TEA Parties, Village Idiots, Demo-Gogues and More

Wall Street tea part

From The Patriot Post Wed Chronicle - Vol. 09 No. 16

THE FOUNDATION

"Newspapers ... serve as chimnies to carry off noxious vapors and smoke." --Thomas Jefferson

DEZINFORMATSIA

The media doth protest too much: "What's disturbing about some of these [tea party] protests and some of the people at these protests is this edge of anger at the government. There is ... a real hostility that is not just politics as usual among some of these people." --CNN's Jeffrey Toobin ++ "[T]his is a party for Obama bashers. I have to say that this is not entirely representative of everybody in America.... I think you get the general tenor of this. It's anti-government, anti-CNN, since this is highly promoted by the right-wing conservative network, Fox." --CNN's Susan Roesgen ++ "Are these protesters really out of step with the majority of Americans? We just saw ... that 62 percent of the people here approve of the president's handling of the economy, and that Americans rate taxes, incredibly at, the very bottom of the most important economic issues right now." --CNN's Christiane Amanpour ++ "You have to remember that at almost any given time any cockamamie proposition in America will have at least 25 percent of those polled supporting it. It was a good stunt. ... We pay relatively small taxes. ...[W]hat you ostensibly get for it is a civilized kind of social compact where you don't have massive civil eruptions. That is what taxes are for." --NPR's Nina Totenberg on the tea parties

This week's "Leftmedia Buster" Award: "A lot of news outlets mocked these protesters.... But, if a media outlet wants to expose its bias, they can mock tea parties, if they like. ... I'm not going to mention names of people on networks that made sexual jokes, childish sexual jokes, about tens of thousands of Americans who went out and wanted to get involved in their government. I mean, it was really middle school jokes being made. I didn't hear those jokes being made when people on the left protested over the past eight years." --MSNBC's Joe Scarborough

Repeating the BIG Lie: "On the violence issue, 6,500 people were killed in drug violence in 2008 alone. Ninety-five percent of the guns used were out of the United States. What is the U.S. going to do to stop the guns from getting there?" --ABC's Diane Sawyer to DHS secretary Janet Napolitano, who replied that she wouldn't "quibble about numbers" since "that's not the point."

Newspulper Headlines:

Couldn't They Find One That Was Still Afloat?: "Coast Guard Opens Hearing on Sunk Fishing Boat" --Associated Press

Look Out Below!: "Workers Falling Through the Jobs Net" --Detroit News

Everything Seemingly Is Spinning Out of Control: "Thieving Dwarves Cause Supernovae" --BBC Web site

Bottom Stories of the Day: "Small Cars Get Poor Marks in Collision Tests" --Associated Press

(Thanks to The Wall Street Journal's James Taranto)

VILLAGE IDIOTS

Spewing hate: "It's not about bashing Democrats, it's not about taxes, they have no idea what the Boston tea party was about, they don't know their history at all. This is about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism straight up. That is nothing but a bunch of teabagging rednecks. ...[T]he limbic brain inside a right-winger or Republican or conservative or your average white power activist, the limbic brain is much larger in their head space than in a reasonable person, and it's pushing against the frontal lobe. So their synapses are misfiring." --actress Janeane Garofalo on last week's Tea Parties

Speak for yourself: "Why are they out there whining with this Tea Party thing? Just a bunch of wimpy, whiney, weasels who don't love their country..." --CNN contributing Clintonista Paul Begala

Too many knocks upside the head: "I don't know whether it is better to have freedom or to have no freedom. With too much freedom ... it can get very chaotic, could end up like in Hong Kong or like in Taiwan... I'm gradually beginning to feel that we Chinese need to be controlled." --actor Jackie Chan, who made millions of dollars filming movies in a free country

The BIG Lie: "You in United States, you have a lot of traffic of drugs, you have a lot of distribution of drugs, you have a lot of corruption as well. ... But most of the weapons, almost 16,000 are assault weapons and 90 percent of those were sold in United States." --Mexico's president Felipe Calderon

INSIGHT

"I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public charity." --President Franklin Pierce (1804-1869)

"I feel obliged to withhold my approval of the plan to indulge in benevolent and charitable sentiment through the appropriation of public funds. I find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution." --President Grover Cleveland (1837-1908)

