Mattel's Tommy Burst Machine Gun ad.
October 7, 2010
September 24, 2010
September 15, 2010
A Compilation of Close Calls
A wickid cool compilation of close calls. What I don't get is the idiots that get off by flirt ing with a high spped train? WTF?
September 8, 2010
August 31, 2010
August 14, 2010
August 6, 2010
367mph school bus bus!
Original story: Motoring enthusiast builds 367mph bus
Powered by an after-burning General Electric J79 engine from an F-4 Phantom Fighter, my first thought was that the big boxy School bus would have better aerodynamic propperties than the aircraft it came out of.
Powered by an after-burning General Electric J79 engine from an F-4 Phantom Fighter, my first thought was that the big boxy School bus would have better aerodynamic propperties than the aircraft it came out of.
Building your own Jet powered, car, tractor or Hover-round you might just need the IPB for the J-79 see the add to the right.
Black Tea party Patriots in action.
Black Tea party Patriots in action. Racist? No! Patriots? Yes! Balls? You betchya!
You can't stop the signal! (Blatently stolen from The real King of France.)
You can't stop the signal! (Blatently stolen from The real King of France.)
August 5, 2010
Holery Carp!
Wow! Talk about being robed of a home run! Outstanding play.
For a good laugh check out the name on the jersey!
For a good laugh check out the name on the jersey!
August 2, 2010
You can't stop the signal.
As a SciFi fan I am reminded of the line in Serenity. This document, Disco and Atomic War, is about growing up in Estonia, and the effect of Finish television in the former Soviet Union. The full movie can be seen below but only for a limited time. I highly recommend watching.
I have a sneaky feeling history will prove that cell phone video and YouTube will have the same effect in this country. "You can't stop the signal".
I have a sneaky feeling history will prove that cell phone video and YouTube will have the same effect in this country. "You can't stop the signal".
July 30, 2010
July 28, 2010
July 23, 2010
Another example of Dem Damn Dems.
A D.C. cab driver said he was stiffed by Congressman Jerald Nadler (D-NY), who he said walked off without paying his fare.
Nadler, 8th district in NY, is your typically Assshat Progressive Socialist Dem. He will tout that he is for the little guy but wont think twice about stiffing a cabbie.
Sorry I can't embed the video but here is the link:
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6677406n&tag=mncol;lst;1
(What a dick!)
Nadler, 8th district in NY, is your typically Assshat Progressive Socialist Dem. He will tout that he is for the little guy but wont think twice about stiffing a cabbie.
Sorry I can't embed the video but here is the link:
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6677406n&tag=mncol;lst;1
(What a dick!)
July 21, 2010
Liberal Racism
Original story: Liberal Racism
This is a great piece by Allen West who is running for the as seat in Florida's 22nd Congressional district. It's renews my faith in my country to see men of strong moral character standing up and saying what needs to said. Buy the way, he doesnt look angry or ..... ra... never mind. I encourage supporting him.
Juicy Snippets:
"It is this duplicitous hypocrisy which allows me to state that the NAACP is shamefully now a liberal racist enabler. The upcoming mid-term elections have the Democrat party in certain peril. Therefore they have turned to their tactic of first and last resort, race baiting.
The resolution issued by the NAACP against the Tea Party is just a strategy to focus this coming election not against liberal progressive policies, which are anathema to our Republic. No, the NAACP, in conjunction with their masters, the Democrat party, seek to make this into an election based upon an insane charge of racial hatred."
"I find the Tea Party, to which I have spoken to several times, stands for fundamental principles and values consistent with that which has made America an exceptional Constitutional Republic.
Therefore, under the "leadership" of Al Sharpton, this counter group One Nation obviously stands for principles which are antithetical to our Republic."
"antithetical to our Republic" Mr. West is definitely polite. I would have used much stronger language. BTW: I like your shirt Allen!
Juicy Snippets:
"It is this duplicitous hypocrisy which allows me to state that the NAACP is shamefully now a liberal racist enabler. The upcoming mid-term elections have the Democrat party in certain peril. Therefore they have turned to their tactic of first and last resort, race baiting.
