To my ancestor who fought in World War One and brought back a cloth German Pickelhaube that decorates the family mantle.

My great-uncle Robert was a tank mechanic in Patton’s Third Army. He loved the man, and would stand up to salute at his name.

My great-uncle Gene fought in World War II. He was at Pearl Harbor getting cigarettes for his shipmates on the Arizona when the Japanese attacked, and never forgave them, even after the war had ended. He survived the destruction of his destroyer at Midway.

My great-grandfather fought in the US Army. I never knew him.

My grandfather was a submariner during the Korean War. He never talked about his service.

My uncle was a member of the Marine Corps. He never talks about his service.

A colleague at work was deployed in Iraq as a Marine Corp sniper. During a tour of duty in Fallujah, insurgents threw grenades onto the rooftop where his squad was deployed. Two survived, and both received Purple Hearts. My friend was lightly wounded with shrapnel embedded in his body, but the other was blinded and hurt more badly.

To my ex-Navy work colleagues.

“Thank You” to these people in my life seems inadequate, so I must borrow the hard words of General Patton:

It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.

Could it be because the eyes of the populace have been opened through the union-busting actions of Scott Walker, that just because someone talks a good game doesn’t mean they will be a good leader, that they are tired of the cheap one-liners?

I don’t precisely know, but I will continue my support for Perry, who has produced results and not rhetoric.

Unlike the Occupy Wall Street protesters, I will not riot, defecate in the streets, or vandalize public property, which given your coverage you condone.  I ensure by every legal, law-abiding, and moral means at my disposal to ensure that your “god” is defeated in 2012 and he takes as many Democrats as he can with him.

In short:

P.S.

Have A Nice Day.

1) Why will Herman Cain not endorse Rick Perry against Obama, even when Mitt Romney will endorse the GOP nominee?

2) Why can’t Herman Cain give a clear answer on anything (despite his no BS clarity?

- Abortion (yes, I know he’s pro-life, but why not say it in the first place?)
- (non) sex scandal (why be so evasive)
-Gitmo
- 2nd Amendment is a states’ issue

3) Why did Herman Cain play the race/victim card on Rick Perry?

AMANPOUR: On the front page of the Washington Post today, there’s a story about Rick Perry…

CAIN: Yes.

AMANPOUR: … and a hunting lodge that belonged to his family, bought in the 1980s. And on a rock apparently near the entrance there, there is a word that is a very ugly racial word, a slur.

CAIN: Yes.

AMANPOUR: And it’s been — it’s been painted over. But the report raises questions about whether this rock, this stone, with that word on it, was still on display even quite recently in the last several years. What is your reaction to that?

CAIN: My reaction is that is very insensitive. There are some words that do not basically inspire the kind of negativity like that particular word. And I know that you’re refraining from saying that word, so I’m going to say what the word was on the rock. The name of the place was called “N****head.” That is very insensitive.

And since Governor Perry has been going there for years to hunt, I think that it shows a lack of sensitivity for a long time of not taking that word off of that rock and renaming the place. It’s just basically a case of insensitivity.

AMANPOUR: It was painted over.

CAIN: Yes. It was painted over. But how long ago was it painted over? So I’m still saying that it is a sign of insensitivity.

Bonus question: What does Herman Cain have against Rick Perry in general?

4) If Herman Cain was a Democrat, and he said these things, what would your reaction be?

After Perry had announced, everyone began to attack him: the liberal establishment, the GOP establishment, the Paulites, the Palinsitas, the media  This piqued my curiosity, since a person is judged by his enemies; if everyone hates him, he’s either the political equivalent of a skunk or he’s doing something right.

I heard some stories in the press about Perry’s Texas policies (TTC, HPV vaccine, the so-called ‘Dream Act), but I was willing to let the man explain at his first debate.  Then came…the line: “…heartless”  Cringe.  Facepalm.  Granted, I’m a little more squishy on immigration policy than some here, but Perry’s comment fell into the  “if you have to explain it, you’ve lost 50% +1 of your voting public” category.  With research (provided in part by Redstate diarists) I came to understand his positions, I still was uneasy about them, but I did take away the fact that Perry believes in doing the will of the people and in the rule of law.  This last point is especially important as the current administration has a flagrant disregard for the law and the will of the people.

