Clinton-appointed District Court Judge Susan Bolton blocked most of Arizona's immigration law this week, ruling that it would "impermissibly burden federal resources." In other words, enforcing federal law is a violation of federal law. The preliminary injunction, she said, would merely preserve the status quo and be less harmful to immigrants than allowing the law to be enforced in full. The next step for Arizona is an appeal before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, where Bolton said that the Justice Department's suit was "likely to succeed on the merits."
Bolton blocked the primary provisions of the law -- including those requiring state law enforcement officials to check immigration status when other legitimate contact occurs, as well as the requirement that foreigners carry their papers at all times (federal law already requires this). On the other hand, 12 provisions, including some on human smuggling and transporting illegals, were left intact. All told, though, her ruling went even further than the DoJ had hoped.
The Department of Homeland Security is bound by federal law to "respond to an inquiry by a federal, state, or local government agency, seeking to verify or ascertain the citizenship or immigration status ... for any purpose authorized by law, by providing the requested verification or status information." Yet Bolton wrote, "An increase in the number of requests for determinations of immigration ... will divert resources from the federal government's other responsibilities and priorities." Or as National Review put it, "she accepts Justice's implicit argument that it's not the letter of the federal law that matters, but what parts of the law the executive decides to enforce."
National Review concludes:
The bottom line is that Arizona wants to enforce the law against illegal aliens. It wants them to be cognizant of the fact that the state is serious about the law, and therefore to conclude that it's best to leave or not come in the first place. Arizona did not deem these people illegal aliens. The federal government did, in laws passed by Congress and signed by the president of the United States. Arizona thinks those laws mean something. If the Justice Department's suit -- and Judge Bolton's line of argument -- prevails, then we'll know that they don't. The real law of the land will be our current, de facto amnesty, imposed by executive whim.
For the administration, the bottom line isn't the law, but getting voters from the Hispanic bloc. With the help of their Leftmedia minions, they are succeeding.
Meanwhile, America's immigration system remains broken and in desperate need of repair -- preferably by those who value and uphold the Rule of Law.
Friday, July 30, 2010
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Sunday, July 25, 2010
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Publisher's Note: We are now receiving numerous conflicting reports regarding the veracity of this article. Numerous sources on the web (found via Google search) are picking up on this report, just as we did at The Cypress Times. The original writer for this article stands by his sources. If you wish to inquire about the sources, please visit the original story source URL listed in the article body below. I can tell you that as of now The Cypress Times has been unable to confirm the story. - John G. Winder, Publisher - The Cypress Times.
UPDATE: Story is now 100% confirmed by second source within the Laredo Police Department
The bloodbath continues along our southern border and now word is coming in that Los Zetas, the highly trained killers formerly with the Gulf Cartel, have crossed into the United States and taken over at least two ranches in the Laredo, Texas area. I am receiving word that the owners of the ranches have evacuated without being harmed.
Founder of the San Diego Minutemen Jeff Schwilk tipped me off to this story and passes along the following information on the location. The ranches are said to be "near Mines Rd. and Minerales Annex Rd about 10 miles NW of I-35".
Update - Statement from Mr. Schwilk)
I can personally vouch that this info came in late last night from a reliable police source inside the Laredo PD. There is currently a standoff between the unknown size Zeta forces and U.S. Border Patrol and local law enforcement on two ranches on our side of the Rio Grande. The source tells us he considers this an "act of war" and that the military is needed on the border now!
Whether it is lone members or squads is not certain.
Anonymous sources in law enforcement in the Laredo area tonight have passed on word that US law enforcement agencies are in the area and are weighing their options regarding the ranches. The media has been silent on this incident and some law enforcement in the area says that they are furious that the media is not reporting the whole story of the continued violence along the border. Their frustrations are understandable because keeping the truth suppressed continues to hamper law enforcement from receiving the true support they need along the border.
The ranch assaults come on the heels of attacks in Nuevo Laredo that shut the city down as a gun-battle raged in the streets. Los Zetas blocked off intersections with vehicles and used fragmentation grenades to attack Mexican law enforcement. In the end 12 were killed and 21 injured in the assaults. Citizens in the area were told to stay in their homes and bullets whizzed all around.
The U.S. Consulate in Nuevo Laredo had posted warnings on its website hours before the gunfire was reported by Texas citizens, “We have received credible reports of widespread violence occurring now between narcotics-trafficking organizations and the Mexican army in Nuevo Laredo.”
The U.S. Consulate went on to say, “The consulate confirmed that fragmentation grenades were used in the attacks and that suspected drug-gang members had blocked several roads, adding that it advised ‘all U.S. citizens in Nuevo Laredo to remain indoors until the security situation improves.’”
US Citizens in Laredo called 911 after hearing gunfire and explosions just across the border. Laredo police spokesman Joe Baeza deflected the concerns of citizens with what I see as utter contempt. He said there was no spillover violence onto the US side and "We were getting reports from people who live on the river's edge that they could hear gunfire and explosions from the Mexico side," Baeza said, "We didn't have any incidents on the American side. It's hard for people to understand who don't live here ... They're not Vikings, they're not going to invade us, it doesn't work that way."
This was said just a day before the reported breaking news on the ranches being taken above.
Violence has been on the rise along the border. In April 2010 a Border Patrol agent in Laredo shot and killed an lllegal alien drug smuggler near the Rio Grande
The Los Zetas are highly trained killers initially trained by United States Special Operations forces to combat the drug cartes within Mexico. As the drug war heated up the Zetas saw more money in working for the cartels and joined up with the Gulf Cartel.
In March, 2010 there was a fracture between the Los Zetas and the Gulf Cartel when a Zetas leader was said to have been assassinated by the Gulf Cartel. They demanded that the killer be turned over to them. When the Gulf Cartel refused the Zetas captured 16 Gulf Cartel members.