The resolution issued by the NAACP against the Tea Party is just a strategy to focus this coming election not against liberal progressive policies, which are anathema to our Republic. No, the NAACP, in conjunction with their masters, the Democrat party, seek to make this into an election based upon an insane charge of racial hatred."
"I find the Tea Party, to which I have spoken to several times, stands for fundamental principles and values consistent with that which has made America an exceptional Constitutional Republic.
Therefore, under the "leadership" of Al Sharpton, this counter group One Nation obviously stands for principles which are antithetical to our Republic."
"antithetical to our Republic" Mr. West is definitely polite. I would have used much stronger language. BTW: I like your shirt Allen!
July 19, 2010
Jobless in Cuba? Communism faces the unthinkable.
This story is brought to my attention by Kalishna Kitty.
"Without people feeling the need to work to make a living, sheltered by state regulations that are excessively paternalistic and irrational, we will never stimulate a love for work" -Is this a quote from Ayn Rand? Ronald Reagan? Thomas Jefferson? Nope, believe it or not it was actually said by Raul Castro!Other great snippets: It's a common sight in communist Cuba. Here, nearly everyone works for the state and official unemployment is minuscule, but pay is so low that Cubans like to joke that "the state pretends to pay us and we pretend to work."
With the government giving no details of its thinking, rumors have spread that as many as a fourth of all government workers in some industries could lose their jobs or be moved to farming or construction. But Labor Minister Margarita Gonzalez has promised that "Cuba will not employ massive firings in a manner similar to neoliberal cutbacks," using "neoliberal" as a description of free-market policies.
Neoliberal! Ha! I like that! (Can't say Capitalism outloud can you!)
July 10, 2010
July 8, 2010
Follow up to the previous post.
Just a quick follow up from the previous post. I saw this on Glenn Beck's show and the hair stood up on the back of my neck.
And in the Amrican Thinker is this ray of hope. http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/07/my_black_dad_obama.html
And in the Amrican Thinker is this ray of hope. http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/07/my_black_dad_obama.html
Things that are getting under my skin:
Just some thoughts.
Illegal is not a race. It is an action. The U.S. is, (or dare I say was?)
The Black Panther poll intimidation case. ( My emotions, mad, scared, disgusted, and very wary.)
Illegal is not a race. It is an action. The U.S. is, (or dare I say was?) a constitutional republic, based on the rule of law. And while I understand and welcome anyone who wants to live in our country, they must first obey the law.
Did ya hear the latest trial balloon? It's the transaction tax. A 1% on all transactions. Buy Starbucks, TAX, use a credit card,TAX, cash a check,TAX, transfer money, from checking to savings,TAX! pay your light bill, TAX.
The Black Panther poll intimidation case. ( My emotions, mad, scared, disgusted, and very wary.)
July 4, 2010
July 3, 2010
Independence Day Reflections
Happy Independence day. Mostly.... On this fourth of July weekend I would like to reflect on just what the declaration of independence meant, what it means today, and compare the first hundred and forty odd years years since the signing, and the years following. Our great nation was built on some very simple yet at the time, and even today, radical ideas.
Rights: First and foremost the declaration of independence affirmed that man has natural rights. Rights, not given to him by any worldly entity, but rights by simple reason of mans existence. Your natural and individual rights,"God given rights"are yours by virtue of your birth. No King, Government, nor any person gives you your rights. Ask yourself "Do I believe this?". If so are you willing to act accordingly?
Capitalism: The United States, from it's inception has grown and shortly led the world in Freedom, Prosperity, Wealth, Technology and Social Mobility for most of it's existence. Why? The answer is simple. Capitalism. Capitalism is the only means of wealth exchange that is moral and fair. (All others at some point wind up with the muzzle of a gun pointed at you) In the years prior to WWI , the American way of life could be defined as unfettered capitalism. Our nations growth was unmatched. Growth, and prosperity sored. The world looked at us with envy. What changed and why? Why do we not defend capitalism any more? Why do our "Conservatives" , politicians and laymen, dare not speak the word, much less defend it? True conservatism is to be a Capitalist, but many who call themselves conservatives, cite God, the Flag, Tradition and "Our Troops" but never speak of the true virtues of Capitalism. Why do "Conservatives" surrender this ground to the enemy unchallenged?
