banners

According to The American Vision, a man in Louisiana has been detained by police on the side of the road for displaying one of America's first flags on a bumper-sticker. He had to wait while they ran a background check on him to make sure he wasn't a member of an "extremist group".

It is apparent that displaying Rattler flags is now illegal in some states.

I'm glad. They just keep pushing it more and more, people are waking up to the massive amounts of treason and terror and treachery against us.

The line in the sand is now being drawn between the free, sovereign states and the enslaved, agent states with the issue of gun rights; Alaska, Montana, Tennessee, Texas, and Utah are all saying any firearms or ammunition made in their states are free from federal regulation.

If Kansas doesn't allow itself to join them, as we have a very dysfunctional legislature, I may join the influx of freedom-seeking peoples from all over the country that will undoubtedly be making the pilgrimage to the free states. I hope, though, that Kansas will not fail me.

But, will Obama allow these states to defy him? Will the Democrats or back-stabbing Republicans allow this either? Will the men who have invested their lives and fortunes into disarming this enslaved nation allow it, too?

Montana's law goes into effect in October; will we see something happen that may hinder the execution of such legislation -- say, Martial Law?

There would have to be a pretext for this, but it's easy enough to create a problem-reaction-solution. Eh, Obama?

Alan Keyes Arrested Protesting Abortion

Alan Keyes was arrested along with several others while protesting abortion on the Notre Dame campus.
I have always supported Alan Keyes, as he is a great American, and I hope the full details of his arrest will quickly be made public. This sort of thing will only continue as the Socialist takeover continues over the coming months and years.

Democracy at Work: Influenza Fuels Draconian Legislation

As stated in the story previously posted here, a democracy will do anything to remain safe and secure. Introduced and passed unanimously by the Massachusetts Senate, S18 will institute martial law in the event of an influenza outbreak.

According to this new bill, the the Commonwealth of Massachusetts will be given power:

(1) to require the owner or occupier of premises to permit entry into and investigation of the premises;

(2) to close, direct, and compel the evacuation of, or to decontaminate or cause to be decontaminated any building or facility, and to allow the reopening of the building or facility when the danger has ended;

(3) to decontaminate or cause to be decontaminated, or to destroy any material;

(4) to restrict or prohibit assemblages of persons;

(5) to require a health care facility to provide services or the use of its facility, or to transfer the management and supervision of the health care facility to the department or to a local public health authority;

(6) to control ingress to and egress from any stricken or threatened public area, and the movement of persons and materials within the area;

(7) to adopt and enforce measures to provide for the safe disposal of infectious waste and human remains, provided that religious, cultural, family, and individual beliefs of the deceased person shall be followed to the extent possible when disposing of human remains, whenever that may be done without endangering the public health;

(8) to procure, take immediate possession from any source, store, or distribute any anti-toxins, serums, vaccines, immunizing agents, antibiotics, and other pharmaceutical agents or medical supplies located within the commonwealth as may be necessary to respond to the emergency;

(9) to require in-state health care providers to assist in the performance of vaccination, treatment, examination, or testing of any individual as a condition of licensure, authorization, or the ability to continue to function as a health care provider in the commonwealth."

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." ~Benjamin Franklin

Lunatic Policeman Assaults Local News Crew

A local news reporter, along with his Constitutional rights, was virtually pummeled by a rabid, power-tripping policeman, who is supposedly a "civil servant".



Why did he do this?

This is one of the more egregious attacks on the American press, especially since he was so physically abusive towards the reporter. An internal investigation is not enough; that policeman should be tried and imprisoned for assault.

He seems to think police have absolute control over non-police citizens, as police, by definition, are themselves regular citizens.

This is a disturbing trend toward a world more violent than George Orwell's "Nineteen Eighty-Four".

But, in this particular case, we must understand the circumstances:

If you watched the video all the way through, you will have seen a man in desert-style camouflage, which I took to be either National Guard or Army; it was then explained that Ft. Bliss soldiers were "heroes" in the traffic incident, rescuing the driver of the overturned vehicle.

Well, whoever ordered those troops deployed should also be incarcerated for violating the Posse Comitatus Act. (If you not quite familiar with that, double-click it.)

I don't think I would have been able to stop myself from tasing or pepper-spraying that policeman; he is a treasonous criminal.

Baptist Pastor Abused by Border Patrol

Does this guy look like an illegal Mexican to you?



Why is there a border checkpoint (illegally) so far inside the border?

And, why aren't border agents given anything better to do than harass presumed citizens?

Bad deal.

Kansas City Federal Reserve Security: Vhere are Your Papers?

Kansas City, my own family's old stomping grounds, has now felt the sting of usurpation.

(Warning: Contains anti-tyrannical sentiments; despotic politicians' viewing discretion is strongly advised.)

"None are more hopelessly enslaved

than those who falsely believe they are free."
~Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

MIACgate III: The Ideology

This video, which I believe relates to the ideology behind the MIAC report, shows a FEMA lecturer teaching firemen and police that our country's Founders were the first terrorist group in the U.S., a treasonous statement to be sure.



Note the date: July 19th, 2001, a mere two months before the WTC attacks, from which would rise the very un-American "USA PATRIOT Act".

Section 802 of the USA PATRIOT Act defines "domestic terrorism" as activities that, "involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State."

Jaywalking, for example.

Interesting how they always give tyrannical legislation names that are the complete opposite of their contents (e.g. "the Fairness Doctrine").