Since March Los Zetas abandoned their stronghold in Reynosa and moved to Nuevo Laredo, just across from the border with Laredo, Texas. There are estimated to be over 1,000 Zeta members there.
Additional Sources: Houston Chronicle, Borderland Beat
Visit DiggersRealm.com for more info.
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: This article is re-published in its entirety from DiggersRealm.com, any requests from media, or others, wishing to learn more about the content of this article should contact DiggersRealm.com HERE - Thank you, John G. Winder, Publisher - The Cypress Times
In honor of our fearless leader,
And in honor of President Obama's skillful handling of the the economy:
I think B.B. King might be singing about the country's feelings about the President and the Congress:
And here is why:
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
The epicenter of the world is located in two places - Shanksville, Pennsylvania, and at Ground Zero in Manhattan, New York.
When Soviet Communism collapsed in 1989 many in the West believed that we had entered a post-historical world; they were wrong. There would be no “peace dividend” – instead, we now have a reinvigorated ideological existential enemy.
The events of 9/11 signaled a fundamental shift in how the world functions, or does not function. Our response to 9/11 will determine the future of humanity.
Freedom of religion is guaranteed to us by our Constitution. This also means that we have freedom from religion; we can choose what we want to believe. This is not the case in Islam.
According to Islamic Sharia law, apostates (one who leaves Islam) are to be killed. This is compliant with the commands of both Allah and Mohammed in Koran, Sira, and Hadith, the trilogy doctrine of Islam.
As Freedom of Religion (and freedom from religion) is a Constitutional guarantee, Islamic apostasy tradition and laws are both barbaric and unconstitutional. This would suggest that the Ground Zero mosque or any mosque cannot then be built anywhere within the United States as the ideology promulgated in mosques is in opposition to the Constitution.
Article 6 of the US Constitution states:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land;
Islam does not subordinate to the law of the United States; nor does its system of law, Sharia.
Mohammed said, ‘I have been directed to fight the kafirs until every one of them admits, “There is only one god and that is Allah.”Whoever says, “There is only one god and that is Allah,” his body and possessions will be protected by me except for violations of Islamic law, in which case his fate is with Allah, to be punished or forgiven as he sees fit. (Hadith Bukhari; 4, 52, 196)
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
WASHINGTON - Congressman Charles Rangel on Thursday introduced H.R. 5741, a bill that would reinstate a compulsory military draft, or alternative national service, during times of war, for men and women, aged 18 to 42, who are citizens or permanent residents of the United States.
"What troubles me most about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is the total indifference (LIE) to the suffering and loss of life among our brave young soldiers on the battlefield," Congressman Rangel said. "The reason is that so few families have a stake in the war which is being fought by other people's children. (Rangel is lying. Total Indifference? This man is delusional and is using this perception as a way to justify his moral cowardice. He doesn't want to be seen de-funding the war, so he uses this premise.)
"The test for Congress, particularly for those members who support the war, is to require all who enjoy the benefits of our democracy to contribute to the defense of the country. All of America's children should share the risk of being placed in harm's way. (No child shares the risk. If fact, there is NO risk of being placed in harm's way. Every ADULT CHOSE to enter the military. If no one chooses, then no one is at risk.)
"In other words, if you support the war, you should support a compulsory military draft," Congressman Rangel said. (So, he supports the war? But wants to end the war? By having a draft?)
The bill, which the Congressman first introduced in 2003 as the nation prepared for the invasion of Iraq, and offered again in 2004, 2006, and 2007, provides for:
• A national service obligation--either military or civilian--for every citizen and permanent resident, male and female, of the U.S., aged 18 to 42.
• Persons may inducted to perform military service only if a declaration of war is in effect, or if the President declares a national emergency necessitating the induction of persons to perform military service and immediately informs Congress of the reasons for the declaration. (Does Congress have to APPROVE or just be notified? No responsibility here...)
• Defines "national service" as either military or civilian service as defined by the President that promotes national or homeland security. (Defined by whom? Not a written criteria? The President gets to decide?)
• Give the President the authority to establish the numbers of persons to be selected for military service and the means of selection. (Currently, the quotas for enlistment are approved by Congress. I mean, they pay for it. If this went through, this would remove responsibility from Congress on how much they want to pay.)
• Requires those not selected for military service to perform their national service obligation in a civilian capacity for a period of two years. (Since it may take two years just to train a military member, this seems a little low.)
• Directs the President to prescribe the regulations necessary to carry out the act. (Congress abrogating responsibility again)
• Deferments for education are only permitted through completion of high school, to a maximum age of 20.
• Deferments may be made for physical or mental disability, or under claims of conscientious objector. (Or, now, they can just NOT ENLIST. No need to be an objector.)
BRINGING THE TROOPS HOME
Rangel said that he was not challenging President Obama's handling of the war in Iraq or Afghanistan, conflicts with few options that the President had inherited from the previous Administration. (Unlike what he did to Bush under the SAME conflict.)
"I support the President's intentions to withdraw our troops, but I'd like to see it happen sooner. In my view, no additional tax dollars should be appropriated for any reason except to bring home our brave and exhausted young men and women. The loss of 5,500 lives and 38,000 wounded is enough." (Hey Rangel. That's YOUR job. DO IT! IF YOU OBJECT, PUT YOUR DEFUNDING WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS.)
A combined total of 160,000 Americans are currently deployed. More than 2 million men and women have served in the two conflicts, nearly half of them for more than one tour of duty. And because of a shortage of manpower, some of them have been deployed as many as six times.
"The 3.3 million military households, representing only one percent of American families, have become a virtual military class who are unfairly carrying the burden of war," Congressman Rangel said. "If there were a draft, there would be no shortage of troops to fill the ranks without repeatedly deploying the same exhausted troops over and over." (Of course there would be shortages. Does he think that this would magically create millions of soldiers overnight?)
So far, the numbers of casualties may not be as high, or as shocking, as those suffered in previous wars. But the physical and mental damage to individual soldiers is not only heartbreaking but is taking place at rates never before seen in modern warfare. (BS. We just weren't able to diagnose it in WWII.)
