Archive for July 21st, 2008

Profiles of valor: USA Sgt. Mora

July 21, 2008

United States Army Sergeant Ezequiel Mora of DeKalb, Illinois, was on patrol in a Baghdad neighborhood in May 2007 when his convoy was attacked. The rear Humvee in the convoy was hit by an explosively formed penetrator, the most lethal of all roadside bombs. The convoy commander and platoon medic were both in the damaged vehicle, and both were badly injured. Mora directed his Humvee to the rear. He ignored heavy fire as he jumped out to aid the trapped soldiers. Mora assisted in rescuing the gunner and administered first aid to the badly wounded medic. He turned his attention back to the wounded gunner and, along with another sergeant, carried him to safety though still under fire from the insurgents. Sergeant Mora saved the lives of many soldiers that day. As a result of his courage and determination, he was awarded the Bronze Star with Valor.

Ooh Rah!

American Gestapo?

July 21, 2008

Barack Obama showed more of his true intentions the other day. Just who will this new force answer too? An American Gestapo is a sure way to a path of revolution here in these not so United States. Others have called me crazy in the past when I reffered to “Authoritarians.”

“According to Obama, the U.S. “cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set.” He continued, “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.” Whoa there, compadre! (That’s a little Spanish there for the man who wants us all to learn it.) Will this “national security force” also wear brown shirts? Oddly enough, it seems that Obama’s campaign realized that wouldn’t fly—the line was stricken from the transcripts given to the media, though it is still in the video posted on YouTube.”

Source: Patriot Post; This was also reported by Gunny Bob at 850KOA

Taliban resurgence?

July 21, 2008

On Sunday, 200 Taliban fighters attacked 45 American soldiers at a remote outpost in Afghanistan. The Taliban militants crossed the border from nearby Pakistan under cover of darkness, surprising the American troops, who had not yet completed the defenses of their new, makeshift outpost. But despite being outnumbered more than four to one, the valorous American force inflicted grievous losses on the Taliban, who were driven off after a four-hour firefight. Nine American soldiers were killed and at least 15 more were injured. While Leftmedia outlets like The New York Times are pointing to the incident as proof that we are losing in Afghanistan, we think it shows that our courageous soldiers are capable of winning against overwhelming odds, especially when they are given the right strategy and support.

To that end, the Pentagon has dispatched the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln to the Gulf of Oman, where it will provide air support for U.S. special forces. Democrat and Republican lawmakers have confirmed that the White House has authorized a plan to deploy commandos deep into Pakistan’s tribal areas, where al-Qa’ida and the Taliban have been operating freely. The decision comes after a tumultuous debate among President Bush’s staff. In light of Islamabad’s failure (and even unwillingness) to rein in the Islamic terrorists within its borders, we believe that President Bush’s decision to take more aggressive action inside Pakistan is the right one. As the improved situation in Iraq clearly shows, an insurgency can be defeated, but only when its havens are no longer safe.

source: Patriot Post

White in America

July 21, 2008

White In America!

For those of you that watched “Black in America” on CNN, you might be interested in how it is to be White in America

1. We are racists. WE can not use the “I have a black friend” excuse, it doesn’t work. WE have either owned a black person or OUR family has, and therefore WE as white people OWE every Black person in America something.

2. WE are in control of ALL money in America, WE have the ability to hire anyone, and WE never hire black people because they are black. That is the rule.

3. When Black folks walk past US and WE grab your wallet or purse, that is a racist response no matter where WE are or what time of day it is. IT is acceptable however to open OUR wallet or purse and empty the contents on the sidewalk and run because (see #1 WE OWE THEM).

4. WE vote for Barak Hussein Obama because you owe black people.

5. WE don’t vote for Barak Hussein Obama because you are racist.

Oh and according to all politicians, movie makers, media outlets, sitcoms, radio hosts, bloggers or basically ANYONE saying anything… White, hetero sexual, Christian, Males are the reason for everything bad in America. However; if you mention any facts that do not agree with that assertion YOU ARE A RACIST!

I hope one day to see true racial equality, I hope one day to see the end of the victim mentality in America, and the start of the personal responsibility era, maybe my grandchildren will see it but I honestly believe it is ingrained in the culture now. Oh Shit I must now be a racist.

Proudly Stole From:
White in America – American and Proud

Yes, I have a serious problem with these misconceptions…

Why the Left can’t get it Right

July 21, 2008

By Mark Alexander

Ask a liberal about some manifestation of his worldview—for example, why he supports charlatans like Barack Hussein Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Albert Arnold Gore, Jean-Francois Kerry, et al., and he invariably predicates his response with, “Because I feel…”

Ask a conservative about what he believes, or why he does or doesn’t support John McCain, and he invariably predicates his response with, “Because I think…”

It has always been easier to “feel” rather than “think,” and that is why our national culture, and by extension, national politics (see Democrat Party Platforms) reflect only the most rudimentary remnants of the guiding principles established by our Founders. Of course, though Republican Party Platforms are more consistent with our Founding principles, Ronald Reagan was the last Republican president to stand firmly in support of those principles.

Liberalism tends to appeal to the worst of human instincts—greed, envy, laziness, victimization and every line of division. Its practitioners appeal to constituent “feelings,” and they thus convert emotions into political capital.

Leftist pathology is deserving of its own category on the short list of personality disorders, and liberal politicians have one uniformly defining characteristic: hypocrisy.

Liberal politicos advocate populist themes but are consummate elitists. They feign concern for the plight of the poor while hobnobbing with the richest of the rich. They are charitable with everyone’s income but their own. They decry school vouchers yet send their children to the finest academies. They hate SUVs, unless they are expensive imports. They advocate mass transit but commute on private jets. They express concern for the homeless yet maintain multiple manors.