I continued leaning towards Perry, but I was also looking at Cain (an unknown) and Gingrich ( “of all the words of tongue and pen, the saddest are ‘he might have been’).   Michelle Bachmann  (who I had seen at Eagle Forum, and had some respect for), went into histronics over a seemingly non-issue (the HPV vaccine) while ignoring her own record; I basically lost most of my respect for her.   Over a period of about 1,5 months,  the other candidates (with the exception of Gingrich)  have commenced to pile-on Perry for no other reason than being Perry.  Cain went to the lengths of saying that he would support Romney over Perry, gave credence to Perry’s campground story in a racially tinged manner without investigating the facts, and said that he would be VP for anyone but Perry (interesting behavior for an associate Baptist minister).

Although I might point out that Perry came into this race expecting to wipe the floor with his competition, he has displayed more graciousness and character than I would have under similar circumstances.   I daresay that he is better than Palin; Palin faced only liberals with an army of rabid supporters at her back, while Perry faced the MSM and the circular firing squad ALONE.  And in the end, we are all alone.

So why do I support Perry?

1)  Perry has created the environment for economic success in spite of a recession and a hostile federal government.

2)  Perry shows respect for the rule of law and the will of the people.

but above all

3) Perry is a man of character.

I will always view Perry as a man (as I’m uncomfortable with some of his record) and I will work to ensure more conservatives are elected to Congress to control his wilder impulses, but Perry has my vote for the 2012 GOP nomination.

I am working under the premise, however, that the Committee is constitutionally prohibited from raising taxes (or more precisely, revenue). This follows from Article I, Section 7:

All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

The Committee is organized as a Joint Committee of both House members and Senators, and their results will not be a pure House concoction, hence taxes or ‘revenues’ are illegal.

Since revenues cannot be raised, cuts are the only alternative. Although the Democrats will want to cut defense, the cost of entitlements will quickly surface, including (gulp…) Obamacare, whose costs are estimated at ‘between 2.5 and 3 trillion over 10 years’ (twice the cuts required), not including the consequences on businesses.

Immediate repeal of Obamacare is unlikely, as the GROFAZ would be eating a large slice of humble pie. But at the very least the debate would be forced where we want it, that is, if the country is not to become another Greece.

The video documents the incident, but I will sum it up.

1) The event occurs at a PUBLIC FORUM. The moderator asks that all filming cease. The cameraman continues to film.

2) Someone tells the cameraman to stop filming. When refused on the grounds that he is exercising 1st Amendment rights at a public forum, the person (usher?) says “There’s gonna be a mess.”

3) Someone sits on the cameraman’s left and asks him to quit. Upon explaining again that he is exercising his 1st Amendment rights at a public forum, the camera is knocked down. The scuffle continues; the cameraman tells Charles McC??? that he will have to get the police to remove him and his camera off the premises. Charles looks behind the cameraman, and appears nervous. The camera is pulled away from the cameraman, exposing a man on the cameraman’s right, who punches the cameraman with the camera twice.

4) The incident is shown from another angle. Note the reactions by some in the audience (or rather, lack of: some turn their heads, but no one takes any action. (the clip is cut short as well).

Now, the argument made by Charles McC??? for banning the filming cameras is that this is private property (namely theirs). That argument should not be valid because this PUBLIC FORUM (as advertised by the hosts and the local TV station KOIN6 in Portland, OR) and wasfilmed live and streamed by that same station.

Charles McC???’s badge reads that he is a member of the African American Alliance [for Houseownership], which is a subsidiary for Mission of Peace , a housing counseling non-profit corporation affliliated with PMI Group, Inc. All three groups look legitimate (i.e, not ACORN, but serve some similar functions). Of course, one has to answer the question, why were they afraid of the camera?

No justification exists for this assault. The cameraman was a private citizen filming a public candidate at a public forum (which was being filmed by a local TV station). Charles McC??? knew he was doing wrong: he looked over and behind the cameraman to 1) see if anyone was watching the scuffle, and/or 2) making sure his compatriot was in place. This act was clearly premediated, but where’s the media outrage?

Why is this important?

