Saturday, July 21, 2012

US Military Reveals Coup Plan To Topple Obama

via: EU Times
A shocking Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation (MTC) report red-lined to President Putin this morning warns that “various elements” within the US Military establishment are “actively planning” for the overthrow of President Barack Obama prior to the November elections.
According to this report, Russian Naval Infantry Forces commanders participating in Rim of the Pacific-2012 (RIMPAC) international naval war games off Hawaii (the world’s largest multi-national maritime exercise) this week were told by their US counterparts aboard the USS Port Royal (CG-73) that Obama had to be overthrown as he posed the most dangerous threat to the United States since the founding of their nation.
US Military commanders, this report continues, stated that American officers and soldiers, along with elected and appointed Federal government officials, all take an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, of which they claim Obama is one due to his overturning of established law and constitutional precedents bringing their country to the brink of all-out civil war.
Of particular concern to US Military leaders, this report says, is the unprecedented level of debt Obama has added since taking office that threatens the United States with an “economic Armageddon” the likes of which has never been seen and would force upon the Pentagon massive cuts beginning on 1 January 2013.

Important to note is that just hours ago US lawmakers passed a sweeping $606 billion defense bill that exceeds a budget cap and faces a veto threat from Obama for failing to sufficiently rein in spending, and puts the Republican Party squarely on the side of those US Military forces seeking the Presidents ouster.
When asked by Russian commanders what parts of the American Constitution Obama had violated, this report continues, their US Military counterparts listed a number of serious charges that include:
1.) Obama’s authorizing the assassination of US citizens without their having charges made against them or being able to defend themselves at trials.
2.) Allowing the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to conduct murders on US soil.
3.) Allowing the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to tap the phones, intercept the emails, and in other ways spy upon the American public;
4.) Allowing the National Security Agency (NSA) to conduct against the American people the largest spy operation ever undertaken.
5.) Conduct an illegal and un-Constitutional war against Libya.
6.) Obama’s overturning of US laws by executive power without Congressional approval.
Of the gravest concerns about Obama these US Military commanders have, this report says, was his 6 July 2012 Executive Order giving him total power over all communication systems in the United States, and his 16 May 2012 Executive Order wherein he outlawed any American citizen from writing or saying Yemeni President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi was elected to office because he ran unopposed.
Both of these Executive Orders, US Military commanders said, “Strike at the heart” of the very essence of what it is be an American and which without the United States would cease to exist.
Most ominously for the American people are new reports being leaked by the US Military about Obama stating that his “mentors”, who include those of his inner circle, have long advocated the overthrowing of the Constitution and have openly discussed the “eliminating” of the estimated 25 million US civilians they believe would oppose them and not be able to be “reconditioned” in their planned reeducation camps.
To how Obama would “eliminate” such a staggering number of armed Americans, this report continues, would be by his unilaterally imposing on his nation the United Nations Small Arms Treaty many experts are warning will be the largest gun grab in US history.

Interestingly, this grave report notes that what the US Military is planning for Obama they have done before when they planned for the overthrow of President Franklin Roosevelt in 1933 in what is referred to as “The Business Plot”.
The Business Plot (also known as the Plot against FDR and the White House Putsch) was a political conspiracy in 1933. Retired Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler warned that wealthy businessmen and bankers were plotting to create a fascist veterans’ organization and use it in a coup d’état to overthrow United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt, with Butler as leader of that organization.
In 1934, Butler testified to the Special Committee on Un-American Activities Congressional committee (the “McCormack-Dickstein Committee”) on these claims. In the opinion of the committee, these allegations were credible, but no one was ever prosecuted.
And, in what can only be described as history making a full circle, the JP Morgan banking empire that financed the attempted coup against Roosevelt in 1933 appears to be behind the US Military plan to oust Obama too.
According to this report, the $5.8 billion trading loss JP Morgan reported this past week has been traced by Russian finance experts to a “great number” of shell companies under the control of former US Military officers designed to destabilize the Obama regime creating the pretext for the overthrow of the American President.
To who will win this titanic struggle this report doesn’t say. But, it does grimly note that where the coup against Roosevelt in 1933 failed, these plotters have had a long time to learn the lessons of their failure making them less likely to fail again.

The Adventures of Michele Bachmann..busting the Ghost Myths of CAIR..!

Michele Bachmann is taking the heat left over from the Good Ol' Boy GOP RINO's dissing Sarah Palin... namely John Boehner,John McCain,Ellison and now Marco Rubio...maybe these fools should take a class in Ghost Busting...they seem to fear sad is that of grown so called men?

New Twitter hash tags for Michele Bachmann

And her theme song to go with her bravery to attack a problem the Men in Black in Congress fail to do!

Bachmann responds to critics (i.e., defenders of Muslim Brotherhood)

 oped: Jack
Well Marco Rubio just went on my no confidence list...he can sleep with John McCain and John Boehner till the cows come home...Marco is Caca now! 

el pollo loco~>    

me casa su casa ~>       casa ~>   

Cowards, corrupt or pandering for votes? Or all of the above. McCain, Boehner, and Marco Rubio joining with Keith Ellison, CAIR, and others in defending the Muslim Brotherhood. via The Blaze (go there if videos below get yanked) 

Bachmann’s full letter is posted on her website in PDF format – here.

Mitt Romney really needs Allen West as his VP..!

LTC Allen West is akin to LTC Moore...a proven Leader who can lead men...he sets the pace as a great leader does:
'Quote from LTC Moore " I can't promise you that I will bring you all home alive. But this I swear before you and before almighty God, that when we go into the battle I will be the first to step foot on the field and I will be the last to step off and I will leave no one behind . Dead or alive we will all come home together."
Anyone care to dispute my selection for VP?

Colorado theater called 'gun-free' zone

oped: Jack
Ok bottom line 12 dead 58 wounded...why? Because another business denied their customers the right to legally carry and defend themselves..when will this insanity cease?

by: Chelsea Schilling 
Gun advocates say the movie theater where a Colorado gunman opened fire Friday, killing 12 and wounded 58, has a strict policy against firearms on its premises – even for patrons with concealed handgun permits.
Cinemark Holdings Inc. owns 459 theaters and 5,181 screens in the U.S. and Latin America – including the Century 16 movie theater in Aurora, Colo., scene of the mass shooting.
The company does not appear to post its firearms policy on its website. WND’s after-hours calls and emails to Cinemark had not been returned at the time of this report.
Dudley Brown, executive director of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, told ABC News the Aurora Century 16 movie theater’s policy prohibits firearm carry.
Since 2006, some pro-gun bloggers have complained about their own experiences with Cinemark gun policies.
On the Defensive Carry blog, one Alaskan moviegoer posting under the name “SubNine” claimed Cinemark managers asked him to put his firearm in his vehicle if he wanted to see a movie. According to his post, the managers showed him a cardboard sign near the ticket counter that said, “No firearms allowed.”