Freedom: Are we free today? Please discuss. Bueller?.......
Bueller?........
How about liberty?.....
Bueller?......................
Capitalism: The United States, from it's inception has grown and shortly led the world in Freedom, Prosperity, Wealth, Technology and Social Mobility for most of it's existence. Why? The answer is simple. Capitalism. Capitalism is the only means of wealth exchange that is moral and fair. (All others at some point wind up with the muzzle of a gun pointed at you) In the years prior to WWI , the American way of life could be defined as unfettered capitalism. Our nations growth was unmatched. Growth, and prosperity sored. The world looked at us with envy. What changed and why? Why do we not defend capitalism any more? Why do our "Conservatives" , politicians and laymen, dare not speak the word, much less defend it? True conservatism is to be a Capitalist, but many who call themselves conservatives, cite God, the Flag, Tradition and "Our Troops" but never speak of the true virtues of Capitalism. Why do "Conservatives" surrender this ground to the enemy unchallenged?
Freedom: Are we free today? Please discuss. Bueller?.......
How about liberty?.....
Bueller?......................
June 28, 2010
Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide
Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide.
By MARK SHERMAN
The Associated Press
Monday, June 28, 2010; 10:46 AM
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court held Monday that the Constitution's Second Amendment restrains government's ability to significantly limit "the right to keep and bear arms," advancing a recent trend by the John Roberts-led bench to embrace gun rights.
By a narrow, 5-4 vote, the justices also signaled, however, that some limitations on the right could survive legal challenges.
Writing for the court in a case involving restrictive laws in Chicago and one of its suburbs, Justice Samuel Alito said that the Second Amendment right "applies equally to the federal government and the states."
The court was split along familiar ideological lines, with five conservative-moderate justices in favor of gun rights and four liberals opposed. Chief Justice Roberts voted with the majority.
Two years ago, the court declared that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess guns, at least for purposes of self-defense in the home.
That ruling applied only to federal laws. It struck down a ban on handguns and a trigger lock requirement for other guns in the District of Columbia, a federal city with a unique legal standing. At the same time, the court was careful not to cast doubt on other regulations of firearms here.
Gun rights proponents almost immediately filed a federal lawsuit challenging gun control laws in Chicago and its suburb of Oak Park, Ill, where handguns have been banned for nearly 30 years. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence says those laws appear to be the last two remaining outright bans.
Lower federal courts upheld the two laws, noting that judges on those benches were bound by Supreme Court precedent and that it would be up to the high court justices to ultimately rule on the true reach of the Second Amendment.
The Supreme Court already has said that most of the guarantees in the Bill of Rights serve as a check on state and local, as well as federal, laws.
Monday's decision did not explicitly strike down the Chicago area laws, ordering a federal appeals court to reconsider its ruling. But it left little doubt that they would eventually fall.
Still, Alito noted that the declaration that the Second Amendment is fully binding on states and cities "limits (but by no means eliminates) their ability to devise solutions to social problems that suit local needs and values."
By MARK SHERMAN
The Associated Press
Monday, June 28, 2010; 10:46 AM
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court held Monday that the Constitution's Second Amendment restrains government's ability to significantly limit "the right to keep and bear arms," advancing a recent trend by the John Roberts-led bench to embrace gun rights.
Writing for the court in a case involving restrictive laws in Chicago and one of its suburbs, Justice Samuel Alito said that the Second Amendment right "applies equally to the federal government and the states."
The court was split along familiar ideological lines, with five conservative-moderate justices in favor of gun rights and four liberals opposed. Chief Justice Roberts voted with the majority.
Two years ago, the court declared that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess guns, at least for purposes of self-defense in the home.
That ruling applied only to federal laws. It struck down a ban on handguns and a trigger lock requirement for other guns in the District of Columbia, a federal city with a unique legal standing. At the same time, the court was careful not to cast doubt on other regulations of firearms here.