The reason is that advances in medical technology have allowed more wounded soldiers to survive the loss of limbs, and serious head and brain injuries. "The result is a practical epidemic of cases of post traumatic stress disorder, suicides, and family disruptions," Congressman Rangel said. (So what are you saying? Better to be dead on the battlefield?)
Again in this war, troops recruited from large urban centers with high unemployment(HIS CODE WORD FOR BLACKS) and from economically depressed small towns, are carrying the heaviest burden of service. Enlistment bonuses are as high as $40,000. Incentives for reenlistment range from $1,000 for the lowest-skilled privates to $27,000 for staff sergeants with special skills. (100K for special forces. 80k for Navy nukes.) Combined with the economic recession these incentives have produced record-breaking recruiting results this year. (Record breaking? With a war on? Amazing what happens when the press stop badmouthing the war every day. Statistics show that small town whites are the, by ratio, the most likely to enlist. Urban blacks enlist in about, or a little greater, ratio as they are a minority. They do not tend towards combat positions. They tend towards miiltary jobs that have job skills for a later civilian life. The combat arms are mostly white, with minorities in a smaller ratio than they are in the population.)
"The question of whether we need a universal compulsory military draft will be important as long as this country is placing thousands of its young men and women in harm's way," Congressman Rangel said. (There's no question. The military has stated repeatedly and loudly that a draft would HARM military readiness.)
"We make decisions about war without worry over who fights them. Those who do the fighting have no choice; when the flag goes up, they salute and follow orders," Congressman Rangel said. (Of course they have a choice. EVERY SINGLE MILITARY MEMBER SERVING TODAY CHOSE TO BE THERE DURING A COMBAT TOUR. EVERY SINGLE ENLISTEE JOINED DURING WARTIME.)
Rangel does this only to make a political point. The last time it came up for an actual vote, he voted NO.
Who on earth could be calling me at 5:30 am? It was CNN. After apologizing for the early call, the producer, almost giddy with excitement, said that Tea Party spokesperson Mark Williams made "what some would call" a racist comment on his blog about the NAACP. As for me, CNN was requesting that I, being a black spokesperson for the Tea Party Movement, come on the air to address Mark's comment. I told the CNN producer that I had not read it. The response was, "I'll e-mail it to you. Please read it and call me back."
After reading Mark's comment, I told my wife, "This is much ado about nothing. I am not going on the air allowing them to put me on the defensive defending Mark Williams." My beautiful, wonderful, and wise wife replied, "Do the interview, but do not defend Mark. Use this as an opportunity to defend the Tea Party Movement."
It is truly unfortunate that some on our side are so easily put on the defensive. NAACP president Ben Jealous slandered millions of decent Tea Party patriots by saying we tolerate racist signs. We do not. Not one liberal mainstream media outlet demanded that Jealous produce the "Lynch Barack Obama" and "Lynch Eric Holder" signs he claimed to have seen. Thus, the liberal media are saying these violent, racist signs exist, and the Tea Partiers are guilty simply because Jealous says so.
Furthering their efforts to discredit the Tea Party movement by portraying them as racist, the liberal media attacked our Mark Williams for a satirical comment on his blog. Mark is a personal friend who is not a racist -- far from it. On his blog, Mark was making a point about the blatant hypocrisy and backwardness of the NAACP.
Meanwhile, the liberal media typically ignores "real racism" coming from the left. A member of the New Black Panther Party boldly proclaimed he hates crackers (white people) and that they need to "kill more crackers." Has the liberal media confronted the NAACP about denouncing the New Black Panthers' hate-filled, racist statement? No, they have not.
And yet, folks on our side ran to the microphones to denounce Mark Williams and the Tea Party Express, and both were "expelled" from the National Tea Party Federation. Dear Lord! People, wake up and smell the liberal media manipulation!
As for those so-called racist signs, in my travels with Tea Party Express attending over two hundred tea parties nationwide, I have not seen one overtly racist sign. Researchers have documented that the same sort of negative images which were called "patriotic" and "celebrated" for exercising free speech when used against George Bush are now considered racist when used against Barack Obama.
As far as Democrats, the Obama administration, and the liberal mainstream media are concerned, Obama's race trumps everything.
In a blatant assault on our free speech as Americans, for the first time in U.S. history, we have a president of whom any criticism, satire, and negative portrayals will be attacked as racist. Offenders are denounced, shunned, and defamed by Obama's Enforcers, the liberal mainstream media.
Falling into the defensive trap, some Tea Party leaders have suggested that we change our name. They say, "The term "Tea Party" has become so negative." The liberal mainstream media is going to trash us no matter what we call ourselves, even if we change our name to the "Happy Go Lucky Really Nice People" movement.
News flash! The goal of the liberal mainstream media is to "crush" the Tea Party Movement. Obama is their guy. The liberal mainstream media's unprecedented protection of Obama during the election, skipping the usual vetting process for one applying for the job of leader of the free world, won Obama the White House. Along with their racist support because he is black, the liberal mainstream wholeheartedly embraces Obama's socialist/progressive agenda.
Thus, it is foolish for Tea Party patriots to pander to our enemy, the liberal mainstream media. Relentlessly, the liberal mainstream media Obama-ites and Progressivism religious zealots will distort, lie, and do whatever is necessary to divide and conquer us. Brothers and sisters, please do not fall for it. God bless.
The New York Times confirmed Friday that in preparation for defending constitutionality of the Obamacare individual mandate in court, an Obama Justice Department legal brief argues that the penalty used to enforce the mandate is “a valid exercise” of Congress’s power to impose taxes. Mr. Obama’s own Justice Department further repudiates the President’s earlier statement by noting that the penalty is imposed and collected under the Internal Revenue Code, people must report it on their tax returns, and that the Congressional Budget Office estimates that it will cost Americans $4 billion a year. Yale Law School professor Jack Balkin told a meeting of progressive activists last month that President Obama “has not been honest with the American people about the nature of this bill. This bill is a tax.”