“I’ll be writing Cinemark a nice letter explaining my views towards their no firearms policy,” he wrote on an Oct. 18, 2009, discussion board.
Another man in Utah posted in a 2008 forum on that he had received a call from Dan Myers of Cinermark’s corporate office.
“[H]e informed me that Cinemark’s official policy is that ONLY [law enforcement officers] CAN CARRY INTO THEIR THEATERS. NO CONCEALED WEAPONS, NO [open carry],” he wrote. “He asked me that we not send e-mails to tell them their policy sucks. Okay, well I don’t think that’s possible.”
In August 2009, one moviegoer in Scranton, Penn.,  claimed he had been escorted by police out of a Cinemark location after a manager pulled him aside and told him he couldn’t enter a theater while carrying a gun. The manager asked him to put his gun in his car.
“I told him that I would mind putting it in my car and that as I was handicapped, my gun is my crutch for self-defense and that I had openly carried there many times before,” the poster identified as “Nepawolf” wrote. “He said alright, that’s fine. To make sure I understood his last statement, I asked if I had to put my gun in my car, to which he replied that I didn’t and told us to go on in.”
However, “Nepawolf” said the manager entered the theater with two police officers, who asked him to go outside.
“Officer #1 informs me that firearms are prohibited in the theater and as such I’m going to have put it in my vehicle,” he said. “Officer #1 said that they have a ‘no firearms’ sign out front and as such I have to leave if I won’t put it in my car. …
“Officer #1 shows us the sign at the bottom of a list of prohibitions, about knee height on the far left side (Which, of course, you wouldn’t see when you’re looking straight up to find your movie time or when you’re paying for your ticket as the counter is in the way then). Officer #1 tells us that since they have the sign they can ask us to leave and if they didn’t they wouldn’t be able to. He also said that Mr. Halt can’t give us special permission as it is corporate policy. Mr. Halt gives us our movie ticket refund (no money back for the almost $5 drinks though) and we leave.

“Also, at no time were we asked for ID, nor did they run the ‘registration’ on either one of the OCed guns, nor were we searched or disarmed. The bottom line of the whole situation is that we were allowed entrance, had to talk to the manager and were given the OK, and then escorted out in front of a packed theater like criminals and were not given a full refund.”
In 2006, bloggers reported Cinemark theater in Merriam, Kan., posted a sign banning concealed carry.
In 2007, Reno, Nev., blogger “Felid Maximus” said he was asked to leave a Cinemark theater.
In 2008, another moviegoer reported seeing a “no firearms” sign at a Cinemark theater.
In 2010, another person complained about his experience with Cinemark in Louisville, Ky.
On March 28, 2012, a Pennsylvania blogger identified as “CapGun” wrote about his local Cinemark theater: “I was very disappointed and surprised to see a number of small signs one below the other off to the side of the ticket booths at about 2&1/2 feet off the floor>>> No smoking, no outside food allowed etc and the one that bothered me… Firearms prohibited.”

In the wake of the Colorado tragedy, Texas Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert asked today, “Well it does make me wonder, you know with all those people in the theater, was there nobody that was carrying that could’ve stopped this guy more quickly?”
That’s exactly how it happened in the same town just three months ago – when a man gunned down a pastor’s mother at the New Destiny Center church in Aurora, Colo.
The shooter, Kiarron Parker, had been released early from prison after serving time for assaulting two officers.
An off-duty Denver police officer – who had been carrying a concealed firearm during the church service – shot and killed the gunman.
What would you do if armed attackers broke into your church or movie theater and starting attacking your friends with automatic weapons? Would you be prepared to defend yourself and other innocents?  A man who did just that explains why good people NEED guns.

Friday, July 20, 2012

Michelle Jenneke Dancing Sexy as Hell at Junior World Championships in Barcelona 2012

Ok time to step back take a break from politics for a few moments and enjoy this Australian Lass prepping for a run then winning her go girl thats the spirit..:) 

Open Letter to Harry Reid...Retire!

oped by: jack
Senator Harry Reid...please step down resign and retire you are a embarrassment to the State of Nevada as well as your Mormon Church...we no longer want you representing the State of Nevada or the US of America for that matter...hang your silly boxing gloves up go home and enjoy the desert sunsets til God calls you home for Judgement Day!


Mathew Staver, Chairman 
Liberty Counsel Action
Obstructionist Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has once again blocked a Senate vote on repealing ObamaCare. 
Senate Republicans had added a repeal amendment to the “Bring Jobs Home Act,” which had a procedural vote yesterday afternoon, but Reid blocked the amendment.   
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has vowed to keep fighting for a repeal vote prior to the Senate’s August recess.  It has been very heartening to see Mitch McConnell confronting Harry Reid on the Senate floor in recent days – it must be extremely difficult to remain civil as Reid once again forces his will on his fellow senators and the American people!
it is imperative that we support Senator McConnell’s resolve to keep fighting!  
++Harry Reid IS the chokepoint on the Senate repeal vote.
Under pressure from Minority Leader McConnell and other Republican senators, Reid made an uncharacteristically candid comment yesterday on the Senate floor…
“We do what we can to protect the President of the United States.”  
Here’s Liberty Counsel Action’s response to Senator Reid:
What about protecting the interests of the citizens of the United States, who you were elected to represent?  What about upholding the Constitution of the United States, which you took an oath to defend?  
it will take a massive grassroots effort and outcry from American citizens to get past Reid’s blockade and pressure senators to get an ObamaCare repeal initiative to the Senate floor. 
That’s why Liberty Counsel Action is hand-delivering petitions to Harry Reid’s office along with Senator McConnell’s office and the offices of Majority Whip Dick Durbin and Minority Whip Jon Kyl calling for a Senate up or down vote on ObamaCare. 
These elected officials, whose duty is that of representation, must stand up and be counted – then held accountable for their decisions. In the case of Senators McConnell and Kyl, they need to know there are millions of patriotic Americans who see what is going on and want the Republican leadership to get even more aggressive in demanding a vote on the repeal!
Please take a moment right now and add your name to this LCA petition. I believe we can have 50,000 petitions delivered to Harry Reid’s door on Tuesday – but I must have your name added by Monday at noon (EDST).  
Click here to add your name now to this vital petition:  
In conjunction with the petition delivery, many Liberty Counsel Action team members have also been barraging their Senators with faxes demanding an ObamaCare repeal vote. This strategy has been proven to be very effective in reaching Capitol Hill with our message.  
Please, take a minute now and add your name to this growing petition: 
Reid’s actions (or lack of them) amount to a politically motivated election year blockade designed to make sure vulnerable liberal senators do not have to be held accountable for their voting records.  Harry Reid will do anything to keep the Senate under his control when the dust has settled after the 2012 elections!  
For our part, we want these elected representatives ON RECORD as to their support or opposition to the President's healthcare "reform" law.  LCA will score their votes on our Congressional Scorecard – and, together, we will aggressively hold all Members of Congress accountable for their votes! 
Tens of thousand of Liberty Counsel Action team members have said they are united in this crucial campaign and have signed the petition.  As of last night, we had nearly 40,000 signers, but I think the strategic number we must reach is 50,000.
I sincerely want YOUR petition included in Tuesday’s delivery.  Please click here now to sign:  
The will of the American people MUST be heard and reflected by the United States Senate!  It is no exaggeration to say that the very survival of our nation is at stake in this battle over who we are as a people.
Liberty Counsel Action will not give up on having the tax-laden, abortion-enhancing ObamaCare law stricken from the laws of our land!  Please continue to stand with us: 
Thank you for your ongoing role in the battle to STOP ObamaCare and to prevent its further implementation.    
Mathew Staver, Chairman
Liberty Counsel Action 
P.S. We must be united in our messaging in order to overcome Harry Reid’s obstructionism. Please, don’t let this opportunity pass to tell the Senate that you want a vote on the repeal of ObamaCare! Click here to add your name to the petition:   