"I don't like the income tax. Every time we talk about these taxes we get around to the idea of 'from each according to his capacity and to each according to his needs.' That's socialism. It's written into the Communist Manifesto. Maybe we ought to see that every person who gets a tax return receives a copy of the Communist Manifesto with it so he can see what's happening to him." --accountant and Commissioner of Internal Revenue T. Coleman Andrews (1899-1983)

UPRIGHT

"The country has gotten into a painful fiscal predicament because both parties have let us believe we can have more and more goodies from Washington at no additional cost. The recent explosion of federal spending has succeeded in one way: It has exposed that assumption for the fiction it was. Like Bernie Madoff's investors, we now face the bleak truth that the comfortable future we expected is gone. Everything the federal government is doing will be forcibly extracted from our future earnings." --columnist Steve Chapman

"The GOP path to reclaiming power lies with candidates who can make a credible case that they will support and defend fiscal responsibility. That means acting on fiscal-conservative principles now, not paying lip service later." --columnist Michelle Malkin

"Our Constitution represents a compact between the states and the federal government. As with any compact, one party does not have a monopoly over its interpretation, nor can one party change it without the consent of the other. Additionally, no one has a moral obligation to obey unconstitutional laws. That's not to say there is not a compelling case for obedience of unconstitutional laws. That compelling case is the brute force of the federal government to coerce obedience, possibly going as far as using its military might to lay waste to a disobedient state and its peoples." --economist Walter E. Williams

Read the rest here: TEA Parties, Village Idiots, Demo-Gogues and More

Read more great articles at The Patriot Post.US

What Did It Say?

What did it say?

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad calls Rush Limbaugh and tells him, "Rush, I had a wonderful dream last night. I could see America, the whole country, and on each house I saw a banner."

"What did it say on the banners?" Rush asks.

Mahmoud replies, "UNITED STATES OF IRAN."

Rush says, "You know, Mahmoud, I am really happy you called, because believe it or not, last night I had a similar dream. I could see all of Tehran, and it was more beautiful than ever, and on each house flew an enormous banner."

"What did it say on the banners?" Mahmoud asks.

Rush replies, "I don't know. I can't read Hebrew."

What pirates can expect

And now for cartoons

More Cartoon Humor at Patriot Humor
Read more great articles at The Patriot Post.US

Ready For Any of The Obama Regime Decrees!

We can Flush BHO's Failed Socialistic ideas down with Crapper's Invention.

Right-Wing Extremists, a Dying Republic + More

From The Patriot Post Friday Digest - Vol. 09 No. 15

THE FOUNDATION

"These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it NOW deserves the love and thanks of man and woman." --Thomas Paine

PATRIOT PERSPECTIVE

Right-Wing Extremists

By Mark Alexander

My fellow Patriot "right-wing extremists" (or as Barack Obama prefers to describe you, those "bitterly clinging to guns or religion"), it is no small irony that, in the same week the central government demands payment of any income tax they hadn't already withheld (read: "pilfered") from our paychecks for redistribution, we observe Patriots Day.

April 19th marks the 234th anniversary of the early morning ride of Paul Revere and William Dawes to Concord, Massachusetts, in order to warn John Hancock and Samuel Adams that British troops were coming to arrest them and seize their weapons. Revere was captured but Dawes and Samuel Prescott, who had joined them along the way, escaped and continued toward Concord. Dawes later fell from his horse, but Prescott, who knew the area well enough to navigate at night, made it to Concord in time to warn the Sons of Liberty.

Protests had been taking place since 1765 over increased taxation and other indignities, resulting most notably in the Boston Tea Party on December 16, 1773, when colonists boarded three ships in Boston Harbor and threw English tea overboard. The grievances against the imperial authorities were many, but they found their voice in one familiar phrase: "No taxation without representation."

In the early dawn of April 19th, Captain John Parker, commander of the militiamen at Lexington, ordered, "Don't fire unless fired upon, but if they want a war let it begin here." And it did -- American Minutemen fired the "shot heard round the world," as immortalized by Ralph Waldo Emerson, confronting the British on Lexington Green and at Concord's Old North Bridge.

A year later, American Patriots formalized their grievances in the Declaration of Independence, and some 3 percent of the colonists took up arms to battle the well equipped British regulars for almost eight years, until victory was won.