The fact that the Obama administration and their allies are now admitting the individual mandate is a tax betrays their very real fear that the Supreme Court could find Obamacare’s individual mandate unconstitutional. In the bill itself, Congress identified the Commerce Clause as the source of their authority to force all Americans to buy health insurance. But as our legal team has made imminently clear, the mandate does not purport to regulate or prohibit commerce of any kind. To the contrary, it purports to “regulate”—and penalize—inactivity. If the Supreme Court allows the Obamacare individual mandate to stand, then Congress could do anything it wanted. They could: require us to buy a new Chevy Impala each year to support the government-supported auto industry; require us to buy war bonds to pay for the Iraq and Afghan wars; or force us to eat our vegetables.
Saturday, July 17, 2010
By: Jim Meyers
Rep. Sue Myrick tells Newsmax it is “very frightening” that the Iran-backed terrorist group Hezbollah has been sending agents to Mexico — and some have already entered the United States across the porous border.
The North Carolina Republican has asked Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to set up a special task force to investigate the reports that Hezbollah is cooperating with drug cartels along the Mexican border.
In an exclusive Newsmax interview, Myrick — a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the GOP’s Deputy Whip — was asked what is known about Hezbollah’s threat to America.
“Our intelligence sources have really clarified that they are in Mexico, that there is an operation that is quite large in place there, and it’s very frightening to me because this is national security,” says Myrick, who was first elected in 1994.
“Yes, immigration’s a problem too, but this particular situation [involves] people who don’t like us for various reasons.
“We know some of them have gotten across the border in the past, and now we know that there are people from Iran who are going to Venezuela. They are actually learning Spanish, and then they come up through Mexico to cross our border. So they’re working in cahoots with Venezuela as well.”
About Hezbollah’s intentions in the U.S., Myrick says: “We don’t know. It used to be that most of those groups did not really target the United States. They were targeting other countries or they were staying inside their own area of influence. Now they are starting to target the United States and that’s my concern.
“I do want a task force of both U.S. and Mexican officials. Let’s get to the bottom of this and find out what is going on.
“The response I have received was a call that they would like to give me a private intelligence briefing because I’m on the Intelligence Committee. I said that would be fine, but I would like an answer about the task force first because once I get a briefing, I can’t talk about it.”
Sen. John Kyl, an Arizona Republican, has said he met privately with President Barack Obama and implored him to secure the border. Kyl claims Obama told him that if he did secure the border it would remove the incentive for comprehensive immigration reform or amnesty for illegals. Myrick says that “makes no sense whatsoever.”
She tells Newsmax: “It’s obvious that’s what he wants, amnesty. He’s said it over and over again. I don’t see it that way.
“Our responsibility at the federal government is to make sure that our borders are secure. Once the border is secure, like it is in some other places where we don’t have the problems that we do in the areas where it’s porous, then we’ll know who is in the country. We can control who comes into the country.
“It makes no sense to me whatsoever that you can’t secure the border because you can’t get amnesty.”
Myrick takes issue with Attorney General Eric Holder, who has filed suit against Arizona’s tough new law to battle illegal immigration.
“The federal government has not done its job,” she declares.
“Arizona is only trying to do what a state as the right to do, and that is to protect themselves.”
Turning to Iran, Myrick charges that the Obama administration is dragging its feet on dealing with the nuclear threat posed by the Islamic Republic.
“I think we should take a tougher stance and work harder with our partners in the world to make sure they do too,” she says.
The United Nations in its attempts to deal with Iran is “just a joke,” she adds. “They aren’t doing their job.”
Asked about the possibility that Israel may attack Iran’s nuclear facilities on its own, Myrick responds:
“I think Israel has the right to defend themselves. That option is there.
“I hope it does not come to that, but there needs to be something done to have a tougher stand with Iran.
“They aren’t going to be our friends. You can’t convince them they’re going to be our friends. They don’t operate that way. They don’t want to be friends. They want to conquer the world.”
Friday, July 16, 2010
In spite of all the stupid stuff, Billy was a good person. He was a good and decent man. He was content with his station in life and I never heard him blame anyone for it. He was deeply spiritual without being religious and his understanding of Biblical history and End Times prophesy was encyclopedic.
He was born 100 years too late. He lived simply. He gardened. He worked. He fished. He played. He read a lot. In the last 10 years, he expanded his knowledge and worked overseas installing power generating devices at US Embassies. He spent Independence Day 2003 in Yemen with the Marine detachment, something that made me very envious. He called me from The Gambia and described the western Atlantic coastline of Africa a year later. I have the African carving he brought me hanging on my wall.
It had been awhile since I saw him last. I stopped by one day a few weeks back, but he wasn’t home. The one thing about being friends with Billy was, no matter how long it had been since the last time you saw each other, the next time you saw each other was just a continuation of the last time. Chances are you’d just take up the conversation right where you left off, like one of you had just stepped out for a head call. I’m going to miss that.
I used to drive a moving van back in my youth. Billy had never been north of the Rappahannock River. He used to say he’d get the shakes the further North he went, and he was convinced if he crossed the Potomac River chaos would ensue. I needed a hand with a load of furniture, and Billy was willing. I took him to Pennsylvania where I proceeded to get a lung infection. Billy literally carried me into the hospital emergency room that morning. After that, he was only willing to go south on the truck with me. So I took him to Florida the next time. We had a blast.
We worked together off and on for the next 30 years. He was the best help I ever had, without exception. He was a good friend all the time. He was with me the day I caught the biggest largemouth I’ve ever seen outside of a Bill Dance commercial. Billy said it was the biggest he’d ever seen come out of the little pond we were on, and he had been fishing that pond since he was 10.
We were together on 9.11.2001.
I’m going to miss not being able to talk to him.