Gun rights proponents almost immediately filed a federal lawsuit challenging gun control laws in Chicago and its suburb of Oak Park, Ill, where handguns have been banned for nearly 30 years. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence says those laws appear to be the last two remaining outright bans.
Lower federal courts upheld the two laws, noting that judges on those benches were bound by Supreme Court precedent and that it would be up to the high court justices to ultimately rule on the true reach of the Second Amendment.
Monday's decision did not explicitly strike down the Chicago area laws, ordering a federal appeals court to reconsider its ruling. But it left little doubt that they would eventually fall.
Still, Alito noted that the declaration that the Second Amendment is fully binding on states and cities "limits (but by no means eliminates) their ability to devise solutions to social problems that suit local needs and values."
Your Right to Own a Gun. (FoxBusinessNetwork)
I was listening to Fox News on my XM radio the other day and happened to listen to John Stossel promoting this piece. What surprised me is during the promo interview John gave a quick background on himself. He stated that he is a former/recovering liberal who has developed libertarian view because he truly investigated issues and strives to be intellectually honest with himself and the world.
Related post: The gun is civilization
Related post: The gun is civilization
June 21, 2010
Time Traveler Essentials Shirt
Aurora Sentinel Archives Opinion Columnists Green: Obama is a victim of Bush's failed promises
Green is a life long liberal Democrat, and may just be one of the first examples of rats leaving the sinking ship.
June 18, 2010
The Gun is Civilization
My buddy the Red Bearded MeatHead sent me this. (Havent verified yet but is pretty good stuff) Now verified and propper credits given.
The Gun is Civilization
by Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)
by Marko Kloos
Original : The munchkin wrangler
Corrected by Larry in comments. (Thanks!)
Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.
In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.
When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.
The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.
There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat-- it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.
People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.
Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.
People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.
The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.
When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation... and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.
By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)
by Marko Kloos
The Gun is Civilization
by Marko Kloos
Original : The munchkin wrangler
Corrected by Larry in comments. (Thanks!)
In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.
When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.
The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.
There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat-- it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.
People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.
Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.
People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.
The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.
When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation... and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.
by Marko Kloos
June 15, 2010
Just a thought. An Ayn Rand quote.
The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.
Ayn Rand
June 11, 2010
Shhhh! Don't tell anyone.
Asked about affidavits that Obama's ID was assigned to Connecticut address Gibbs sidesteps deflects and plays the "Bither Card".
Social Security number set aside for applicants in Connecticut while there is no record he ever had a mailing address in the state. In addition, the records indicate the number was issued between 1977 and 1979, yet Obama's earliest employment reportedly was in 1975 at a Baskin-Robbins ice-cream shop in Oahu, Hawaii.
Does the Social Security Administration ever re-issue Social Security numbers?
Never, It's against the law for a person to have a re-issued or second Social Security number issued.
Related Story: Investigators: Obama uses Connecticut Soc. Sec. Number
At a minimum someone doctored his Selective Service registration.
Read this from back in 2008 by Debbie Schlussel. Did Next Commander-in-Chief Falsify Selective Service Registration? Never Actually Register? Obama’s Draft Registration Raises Serious Questions
Pretty compelling.
I know you cant get student loans, work for the govt. and get security clearances without registering with the selective service. (Bet ya cant be a US Senator either!)
My open question to the world: Who vetted Barry for his US Senate run?
Thanks to cmblake6 for the heads up on this story!
June 7, 2010
"Well I'll be Wookie’s uncle........" says young Skywalker
I have been gently, and not so gently for that matter, reminded that it has been some time since my last posting here at The BruHa by several very close friends. I would like to say I am back, things are well. My biggest excuse for not posting is that a lot of my time has been trying to start my own business in a an economy that refuses to cooperate. There are other reasons as well, such as doubt that anyone reads this crap, my laziness and apathy, and traveling.
The first thing of many I have learned in taking some time off is that putting something up every day is hard work. My hat is off to all those out there that blog several good and entertaining posts every day. (Special thanks to cmblake6 and The LaSalamander for getting my ass in gear.)