…some bonds, notably those that are made up of consumer loans, are required by law to include ratings in their official documentation. That means new bond sales in the $1.4 trillion market for mortgages, autos, student loans and credit cards could effectively shut down.

I thought that the law was, according to Obama,

…the strongest consumer protections in history…a set of reforms to empower consumers and investors…

and according to Senator Reid

“It’s about fairness and justice.

I’m hardly a financial expert, but how are consumers ‘empowered’ if the bill potentially shuts down the bond markets responsible for making consumer loans? This brand of ‘fairness and justice’ (like that dispensed at Countrywide) brings to mind a old anecdote about the brothel piano player and the politician, but I think ultimately Reagan caught the gise of this bill:

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.

The memo concludes that

(1) States have inherent power, subject to federal preemption, to make arrests for violations of federal law. (2) Because it is ordinarily unreasonable to assume that Congress intended to deprive the federal government of whatever assistance States may provide in identifying and detaining those who have violated federal law, federal statues should be presumed not to preempt this arrest authority. This Office’s [of Legal Counsel] 1996 advice that federal law precludes state police from arresting aliens on the basis of civil deportability was mistaken. 3) Section 1252c (basically, arrest and detention of illegals by state authorities to enforce federal law) does not preempt state authority to arrest for federal violations. (Note: its intent has been argued otherwise)

The text of SB1070 states quite cleary:

NO OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR
OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE MAY ADOPT A POLICY THAT LIMITS OR
RESTRICTS THE ENFORCEMENT OF FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS TO LESS THAN THE FULL
EXTENT PERMITTED BY FEDERAL LAW.
emphasis mine

In fact, just scanning the text of SB1070 reveals that the entire bill depends on the cooperation between the federal government and the state; the state makes arrests of individuals (made under “lawful contact” and when “reasonable suspicion” exists) and verifies their (non)status as a resident alien or citizen.

THIS….SHALL BE IMPLEMENTED IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH
FEDERAL LAWS REGULATING IMMIGRATION, PROTECTING THE CIVIL RIGHTS OF ALL
PERSONS AND RESPECTING THE PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF UNITED STATES
CITIZENS.

What? Due process?! Never heard of it!

With all their degrees and education, Holder and Co. apparently skipped basic reading comprehension.

Neglect of an elderly pneumonia patient lead to death from a “non-life threatening” condition, according to his daughter; besides not monitoring his condition, the nurses refused to give him water since he had “knocked over a cup” during his stay.

The British NHS hospital apologized for this incident, saying

“The trust believes that Mr Sauter did not receive a proper and professional standard of care that he and his family had a right to expect.”

“A right to expect”? Well, to the extent that everyone pays into the system, should get something out of it, yes. But can a simple apology make up for such an blatant display of inhumanity? And we can expect these abuses here if Obamacare endures, just look at Oregon . These crimes deserve more condemnation as the moral high-ground was a justification for this odious legislation. Apparently the left forgot the Gospel of Matthew in their high-minded rhetoric:

” ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me. Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Matthew 25:44-46

“We have yet to determine if Oklahoma will file a lawsuit over the federal health care legislation. I simply believe a thoughtful and thorough legal analysis of the constitutional issues is preferable to a rush to the courthouse. We’re essentially aiming at a moving target because the Senate must still consider the House reconciliation bill, so we don’t yet know what the final law will look like.

(snip)

We will continue to research the constitutional issues and case law. Facts and the law, not politics and fear, will drive our decision.”

Despite his high-minded rhetoric, both politics and fear are the driving motives, but they apply to Mr. Edmondson and not the public. AG Edmondson currently desires the Democratic nomination for governor, and is thus caught between Scylla and Charybdis on the issue of Obamacare; devoured in the general election by the Right if he doesn’t pursue the suit, and pulled under by the Left in the primary if he does pursue. He currently tries to avoid the issue entirely by getting involved with the “Feed the Children” spat to

see that the public’s interest is protected and properly executed.

If he was truly interested in the public good, he would look beyond the confines of his political ambitions, as Rob McKenna of Washington State has shown.

“We have spent the past 30 years supporting causes related to peace and justice to now learn that some of our friends’ music may have been used as part of the torture tactics without their consent or knowledge, is horrific. It’s anti-American, period.”