MIACgate II: The Documents

Note: This report is very poorly written, as it contains spelling errors, grammatical errors, and poor sentence structure; it is therefore somewhat difficult to read. The documents are clickable for enlargement.

MIACgate: Third-Party Bumperstickers are Now Indicative of Militant Ideology

There is nothing amusing or cutesy about the contents of the latest report from the Missouri Information Analysis Center concerning for what law enforcement and other public organizations are to be on the lookout.

I have put off this topic for as long as I have been aware of it, because I didn't know what was going to be the next big break in the story. The story first broke here, when a concerned civil servant, an anonymous policeman, sent in the documents to whom, he felt, would be a safe and reliable recipient.

The findings of this MIAC report are so outrageous and blatantly Orwellian that there were many individual accusations of forgery and fabrication on the part of Alex Jones; these have been silenced with admissions of authenticity from MIAC, a local sheriff, and the governor of Missouri, Jay Nixon.

Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr have co-written a letter demanding a public apology from MIAC and all involved in this highly discriminatory report; if it is not given, they will consider legal action.

Lumping racists and violent-radical organizations together with Constitutionalists and Libertarians, this perverted document equates free-minded Americans with domestic terrorists that are out to maim policemen.

If you speak out against the (dare I say it) "New World Order", you are a dangerous criminal; also, if you've ever seen the documentary "America: Freedom to Fascism", you are, of course, an even more dangerous criminal.

What has happened to my country?

"So as I grew from boy to man
I bent me to that bidding-
The spirit of each selfish plan
And cruel passions ridding
For thus, I hoped some day to aid
Oh, can such hope be vain?
When my dear country shall be made
A nation once again!"

CPAC, CFR, and The Constitution

"We want every American to be the best he or she chooses to be.

We recognize that we are all individuals. We love and revere our founding documents, the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. [Applause]

We believe that the preamble to the Constitution contains an inarguable truth that we are all endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, among them life. [Applause] Liberty, Freedom. [Applause] And the pursuit of happiness. [Applause]

Those of you watching at home may wonder why this is being applauded. We conservatives think all three are under assault. [Applause] Thank you. Thank you." ~Rush Limbaugh

A great speech overall, but I have a few issues with it, and with the speaker.

First of all, you will notice in the second paragraph that he mentions the "inarguable truth" in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution that we are endowed by our creator with the inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Before I continue, let me mention that he was awarded the "Defender of the Constitution" award.

The preamble to the Constitution, you know, the "We the People" document, doesn't say anything about life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness; that's a quote from the Declaration of Independence.

"Ooh, Soory!" ~Alex Trebek

Secondly, how can a man who talks to millions of people everyday, setting the opinion of those who would receive it (don't worry, I'm not a Fairness Doctrine crazy; I know he doesn't set public opinion), be given an award recognizing his "defense of the Constitution", and be lauded as a leader within the "conservative movement" when he puts out the disinformation that the Council on Foreign Relations does not exist.

The Council on Foreign Relations, which has been mentioned on mainstream news programming as actively functioning, is a think-tank for Globalism and one-world government. Many members are politicians such as, admittedly, Dick Cheney:





Ha, ha, ha; Cheney, you are soooo funny.

To understand the basics of the CFR, it requires a goodly amount of time, which I don't currently have, as it is late and I'm slightly cranky. *Smiles Weakly*

Here's an "okay" video that I found; more informative info will follow:

Necessary to the Security?

Since before the Revolution, we've had a "Civilian National Security Force" that was equally matched to the U.S. military establishment, and was deliberately "opposed to the military"; it was called "the militia".

Civilians trained in the use of arms for the benefit of repelling invasions and suppressing rebellions in the homeland, without the need of the state-run military to be deployed on our soil.

This principle of opposing wings of our American military defense system was purposely dismantled by the Congress in the early years of the 20th century, and was replaced by the "National Guard", a mere shadow of the former militia and a concept never imagined by the Founders.

Now Obama wishes to enlist young men and women into yet another insidious attempt to overthrow the concept of a civilian military; an attempt to destroy and reverse what was imagined by Thomas Jefferson when he said, "Every citizen should be a soldier."

If Obama wished to bring back the citizen militia as intended by the Founders, I would thank him. However, he wishes to corral the strongest backs and the brightest minds into service of the state, service that will be used as one more tool for the construction of a socialist America.

I only hope that he doesn't know what he is doing to our country.

To Execute the Laws III

“Widespread civil violence inside the United States would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security.”

“Deliberate employment of weapons of mass destruction or other catastrophic capabilities, unforeseen economic collapse, loss of functioning political and legal order, purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency, pervasive public health emergencies, and catastrophic natural and human disasters are all paths to disruptive domestic shock.”

“An American government and defense establishment lulled into complacency by a long-secure domestic order would be forced to rapidly divest some or most external security commitments in order to address rapidly expanding human insecurity at home…”

“Already predisposed to defer to the primacy of civilian authorities in instances of domestic security and divest all but the most extreme demands in areas like civil support and consequence management, DoD might be forced by circumstances to put its broad resources at the disposal of civil authorities to contain and reverse violent threats to domestic tranquility. Under the most extreme circumstances, this might include use of military force against hostile groups inside the United States.”

~Retired Lt. Col. Nathan Freir: from a report by him at the U.S. Army War College entitled, "Known Unknowns: Unconventional Strategic Shocks in Defense Strategy Development".

The above quote is courtesy of Infowars.com.