Second is that people from all over the world will show up and visit your if you have a link to a naked girl naked woman or stripper. Links to guns and firearms are the next best. This Link: Naked Girl with gun is for thoes who search for such a things, an experiment to see how many people show up for this link, and just maybe someone will stick around read and comment. BTW, my most visited page is this: Activists protest Va. strip club's Obama banner and most likely just for the link to the stripper. I just love the Law Of Unintended Consequences! More than a few people have read this article and maybe an eye or two has been opened.
April 16, 2010
Tea Party Infiltrators at the Jacksonville Landing
I attended the Jacksonville I am against over-taxation and the Nanny State Tea Party last night and had a pretty good time. Like last year the turn out was pretty good, the speakers, though obviously novices were impassioned and patriotic. The organizers, speakers as well as the mainstream attendees were polite and enthusiastic. I was proud to have been in attendance and made some new friends. ( High Five to "Short guy" from the 82nd airborne!) I also met LeAnne Kolb who is running for the house District 3, and if you now Florida house seats that is Corine Browns district. If you want a good laugh just watch Corrine Brown in action: Go Gata! LeAnn has a long way to go. She is just starting out and Browns district is one of the most Gerrymandered districts in FL. I wish her the best of luck.
As for the infiltrators, this photo is of two moonbat dweeb lefftards that decided to try to stir things up. Moonbat 1&2 decided to talk shit, loudly I might add. The navy guys next to us called them out on it and that's why JSO officer is keeping watch on them. Hired help in this photo-is a local vagrant/ret-a drunk.
Some notes on the "hired help guy". His shirt was brand new. It had fresh packaging fold creases in it. He also carried a screwdriver in his back pocket, but he probably calls it a "shank" or a "shiv". He seemed to be moving around the crowd quite a bit and at times he was seen to carrying a motorcycle helmet though I doubt he has one. He also showed up real quick when the Navy dudes called the Moonbats out and got between them. JSO watched him pretty close.
As for the moonbats, the just their mouths trying to start shit. Moonbat 2 said to me, "Yeah, I know who John Galt is.", referring to my shirt. I politely let him know that I found it hard to believe he read read over 2,000 pages of anything in his entire life, and that he and his buddy should go home, put a frozen pizza in the toaster oven and jerk off to 4chan. They looked a bit supprised about the last bit, I think it hit too close to home.
Then there was photographer guy. He did not listen, clap, cheer or anything. All he did is take pictures. He took pictures of people and signs. Specificly close ups of faces. He paled around with another guy that did not seem into the rally and also hid when he noticed I was trying to take his picture.
I would love to know who these people are. If you know, please tell.
Some notes on the "hired help guy". His shirt was brand new. It had fresh packaging fold creases in it. He also carried a screwdriver in his back pocket, but he probably calls it a "shank" or a "shiv". He seemed to be moving around the crowd quite a bit and at times he was seen to carrying a motorcycle helmet though I doubt he has one. He also showed up real quick when the Navy dudes called the Moonbats out and got between them. JSO watched him pretty close.
As for the moonbats, the just their mouths trying to start shit. Moonbat 2 said to me, "Yeah, I know who John Galt is.", referring to my shirt. I politely let him know that I found it hard to believe he read read over 2,000 pages of anything in his entire life, and that he and his buddy should go home, put a frozen pizza in the toaster oven and jerk off to 4chan. They looked a bit supprised about the last bit, I think it hit too close to home.
I would love to know who these people are. If you know, please tell.
April 14, 2010
I'll have a beer, just one please.
The beer, called Tactical Nuclear Penguin is made by Scottish microbrewery BrewDog
Reads the label on the bottle:
“This is an extremely strong beer; it should be enjoyed in small servings and with an air of aristocratic nonchalance. It is exactly the same manner you would enjoy a fine whisky, a Frank Zappa album or a visit from a friendly yet anxious ghost.
"BrewDog has already faced opposition to their high-alcohol beverages on their own soil. Regulators ordered their Toyko beer, with an 18.2% alcohol content, be pulled from shelves over the company's marketing of the product. BrewDog responded by releasing a 1.1% alcohol beer they dubbed Nanny State"
Tactical Nuclear Penguin from BrewDog on Vimeo.
