Strong societies teach respect for history

Via Billy

If you ever visit the Civil War battlefield in Gettysburg, you will find the Eternal Light Peace Memorial.

The top half of the monument is constructed of Alabama limestone, the bottom half of granite from Maine, and, dedicated by Franklin Roosevelt in 1938 on the 75th anniversary of the battle, it was meant as a national tribute to the soldiers of both armies who gave their lives on that field.

More than that, though, it is one among many examples of how the Union chose peace, unity and reconciliation over division, resentment and hate by graciously honoring the heroes of the old Confederacy. Indeed, when, towards war’s end, President Lincoln was urged to hang rebellious Southern leaders, Lincoln responded “Judge not that ye be not judged.”

Rebuking the spirit of respect and reconciliation practiced by Presidents Lincoln and Roosevelt, local NAACP President James Muwakkil has decided to cast his stone at the portrait of Robert E. Lee hanging on the wall of the Old County Courthouse. But if our county commission were to give in to his demand and remove the painting, would they not be surrendering to a destructive logic that would also bring down the county that bears Lee’s name and countless other markers to our history and heritage?

More @ News-Press

Why the Latest Zimmerman Race Riot Conspiracy Theory Is the Dumbest Yet

Via avordvet

 

The conservative blogosphere is brewing with ominous warnings about the inevitable riots they think will come if George Zimmerman is acquitted of charges related to his killing of unarmed teen Trayvon Martin. (My colleague Lauren Williams has rightly questioned this mania here.) An email this week from Everett Wilkinson, a former tea party leader in Florida who now runs something called the Nation Liberty Federation, outlines many of the leading (and recurring) conspiracy theories about the verdict's aftermath, which he naturally thinks will include riots: martial law. FEMA camps. But he offers up some of the new ones, too.

Among those is the suggestion that the New Black Panther Party is busing people to Florida for the specific purpose of inciting riots after Zimmerman presumably walks out of court a free man.

Wilkinson writes:

More @ Mother Jones

Today's patriots are counter-revolutionaries

Via avordvet

 

It may come as a surprise to many people, but America is in the midst of a revolution.

It’s not the revolution you might think. Patriots are not fighting enemies in the street. The Minutemen are not assembling in the green, ready to defend against redcoats.

No, it isn’t the patriots who are fighting a revolution. It’s the progressives who have been fomenting the revolt. And, until recently, they were winning.

Quite simply, they are fighting a revolution against the Constitution.

Think about it. The progressives object to just about everything in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

 Small government, strong gun rights, individual freedom, states’ rights, no unwarranted search or seizure, no quartering law enforcement officers in one’s private home … all these constitutionally guaranteed rights have been under fire by people who don’t like and don’t want the liberties set forth in the founding documents.

So, many decades ago, they decided to slowly but inexorably disassemble our nation’s foundation.
This revolution went unchallenged because it was so gradual as to be almost unnoticed. Old people who knew the real history of America’s beginnings died off, and young people were never educated about their birthright. The progressive media cherry-picked or created news stories to show the “evils” of free-market capitalism and individual liberty, and the despicable nature of moral constraint. This constant erosion of decency bore fruit.

Smugly, the progressives didn’t think anything could challenge their agenda. After all, they had control of the schools, the political machine and the press. What could possibly go wrong? A few more unchallenged years and that pesky Second Amendment would be neutered, and after that every other amendment would fall by the wayside for lack of defense. Then the march toward Marxism would be complete.

It would have been a bloodless coup … except for one thing.

More @ WND

Voting in Confederate states

Via Billy

 

AL 

VERBATIM

Mr. Lindsey Ray's letter "The South will not rise again" (Birmingham News June, 29 2013) believes federal control of voting must continue in his "Confederate states," a black vs. white question.
The U.S. Census Bureau in its "Table 4b. Reported Voting and Registration, by Sex, Race and Hispanic Origin, for States: November 2012" gives the voting percent for "black alone or in combination" citizens and "White non-Hispanic alone" citizens.

Those numbers for each state yield a ratio of black to white voting where parity is achieved at a ratio of 1.0. Black voting rates exceed white voting rates at ratios above 1.0 and white voting rates exceed Black voting rates at ratios below 1.0.

States where Black voting rates exceed white rates are: NORTH CAROLINA (1.21), New York (1.16), Ohio (1.16), MISSISSIPPI (1.15), Illinois (1.14), TENNESSEE (1.12), Indiana (1.11), SOUTH CAROLINA (1.09), New Jersey (1.08), Wisconsin (1.06), LOUISIANA (1.06), GEORGIA (1.05), Maryland (1.04), Pennsylvania (1.03), United States (1.03), Missouri (1.03), TEXAS (1.03), ALABAMA (1.02), and District of Columbia (1.00). Ray's "confederate states" capitalized.