I think they are onto something. Let’s go further and ban all music that is considered ‘torture’. I’d start with the guys that pull up next to you in the light, subwoofers pounding, and speakers blaring (c)rap with an abundance of profanity glorifying sex, violence, abuse of women, drug use, etc. What about your annoying co-worker who turns the music up at work? Celebrities mangling the notes to the national anthem at ball games? Any television theme song (e.g. Barney)?

I know, let’s ban the music of these bands because rebellious teens make the house foundations shake and drive their parents crazy (a rite of passage, it seems, since Elvis). Let’s ban rock concerts because they destroy the hearing (according to OSHA) and drive up healthcare costs.

And remember: it’s all for the children.

1) Obama has the hindsight benefit of Clinton’s history.

2) According to the 1999 National Defense Authorization Act, Section 1512

The President shall certify to the Congress at least 15 days in advance of any export to the People’s Republic of China of missile equipment or technology (as defined in section 74 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2797c)) that–

(1) such export is not detrimental to the United States space launch industry; and

(2) the missile equipment or technology, including any indirect technical benefit that could be derived
from such export, will not measurably improve the missile or space launch capabilities of the People’s Republic of China.

therefore Obama is sidestepping his responsibility (at the least) or breaking it (at the most). The Department of Commerce is mentioned Section 1522, naming the officials that have to submit a written request to assess national security risks. These officials are:

Secretary of State (Hillary Clinton)

Secretary of Energy (Steve Chu)

Secretary of Defense (Robert Gates)

Director of Central Intelligence (Leon Panetta)

Hillary is useless (remember Norman Hsu?) , but I’m not certain on the amount of spine on the others.

Everyone recalls the Obama campaign pledge to leave us defenseless:

Little did we know that he was also going to sell the current technology to the Chinese (and by proxy to everyone else.

But should this really surprise? This administration, supposedly dedicated to transparency, has encouraged getting in your neighbor’s face, reporting your neighbor’s dissent, and gathering personal data off Facebook and other social networking sites. The Department of Justice would do well to read their own mission statement:

…to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans.

Oh, and if any DOJ bloggers are reading this, tell your boss I look forward to his departure from office.

So far the Deity Incarnate’s his reception has been poor: not only was his challenge to the UN concerning global warming “overshadowed” by President Hu of China, but President Sarkozy made a cutting remark towards Obama’s verbosity by promising

not to “inflict” a “grandiose speech” on delegates when “concrete proposals” were needed,

proving that Americans aren’t the only ones tired of the oratory of the self-anointed GROFAZ president. The UK Guardian further labels him as Obama the Impotent and not only compares Obama to Bush, but rants against an American minority of

small-town whites in pickup trucks with gun racks

that impede the glorious and righteous cause of climate reform.

Sticking strictly with Obama, the man “wanted by most of the world” and greeted by cheering international throngs during his presidential campaign is suddenly on par with Bush. And yet even this comparison is false, as Bush was respected, if disliked abroad.

Machiavelli said that being feared is preferable to being loved if you can’t have it both ways, but he also said that is it more secure to be feared. As the domestic political thug is an international babe in the woods, Obama has not secured respect for the US, but rather, as Shakespeare once wrote, “cooled her friends, and heated her enemies.”

A quick summary:

1. A pile of dung that smells like roses is still a pile of dung.
2. Obama senses the economy, not healthcare, is the concern of Americans, hence the references to deficit reduction. But good luck trying to accomplish all the savings with 53 new bureaucracies.
3. Obama tried to slop the R’s (Grassley, Hatch, McCain) for support, but predicts McCain won’t bite.
4. Predicts US citizens will not fall for speech.
5. No Republican in committee has voted for the health bill.
6. Obama is a liar (not an exact quote, but the underlying premise).
7. Obama is out of touch with US citizens’ concerns.
8. Obama will never compromise with R’s.

I recommend listening to the interview; Shadegg has obviously read the bill and can explain it well.

This is a image of the Connecticut state legislature slaving away for the good of the people.

Consider this a caption contest (no prize, but a picture is worth a 1000 words, and mine just get in the way).