Thank you for your friendship over the past three and a half decades.
Nick Popaditch is a war hero. A Marine for 15 years, Gunnery Sergeant Popaditch became famous when the Associated Press photographed him smoking a cigar while his unit pulled down a statue of Saddam Hussein in April 2003. A year later, Popaditch was severely wounded during fighting in Fallujah -- he lost his right eye and much of his hearing after a grenade was thrown through the hatch of his M1A1 Abrams tank. He was later awarded a Purple Heart and a Silver Star.
Now, Popaditch, bald and wearing an eye patch, is running for Congress in California on a platform of limited government, strong national defense and secure borders. The race inspired a cartoon in the Imperial Valley (CA) Press that didn't go over too well. It depicts two skateboarders viewing a campaign poster of a bald man with an eye patch and cracking jokes about him. Even Popaditch's Democrat opponent criticized the cartoon, and the paper has since made an apology after explaining that they were mocking the skateboarders' ignorance, not the candidate himself. Popaditch said he wasn't offended: "I've got much thicker skin than that." Not surprisingly, the gaffe has raised his profile and may help him in November.
“Hidden Cameras on the Arizona Border 2: Drugs, Guns, and 850 Illegal Aliens” is the Center for Immigration Studies' second web-based film on the impact of illegal alien activity in Arizona. The Center's first video on the subject, “Hidden Cameras on the Arizona Border: Coyotes, Bears, and Trails,” has received over 50,000 views to date. This new 10-minute mini-documentary raises the bar, featuring footage of both illegal-alien entry as well as gun- and drug-smuggling. At minimum, the inescapable conclusion is that hidden cameras reveal a reality that illegal-alien activity is escalating.
The hidden camera footage, acquired from a variety of sources, indicates that there is an unfortunate lack of federal law enforcement presence on Arizona’s federal land on the border in Nogales, in the Coronado National Forest (15 miles inside the border), and the Casa Grande Sector (80 miles inside the border). Also significant to the story are responses received as part of Freedom of Information Act requests made by Janice Kephart, the Center’s Director of National Security Studies, in August 2009. Featured in the film is a 2004 federal government PowerPoint showing the near-complete devastation of a borderland national park due to illegal-alien activity, highlighting the disconnect between the situation on the ground in Arizona and Washington rhetoric.
Director/Writer/Narrator/B roll film:
Nogales/Casa Grande Footage:
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Be assured, should we fail to rise to the current challenge, the terminus of the Obama Plan is tyranny.
Barackracy, Part 2
Reversing Course and Restoring Liberty
In Part 1 of this essay, "Breaking the Back of Free Enterprise," I noted, "Barack Hussein Obama's macro agenda to accomplish the 'fundamental transformation of America' is to break the back of capitalism and, in the ensuing crisis, use government intervention to replace it with a more refined socialist economic framework than the one currently in place."
I then posited the question, "Is there still time to restore the primacy of free enterprise over Socialism and turn back Obama and his Leftist ilk?"
The short answer is yes. I believe there is still time to implement political solutions to reverse course and restore Essential Liberty, constitutional Rule of Law and its economic expression, free enterprise. But that window is closing.
There is an economic catastrophe on our horizon, (the Obama Plan), one whose full force will likely be felt in the next few years. It will bring with it massive increases in taxation and income redistribution accompanied by inflation of the cost of goods and services and, ultimately, centralization of the economy through complete regulation of every economic sector. This scenario will be modeled after Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal policies, but it will be so massive as to fully institutionalize Socialism on a national scale.
That's the bad news.
The good news is there exists a solution, short of civil disobedience and revolution, to dispense with the Obama Plan. That solution is a revitalized national movement to restore constitutional integrity. That effort is now well underway bearing the Tea Party label -- not a political party, per se, but the advocacy of a set of principles to restore Rule of Law.
Our success will require a groundswell of action in the next few election cycles, and the seating of a majority of legislators who have both a firm understanding of the principles of Essential Liberty and a willingness to enact the bold and difficult legislation necessary to restore constitutional Rule of Law.
The most important of these legislative measures are outlined in the Patriot Declaration. These include the enumeration of specific constitutional authority for any and every act of the legislature, its compliance with our Constitution's standard for Federalism, the Tenth Amendment, and a complete overhaul of our system of taxation.
In other words, the only way to undermine the Obama Plan is to reduce the size and scope of central government such that it comports once again with the plain language of our Constitution. In fact, this conversion to a government whose powers are, as our Constitution's principal author James Madison declared, "few and defined," will necessarily collapse its size.
However, our Constitution's prescription for central government authority and its proscription against exceeding that authority have been eroded for generations. It will thus take time to restore the Rule of Law, but restoration is the only option if our legacy of liberty is to be extended to future generations.
The alternative is, most certainly, tyranny.
The "Cycle of Democracy," attributed to 18th-century Scottish historian Alexander Tytler, follows this sequence: "From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty [Rule of Law]; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to complacency; From complacency to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage [rule of men]."
The consequences of complacency and apathy are, indeed, dependency and bondage.
The choice that all Americans face today was aptly described by Ronald Reagan in his timeless challenge to conservatives, "A Time for Choosing": "You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right, There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream -- the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order -- or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism."
Now, as then, Leftists decry the Reagan model for restoration, cutting taxes to grow the economy, as "trickle-down economics." But the Reagan Plan resulted in the largest peacetime economic surge in American history.
To be sure, the Democrat-controlled legislature refused to enact the spending cuts Reagan called for, and this led to what were then record deficits. Those deficits, however, pale in comparison to the debt of the Obama Plan, which can only result in "trickle-up poverty."
Alexis de Tocqueville once observed, "Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude."
Today, the once noble Democrat Party seeks only to forcibly reduce the people they pretend to serve to restraint and servitude.