States where white voting rates exceed black are: VIRGINIA (0.99), Oklahoma (0.98), Nevada (0.98), Kentucky (0.96), Connecticut (0.96), California (0.95), FLORIDA (0.94), Michigan (0.94), Delaware (0.91), Massachusetts (0.88), ARKANSAS (0.87), Washington (0.84), Colorado (0.78), Kansas (0.76), Minnesota (0.76), and Arizona (0.72).

Mr. Ray must now show that voting in "Confederate states" where black rates exceed White rates is more-fair than voting in "non Confederate states" where white rates exceed Black.

Joe Boyett
Montgomery

Samuel Adams Beer Ejects God from the Declaration of Independence

 

The Black Sphere 

VERBATIM

Last week, while patriotic Americans celebrated the 237th birthday of our nation’s founding, Samuel Adams Beer commemorated Independence Day by brazenly undermining the very documents upon which our nation was founded.

 

A television ad, which ran over the Fourth of July weekend, depicts an eighteenth century tavern barkeep citing the Declaration of Independence saying:

“All men are created equal. They are endowed with certain unalienable rights: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

It didn’t take long for Samuel Adams’ Facebook page and Twitter feed to light up with protests from Americans who noticed the small but very significant omission of “by their Creator,” from the beer company’s rendition of the Declaration.

In response to a heated email that I swiftly sent off to the Vice President of Marketing at Samuel Adams, I received this response:

Thank you for your message about our recent TV ad and our use of some words from the Declaration of Independence, without the phrase “by our Creator.” We apologize that the omission offended you. That was never our intent. As you may already know, we adhere to an advertising code, established by the Beer Institute – a beer industry trade organization. The code states, “Beer advertising and marketing materials should not include religion or religious themes.” We agree with that, and follow those guidelines in our advertising and responsibly marketing our products.

Sincerely,

Michelle Sullivan
Senior Director of External Relations
Boston Beer Company

Apparently we are to accept the fact that the industry guidelines set by the Beer Industry trump the principles set forth in America’s founding documents? You know, those same founding documents that helped create the free market environment under which Samuel Adams Beer can enterprise and thrive.

It seems that Samuel Adams Relations Executive wants to dismiss this “adherence to guidelines” as a trivial matter. But for those Americans who have been watching the slow and steady devolution of our individual rights by an ever-expanding government, this omission is not insignificant.
If Samuel Adams Beer is going to market and sell beer evoking the name of perhaps our most religious founding father, then maybe they should brush up on their American History.
In the meantime, I penned this response to Ms. Sullivan:

Dear Ms. Sullivan,

Thank you for your prompt response. It’s unfortunate that Samuel Adams Beer and the Beer Industry categorize the Declaration of Independence as a “religious” document. Out of respect for the policies set forth by the Beer Industry, I can no longer in good conscience purchase your product. You see, the currency I use clearly states “in God we trust,” which is an overt violation of your industry standards. (OW!)

Snowden emerges in new video with human rights activists at Moscow airport

Charlie Daniels castigates media over Paula Dean coverage

 

If there’s one straight talker who isn’t afraid to let the media have it over the public flaying of celebrity chef Paula Deen, it’s country and Southern rock legend Charlie Daniels.

Daniels blasted the media for glossing over significant scandals at the highest levels of government to fill the airwaves instead with ire over a National Enquirer story covering a racial discrimination suit in which Deen admitted to having used “the N-word” decades ago and planning a “plantation” theme party that included black servants.

“If anything exemplifies the overt prejudice and determination of the American media to report only the news that suits their social and political interests and concept of what does and does not fit their agenda,” Daniels wrote in a blog post, “it’s the totally overblown coverage of something Paula Deen said 20 years ago, and some party she planned that she wanted to resemble a plantation scene featuring black male waiters in period dress.

“Do the 20-year-old words of a lady with a television cooking show trump the lie an attorney general told Congress, or officials at the IRS usurping the rights of the American public and pleading the Fifth Amendment when confronted about it or the hiding of the facts surrounding the murder of four Americans at a consulate in Libya or the incredibly shabby image of a president taking a 100-million-dollar vacation in this economy while closing down tours of the White House or the NSA invasion on the privacy of millions of unsuspecting citizens?” he posited. “I think not.”

More @ WND

Thoughts On Police Raid On Adam Kokesh

"The Federal Government is treating the 'long train of abuses' enumerated in our Declaration of Independence like a shopping list, and is treating George Orwell's 1984 like an operations manual."