Hillary aide tied to al-Qaida front

by: Aaron Klein 
JERUSALEM – Charges made in a 16-page letter by Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., against longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin miss what may be one of the most troubling radical connections – Abedin’s family is directly tied to the Muslim World League.
The Muslim World League is an Islamic charity known to have spawned terrorist groups, including one declared by the U.S. government to be an official al-Qaida front.
In her now well-publicized letter, Bachmann noted that Huma’s father, Professor Syed Abiden, was the founder of the Institute for Minority Affairs, a Saudi group that “had the quiet but active support” of Umar Abdallah Nasif, the secretary general of the Muslim World League.
However, WND was first to report an even more direct connection to the terror-stained charity – Huma’s mother, Saleha Abedin, was the official representative of the Muslim World League in the 1990s.

Saleha Abedin has been quoted in numerous press accounts as both representing the MWL and serving as a delegate for the charity.
In 1995, for example, the Washington Times reported on a United Nations-arranged women’s conference in Beijing that called on governments throughout the world to give women statistical equality with men in the workplace.
The report quoted Saleha Abedin, who attended the conference as a delegate, as “also representing the Muslim World League based in Saudi Arabia and the Muslim NGO Caucus.”
The U.N.’s website references a report in the run-up to the Beijing conference that also lists Abedin as representing the MWL at the event.
The website posted an article from the now defunct United States Information Agency quoting Abedin and reporting she attended the Beijing conference as “a delegate of the Muslim World League and member of the Muslim Women’s NGO caucus.”
In the article, Abedin was listed under a shorter name, “Dr. Saleha Mahmoud, director of the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs.”
WND has confirmed the individual listed is Huma Abedin’s mother. The reports misspelled part of Abedin’s name. Her full professional name is at times listed as Saleha Mahmood Abedin S.

Al-Qaida links
The MWL was founded in Mecca in 1962 and bills itself as one of the largest Islamic non-governmental organizations.
But according to U.S. government documents and testimony from the charity’s own officials, it is heavily financed by the Saudi government.
The MWL has been accused of terrorist ties, as have its various offshoots, including the International Islamic Relief Organization, or IIRO, and Al Haramain, which was declared by the U.S. and U.N. as a terror financing front.
Indeed, the Treasury Department, in a September 2004 press release, alleged Al Haramain had “direct links” with Osama bin Laden. The group is now banned worldwide by United Nations Security Council Committee 1267.
There long have been accusations that the IIRO and MWL also repeatedly funded al-Qaida.
In 1993, bin Laden reportedly told an associate that the MWL was one of his three most important charity fronts.
An Anti-Defamation League profile of the MWL accuses the group of promulgating a “fundamentalist interpretation of Islam around the world through a large network of charities and affiliated organizations.”
“Its ideological backbone is based on an extremist interpretation of Islam,” the profile states, “and several of its affiliated groups and individuals have been linked to terror-related activity.”
In 2003, U.S. News and World Report documented that accompanying the MWL’s donations, invariably, are “a blizzard of Wahhabist literature.”

“Critics argue that Wahhabism’s more extreme preachings – mistrust of infidels, branding of rival sects as apostates and emphasis on violent jihad –laid the groundwork for terrorist groups around the world,” the report continued.
An Egyptian-American cab driver, Ihab Mohamed Ali Nawawi, was arrested in Florida in 1990 on accusations he was an al-Qaida sleeper agent and a former personal pilot to bin Laden. At the time he was accused of serving bin Laden, he also reportedly worked for the Pakistani branch of the MWL.
The MWL in 1988 founded the Al Haramain Islamic Foundation, developing chapters in about 50 countries, including for a time in Oregon until it was designated a terrorist organization.
In the early 1990s, evidence began to grow that the foundation was funding Islamist militants in Somalia and Bosnia, and a 1996 CIA report detailed its Bosnian militant ties.
The U.S. Treasury designated Al Haramain’s offices in Kenya and Tanzania as sponsors of terrorism for their role in planning and funding the 1998 bombings of two American embassies in East Africa. The Comoros Islands office was also designated because it “was used as a staging area and exfiltration route for the perpetrators of the 1998 bombings.”
The New York Times reported in 2003 that Al Haramain had provided funds to the Indonesian terrorist group Jemaah Islamiyah, which was responsible for the 2002 Bali bombings that killed 202 people. The Indonesia office was later designated a terrorist entity by the Treasury.
In February 2004, the U.S. Treasury Department froze all Al Haramain’s financial assets pending an investigation, leading the Saudi government to disband the charity and fold it into another group, the Saudi National Commission for Relief and Charity Work Abroad.

In September 2004, the U.S. designated Al-Haramain a terrorist organization.
In June 2008, the Treasury Department applied the terrorist designation to the entire Al-Haramain organization worldwide

Bin Laden’s brother-in-law
In August 2006, the Treasury Department also designated the Philippine and Indonesian branch offices of the MWL-founded IIRO as terrorist entities “for facilitating fundraising for al-Qaida and affiliated terrorist groups.”
The Treasury Department added: “Abd Al Hamid Sulaiman Al-Mujil, a high-ranking IIRO official [executive director of its Eastern Province Branch] in Saudi Arabia, has used his position to bankroll the al-Qaida network in Southeast Asia. Al-Mujil has a long record of supporting Islamic militant groups, and he has maintained a cell of regular financial donors in the Middle East who support extremist causes.”
In the 1980s, Mohammed Jamal Khalifa, Osama bin Laden’s brother-in-law, ran the Philippines offices of the IIRO. Khalifa has been linked to Manila-based plots to target the pope and U.S. airlines.
The IIRO has also been accused of funding Hamas, Algerian radicals, Afghanistan militant bases and the Egyptian terror group Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya.
The New York Post reported the families of the 9/11 victims filed a lawsuit against IIRO and other Muslim organizations for having “played key roles in laundering of funds to the terrorists in the 1998 African embassy bombings” and for having been involved in the “financing and ‘aiding and abetting’ of terrorists in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.”