In 1916, a minister and outspoken advocate for liberty, William J. H. Boetcker, published a pamphlet entitled The Ten Cannots, which fittingly contrasts the competing political and economic factions today: You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot build character and courage by taking away man's initiative and independence. You cannot help small men by tearing down big men. You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income. You cannot establish security on borrowed money. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they will not do for themselves.
It is a hard, undeniable truth that the federal government cannot give to anybody what it does not first take from somebody else, and the power to do so is ruinous. As Thomas Jefferson wrote, we must "prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretence of taking care of them."
Further, the debt and taxation crisis we face today was a prospect of great concern to our Founders at the dawn of our Republic. In Jefferson's words, "Taxes should be continued by annual or biennial reenactments, because a constant hold, by the nation, of the strings of the public purse is a salutary restraint from which an honest government ought not wish, nor a corrupt one to be permitted, to be free. ... Would it not be better to simplify the system of taxation rather than to spread it over such a variety of subjects and pass through so many new hands. ... The fore horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its turn wretchedness and oppression. ... We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. ... I place economy among the first and most important of republican virtues, and public debt as the greatest of the dangers to be feared."
In 1824, Jefferson concluded, "I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious." What would he say today?
Our Constitution, and Rule of Law it was meant to ensure, has suffered great injury as a result of national complacency and apathy.
So we must once again choose.
Which will it be, freedom or totalitarianism, the Reagan Plan or the Obama Plan?
If we expect to bequeath liberty to our posterity, then we must dedicate our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor to uphold the primacy of free enterprise over socialism, to defend Essential Liberty and to restore constitutional Rule of Law.
Will enough conservatives be seated in Congress this election cycle to stop, or even reverse, the Obama agenda? Stopping, at the very least, is mandatory. Reversing, while a daunting challenge, is achievable and must be the sole focus of every Patriot in the coming election cycle.
Be assured, should we fail to rise to the current challenge, the terminus of the Obama Plan is tyranny.
So, fellow Patriots, in the words of Benjamin Franklin, "Resolve to perform what you ought. Perform without fail what you resolve."
Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!
Publisher, The Patriot Post
This is phenomenal… Click on the site at the bottom then chose a state.
First click on a state. When it opens, scroll down to the city and the
names will appear. Then click on their names. It should show you a
picture of the person, or at least their bio and medals. This really is an
amazing web site. Someone spent a lot of time and effort to create it.
I hope that everyone who receives this appreciates what those who served
in Vietnam sacrificed for our country.
The link below is a virtual wall of all those lost during the Vietnam war
with the names, bio's and other information on our lost heroes. Those who
remember that time frame, or perhaps lost friends or family can look them
up on this site. Pass the link on to others if you like.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Monday, July 12, 2010
You can't, according to the extremists.
This is a long article but well worth the read:
Obama at odds with Petraeus doctrine on 'Islam'
People in the administration should be making the clear distinction between Islam, which is a religion and which is not our enemy, and extremist Islamism, which is a political ideology and is our enemy. … The fact is our enemies fly the banner of Islam. They claim to represent the religion. There are other people in the religion who say they don't. What we need to be clear about is, our enemy has an extremist political
ideology. They describe that ideology as the true religion. And there is no way we can deal with this phenomenon without confronting the fact that the enemy political ideology is rooted in a religion."
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney writes that if we are to win in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal isn't the only official worthy of firing, and President Obama must abandon his denial that we are at war with "radical Islam." (HT Kenny B.)
First to the State Department: Ambassadors Eikenberry and Holbrooke have long outlived their effectiveness. They are a drag on success in this difficult war. They must go.
Next, to the Department of Defense: This a war is not an "Overseas Contigency Operation (OCO)" as President Obama’s administration calls it. We have lost 89 ISAF soldiers and 53 US soldiers this month with 2 days left to go.
Mr. President, we are in a violent war against radical Islam and your denial of this fact will ensure our defeat.
You and your administration cannot even define the ideology we are fighting against. John Brennan, your National Security adviser for counterterrorism, thinks "jihad" means "holy struggle" not a war against infidels.
Your Secretary of Defense and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have accepted these ridiculous new definitions of the threat.
This means you, and your national security leadership team are clueless about how to defeat this violent threat against America.
They must all go and you must change your senseless strategy.
It is unfortunate that nearly all of the flag officers that make sense have retired.
I have seen no indications that this administration desires victory in Afghanistan. We can debate who should be sacked and who shouldn't be, but regardless of whether McChrystal, Petraeus, or Sun Tzu is commanding ISAF, the result will look pretty much the same as they must follow the Commander-in-Chief. So rather than simply sacking commanders and ambassadors (treating the symptoms and not the disease), I would like to take things one step further: Let's go back to the drawing board.
The president must answer these questions (truthfully):
1. Who is our enemy in Afghanistan and what are their intentions?
2. What are our intentions in Afghanistan?
3. How do you define victory in Afghanistan?
4. What are you doing to achieve victory in Afghanistan?America deserves clear and concise answers, not lies and distractions. If his answers stink, then "We the People" must remind him that the government ultimately works for us. We must fight in Afghanistan - that's not the debate we should have. It should be who we are fighting and how we should fight them. Worry about firing commanders and diplomats after we have a solid and just foundation
Thursday, July 08, 2010
Sarah Palin: A Replacement for Steele?
Thursday, 08 Jul 2010 08:01 AM
In the wake of Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele's lashing out against the war in Afghanistan, CBS News Senior White House Correspondent Bill Plante is reporting a buzz in the GOP inner sanctum that Sarah Palin should replace him.
The former Alaska governor and vice-presidential candidate already qualifies as the Republican Party's top endorser and top fundraiser, reports Plante.
Steele's latest gaffe was calling the Afghan conflict "a war of Obama's choosing."
"This is not something the United States has actively prosecuted or wanted to engage in," he added.
To read the full story — Go Here Now.