Army to court martial 'birther' officer. I say bring it on.
Headline on Drudge this morning linking to the MSNBC story Army to court martial 'birther' officer Lt. Col. Terry Lakin. I gave it quick read, looked at peoples comments, may of them accusing him of being a coward and just avoiding duty, but I decided to find out a bit more about him. With just a little investigation this man appears to be the real deal. He wants a Court Martial!
Please visit and poke around http://www.safeguardourconstitution.com/ and make up your own mind.
Update: Related link on WND NPR changes archive regarding president's birth Thanks to: http://cmblake6.wordpress.com/
Update: Related link on WND NPR changes archive regarding president's birth Thanks to: http://cmblake6.wordpress.com/
LTC Lakin's numerous awards and decorations include the Army Flight Surgeon Badge, Combat Medical Badge, the Bronze Star Medal, the Meritorious Service Medal, the Army Commendation Medal with two Oak Leaf Clusters, the Army Achievement Medal with one Oak Leaf Clusters, the National Defense Service Medal with Bronze Service Star, the Armed Forces Expedition Medal, the Army Reserve Component Achievement Medal, the Army Service Ribbon, the Overseas Service Ribbon sixth award and the NATO service medal. He has served previously in Honduras, Bosnia, El Salvador, Korea, and Afghanistan.
For well over a year, LTC Lakin has asked through his chain of command and his Congressional delegation for proof that President Obama is Constitutionally eligible to serve as his Commander-in-Chief. He has explained to his superiors that he cannot understand how his Oath of Office to protect and defend the Constitution does not allow military officers to pursue this proof of eligibility.
LTC Lakin received military orders in late February for deployment to Afghanistan, including a requirement that he provide "copies of his birth certificate." LTC Lakin is prepared to provide a certified copy of his certification of vital record that lists his birth hospital, physician's name and other key information. He has provided this document for many other required processes, such as his commissioning into the military as an officer, his security clearance and his marriage license. He is the highest ranking officer to go public over this controversy and the first active duty officer to do so.
el Clicky for Vid:
April 6, 2010
Missed by a mile!
This Gem was foound in the comments in the Washinton times article http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/apr/05/missed-mile/
"If Obama were to become a major league pitcher, he would be the worst in history.... he would whine that its not fair that the batters keep advancing to the base on 4 balls, so Obama would demand that the rules be CHANGED so that he could appear as if he's an All Star Pitcher. He would make the strike zone extend from the dirt to the top of the batter's helmet, and when the ESPN clubhouse reporter asks him, "Do you really think its right to change the rules that have governed the game of baseball for over a century just to make it more 'fair' for the pitcher? You do realize, sir, that the pitcher is only one person playing in the game with 17 other players... right?" Obama would answer, "Now, look, I don't think the fans come to the baseball rink to keep track of the 'rules'. People come out here to see me, and to see other big leaguers. I understand that people like you sports reporters love to harp on the rules of the game, or the process by which the game is played, but I don't think that is something the fans come to see. The fans want to come see me be as fair as possible and they come to watch everyone walk off the field a winner. No one even remembers who 'wins' the games...." ESPN reporter, "What do you have to say to those fans outside the park demanding that you restore the rules of the game and those who say that its the consistency of the rules that have made the game such an exestential part of Americana?" Obama, "Those are the same people who protested the idea of integrating the Negro League into the MLB. Those are voices of hate." ESPN reporter, "Actually, sir, I see a group of diverse people out there and I believe that they are professing their LOVE for the game and that your rules change seems arbitrary and damaging." Obama, "Like I said, they are racists. Trust me, if I say it, its true."
April 2, 2010
U.S. Rep. Phil Hare, the Democratic congressman from the 17th District "I dont worry about the constitution"
U.S. Rep. Phil Hare, the Democratic congressman from the 17th District, generated controversy with a comment about the Constitution in a Thursday meeting in Quincy.
Further insight and the congressman's response: http://qconline.com/archives/qco/display_mobile.php?id=486688
Further insight and the congressman's response: http://qconline.com/archives/qco/display_mobile.php?id=486688
March 30, 2010
Who reads instructions?