‘Saudi government front’
In a court case in Canada, Arafat El-Asahi, the Canadian director of both the IIRO and the MWL, admitted the charities are near entities of the Saudi government.
Stated El-Asahi: “The Muslim World League, which is the mother of IIRO, is a fully government-funded organization. In other words, I work for the Government of Saudi Arabia. I am an employee of that government.
“Second, the IIRO is the relief branch of that organization, which means that we are controlled in all our activities and plans by the Government of Saudi Arabia. Keep that in mind, please,” he said.
Despite its offshoots being implicated in terror financing, the U.S. government never designated the MWL itself as a terror-financing charity. Many have speculated the U.S. has been trying to not embarrass the Saudi government.
Tied to Egypt’s new Muslim Brotherhood president
Last month, author Walid Shoebat reported that while she acted as one of 63 leaders of the Muslim Sisterhood, the de facto female version of the Muslim Brotherhood, Saleha Abedin served alongside Najla Ali Mahmoud, the wife of Mohammed Mursi, Egypt’s new president.
Clinton met with Mursi last Sunday.
Saleha Abedin and Mursi’s wife both were members of the Sisterhood’s Guidance Bureau, Shoebat found.
Hillary praise
Saleha Mahmood Abedin is an associate professor of sociology at Dar Al-Hekma College in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, which she helped to create. She formerly directed the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs in the U.K. and served as a delegate for the Muslim World League, an Islamic fundamentalist group Osama bin Laden reportedly told an associate was one of his most important charity fronts.
In February 2010, Clinton spoke at Abedin’s college, where she was first introduced by Abedin and then praised the work of the terror-tied professor:
“I have to say a special word about Dr. Saleha Abedin,” Clinton said. “You heard her present the very exciting partnerships that have been pioneered between colleges and universities in the United States and this college. And it is pioneering work to create these kinds of relationships.
“But I have to confess something that Dr. Abedin did not,” Clinton continued, “and that is that I have almost a familial bond with this college. Dr. Abedin’s daughter, one of her three daughters, is my deputy chief of staff, Huma Abedin, who started to work for me when she was a student at George Washington University in Washington, D.C.”
With additional research by Brenda J. Elliott

James Michael Holmes, Hispanic Tea Party Member Falsely Accused by ABC


Breitbart News spoke to James Michael Holmes, the Tea Party member falsely identified this morning by ABC News' Brian Ross and George Stephanopoulos on Good Morning America as the possible suspect in the mass shooting early this morning at a screening of the new Batman movie, The Dark Knight Rises. He is a 52-year-old Hispanic conservative who joined the Tea Party after becoming disillusioned with the Republican party.

"It was freaky," said Holmes, describing his reaction when ABC News speculated that he was the culprit who entered a crowded theater and opened fire on dozens of innocent men, women, and children. He disconnected his telephone and says that he is worried about members of his family who might be contacted by the media.

ABC News has since corrected its initial report, but tried to share the blame with "social media" and "members of the public" at first:
An earlier ABC News broadcast report suggested that a Jim Holmes of a Colorado Tea Party organization might be the suspect,  but that report was incorrect. Several other local residents with similar names were also contacted via social media by members of the public who mistook them for the suspect.
Now the correction has been updated, with ABC News and Brian Ross taking full responsibility, and apologizing:
An earlier ABC News broadcast report suggested that a Jim Holmes of a Colorado Tea Party organization might be the suspect, but that report was incorrect. ABC News and Brian Ross apologize for the mistake, and for disseminating that information before it was properly vetted.
Holmes reached out to Breitbart News to explain that he is not the suspect initially identified by ABC News, nor is he the James Holmes mentioned in a separate article by Breitbart News.
He is a conservative activist who has worked in law enforcement, and who used to work at the county courthouse in Aurora near the theater where the shootings took place.

He described his recent decision to join the Tea Party Patriots:
I felt a general dissatisfaction with what I guess I like to characterize as the establishment Republicans. I had been to Republican conventions to try to get involved, to see who I could join or get aligned with. I wanted to be effective in changing the outcome for my country. I wouldn't say I was stonewalled, nobody answered me in the Republican Party--not a soul would contact me. I even paid to get involved with the Colorado Hispanic Republicans and nothing happened. The only people that would really be open and honest and invite me to participate were the Tea Party Patriots. I had offers to come to this lecture and that lecture, and offers to come to trainings, so it was something that felt like it was politically active.
Photo credit: Colorado Independent

Shooting at Batman Premier Blamed on Tea Party

by: Gary DeMar
Insanity runs in families. The media family is filled with insane people. The shooting at the The Dark Knight Rises premier has started a liberal media feeding frenzy. Piers Morgan is calling for gun control. Some are calling on Obama and Romney to pull back on campaigning. Fat Czar Mayor Michael Bloomberg wants to know what Obama and Romney are going to do about the violence. Bloomberg and other liberals haven’t said much about the number of murders in Chicago — 260.
You might remember that after the shooting of Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, the Left went into full blame mode by claiming that it was Tea Party rhetoric that led to a lone gunman to shoot Giffords and others.
One liberal group said, “It is fair to say — in today’s political climate, and given today’s political rhetoric — that many have contributed to the building levels of vitriol in our political discourse that have surely contributed to the atmosphere in which this event transpired.”Giffords’s father was more direct. When he was asked if she had any enemies, he said: “Yeah, the whole Tea Party.”
Once again the insane media have tried to make a Tea Party connection. This time it was Good Morning America’s Brian Ross and George Stephanolpoulos:
Stephanolpoulos: I’m going to go to Brian Ross. You’ve been investigating the background of Jim Holmes here. You found something that might be significant.
Ross: There’s a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado, page on the Colorado Tea Party site as well, talking about him joining the Tea Party last year. Now, we don’t know if this is the same Jim Holmes. But it’s Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado.
Stephanolpoulos: Okay, we’ll keep looking at that. Brian Ross, thanks very much.
This passes as journalism at ABC. Even if this particular “Jim Holmes” is a member of the Tea Party, it does not mean that the Tea Party itself has anything to do with violence. In fact, the history of the Tea Party is a history of respectful and peaceful political action.

It’s been said numerous times that bright lights attract big bugs. It wouldn’t surprise me at all that some nut job joined an organization to give him the cover of respectability. All one has to look at is the pedophilia epidemic in the Catholic Church and Jerry Sandusky at Penn State.
Maybe Hollywood is responsible for the violence. Hollywood is a big supporter of President Obama. Two can play this game. Check out the 1986 Frank Miller graphic novel Batman: The Dark Knight Returns. Beltway Confidential reports that “In the comic, a crazed, gun-toting loner walks into a movie theater and begins shooting it up, killing three in the process.” So maybe it’s time to ban comic books.
Of course, just maybe the people responsible for the acts of violence are the ones who commit the crimes. Now that’s a novel idea.