WITH OBAMA'S INCREASINGLY CLEAR INABILITY TO GOVERN INSTEAD OF JUST SHOOTING OFF HIS MOUTH AND HIS PLUMMETING LOSS OF POPULARITY AS HE DESTROYS AMERICA, THE DETAILS SHOWN BELOW WILL BE FORCED INTO THE OPEN AND IN ALL LIKELIHOOD HE WILL BE OBLIGED TO LEAVE THE OVAL OFFICE - EVEN POSSIBLY IN HANDCUFFS.
Expert examination will easily bring the forgeries to light, so everything is still being hidden and not made available to anyone.
Even RECENTLY passing a law making it unnecessary for the Aloha State to respond to enquiries regarding the birth documents or anything related to them!
Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad has repeatedly stated that it is only througn Iran that Obama will survive in holding onto his office. Everyone thinks he's nuts. And as a Hojatieh (search on this site) adherant he truly is weird and certifiably crazy.
However before we mock his statement let's extrapolate it.
Obama has lost his aura. The heavy negatives and even his right to his office (lack of it) are tightening around him. Attacking Iran can provide him a solution:
Read the rest here.
Barackracy, Part 1
Breaking the Back of Free Enterprise
Folks with extensive training in strategic analysis tend to have a very different viewpoint of the macro-political machinations from that of folks in the trenches who have a more tactical perspective. As such, strategic viewpoints are many times received with great skepticism.
At ground level, for example, one might have a problem with the following strategic analysis: It would appear that Barack Hussein Obama's macro agenda for the U.S. economy is to break the back of capitalism and, in the ensuing crisis, use government intervention to replace it with a more refined socialist economic framework than the one currently in place.
If that analysis makes you uncomfortable, prepare to become far more so if his agenda succeeds.
As one with excessive formal training in the art of strategic analysis, I can assure you that Obama's plan, as outlined above, is progressing on schedule.
In regard to the failing economy, Obama recently said, "Make no mistake, we are headed in the right direction, but ... we're not headed there fast enough for a lot of Americans."
Many people hear those words and interpret them to mean that we're progressing toward economic recovery. However, the strategic analyst hears that the Left's objective of a socialized economy is just upon the horizon, that Obama and company would like to bring it to dock at a much faster pace and with such forceful momentum to ensure that the "fundamental transformation of America" can't be undone.
House Minority Leader John Boehner gets it. In regard to House Democrats' passage of Obama's so called "economic reform plan," Boehner responded, "The writing is on the wall for President Obama's 'stimulus' policies and everyone -- taxpayers, economists, and the rest of the world -- sees it but him. How much longer are we going to continue with this disastrous spending spree that is scaring the hell out of the American people and piling debt on our kids and grandkids?"
Answer: As long as it takes to fulfill their Leftist agenda.
"We had to take some tough steps to pull the country out of the free fall we faced when I took office," says the blame-shifting Obama.
For the record, the current economic debacle began with a crisis of confidence in the U.S. housing and security markets -- a crisis largely driven by Democrat policies and their refusal to rein in the government-sponsored mortgage enterprises known as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
The ensuing financial market collapse in the weeks ahead of the 2008 presidential election resulted in the selection of a charismatic radical Leftist community organizer as president of the United States.
Commenting on the agenda of his newly elected boss, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said infamously, "Never allow a crisis to go to waste." And they haven't.
It is no small irony that on the very day Obama asserted the economy is "headed in the right direction," the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office reported, based on the implementation of Obama's "economic recovery" agenda thus far, that the current accumulation of debt will exceed 100 percent of gross domestic production by 2025, and will total almost twice GDP by 2035.
But not to worry, I suspect our economy will collapse long before our national debt reaches that level. The burden of debt accumulation at current levels makes the current economic problems of socialist European states seem like gnats on an elephant's ... uh, rear.
The CBO report concludes, "Large budget deficits would reduce national saving, leading to higher interest rates, more borrowing from abroad, and less domestic investment -- which in turn would lower income growth in the United States. Growing debt would also reduce lawmakers' ability to respond to economic downturns and other challenges. Over time, higher debt would increase the probability of a fiscal crisis in which investors would lose confidence in the government's ability to manage its budget, and the government would be forced to pay much more to borrow money."
In other words, unless Obama's agenda is overturned, the U.S. will one day be a subsidiary of Red China.
On the principles of free enterprise, Obama proclaims, "We already tried the other side's ideas. We already know where their theories led us. And now we have a choice as a nation. We can return to the failed economic policies of the past, or we can keep building a stronger future. We can go backward, or we can keep moving forward. I don't know about you, but I want to move forward."
Obama apparently hopes a majority of Americans have no idea where the Left's theories led in places like the Soviet Union. Unfortunately, he's probably right, given that many of his constituents are little more than sycophantic lemmings, having been sufficiently dumbed down in our government-run education institutions.
Obama's primary co-conspirator in this extra-constitutional folly to undermine the economy is House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, she of the following ridiculous claim: "When I became Speaker of the House, the very first day we passed legislation that made Paygo the rule of the House. The federal government will pay as it goes."
In other words, she promised that Congress would not pass unfunded spending bills. But that would mean either radically reining in spending, or implementing vast new tax initiatives on virtually all income earners, which she and Obama promised they would not do. Thus, Pelosi's Congress has added more than $1 trillion to the national debt, taking the U.S. Debt Clock beyond the $13 trillion mark.
To put their plan into perspective, national debt was about 40 percent of GDP when Obama took office, but with the economic recession resulting in greatly reduced tax revenues, the national debt will be 62 percent of GDP by the end of this year. That would be an increase of more than 50 percent in just two years. (I recommend you read this paragraph at least twice!)
For a complete analysis of federal waste, see the Heritage Foundation's study, "30,543 Reasons Spending Is Out of Control."
To make matters worse, Obama continues to inflate the bloated central government beyond any recognition of its constitutional authority even as American families and businesses must cut back to make ends meet. Adding insult to injury, non-military federal employee salaries are now 40 percent higher than private sector salaries on average, and while private sector benefit packages average $9,882, government employee benefits average $32,115.