Found at the http://consumerist.com/
March 29, 2010
If you call a dog's tail a leg, does it have five legs?"
Story: Please dont call it state socialism.
Snipit:
"We're told that for some reason we're not allowed to call the Obama-Reid-Pelosi agenda "socialism," "communism," "Marxism," "state socialism" "fascism," or anything else that might sound unpleasant.
Much as I hate to cite the tyrant Lincoln, if we call a dog's tail a leg, does it have five legs? Telling us we're not "allowed" to use an accurate label for something doesn't change what it is.
Snipit:
"We're told that for some reason we're not allowed to call the Obama-Reid-Pelosi agenda "socialism," "communism," "Marxism," "state socialism" "fascism," or anything else that might sound unpleasant.
Much as I hate to cite the tyrant Lincoln, if we call a dog's tail a leg, does it have five legs? Telling us we're not "allowed" to use an accurate label for something doesn't change what it is.Instead of allowing General Motors and Chrysler to go through normal bankruptcies, through which new and more efficient private operators could have purchased their worthwhile assets while shedding their crippling union contracts, the two giant auto makers have now been effectively nationalized. Meantime, an unelected federal "pay czar" decides on the compensation of executives, even at supposedly private banks that have paid back all their "bailout" loans. Does that sound like the normal function of the American free market, as understood in 1910, 1960 or even 1990?"
March 25, 2010
Progressivism/liberalism/socialism/fascism/monarchy/oligarchy/dictatorship
Progressivism/liberalism/socialism/fascism/monarchy/oligarchy/dictatorship and other forms of statism are based on the idea that normal people are incapable of handling their own affairs.
They all assume that
(1) there is an elite group of enlightened people who can manage things,
(2) these enlightened despots will not be the same ones who screw up the private organizations that they deem to be the problem in need of fixing,
(3) these will be the people actually put into the positions of authority, and
(4) bureaucrats will be hired to administer the enlightened elite’s dictates.
Unfortunately, that theory quits thinking just before the point where it is clear that
(5) the positions of authority cannot always be filled by the necessary enlightened elite, and
(6) the bureaucrats hired to handle other people’s affairs will be normal people who are incapable of handling their own affairs.
Bureaucrats do not serve the people — they serve the bureaucracy.
(see also: self-licking ice cream cone)
This was blatantly stolen from sondrak because it is so damn good!
(1) there is an elite group of enlightened people who can manage things,
(2) these enlightened despots will not be the same ones who screw up the private organizations that they deem to be the problem in need of fixing,
(3) these will be the people actually put into the positions of authority, and
(4) bureaucrats will be hired to administer the enlightened elite’s dictates.
Unfortunately, that theory quits thinking just before the point where it is clear that
(5) the positions of authority cannot always be filled by the necessary enlightened elite, and
(6) the bureaucrats hired to handle other people’s affairs will be normal people who are incapable of handling their own affairs.
Bureaucrats do not serve the people — they serve the bureaucracy.
(see also: self-licking ice cream cone)
This was blatantly stolen from sondrak because it is so damn good!
From a Doctor Who Will Not Comply
Link: http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZjY3ZTg2ODNhYTg4ZDUyNjlmNTBmYWI0YmY2YTQ0YTI=
"An M.D. in family practice passed along this letter she sent to her patients after Obamacare became law. She relates that, so far, "100% of those who have contacted me about it have supported me and accepted the new conditions."
March 23, 2010
My Dear Patient,
As you must know, Congress has just passed extensive legislation governing health care delivery and insurance systems. Whether you agree with what it does or not, we are all now subject to this law and its sweeping changes.
I have always conducted my medical practice with my patient’s best interests as my first priority. Although not legally obliged to do so, I have routinely provided you with a receipt that has all the codes necessary to bill your own health insurance company for any reimbursement to which you are entitled. Until now, that insurance company was a free enterprise despite the fact that it was heavily regulated by state and federal laws. Now the situation is quite different. Through the new law’s mandates, regulatory powers and reform, health insurance is and will be largely a government activity which will have an ever larger jurisdiction over how doctors practice, make clinical judgments and are paid.