Thursday, July 19, 2012

Mr Bill O'Reilly...Bloviator in Charge...!


Mr.Bill O'Reilly self described Bloviator..well with this definition I totally agree with Bill... not much else with his political diatribes...he does fit the definition :

This word — meaning to speak pompously — is almost entirely restricted to the United States; it doesn’t appear in any of my British English dictionaries, not even the big Oxford English Dictionary or the very recent New Oxford Dictionary of English. Yet it has a long history.
It’s most closely associated with U S President Warren Gamaliel Harding, who used it a lot and who was by all accounts the classic example of somebody who orates verbosely and windily. It’s a compound of blow, in its sense of “to boast” (also in another typical Americanism, blowhard), with a mock-Latin ending to give it the self-important stature that’s implicit in its meaning.
The word is actually much older than Harding; Fred Shapiro of the Yale Law School has recently turned up several examples from the middle of the last century, such as this one from the Debates and Proceedings of the Convention for the Revision of the Constitution of the State of Ohio in 1851: “The bloviators attempt to disturb the proceedings of this Convention”. This and other examples suggest it was at first a local word in Ohio, Harding’s home state. Bloviate may be a back-formation from the noun bloviation. This would fit with the US fashion in the early nineteenth century for expansive mock-Latinate words like sockdolager, hornswoggle and absquatulate

Yes indeed Mr Bill 'Talking Points" O'Reilly has a really hard time using the word Marxism/Communism while describing Barack Obama's ideology..he prefers to use the softened word 'Social Engineer' or some other silly verbiage/verbage to avoid calling Barack Obama that which he is as defined :

Marxism holds -- among other things -- that human history has had and will have a developmental structure, alternating between slow development of technology/economy (and the according philosophy/religion) and short periods of rapid change in technology and economy (as well as philosophy and, sometimes, religion). The short periods of rapid change take place immediately after revolutions of one kind or another.
Also, in Marxist theory, communism is the final evolutionary phase of society (coming after socialism), at which time the state would have withered away. Marx specified that the workers should rise up to destroy capitalism and replace it with socialism, a transitional stage during which the state holds the property of the means of production (property over the objects used in economic activities, not over items meant for personal use) on behalf of its citizens. According to Marx, socialism is, in turn, destined to be replaced by a classless, stateless and propertyless stage of society, named communism. Communism is supposed to be achieved by the "withering away" of the socialist state. This "withering away" consists of the transfer of power from the state to the people themselves - to be more exact, the representative democracy of socialism is to be gradually replaced by the direct democracy of communism.
"Communist states" never actually claimed to have reached communism. They claimed to be in the process of building communism, and they claimed to be socialist and democratic states. While most people would strongly disagree with the claim that those states were actually democratic in any way, the same standard is usually not applied to their claims of being socialist.

So Mr.Bill O'Reilly would you at least admit Barack Obama is in the 'Socialist Stage' of Marxism/Communism ? does go in stages to achieve the ultimate goal of One Party rule and control over all things !

Obama Eligibility Lawsuit Reaches Supreme Court

obama birth certificate Obama eligibility lawsuit reaches Supreme Court
Of the dozens of lawsuits questioning the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to be President of the United States, one has finally reached the docket of the Supreme Court. Should the Court accept the case for review, it will be the first upon which the justices will issue a substantive ruling—one based on the merits.
On February 3rd, Georgia Administrative Court Judge Michael Malihi ruled that Barack Obama is eligible to appear on the Georgia ballot. It was a case during which Malihi received not one scrap of evidence from Obama or his attorney. Subpoenas from plaintiffs were ignored; Obama’s clear burden of proof was NOT imposed. Plaintiff’s motions for contempt were neither acted upon nor forwarded to higher courts; and U.S. Supreme Court precedent took a back seat to the rambling, non-substantive pronouncement of dicta from an Indiana justice.

Yet in his 10 page ruling, Malihi had the monumental gall to claim “This decision is entirely based on the law, as well as the evidence and legal arguments presented at the hearing.” Malihi’s ruling was then rubber stamped through the Georgia Superior Court and eventually denied review by the state’s Supreme Court as both refused to apply basic principles of jurisprudence to the legally indefensible tripe offered by the Administrative Court judge.
But on June 28th, the Petition for Writ of Certiorari in Plaintiffs David Weldon, Carl Swensson and Kevin Richard Powell v Barack Obama was filed with the Supreme Court. These are the plaintiffs whose case had been argued before Judge Malihi by attorneys Van Irion and Mark Hatfield. It is an important event because all other eligibility cases appealed to the Supreme Court had been dismissed in lower courts exclusively on procedural grounds, the plaintiff’s lack of standing being the most common. Such procedural decisions relieve judges from the potentially career-ending task of issuing an honest and legally supportable ruling dismissing Barack Obama from his job and opening him to charges of fraud. And cases dismissed on procedural grounds are almost NEVER taken up by the Supreme Court.

The Weldon v Obama case will pose 2 vitally important questions to the Court. First of all, “…whether states can be forced to accept any candidate from a political party for presentation on state ballots even when the candidates do not meet the required qualifications.”  Attorneys for Obama have argued that it is up to the particular political party to decide who their presidential nominee will be and that it is not necessary that the party obey state laws that demand the nominee be qualified to hold that office.
And most importantly, the Supreme Court could decide whether the “natural born citizen” definition written by the Supreme Court in the 1875 case of Minor v Happersett will at last be awarded the precedential status ignored by so many cowardly and corrupt judges in response to the matter of Obama’s eligibility.
The American public should know by early fall whether the Supreme Court is willing to rule on the question of Barack Obama’s eligibility for the White House by addressing the constitutional importance and definition of natural born citizen. In short, by its decision to hear or ignore the case, we will know whether the Court truly represents little more than the small but powerful cabal of Washington DC’s political ruling class made so evident by the ObamaCare ruling.
Follow Coach at @KcoachcCoach

The Sex Life of a Onion...!

Deciding on me cover>

Ok folks I need a break from politicking..I am writing my first Novel..The Sex Life of a Onion'...I mean 'The Obama Economy is Killing Me'  lol...retirement isn't what it is cracked up to be...way more time than I will digress like all the other Talk Show hosts and write my own Novel..

I am stuck on the first chapter...It's a real tear jerker...damn can't see the keys in order to thats just an excuse for writers block..any suggestions on what I should write...HELP!!!!