In 1787, our Patriot founders codified a Constitution of Government for their hard-won republic. For almost 150 years, our Constitution stood true to its original intent, just as our Founders, and more important, "the people," had willed it. But constitutional rule of law suffered repeated humiliation during the Great Depression, as FDR used the economic crisis as cover to implement "change," ostensibly at the behest of "hope."

The result was a "Living Constitution" for a Dying Republic.

In the 1930s, FDR launched myriad socialist programs and redefined the role of the central government. He proposed to pay for his folly through excess taxation, proclaiming, "Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle." (Of course, that wasn't an "American principle," but a paraphrase of Karl Marx's Communist maxim, "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.")

More recently, under cover of yet another economic crisis, Barack Obama and his Leftist cadres in Congress have authorized trillions of dollars of government spending programs. Many economists believe the generational tax burden for these programs will, by design, prove the demise of free enterprise in America. As Obama's chief water boy, Rahm Emanuel, announced, "Rule 1 of the Obama administration: Never allow a crisis to go to waste. They are opportunities to do big things."

Indeed, Obama and company accomplished this subterfuge in their first 60 days, and the magnitude of their ruse is staggering -- but the inevitable consequences have not gone completely unnoticed.

As it was in the years before the first American Revolution, this week a small but clearly perceptible grassroots movement manifested in the form of more than 750 "Tea Parties" across the nation attracting "hundreds of thousands" of American citizens, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Some other news organizations, with a little prompting from the Department of Homeland Security, preferred to call those citizens "radicals."

A DHS document, "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment," published by the Office of Intelligence and Analysis includes a footnote which defines "rightwing extremism in the United States" to include groups which question federal authority and support states' rights. It also notes that DHS "will be working with its state and local partners over the next several months" to collect information on these radicals, with "a particular emphasis" on sources of "rightwing extremist radicalization."

As my colleague Michelle Malkin observed, "What and who exactly are President Obama's homeland security officials afraid of these days? If you are a member of an active conservative group that opposes abortion, favors strict immigration enforcement, lobbies to protect Second Amendment rights, protests big government, advocates federalism or represents veterans who believe in any of the above, the answer is: You."

DHS czar Janet Napolitano expressed her concerns about "trends of violent radicalization in the United States," but insists, "We are on the lookout for criminal and terrorist activity but we do not -- nor will we ever -- monitor ideology or political beliefs. We take seriously our responsibility to protect the civil rights and liberties of the American people, including subjecting our activities to rigorous oversight from numerous internal and external sources."

The report also took a cheap jab at veterans and active duty military personnel, prompting American Legion national commander David Rehbein to respond: "Your report states that 'Rightwing extremists were concerned during the 1990s with the perception that illegal immigrants were taking away American jobs through their willingness to work at significantly lower wages. Secretary Napolitano, this is more than a perception to those who have lost their job. Would you categorize union members as 'Right Wing extremists'? I think it is important for all of us to remember that Americans are not the enemy. The terrorists are."

Perhaps DHS should add a threat warning level colored red, white and blue.

Napolitano could not explain why the DHS "radicalization" report was released just ahead of all the Tea Parties -- a mere coincidence, I'm sure.

Of course, "radical" is a term that was correctly associated with anarchists of the 1960s and '70s -- paradoxically, those who occupy key national leadership positions today. But anarchy is defined as "lawlessness," which raises an important question: Who better fits that description -- conservatives or liberals?

Let's review: Conservatives have always endeavored to conserve our constitutional republic while liberals have sought to "liberate" America from constitutional rule of law for decades, preferring instead to make all the rules themselves.

Answer: Obama, et al., are the "radicals."

As for the Tea Parties this week, I wouldn't describe the level of grassroots discontent as a "powder keg." At least not yet.

The Tea Party of 1773 was a tactical event, but the rallying cry of "No taxation without representation" provided a unified strategic front.

As more Patriots across the nation take a lesson from our Founders, and make the leap from tactical skirmishes to a unified strategic front, protests will become far more focused and effective.

If I might make a humble suggestion, insisting on the restoration of constitutional rule of law is a worthy unified strategic objective.

While most of my colleagues at the nation's premier think tank, The Heritage Foundation, have yet to be profiled by DHS as anarchists, their organization has done precisely what I believe every Patriot should do.