Liberals advocate diversity, unless your views don’t comport with their own doctrines of moral relativism. They want to preserve nature and the natural order but advocate homosexual “marriage.” They oppose the death penalty for the most heinous of criminal sociopaths, but they support the execution of unborn children in their mothers’ wombs. They believed that one nut who bombs an abortion clinic deserves far more law-enforcement attention than jihadi cells planning the 9/11 attacks. They called 9/11 victims “Little Eichmanns” while calling their murderers “oppressed.” They “support our troops” while calling for retreat and surrender.

Liberals call for “change” but are firmly committed to the status quo. They oppose nuclear power production while complaining about “global warming.” They call for racial, ethnic and religious harmony, but they rally constituencies by fomenting division and hate. They deride moral clarity because they can’t survive its scrutiny.

Indeed, liberals have turned the wisdom of their iconic sovereigns inside out.

Then: “My fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country.” —John F. Kennedy, Inaugural Address, 1961

Now: “Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you.”

Then: “I have a dream that my children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” —Martin L. King, Address from the Lincoln Memorial, 1963

Now: “I have a dream that my children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the content of their character but by the color of their skin.”

Liberals have replaced the original Constitution with their so-called “Living Constitution” so that they can insist on viewing the First Amendment through a wide-angle lens—except, of course, the “freedom of religion” part, where they opt to censor Christianity while imposing secular atheism. They advocate a “Wall of Separation” between church and state, but they tear down any obstacles between your income and the state. Of course, they also insist on viewing the Second Amendment through a pinhole.

Liberals protest economic recession, all the while suppressing economic growth with evermore taxes and regulations. Most of them are card-carrying members of the ignoble ranks of “useful idiots,” those Western apologists for Marxist-Leninist-Maoist collectivism. Of course, that card reads: “Member, Democrat National Committee.”

I have no doubt that you’ve already come up with a list of additional examples of liberal hypocrisy. Unfortunately, there isn’t enough bandwidth on the Internet to compile a comprehensive list here. (Feel free to post additional examples on our reader comments page.)

Liberal and conservative worldviews often collide for this reason: Disciplined conservatives put God first, family and country second and themselves third, while liberals tend to put themselves first, their country last, and serve gods made in their image. This is the most defining philosophical distinction between these two groups.

As we approach the next presidential election, Leftmedia types suggest that most Americans are in the middle—“moderate” or “centrist.” But political researchers are finding that we are in fact a deeply divided nation, with many voters strongly identifying with either conservative or liberal doctrines.

Let’s hope and pray that more of our fellow Americans, those guided by their feelings, will think better of this process and vote on right-minded principles. Otherwise, it will be difficult to seat candidates who, in the words of Samuel Adams, possess the qualities of “wisdom and knowledge, of moderation and temperance, of patience, fortitude and perseverance, of sobriety and true republican simplicity of manners, of zeal for the honour of the Supreme Being and the welfare of the commonwealth…”

Sort of reminds me of something we were taught in Devil Pups on Camp Pendleton all those years ago. God, Family, Country, Corps…

source

Boston Tea Party 2008

July 21, 2008

Join in NRA and GOAL’s “Boston Tea Party 2008!” In 1998, former Massachusetts Governor Paul Cellucci (R) signed a law into effect that continues to violate our Second Amendment rights.   Wednesday, July 23 will mark the ten-year anniversary of the signing of the Gun Control Act of 1998.  Chapter 180 of the Acts was signed with the ill-conceived notion that crime and violence would be eradicated from the streets.  Not only has this notion proven to be incorrect by the increase in criminal activity, but it’s also been in direct violation of our Second Amendment rights.  As a result, July 23, 2008 will be known as the “Boston Tea Party 2008” and the National Rifle Association, in conjunction with the Gun Owners Action League (GOAL), are encouraging members to send a symbolic message to our elected officials that we want them to repeal Chapter 180.  We are asking members to send this note, as well as a tea bag, to your elected officials to let them know, just as our forefathers did, that unfair treatment against lawful gun owners will not be tolerated.  To find contact information for your State Legislators, please click here.

I love a good twist on history! 😀

D.C. Refining of Gun Laws–Offensively Stupid

July 21, 2008

Washington D.C. is not into following the law it would appear. At least when it doesn’t suit them is probably a more accurate way to phrase the situation.

Only a few weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the Heller case, which struck down D.C.’s ban on handguns and allowed having a firearm in operable condition at home, D.C. has passed “emergency” law and new police regulations intended to retain as much of the ban and storage requirement as possible. The law was crafted in consultation with the Brady Campaign, according to the Washington Post.

There are many objectionable features to the new D.C. law and regulations, but two stand out as particularly egregious. Though the Supreme Court ruled that D.C. could not ban handguns, the new rules would still ban all or most semi-automatic pistols. And in spite of the fact that the court ruled that D.C. cannot ban the use of guns for protection in the home, the District still prohibits having a gun loaded and ready unless an attack within your home is imminent or underway.

Without Congress’ intervention, D.C. can violate the intent of the Heller decision indefinitely. That is because under “Home Rule,” D.C.’s emergency bills are not subject to review by Congress, and D.C. can reinstitute “emergency” laws every 90 days. The city’s officials are already thumbing their noses at the Supreme Court.

source

Personally, I would love it if the Supreme Court charged all those involved in these shenanigans with contempt and had them paraded before the Court dressed in those pretty orange jump suits, on television, and had some serious discussions with them.