 Excerpts:

The U.S. government is playing with fire. This is yet another example of police using unnecessary military assault tactics on a suspect to merely serve a warrant, that vastly increase the chances of someone being killed or severely injured.  There was no hostage.   This was not a case of a barricaded suspect who refused to come out.  This was just an arrest.  One mistake, one perceived false move by anyone who happens to be in the home, and they are shot.   And bursting into an armed man's home in the middle of the night is also a great way to get shot.  Just doesn't make any sense.  They could have arrested him while he went out for a morning Starbucks, or went out for lunch or dinner. And it would have taken just a couple of detectives to conduct such an arrest on the streets.  No need for a 20 man SWAT team to enter his home, in the middle of the night, where the risks to all are greatly increased.   No need for an armored vehicle and helicopters.    No, this makes no sense if their only concern was making a safe arrest.  This was a show of force.  An example.  A lesson.

The more illegitimate and absurd the arbitrary rule of Leviathan, the more it violates our natural rights, the more it has to make examples out of anyone who dares to openly defy it by means of civil disobedience or nullification.   You can, and should, expect more of this, and more severe examples.
  
When a government steps outside of its limited delegation of powers that were intended to secure liberty and "becomes abusive of these ends," it will of course lose the respect, consent, and willing cooperation of increasing numbers of the people.    There is now a large, and growing portion of the American people who correctly see this current regime to be every bit as illegitimate and unjust as the one our forefathers took up arms against in 1775.    Such a government, which violates the rights of the people and thus no longer has the loyalty, respect, and consent of the people, can rule only through force and the instilling of fear - just like the British Crown and Parliament.

And this current regime is making the same mistakes the Crown made.  Rather than recognizing any of the grievances of the people as legitimate, and backing off from its violations of our rights, it is doubling down on them, and asserting even more power, and using enforcement methods that increasingly make it obvious that it sees we the people as its current and future military enemy, as it treats us "As If An Enemy's Country" - like an occupied, conquered enemy nation.  How else do you explain the detention of  U.S. citizens Jose Padilla and Yasir Hamdi as "enemy combatants", the NDAA military detention and trial provisions, warrantless domestic NSA spying, drone strikes on Americans, and the gross violations of the Fourth Amendment we saw in Boston after the bombing in April, or the calls to treat the bombing suspect as an "unlawful combatant" under the laws of war?

 They are all claims of power to use the international laws of war on us.  And that claimed power will not, and already has not, been limited to use against Muslims.  It is meant for all of us, which is exactly why the NSA has been mining metadata on all of us.   All of us are considered part of the conquered enemy population - just like in Afghanistan or Iraq.  Not just some of us.  All of us.  All are suspect.  All (except the most vetted and trusted minions) are potential "terrorists" or "insurgents" and all will be monitored, tracked, and metadata profiled.  There will be a "file" on us all because they know that what they are doing is contrary to the rights of us all, and any of us, or all of us, may join the  resistance to their plans, at any time.  

They correctly assess us all as potential military adversaries precisely because they intend to violate the rights of all of us.   And you can bet they are prioritizing who is the greater threat, with veterans, retired police, and gun owners considered a threat because of their training and competency at arms alone.  And of course they also place all constitutionalists of any stripe - Ron Paul supporters, Chuck Baldwin supporters, libertarians, Constitution Party members, John Birch type conservatives, traditional Barry Goldwater conservatives, etc., - right up there at the top of the lists of "threats" because all such people adhere closely to the principles of the Founders' Republic - to classical liberal ideas and ideals on immutable natural law and inalienable rights that must be defended at all hazard.   And to chill, suppress, and prepare to stop such people from resisting, those who control the federal government and their fellow travelers at the state level are resorting to precisely the same totalitarian methods and tools used by oppressive regimes throughout history, from King George to Stalin.

Complete article @ Oathkeepers

My nephew - Will Overman - Barn Session

My nephew hikes the Appalachian Trail

Dershowitz: Zimmerman Prosecutors 'Should Be Disbarred'

 

Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz says the prosecutors in the George Zimmerman murder trial should be charged with "prosecutorial misconduct" for suggesting the defendant planned the fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin.

"That is something no prosecutor should be allowed to get away with … to make up a story from whole cloth," Dershowitz told "The Steve Malzberg Show" on Newsmax TV.

"These prosecutors should be disbarred. They have acted absolutely irresponsibly in an utterly un-American fashion."

Zimmerman, a 29-year-old neighborhood watch volunteer, is charged with gunning down Martin, 17, as the two fought following a confrontation in the gated Sanford, Fla., community where Zimmerman lives — an act the defendant said was in self-defense.

In the prosecution's final argument on Friday, lawyer John Guy said Zimmerman deliberately followed Martin and "shot him because he wanted to."

Dershowitz called Guy's statement "such speculation. How does he get into the mind of Zimmerman? He hasn't cross-examined him, he hasn't met him.

More @ Newsmax