Though Heritage will remain on the front lines of the war of ideas, producing some of the best policy analysis available anywhere, they are renewing their strategic emphasis on "First Principles."

Their revised statement of purpose notes: "We face an education system that upholds mediocrity in the name of relativism; an ever-expanding and centralized government, unmoored from constitutional limits; judges openly making laws and shaping society based on pop-philosophy rather than serious jurisprudence; and growing confusion over America's legitimate role in the world, made all the more apparent by the fundamental threat posed by radical Islamists. At the root of all these problems is a pervasive doubt about the core principles that define America and ought to inform our politics and policy."

Consequently, Heritage is focusing its resources to "recall the nation to its first principles, reinvigorate American constitutionalism, and revive the sturdy virtues required for self-government."

The statement concludes, "In short, our vision, building on the great successes of the modern conservative movement, must now be to save America by reclaiming its truths and its promises and conserving its first principles for ourselves and our posterity."

So there it is: a template for the strategic commitment every Patriot and every grassroots movement ought to adopt.

With a strategic cause of "restoring constitutional primacy and integrity," we could then stage tea parties to ask, "What is the constitutional authority for all the government programs now being funded by Congress?" And given that there is no constitutional authority for the redistribution of our wages, we could then adopt a rallying cry of, perhaps, "No taxation without constitutional authority."

How this plays out in the political arena depends largely on whether we get sucked into "constituency politics" built around tactical issues. Far better to find and support national leaders who can both articulate and advocate for constitutional rule of law, the most pressing issue of our time.

Should the Republican Party ever wish to regain its majorities, it might start by reading Ronald Reagan's speech, "A Time for Choosing," and then adopt and abide by his 1984 Republican Platform, which yielded a historic victory.

Read the rest of Right-Wing Extremists... at PA Pundits - International

Obama Attorney Threatens Distinguished Veteran on Obama Birth Certificate Issue: Why?

Exclusive by Margaret Calhoun Hemenway

(Editor's note: Barack Obama's lawyer, Robert F. Bauer, is threatening a D.C. attorney with "sanctions," because the attorney is simply requesting that Obama show proof of his birth. No legalizing on our part. No exaggeration. No political manipulation. Just the facts in black and white. We have the shocking letter dated April 3 . The president of the United States is threatening sanctions - and the word "sanctions" is used in the threat -- against attorney John Hemenway. Read on.)

After the flippant dismissal by U.S. Circuit Court Judge James Robertson of the lawsuit to attempt to determine whether Barack Obama is constitutionally eligible to serve as President, D.C. attorney John Hemenway received a letter from a lawyer representing Barack Obama and Joe Biden, his Vice President. (Hemenway had joined the suit launched by Hillary Clinton's ally, Philip Berg, the former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania and attorney Lawrence Joyce of Arizona, in an attempt to force President Obama to disclose his birth records, currently being protected against public scrutiny by the Obama legal team at a reported cost of as much as one million dollars.) The entire letter , written by Obama attorney Robert F. Bauer, states the following (and we note that there is no reference in this letter to an existing valid Birth Certificate for Barack Obama, as opposed to a Certificate of Live Birth, and there is no claim that a valid Birth certificate exists which can be shown to the American people, an act that immediately would shut down this query):

"I represent President Barack Obama and Vice President Joseph Biden. I write to request that, in light of the District Court's March 24, 2009 Rule 11 order in Hollister v. Soetoro, No. 08-2254, you withdraw the appeal filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, No. 09-5080. For the reasons stated in Judge Robertson's order, the suit is frivolous and should not be pursued.

Should you decline to withdraw this frivolous appeal, please be informed that we intend to pursue sanctions, including costs, expenses, and attorney's fees, pursuant to federal Rule Appellate Procedure 38 and D.C. Circuit Rule 38."

Mr. Hemenway's response to the letter was a promise to "write and protest and attack those against the demand that Obama show proof of his birth, and I will continue to do anything I can think of doing that might perhaps deter or injure those who are opposed to "transparency" and "openness" and honesty in governmental operations-all those good and vague promises that Obama threw out in speeches read from his teleprompter."