This week, Obama laughingly launched his annual "SAVE" Award dog and pony show, ostensibly encouraging federal employees to recommend how to save taxpayer dollars. I have more than a few ideas, but Obama did not ask taxpayers how to save taxpayer dollars.
That old sage Will Rogers once quipped, "Be thankful we're not getting all the government we're paying for." If he only knew...
Demonstrating the extent to which government has exceeded its constitutional mandate, my colleague Walter Williams wrote, "In 1794, when Congress appropriated $15,000 to assist some French refugees, James Madison, the acknowledged father of our Constitution, stood on the floor of the House to object, saying, 'I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.' He later added, '[T]he government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.'"
Professor Williams concludes, "Two hundred years later, at least two-thirds of a multi-trillion-dollar federal budget is spent on charity or 'objects of benevolence.'"
Is there still time to restore the primacy of Free Enterprise over Socialism and turn back Obama and his Leftist ilk?
The short answer is, yes. Next week Part 2 of this essay, "Reversing Course and Restoring Liberty," will clearly outline how to restore the constitutional role of government.
Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!
Publisher, The Patriot Post
Tuesday, July 06, 2010
If you are a fan of the Avatar: The Last Airbender Series found on the Nickelodeon Channel, then you will be disappointed in the movie. AND DON'T WASTE YOUR MONEY ON THE 3D VERSION, IF YOU MUST SEE IT.
The characters that are so rich in the cartoon are pale, wan copies in the movie. The humor that makes you laugh out loud is...just gone. So much time is wasted watching Aang perform kung-fu "bending" kata, time that could have been used for character development, two main characters are barely there. The only thing that I can recommend is the cinematography (that's not ruined by bad 3d) and the imagery. Aapa, the sky bison rocks.
Logic and plot holes are big enough to make even my 10 year daughter realize that this movie was, well.......not what it was supposed to be.
Don't take my word for it.
Here's an excerpt from Charlie Jane Anders at io9:
Shyamalan's true achievement in this film is that he takes a thrilling cult TV series, Avatar: The Last Airbender, and he systematically leaches all the personality and soul out of it — in order to create something generic enough to serve as a universal spoof of every epic, ever. All the story beats from the show's first season are still present, but Shyamalan manages to make them appear totally arbitrary. Stuff happens, and then more stuff happens, and what does it mean? We never know, because it's time for more stuff to happen. You start out laughing at how random and mindless everything in this movie is, but about an hour into it, you realize that the movie is actually laughing at you, for watching it in the first place. And it's laughing louder than you are, because it's got Dolby surround-sound and you're choking on your suspension of disbelief.
And if that's not enough, here is Roger Ebert:
That's just the start of an accurate portrayal. And I don't usually agree with Roger Ebert about anything.
"The Last Airbender" is an agonizing experience in every category I can think of and others still waiting to be invented. The laws of chance suggest that something should have gone right. Not here. It puts a nail in the coffin of low-rent 3D, but it will need a lot more coffins than that.Let's start with the 3D, which was added as an afterthought to a 2D movie. Not only is it unexploited, unnecessary and hardly noticeable, but it's a disaster even if you like 3D. M. Night Shyamalan's retrofit produces the drabbest, darkest, dingiest movie of any sort I've seen in years. You know something is wrong when the screen is filled with flames that have the vibrancy of faded Polaroids. It's a known fact that 3D causes a measurable decrease in perceived brightness, but "Airbender" looks like it was filmed with a dirty sheet over the lens.
2053 by 1998.
Over 1000 by the US. Most within the continental 48 states. Even two in Mississippi.....
I never had an idea that so many had been fired. And yet, the environmentalists FRREEEEK whenever civilian use is mentioned........
umm.....borrowed......that's the word.... from Rico at Theo Sparks at The Last of the Few
Friday, July 02, 2010
Thank you, Sir.
Chris and Damon are cool for helping out too. They all get BBQ sauce.
Thanks to everyone who took part in the contest. LW has a post up at Blackfive.
We have the winner and 2nd and 3rd place.
Conservative commentator William Kristol immediately called for Steele to resign.
“At a time when Gen. [David] Petraeus has just taken over command, when Republicans in Congress are pushing for a clean war funding resolution, when Republicans around the country are doing their best to rally their fellow citizens behind the mission, your comment is more than an embarrassment. It’s an affront, both to the honor of the Republican Party and to the commitment of the soldiers fighting to accomplish the mission they’ve been asked to take on by our elected leaders,” he writes in a post at The Weekly Standard.
Steele released a statement in which he walked back his comments and voices support for the war.
“There is no question that America must win the war on terror,” he said. “During the 2008 Presidential campaign, Barack Obama made clear his belief that we should not fight in Iraq, but instead concentrate on Afghanistan. Now, as President, he has indeed shifted his focus to this region. That means this is his strategy. And, for the sake of the security of the free world, our country must give our troops the support necessary to win this war.”
The RNC staff sought to tamp down the controversy—ill-timed ahead of the July 4 holiday—by circulating a memo to reporters highlighting the chairman’s support of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The memo is title: “RNC Chairman Michael Steele Has Been A Consistent, Vocal Supporter Of The Wars In Afghanistan And Iraq.”
It may not be enough to appease conservatives, many of whom are already tired of Steele’s lengthy record of verbal gaffes and fund-raising controversies since he took over the party committee in January 2009.
“The war in Afghanistan is not a war of Barack Obama’s choosing. It is a war of Al Qaeda and the Taliban’s choosing. We responded. Michael Steele must resign. He has lost all moral authority to lead the GOP,” Erick Erickson of RedState.com, a popular conservative blog, wrote this afternoon.
Thursday, July 01, 2010
What's a great way to celebrate the new laws in the Commonwealth and the success of the McDonald case! Oh, wait! I know!
Go out to eat without worrying about open carry! Go support the gun friendly restaurant of your choice!