12th NC PATCON October 4th - Octob...
11th NC PATCON May 31st - June 5th...
AAR & Pictures X NC PATCON +
10th NC PATCON September 28 - October 3rd 2016
Pictures: 9th NC PATCON
9th NC PATCON June 1 - June 6th 2016
PICTURES: NC PATCON VIII
8th NC PATCON September 30 - October 5th 2015
7th NC PATCON May 6th - 11th 2015
Pictures: 6th NC PATCON October 1st - 6th 2014
AAR - 6th NC PATCON October 1st - 6th 2014 SCALAWAG OF THE MONTH: TRAITOR SESSIONS
Friday, December 3, 2010
Cape Fear Historical Institute
“His mission [of chasing a Northern gunboat away with cannon fire], Pelham led his crew to the burning town, now deserted by the enemy infantry who had fled on [General Jeb] Stuart’s approach. When he reported to General Stuart, the cavalry chief warmly clasped Pelham’s hand and said: “Well done, Captain, you certainly handled the Union Navy as roughly as you do the Army of the Potomac.”
Turning to the smoking ruins of the town, “Jeb” said, “Pelham, my boy, take your crew and help yourselves to the bountiful provisions our Yankee friends were unable to destroy in their hurry to escape.” Pelham’s cannoneers needed no second invitation to join Stuart’s troopers in tackling the fancy luxuries intended for General [George] McClellan’s army. Hungry Southern lads who had lived the past few days on salt meat and crackers now feasted on tropical fruits, lemonade, preserved eggs, meat, fish, French rolls, candy, Havana cigars and assorted liquors.
When some of the troopers began to get tipsy from sampling the whiskey, Colonel “Rooney” Lee, General Lee’s second son, started a rumor that the enemy had poisoned the liquor to get even with the Confederates. The story spread swiftly causing many red-faced celebrators to throw away their flasks and hold their stomachs in imagined agony.
Pelham and Jim Breathed feasted on pickled oysters and fruit under the shade of a tree beside the river. After finishing a juicy pear, Jim commented, “Captain, if McClellan’s troops eat like this every day it’s no wonder they run away rather than fight and get killed.”
(Colonel John Pelham, Lee’s Boy Artillerist, William Woods Hassler, Garrett and Massie, 1960, pp. 41-42)
"But we are told that centralized control by an overwhelmingly powerful national government is good in our case because "they" know what is best for us.
Oh really? They sure have done a great job "managing" our economic system, haven't they? Unfortunately, it seems as though anything that the federal government takes control over just gets more messed up.
The following are 28 hard questions that you should ask anyone who believes that having a highly centralized economy and a highly centralized government is good for us...."
-- Anthony Fry, as quoted by CNBC, June, 2010
The Penniless Billionaires
Read and weep.
"A German woman feeding a stove with currency notes, which burn longer than the amount of firewood they can buy.”
The German Hyperinflation, 1922-1923
In the autumn of 1923, Lott Hendlich, a German widow in her fifties, returned to her native Frankfurt after an absence of more than four years in Switzerland. In 1919 she had gone to spend a few pleasant weeks in a Swiss village where her relatives lived. But almost immediately, Frau Hendlich broke her hip in a fall. During her long convalescence her chronic cough became worse, and the doctor attending her advised her that she was suffering from advanced tuberculosis. The months and years of her illness dragged on interminably even though her relatives were genuinely solicitous (they insisted on defraying all her expenses, including the fees of her doctor). At last, in September 1923, she was "cured" and considered well enough to return home. Her much longed-for homecoming soon became a nightmare.
In the stack of accumulated mail she found three letters from her bank; they delineated her ruin. The first–written in mid-1920 by a minor bank officer who had befriended her–advised her "to invest most of the funds in your rather substantial bank account" (amounting to over 600,000 marks, or the equivalent of more than $70,000 at the exchange rate prevailing in 1919). "It is my judgment," the writer continued, "that the purchasing power of the mark will decline, and I suggest you try to guard against this through some suitable investment which we can discuss when you come into the bank."
The next letter, dated in September 1922, and signed by another officer said, "It is no longer profitable for us to service such a small account as yours. Will you kindly withdraw your funds at the earliest opportunity?"
The third letter, dated several weeks before her return from Switzerland, announced, "Not having heard from you since our last communication, we have closed out your account. Since we no longer have on hand any small-denomination bank notes, we herein enclose a note for one million marks."
With gathering panic Frau Hendlich looked at the envelope that had contained the letter and the million-mark note. She noticed that affixed to it there was a canceled postage stamp of one million marks. Her bank account–which four years before seemed large enough to provide her with a serene existence to the end of her days–had been utterly consumed by inflation and could no longer (Only? BT) pay for an ordinary postage stamp.