Hope y'all enjoyed a lil break..and thanks for viewing my nonsense..:)

Obama Campaign Makes Case for Releasing His College Transcripts

As the Obama campaign continues its attacks on Romney’s tenure at Bain Capital and his tax returns, it has argued that the focus is justified because Romney made his business background his “calling card” for his presidential run. They argue, not unreasonably, that Romney’s use of his business experience as the centerpiece of his candidacy warrants close scrutiny of that experience. Okay, but what about what was, in 2008, Obama’s main “calling card”, his successful academic career? Doesn’t that warrant similar vetting?
During the 08 campaign, Obama and his supporters touted his editorship of the Harvard Law Review and his position as a “constitutional law professor” at University of Chicago as significant achievements. His academic rise through Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard Law School were prima facie evidence of his brilliance. No other modern candidate for President has used his academic achievements as his chief “calling card” for the Presidency. And yet, while many candidates have released or had leaked their academic transcripts, we have almost no information on Obama’s. It was damn near the sum-total of his “qualifications” to be President, and we know nothing about it.

Continue Reading on ...

Socialist France Losing Citizens

Socialist France Losing Citizens
Facing high taxes, many wealthy French are moving out of the country.
It turns out socialists know how to grow the economy in one segment of the market: real estate.
French real estate agency figures show that following the country’s recent election of a socialist president and political majority, wealthy Frenchmen are opting to move out of the country.
From The Telegraph:
Sotheby’s Realty, the estate agent arm of the British auction house, said its French offices sold more than 100 properties over 1.7 million euros between April and June this year – a marked increase on the same period in 2011.
Alexander Kraft, head of Sotheby’s Realty, France, said: “The result of the presidential election has had a real impact on our sales.
The exodus is most likely the result of a round of “share the wealth” proposals being considered by French socialist leaders. The government is currently in the process of trying to implement a 75 percent tax rate on French taxpayers earning more than 1 million euros yearly and a tax raise on the middle class in the country from 41 to 45 percent.

France’s Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault has promised the new government will quickly enact a number of other socialist reforms as well. These include plans to construct more than a 500,000 new public housing units each year, the right for same-sex couples to get married and adopt children, a higher minimum wage and the right to vote in municipal elections for documented immigrants who have resided in France more than five years.

A Business Owner’s Angry Response To Obama


Wayne Allyn Root responds to President Barack Obama’s recent assertion that government, not entrepreneurs, is responsible for business success in the United States. Root, Obama’s college classmate at Columbia University, Class of 1983, notes that nearly all of his classmates at the college were openly socialist or Marxist. He says that the President’s most recent remarks are simply an act of the Marxist-in-Chief coming out of the closet. 

New in 'gay' parade: U.S. troops in uniform

by: Bob Unruh
In what appears to be an extraordinary reversal of military policy, members of the U.S. armed forces say they have been given permission by their commanding officers to march in a “gay pride” parade Saturday – while wearing their service-issued uniforms.
Meanwhile, WND has learned, one of the top officers who approved the decision has since entered retirement.
The top echelons of the U.S. Air Force approved a request by a senior recruiter based in Arizona to join “a uniformed, active-duty military contingent” in a San Diego homosexual pride event, the San Diego Union Tribune reported.
The decision breaks down generations of tight limits on when and where a service member is allowed to appear in uniform, and appears to stray from the Department of Defense regulations on the use of uniforms, dated 2005 and signed by Defense Undersecretary David S.C. Chu, which says using the U.S. military uniform is prohibited in a number of scenarios.

Those include “in connection with furthering political activities, private employment or commercial interests, when an inference of official sponsorship of the activity or interest may be drawn.”
Using the uniform also is banned “When wearing the uniform may tend to bring discredit upon the armed forces,” and while former members are allowed to wear them for funerals, memorial services, weddings, and “other parades … in which any active or reserve United States military unit is taking part,” the regulations state, “wearing of the uniform or any part thereof at any other time or for any other purpose is prohibited.”
Current Air Force rules say members may appear in uniform “at local community-wide civic-sponsored events only when the approving commander believes participating is appropriate and in good taste; the individuals volunteer for the assignment; there is no interference with military duties or operations; participation involves no additional cost to the government; and the event meets the basic participation criteria below.”
That section specifies that an event “intended to, or which appears to endorse, selectively benefit, or favor any private individual, special interest group, business, religious, ideological movement, commercial venture, political candidate, or organization” would be “disapproved.”
Yet Joanna Gasca, a reserve Air Force recruiter, told the San Diego Union Times that she has been given permission by her chain of command to appear in uniform at Saturday’s San Diego “Gay Pride Parade.”

A spokeswoman at Luke Air Force Base in Arizona, where Gasca is assigned, confirmed to WND that the decision came from high up in the military’s ranks.
Meredith Mingledorff of the 944th Public Affairs Office said Gasca’s commander told her the approval came from Lt. Col. Pratt of the Secretary of the Air Force’s public affairs office.
However, she also said Pratt had immediately retired and was not available to respond to questions about his decision.
At the time of this report, his profile was scrubbed from the Air Force website, although a cached version available on Google revealed a Lt. Col. Leslie J. Pratt had served as director of public affairs at headquarters of the Air Force Reserve Command in Georgia for several years.
He entered the military in 1979 as a mechanic and was commissioned a second lieutenant upon completion of training in 1988.
“That’s where she got permission,” Mingledorff told WND.
The Air Force did not respond to WND’s requests to ask Pratt about his decision, or to obtain comment from his successor.
WND earlier had contacted Air Force headquarters, where Maj. Joel Harper told WND that such decisions were allowed but were made at the local command level, referring WND to Luke Air Force Base.
When asked if the precedent would allow a service member to appear in uniform at a GOP event, a Democrat event, a pro-life rally or the like, Harper’s response was mere silence.

A spokesman at Luke Air Force Base told WND the chain of command responsible for Gasca was at Robins Air Force Base in Georgia. Officials there demurred, saying the command was, in fact, at Luke. Mingledorff, finally tracked down at Luke, told WND that Gasca wasn’t even in the 944th’s command structure, but her office simply was “providing her service” in responding to questions.
A former member of the U.S. military confirmed that such use of uniforms in the past has been regulated strictly. The veteran, who asked to remain anonymous, told WND, “It is such a big deal, that, unless the event is specifically approved by the military, you are strictly forbidden from appearing in uniform.
“If you do it without permission, you will be written up (getting a warning that goes in your file that may threaten Uniform Code of Military Justice action if you continue. You might even be threatened with demotion and loss of pay),” the former member said. “When members of the military wear their uniforms, they represent our armed forces. It’s not taken lightly.”
Next, WND contacted the Department of Defense.
DoD spokeswoman Eileen M. Lainez said military members are allowed to march or ride in “nonpartisan” parades while wearing civilian clothing – but she made no specific mention of “gay pride parades.”
However, she said members of the military may only wear uniforms in a parade when they have been given permission by the DoD – or are part of a ceremonial unit in an approved “community-relations” event.
“Except when authorized per DoD or service policies (such as a community-relations approved ceremonial unit), military members are restricted from wearing uniforms while participating in parades,” she said.