Mr. Hemenway added, "The lawyer for Obama, Robert Bauer, has abused his privileges as an attorney, because I can regard his premature (and totally inaccurate) threats to seek some sanction against me as a threat to keep me from performing my duty to my client. It won't work and he will soon see that it has not worked to intimidate me." In his opinion, "many judges and other officials are simply crassly violating their oaths of office. Since I had been in the Department of State and served in Moscow for two years, I am mindful of an expression used by the Russians: "Nada dakazat' kulak!" (You must show them your fist!)"

Hemenway also pledged:

"...to appeal the slap taken at me (the so-called "reprimand") by Judge James Robertson who tried unsuccessfully to label our efforts as "frivolous" but who did not have the guts to sanction me under Rule 11. (This would have given me-and others engaged in this important battle -standing in the Court of Appeals.) I will do my duty to Colonel Hollister, who technically is a client, even though I never agreed initially to follow the case in the Court of Appeals. The military, as Colonel Hollister's interest demonstrates, is quite concerned with the basic issue of ‘legal' and ‘illegal' orders originating from a ‘legitimate' or ‘illegitimate' commander-in-chief. Recall that Judge Robertson never did admit attorneys Berg or Joyce to practice in his court, never had a hearing and never examined evidence because he didn't seek any. The Judge gave the impression that his decision was predicated solely on ‘blogging and twittering'."

For the many others who have contacted him and expressed interest in this cause, Hemenway invoked Churchill's admonition: "If a matter of principle is involved in a course of action, then never give up-never - never - never." The most important part of that quote is the "matter of principle." It was not just a display of the stubborn nature of Churchill. Following that advice, we can see that here, we have a grave matter of principle.

If Obama can break such a basic, fundamental rule of the Constitution, then what is to keep him from ignoring or suspending other basic rights, such as the Writ of Habeas Corpus?

Last, Hemenway points out: "Mr. Bauer claims his father was an attorney in Vienna who opposed the union with Germany (the so-called "Anschluss") and promoted anti-Nazi political movements while he was in Austria. He says his father left Austria in 1940. Very few people left greater Germany after 1939, when the war started. In any event, if Bauer's background includes such a family history of opposition to anti-rule-of-law monsters, how does he explain his support for this Chicago-styled conspiracy to violate a basic requirement of the United States Constitution?"

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Margaret Calhoun Hemenway is a retired federal employee, having served fifteen years in the U.S. Congress and five years as a White House appointee at DoD and NASA.

Bailout Mascot

By hco12345

Reid, Pelosi and the Dying Priest

Reid, Pelosi and the dying priest The old priest lay dying in the hospital. For years he had faithfully served the people of the nation's capital. He motioned for his nurse to come near. "Yes, Father?" said the nurse. "I would really like to see Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi before I die", whispered the priest. "I'll see what I can do, Father" replied the nurse. The nurse sent the request to them and waited for a response. Soon the word arrived. Harry and Nancy would be delighted to visit the priest. As they went to the hospital, Harry commented to Nancy "I don't know why the old priest wants to see us, but it will certainly help our images." Nancy couldn't help but agree. When they arrived at the priest's room, the priest took Nancy's hand in his right hand and Harry's hand in his left. There was silence and a look of serenity on the old priest's face. Finally Nancy spoke. "Father, of all the people you could have chosen, why did you choose us to be with you as you near the end?" The old priest slowly replied, "I have always tried to pattern my life after my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ." The old priest continued... "He died between two lying thieves. I would like to do the same." How things work Reader Submitted And now for a cartoon

To submit humor items for our consideration, email us at Humor@PatriotPost.US

See more Cartoon Humor at Patriot Humor
Read more great articles at The Patriot Post.US

Is Barack Obama Fidel Castro's Son?

HAVANA (SR) - On the heels of a report from the White House that President Obama plans to lift longstanding U.S. restrictions on Cuba, a startling photo has surfaced in Havana showing a young Fidel Castro holding a child described as his son, clearly a young Barack Obama!

This photograph, coupled with rumors that Obama's mother, Ann Soetoro, spent the early Sixties in Cuba, may go a long way in explaining Obama's political motives, as well as the apparent fondness Castro and his communist and socialist cronies have for the young President.

More on this earth-shattering story as it develops.

Fidel Castro with his son, later to be known as Barack Obama

Read More Satire at Scooter's Report

Say NO to Political Thieves!