"We did not ask you to send us all your illiterates from Anatolia. Turkey Sent them here. we haven't asked you to send up your stone-age Islamist either."
"And despite the misinformation spewed on this floor, the fact is that when taxes have been cut, revenues go up — each time it's been done. But we have such an ignorant way for CBO to operate, so for this political animal, and "I know people say it's bipartisan — baloney. CBO is not bipartisan," he said.
And the rest of the illegitimate government while we're at it.
"I will not agree to have this bill go forward and neither will 41 of my colleagues--because our economy is in the tank, and the American people want that issue addressed... so to somehow believe that this is a compelling issue in [the middle of fighting two wars] is [absurd]."
Sen. John McCain
"Why are we here?" Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) wondered aloud. It's a question the American people probably share, as our leaders fritter away hour after hour debating a policy that not one senator has a legitimate reason to do away with. Yet here we are, 14 days from the end of this lame-duck session, and Senate Democrats are so focused on endearing themselves to the gay community that they're willing to spill innocent soldiers' blood to do it. "I cannot reconcile, nor turn my back, on the negative perceptions held by our Marines who are most engaged in the hard work of day-to-day operations in Afghanistan," said Gen. James Amos. One of his combat lieutenants came to him, worried that this repeal would rip his unit apart. "My team's... effectiveness is directly tied to its cohesiveness... Despite differences, we are so close that we anticipate others' moves... our ability to do our job is predicated on this kind of [close] relationship. To add any element of sexual competition, sexuality, or hesitance in trust would unquestionably prevent these bonds--and destroy [them]."
Gen. Amos was one of four service chiefs hauled before the Armed Services Committee to talk--not about ongoing military operations or national security--but how to pamper less than one-half of one percent of America's force. All but one of the top brass was adamant: the repeal is not worth the risk. According to the Army's Gen. George Casey, lifting the ban in the near term "will add another level of stress to an already stretched force; be more difficult in combat arms; and be more difficult for the Army than the report suggests." "War complicates repeal," Gen. Casey said, calling Adm. Mike Mullen's statement yesterday (that war "facilitates change") "a stretch."
Like the others, Air Force Chief Norton Schwartz told the panel that he would follow Congress's orders, but admitted, "It is difficult for me... to recommend placing any additional discretionary demands on our leadership cadres in Afghanistan at this particularly challenging time." To demonstrate what a small minority these gay service members are, Gen. Amos said that since 1993 (when the policy was enacted), the Marine Corps has discharged a total of 625,000 men and women. Most of them left the service under normal circumstances like retirement or the end of their enlistment. In 17 years, the Marines have booted 1,304 soldiers under the umbrella of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy--and 400 of them occurred at boot camp, where enlistees with second thoughts use the policy as a way to get out. In other words, homosexuals make up a microscopic portion of the military population--yet our President is willing to gamble the safety of two million service members and the security of 307,000,000 Americans to boost their self-esteem?
Speaking of gambling, the Air Force team did some number-crunching, and Gen. Schwartz estimates that this coming out party would cost taxpayers somewhere in the neighborhood of $40-50 million. That's a of lot flak jackets to give up just so the President can stroke a few egos. "I will not agree to have this bill go forward," Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) vowed. "And neither will 41 of my colleagues--because our economy is in the tank, and the American people want that issue addressed... so to somehow believe that this is a compelling issue in [the middle of fighting two wars] is [absurd]." Our experts couldn't agree more. Hear what Gen. Carl Mundy, former Commandant of the Marine Corps, said in this clip from yesterday's webcast.
The "trouble" I'm referring to is the explicit right asserted by the Declaration - the right to "alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government".
"The so-called science was always fictional and fraudulent and the economic implications were clearly insane, so it's about time that the politics began to reflect those realities"
|Dr. Robinson (Dixie's Homeschooler) Myth Of Global Warming|
DixieBroadcasting brings you this Southern Heritage action alert. Please get involved!
Now, however, there’s even more disturbing news. Senators Tom Coburn (R – Oklahoma) and Richard Burr (R – North Carolina) sent a letter to the Education Department last week citing public documents indicating that it “may have leaked the proposed regulations to parties supporting the Administration’s position and investors who stand to benefit from the failure of the proprietary school sector.” The Senators’ letter comes on the heels of a lawsuit whose evidence includes emails between Education Department advisers and short-sellers.
"At a White House gathering for the new governors, Governor-Elect Haley confronted Mr. Obama and asked him to repeal Obamacare. Obama refused so Haley said she wanted an opt-out for South Carolina. She made sure the White House knew she was going to fight every step of the way on this."
"This is the most breathtaking endorsement of utter tyranny to foul American discourse in recent memory. No past action conveys immunity from legal consequence."
“It will come to an end. And when it ends with the dollar crisis, everybody loses . . . and then there's political chaos. We're not immune to that,” Paul said in an interview on MSBNC