Lainez said the DoD advises military service members to obtain permission from their own unit commanders before marching in parades.
“We always recommend service members consult their chain of command before participating in any parade,” she said. “When troops are requested to participate in parades, commanders must determine if military participation in the event is appropriate per DoD community relations policies and does not violate policies regarding wearing of the uniform, to include preventing any inferences that a service member’s activities may imply official sponsorship or endorsement.”
Lainez referenced DoD Directive 1344.10, Political Activities by Members of the Armed Forces, and DoD Instruction 1334.01, which contains guidance and limitations on the wear of military uniforms.
Lainez copied numerous high-ranking officers in her response to WND, none of whom had responded to requests for comment at the time of this report.
The San Diego newspaper also featured an image of Army Spc. Brenna Saldana participating, in her military-issued combat fatigues, in a ceremony raising a rainbow flag at San Diego State University just days ago.
The report from Matthew Hall said organizers for the parade coming on Saturday “urged service members to ask their commanding officers for permission to march in their uniforms.”
Some requests were rejected, but not all, according to the report.
“Gasca … cried when she read the email containing the approvals she needed to return home and march in her uniform in front of her family,” it said.

The move appears to be the latest by Obama’s administration to normalize homosexuality in the U.S. military, a campaign highlighted by Congress’ decision to overturn the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy and allow open homosexuality in the ranks.
The military earlier declared June “Gay Pride Month” and held events to mark the occasion. Military officials attribute the motivation behind the event to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s desire to single out and honor homosexual military personnel for their service.
“Now that we’ve repealed ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ he feels it’s important to find a way this month to recognize the service and professionalism of gay and lesbian troops,” stated Capt. John Kirby, a Navy spokesman.
The Thomas More Law Center noted that the premise of normalized homosexual behavior not having a significant impact is fabricated.
“To accomplish this political objective [of normalizing homosexual behavior in the military], Pentagon officials utilized rigged public opinion polls, leaks of false information and muzzling of combat commanders who opposed the repeal,” the law center reported in a public statement.
Center for Military Readiness President Elaine Donnelly believes that the aggressive policies and instruction administered to all 2.25 million armed forces members are far from what many would consider progress.
“It’s too early to report any success, but indicators show that there are negative consequences of the new military policy known as LGBT law, which was created at the repeal of the 1993 law called DADT,” Donnelly told WND in an exclusive interview. “Trends are not good.”

Donnelly points to the CMR Policy Analysis called “Chilling Trend of Sexual Assault in the Military,” which reports that “sexual assault in all branches of the services have increased by 22 percent since 2007.” It also states that violent attacks and rapes in the Army have nearly doubled since 2006 to 1,313 last year, with 5 percent of the assaults on men. Furthermore, it reported that in “all branches of the service, male sexual assault victims have increased significantly, from 10 percent in 2010 to 14 percent in confidential reports.”
The trend continues, says Donnelly, who stresses that it can hardly be considered “success.”
When asked whether the Pentagon overstepped it boundaries by planning an event celebrating homosexuality when the originally declared intent of the policy change was only to tolerate the open expression of homosexuality, Donnelly answered to the affirmative.
“Yes, but this should have been foreseen by those signing the current LGBT law in 2010, which now controls the military,” Donnelly replied. “In the early 1990s, the Clinton administration held a similar celebration called the ‘Diversity Gay Training Event,’ and the demonstrations by LGBT activists there were so offensive and controversial to Christians and non-Christians alike that Clinton never held the event again.”
Donnelly said the promotion of homosexuality will just grow, pointing to a WND article earlier this year titled, “Marines starting to look ridiculous.”
The overriding concern for many, however, is the impact on national security.

“There is no constitutional right to serve in the military,” the CMR president explained, emphasizing that segregation based on sexuality has always been rational and customary. “They blur the issue with irrational segregation, such as racial segregation, which has no reasonable basis. Sexual privacy is necessary for troops to function properly in our military, but this is no longer respected as it has been in the past.”
The Thomas More Law Center agrees that the current administration putting LGBT law into the military puts both soldiers and citizens in danger, and its attorneys continue to challenge this threat to America’s national security.
“This new law will ultimately destroy unit cohesion and morale, reduce the number of heterosexual volunteers, and considerably degrade the ability of the military to defend our nation, their first responsibility,” said Thomas More Law Center President and Chief Counsel Richard Thompson. “Our military men and women, our sons and daughters, should not be subjected to an involuntary social experiment which will damage our national security. That’s why we will continue our efforts to oppose this immoral law.”
Concerned individuals may contact the Air Force Reserve Command.

Team Romney: “It’s Time to Vet the President”

Between yesterday’s fantastic speech and this BuzzFeed report, is the Romney campaign finally immersing itself in the 2012 bare-knuckles brawl? Pow:
In speeches from Des Moines to Dallas, Romney has always been careful to hedge his tough digs at Obama with a civil nod toward the president’s moral character: “He’s a nice guy,” the Republican has often said. “He just has no idea how the private economy works.” But Tuesday’s speech included no such hedge — and one campaign adviser said there’s a reason for that. “[Romney] has said Obama’s a nice fellow, he’s just in over his head,” the adviser said. “But I think the governor himself believes this latest round of attacks

that have impugned his integrity and accused him of being a felon go so far beyond that pale that he’s really disappointed. He believes it’s time to vet the president. He really hasn’t been vetted; McCain didn’t do it.” Indeed, facing what the candidate and his aides believe to be a series of surprisingly ruthless, unfounded, and unfair attacks from the Obama campaign on Romney’s finances and business record, the Republican’s campaign is now prepared to go eye for an eye in an intense, no-holds-barred act of political reprisal, said two Romney advisers who spoke on condition of anonymity.
 Continue Reading on

Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Marco Rubio...Bobby Jindahl VP consideration?


Although I like and respect both Marco and Bobby... if selected for the VP slot... as a 'Oath Keeper' I could not in conscience vote for the Mitt Romney Ticket..This would violate the eligibility requirement spelled out in the US Constitution...Two wrongs do not by any means make a right...I suspect the GOP fails to Impeach Barack Obama on his fraudulent eligibility and forged documents as they plan on running their own ineligible candidate...This is a sorry state of affairs folks...either we adhere to all parts of the Constitution or we have failed as a nation to serve,protect and cherish that which our founders gave us!

addendum: Marco Rubio joined John Boehner and John McCain bashing Michele I no longer like Marco..!

Who’s The Real Felon, Mr. Obama?

Obama Jailbird Whos The Real Felon, Mr. Obama? 
By his own admission, Barack Obama used drugs and almost certainly passed drugs to his friends. This makes it likely he has committed drug-related felonies. Even just passing drugs around in a circle of friends is a “sale of drugs” felony. Nevertheless, it’s not really important whether we have enough definitive evidence to convict Barack Obama in a court room. It is, after all, only the seriousness of the charges and not the nature of the evidence that counts.
During Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s March 1, 2012 press conference, his lead investigator presented a copy of Barack Obama’s draft registration card and explained how it was forged. It was clear that if the draft card Obama possessed was genuine, he, Barack Hussein Obama, received THE ONLY draft card issued since 1980 that was stamped with a single digit year. Every other draft card issued before and after Barack Obama’s special one includes four digits. Obama’s draft card is stamped with “80” for the year it was issued. Any legitimate stamp would say “1980.”