Money, Power, Obama and Redistribution

By MJMotley

No one should be surprised by Barack Obama's hubris in his disenfranchisement  of GM's and Chrysler's boards' of directors and shareholders. His audacity in presuming that he was qualified to run the nation, after having never successfully run anything, was evident. There wasn't anything, in his remarkably thin resume, to suggest that he had earned the privilege to the nation's highest office. With that privilege now his, it should be only natural that he presume to usurp that which used to belong to GM's & Chryslers shareholders and give it to whom he sees fit.

Obama's use of offices held, for that which they were never intended, was how he ascended the ladder of Chicago politics. Example, Obama's position overseeing the  Annenberg_Challenge  grants meant to improve of the test scores in Chicago Public Schools and then using them for the implementation Bill Ayers' social engineering agenda. Ayers' scholastic program  is about building the political power base of the future. That test scores  did not improve even marginally after $100's of millions doled out, or that the Chicago Public Schools system remains the worst in the nation is of no matter. His political allies were generously funded, his political base strengthened, and then used to propel him up the next rung. It is not about doing what is best for his constituents, it is about building power.

Similarly, Obama's seizing of GM & Chrysler is not about the health of America's industry, it is about the health of his union base. Likewise his forcing GM & Chrysler/Fiat to adopt unproven "green technologies" is about saving the financial and political capital of his allies vested in it. Namely the environmental lobby, and the mistaken investors that placed bets on "green technologies" profitability. Obama will now guarantee those investors' returns, and continued green support, through manufacturing subsidies and government service warranties of vehicles that don't work, like the Chevy Volt . He will further insure those investments and political support by seeking legislation to limit the market to offering green products only. We again see the pattern, his financial generosity with someone else's money, in return for political power.

We can also see this in the allocation of funds the Stimulus Bill . Banks that held the "toxic assets" are to be recompensed in full, while we have been left on the holding worthless paper. There is pitifully little in the stimulus for any of the people holding underwater mortgages, but billions for his political base in Community Organizing, Teachers Unions, and Green-Technology speculators.  Are we getting the picture yet?

While Obama may soothe the masses with platitudes about the under-privileged, what he is about is power. And he is assuming ever more of it as Geithner & the Fed assume control of any and all firms that they feel is a "systemic risk". As we observe Team Obama ruling by fiat over our banks and industry, and coming soon, to our health & education systems, plus whatever else they deem as vital.  Contemplate that which they may possibly next construe as a "systemic risk", and prepare to be denuded of further of the rights and protections that used to be afforded us by our Constitution.

As Obama amasses ever greater means of control over our economy, and therefore ourselves, remember that power once given, is far harder to retrieve afterward.

Eldrick Tont Woods - A True Giant

By TonyfromOz

I'll bet you didn't read much about this in the mainstream media.

This was a very publicly delivered speech that would have been shuffled away unreported, mainly because it really wasn't what the public, and that adoring media, gathered for the purposes of adoration, was expecting to hear.

He was asked to appear at the inauguration of President Obama, and you can figure out why for yourself, and he was asked to speak, an honour given to few on that day.

He then gave the following speech, and this is it in its entirety.

Not once did he mention President Obama, only alluding but one time, and that was to 'this historic day'.

It was patently obvious that the assembled crowd, and the reporting media would have been hoping to hear something entirely different.

However, what he did say was probably more important than what the crowd was expecting to hear.

I'll bet that somewhere up there, LtCol Earl Woods was looking down, immensely proud and pleased with his son.

The rest of us should also be just as proud, because men who get all but the most minor of grudging respect are out there doing what they do in our name with very little support, or even recognition, while this assembled gathering all just wanted to abase themselves in obeisance before the anointed one.

Tiger Woods. On that day you proved yourself an even greater giant of a man. a man who has no need to bow down before another mortal man, who has no need to offer false praise, which is all they wanted to hear on that day.

This is the full speech.

NewsBusted Ep. 2-44

Topics in today's show:

--Chavez calls on Obama to become a socialist

--President Obamas hair is starting to turn gray

--Janeane Gerafalo implies RNC chair, Michael Steele, is a self-loathing black man

--The New York Times rails against toilet paper

Starring: Jodi Miller
Director: Bruce Roundtower
Executive Producer: Matthew Sheffield
NewsBusted is a comedy webcast about the News of the day

Military Officer Oath Analysis - Defender of Constitution

This is written by one of our MIL Plaintiffs:

There is a huge difference between the military enlisted oath and the officer oath of office.