Obama’s draft card looks like it was made by a high school kid learning how to photo-shop a document. All of this strongly suggests Obama may very well be a felon under several statutes of both Hawaiian and federal law.
When Obama either made or received his obviously fake draft card, that could be a  felony violation of Jimmy Carter’s  Proclamation 4771, Registration Under the Military Selective Service Act,  which retroactively re-established the Selective Service registration requirement for all 18–26 year old male citizens born on or after January 1, 1960.

Failure to register for the draft – certainly indicated by possession of a forged draft card – makes a man born after December 31, 1959 liable for a maximum fine of $250,000 and a prison term of up to five years.
The law also stipulates that an unregistered male is not eligible for a job in the Executive Branch.  This means a forged draft card cannot be used to satisfy the requirements to be the president. It means Barack Obama may be guilty of federal felonies because he possessed and presented an identification document that is a fake.  It means he may have committed more federal felonies involving fraud when he presented a forged draft card to satisfy the requirements for any federal student aid he used to attend college in America.
My goodness, there may be a felon in the White House!
Follow Coach at @KcoachcCoach

Newt To Mitt: Invite Palin To Convention

Newt Gingrich 4 SC Newt to Mitt: Invite Palin to convention
Former House Speaker and Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich slammed the Romney campaign Tuesday, saying former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney should extend a speaking invitation to former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.
“Governor Palin motivates and arouses an entire base,” Mr. Gingrich said in an interview with conservative radio host Laura Ingraham. “[She] should absolutely have a speaking slot.”

Mr. Gingrich’s comment on the matter comes just days after reports emerged noting that Mr. Romney has yet to invite Ms. Palin to the Republican presidential convention hosted in Tampa, Florida. Mr. Gingrich, who has not been invited to speak at the convention, said that he would be honored to speak at the convention if asked, but the decision is up to Mr. Romney and his team.
Ms. Palin, who responded to reports that the Romney campaign has yet to offer her a speaking invitation, said the circumtances regarding the Romney decision was payback for her outspokenness and criticism of his policy stances.

“What can I say?” Palin told Newsweek when asked about the convention. “I’m sure I’m not the only one accepting consequences for calling out both sides of the aisle for spending too much money, putting us on the road to bankruptcy, and engaging in crony capitalism.”

Help LTC(R) Allen West defeat the Soros Machine..!

Fellow Conservative,

We recently learned radical leftist billionaire George Soros has agreed to bankroll a new SuperPAC aimed at defeating our campaign this November.

Soros has pledged up to $5 Million for the effort to distort my record and defeat the conservative principles you and I believe in. This is in addition to two other left-wing SuperPACs, massive ad buys by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, out-of-state, occupy-style protesters descending on the district, paid canvassers bank-rolled by union bosses, and a liberal media intent on defending the 'progress' they've made the past three years.

We will fight back and we need you to join the fight today. Donate what you can here:

If we're going to repeal Obamacare, stop Barack Obama's $494 Billion Taxmageddon, prevent amnesty for illegal immigrants, balance the federal budget, and protect the American Dream as you and I know it -- we absolutely need to retain our Majority in the US House.

I'm the liberals' number one target and defeating me is a key part of their plan to return the Speaker's gavel to Nancy Pelosi. We absolutely can't allow them to win.

I pledge to you that I will never back down and I will continue to present a stark contrast based on proven conservative principles and solutions to the problems facing our nation. I hope you'll stand strong with me by making a contribution here:

Thank you!

Steadfast and Loyal,

LTC(R) Allen B. West
Member of Congress

P.S. Liberal Billionaire George Soros is pledging $5 Million to attempt to defeat me and create a House Majority for liberals. Help me fight back today by donating here.

Congress Won’t Act on Arpaio’s Call for Investigation of National Security Threat; Should the Military?

by: Tad Cronn
Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz., and lead Cold Case Posse investigator Mike Zullo set out last year to prove President Obama was born in Hawaii and that all the rumors about his birth certificate were unfounded.
After nine months of investigation, they’ve come to the opposite conclusion, that the birth certificate and other documents relating to the president’s past are forgeries and that there has been a massive coverup, although they have not directly accused Obama of knowledge of or participation in any such criminal acts.
What Arpaio and Zullo did say at a press conference Tuesday is that the latest information they’ve uncovered reveals a serious national security threat and shores up the case for fraud in the tale of Obama’s Hawaiian birth.
During the press conference, Zullo related how his team of investigators found and interviewed the person who actually would have signed Obama’s birth certificate, and she offered information that solidifies the case that the document released by the White House was tampered with.

Specifically, some boxes that are filled in on the certificate are marked with a handwritten numeric code, 9, meaning no information was provided and the boxes should have been left blank. Also, the clerk who signed Obama’s birth certificate, Verna Lee, indicated that Obama’s birth certificate was out of sequence if he had been born at Kapioloni Hospital as claimed.
But what led investigators to conclude that there is an imminent national security threat is the discovery that Hawaii’s law has a flaw in it such that any foreigner can obtain a Hawaiian birth certificate just by showing he has resided in Hawaii. The information presents Arpaio with a quandary.
“Although I am having a difficult time deciding who to forward this information to given the fact that the obvious choices report directly to the president, I cannot stand by and hold on to information that threatens to weaken national security,” Arpaio said.
(Or as the future Commissioner Gordon said in the first Batman movie with Christian Bale, “In a town this bent, who is there to report to?”)
Although Arpaio called for Congress — “someone” — to investigate this situation, he’s right that no one under Obama will lift a finger, for two reasons: one, Obama ordered Homeland Security to ignore Arizona law enforcement in revenge for the state’s immigration policy being upheld by the Supreme Court; and two, Obama clearly intends to weaken U.S. borders by using his executive order to grant amnesty to young illegal aliens and by closing Border Patrol stations in Republican states.

Since Congress has allowed Obama to get away with making himself a de facto king by going around Congress and declaring amnesty by his own, sole authority, there is no reason to think Congress would act on Arpaio’s new information.
So this raises a question, and it’s a scary question to have to ask: Is it time for the military to step in and stop Obama and our other elected leaders from weakening our national security?
The Oath of Office taken by officers of the uniformed services upon commissioning states:
I, [name], do solemnly swear 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; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

This oath is recognized as requiring officers of the military to refuse to obey unconstitutional orders. Should it be construed as requiring them to step in when both the Executive and Legislative Branches appear to be colluding to weaken our national defense?
Have Obama and the hands-off Congress risen to the level of a domestic enemy?