The wordings of the current oath of enlistment and oath for commissioned officers are as follows:

Enlisted Oath

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

Officer Oath -

"I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)

As you can see, the officer does not swear to obey the orders of the President. We only have an obligation to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic (for example, a Presidential Usurper). (My bold emphasis. ---Al)

Our forefathers were so brilliant to foresee a situation like we find ourselves in now. The officer oath is a safeguard to protect the Constitution against a corrupt elected government. Officers only have an obligation to defend the Constitution. Military officers have a lot of legal clout when it comes to Constitutional matters. The officer oath does not mention following the UCMJ laws as does the enlisted oath.

Let's see if SCOTUS runs and hides again. They failed to live up to their oaths by ignoring the prior cases. I pray they will wise up very soon and honor their oath to defend the Constitution.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for your service! Not only is Dr. Taitz and her Defend Our Freedoms Foundation behind you; but it seems you have some extremely impressive support too:

Open Letter from Brigadier General Charles Jones

Major General Commanding General Carroll D. Childers Joins Military Suit

Col. Riley former division chief national security agency joins our action

Officer Easterling, Active military officer deployed with the US military in Iraq

• No Image

Lt Col. David A. Earl-Graef

• No Image

SSgt Brian A Keith USMC Joins Military Action

Major Cannon former Marine Corps. joins our action

Lt Col. Chuck Miller, USAF (Ret) is honored to be a Plainftiff in Military Action

Officer Grimes joins the Military Action

Their bravery and leadership has inspired others to step up too. They are the leaders. And we thank them all for their service!

Read All Critically Important Articles at DEFEND OUR FREEDOMS FOUNDATION
"To defend the rights and freedoms that exist for all citizens in the United States"

Read Pat Dollard's: “Ineligible Imposter”: First Soldier Refuses Obama’s Orders
Expanding Mutiny Against “Ineligible Imposter”: Second U.S. Soldier Refuses Obama’s Orders

See previous posts: Are We Slaves Or Do We American Citizens Have Constitutional Rights? By Ed
Reasons Why Obama Won’t Show His Original Birth Certificate By Mario Apuzzo, Esq.

Obama Channels Chavez, Markets Crash

WASHINGTON (SR) - In his first address to a joint session of Congress, President Barack Obama sought to soothe America's financial concerns, pledging to borrow hundreds of billions more for liberal social programs, and adding free college educations and health care to the mix.

"We will rebuild, we will recover, and the United States of America will emerge stronger than before - think Cuba without the frills," Obama said to thunderous Democratic applause.

In response to the President's upbeat speech, the markets today dropped faster than Bill Clinton's pants at a sorority mixer, leading many to question the brilliance of electing a socialist ex-crackhead community organizer to the nation's highest office.

"What was I thinking," asked Kashanda Johnson of Cleveland, Ohio. "My pimp handles money better than Barack. We're screwed."

President Obama Addresses joint session

Read More Satire at Scooter's Report

D.C. Woman Gives Birth to 798 Pound Baby

The Endive

The News Leader of the Known Universe

After months of build-up and difficulty, a Washington, D.C., woman has given birth to a 798-pound baby boy, setting a new world record for its excess.

Anya Reed successfully gave birth in a grotesque public display where doctors from around the country argued about just how to deliver the baby and where to put all of his girth post-delivery.

Specialists from the country's most respected clinics lent a hand to Reed in her nine-month effort to craft what will prove to be the most difficult baby to maintain and feed.

"It cost us thousands and thousands of dollars to have this baby," said Reed, "But it was worth it. Our little boy is big enough to hold this entire country on his back."

Controversy quickly followed the birth when it was discovered that Reed, a single mother, lacked the funds to pay for all the doctors who helped her conceive this baby and had no income to care for it in the long term.

"It's true, I'm unemployed," said Reed, "But this great country has always come through for underdogs like myself. Yes, the baby has already caused me to mortgage my house, pawn my valuables, and donate more blood than I actually have, but I'm sure someone will help me pick up the tab. We really need this baby. He's going to be a valuable contributor to society."

Reed even received a supportive phone call from President Barack Obama.

"I called Ms. Reed to let her know that she's right," said the President, "Nothing is more valuable to this country than an obese, expensive, sweaty, formula-puking, 3-ton-diaper-filling, Goodyear blimp of a baby. He's like a 798-pound beacon of hope."

Many doctors were involved in the controversial birth up until the last second, arguing all the way.

"I was insistent that we make sure and cut the umbilical cord so that it's an 'innie' once the baby's born," said Dr. Sam Oliphant of the Minnesota Pre-Natal Center, "My colleague from Massachusetts continued to insist upon an 'outtie' and we could not perform the birth until this was resolved. Thankfully, we got it resolved the night before."

Other controversial issues with the birth included an argument over whether or not to clip the baby's fingernails and toenails in-vitro in order to cut his weight down a little. Doctors from New York were no more willing to do that than they were to pick his nose in-vitro. In the end, the baby's weight was reduced in a compromise that included the in-vitro removal of a small build-up of toe-cheese.

Crowds gathered at local bars to watch the birth live on air winced as the mammoth bundle of jiggling joy slid from his very uncomfortable mother's body.

"I honestly wasn't sure what to do after I saw that," said Washington D.C. bartender Joe Stevens, "Cut people off from drinking or give away free drinks. Either way they're going to have to save their money to help feed this kid. The question is, would it be better if they got really, really drunk first."

Read more Satire at The Endive

ACT NOW ALERT! "stimulus" Bill - SENATE may vote TODAY!

This Porkulus Bill passed the House (as expected) but needs 60 votes to pass the Senate. It got 61 votes originally.

Call, Fax or email your Senator both Democrat and Republican!

This is Your LAST CHANCE to save Our Country and Our Economy from this Devastating PORK Bill - ACT NOW!

Our U.S. Senate May Vote On This Bill today. The U.S. House is racing through this bill right now. Many families aren't even aware this is going on because of the President's Day holiday weekend. Nancy Pelosi is scheduled to fly out of the United States today for a trip to Europe. The Bill is now over 1000 pages. One Senator Predicts None of His Colleagues 'Will Have the Chance' to Read Final Stimulus Bill Before Vote Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Arlen Specter (R-Pennsylvania) are helping to make this a bipartisan effort. If one of these change their minds, Senator Reid could end up with a loss, and Speaker Pelosi would have to go back to the drawing board. Americans would have more time to understand what this bill is all about and more time to share their feedback to their elected reps. Call the Senate Switchboard NOW ! (202) 224-3121 Additional Senate Contact Information for individual senators and their staff members: Click Here Congress' Leaders... Break Promise To Post Stimulus Bill Online For 48-Hour Public Airing... From Obama Campaign Website: Sunlight Before Signing Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days. Our Children.....Our Future.....

U.S. Senate Contact Information: SENATOR SUSAN COLLINS DC PHONE: (202) 224-2523 DC FAX: (202) 224-2693 AUGUSTA PHONE: (207) 622-8414 AUGUSTA FAX: (207) 622-5884 EMAILS TO CONTACT: Steve_Abbott@collins.senate.gov Holly_Nesbit@collins.senate.gov SENATOR OLYMPIA SNOWE DC PHONE: (202) 224-5344 DC FAX: (202) 224-1946 BOSTON PHONE: (207) 622-8292 BOSTON FAX: (207) 622-7295 EMAILS TO CONTACT: John_Richter@snowe.senate.gov Anna_Levin@snowe.senate.gov SENATOR ARLEN SPECTER DC PHONE: (202) 224-4254 DC FAX: (202) 228-1229 HARRISBURG PHONE: (717) 782-3951 HARRISBURG FAX: (717) 782-4920 EMAILS TO CONTACT: Scott_Hoeflich@specter.senate.gov Maria_Plakoudas@specter.senate.gov Christopher_Bradish@specter.senate.gov thomas_dower@specter.senate.gov seema_singh@specter.senate.gov corene_ashley@specter.senate.gov regina_campbell@specter.senate.gov gayle_mills@specter.senate.gov Don't forget to call your Democratic Senator and tell him or her to vote against this PORK Bill. Over the years the only thing that ever Stimulated the Economy was TAX CUTS! Tax Cuts cause an increase in jobs, improves the Economy and increases the Tax revenue. Almost 60% of Americans have serious misgivings about this legislation! ---ed Post this to your blog. Copy the entire page as is and it will conform to the width of your Blog.

Read more excellent articles from Family Security Matters