The new law provides for about 150 new government agencies, many of which are designed to be ‘oversight’ bureaucracies which will have the right to decide what medical care is legal to provide through insurance. Among other things, they will have the right to review my medical care of you and read your medical record. Now, as soon as you submit our economic transaction to your insurance company for reimbursement, you have involved me in these regulations and put me in the jurisdiction of government for my activities, decisions and behavior as your doctor.
No one can have two masters. Either I can serve you as my patient or I can serve the government. Either I can continue to make your welfare and health my only concern, including the protection of your privacy and medical records, or I can abide by ever-increasing amounts of government regulations and dictates to my decisions. I can’t do both. I choose to continue to follow my conscience and practice medicine to serve you.
For this reason, I am responding to the situation created by this new law by exercising my right not to participate in any health insurance program. I will still provide you with the same medical services that I always have, but the interaction will be exclusively and privately between you and me. This means that I will provide you only with a receipt for the services you have paid for, but without the additional information that is required to submit your receipt for reimbursement to your health insurance company. That is the only way I can make sure there will be no conflict between following the law and serving you. Because the law is now in effect, so must these changes be to my practice.
Sincerely,
Linda Johnston, MD
"An M.D. in family practice passed along this letter she sent to her patients after Obamacare became law. She relates that, so far, "100% of those who have contacted me about it have supported me and accepted the new conditions."
March 23, 2010
My Dear Patient,
As you must know, Congress has just passed extensive legislation governing health care delivery and insurance systems. Whether you agree with what it does or not, we are all now subject to this law and its sweeping changes.
I have always conducted my medical practice with my patient’s best interests as my first priority. Although not legally obliged to do so, I have routinely provided you with a receipt that has all the codes necessary to bill your own health insurance company for any reimbursement to which you are entitled. Until now, that insurance company was a free enterprise despite the fact that it was heavily regulated by state and federal laws. Now the situation is quite different. Through the new law’s mandates, regulatory powers and reform, health insurance is and will be largely a government activity which will have an ever larger jurisdiction over how doctors practice, make clinical judgments and are paid.
The new law provides for about 150 new government agencies, many of which are designed to be ‘oversight’ bureaucracies which will have the right to decide what medical care is legal to provide through insurance. Among other things, they will have the right to review my medical care of you and read your medical record. Now, as soon as you submit our economic transaction to your insurance company for reimbursement, you have involved me in these regulations and put me in the jurisdiction of government for my activities, decisions and behavior as your doctor.
No one can have two masters. Either I can serve you as my patient or I can serve the government. Either I can continue to make your welfare and health my only concern, including the protection of your privacy and medical records, or I can abide by ever-increasing amounts of government regulations and dictates to my decisions. I can’t do both. I choose to continue to follow my conscience and practice medicine to serve you.
For this reason, I am responding to the situation created by this new law by exercising my right not to participate in any health insurance program. I will still provide you with the same medical services that I always have, but the interaction will be exclusively and privately between you and me. This means that I will provide you only with a receipt for the services you have paid for, but without the additional information that is required to submit your receipt for reimbursement to your health insurance company. That is the only way I can make sure there will be no conflict between following the law and serving you. Because the law is now in effect, so must these changes be to my practice.
Sincerely,
Linda Johnston, MD
March 23, 2010
The Health Care Bill Is Not Socialism.
I have taken some time off to watch the Health Care bill unfold, reserving an immediate opinion until I have fully digested what has happened. My immediate reaction was that "This is socialism".
But this bill is not socialism, it is Statism using a socialistic tactic. Look at what has been done; You no longer have ownership of you own body. You are taxed/fined by the mere fact of your existence. By definition you are a subject of the State. Your body is now owned by the State. If you refuse to pay your Tax/Fine you will go to Jail. If you refuse to go to jail the State will KILL you. (Now that's healthy) Your life has now become a privilege granted by the State.My points will not be debated by supporters of this bill in a rational manner. The supporters of this bill and other progressive ideas like this will dismiss me as a nut, but the truth remains. You are no longer a sovereign entity. You are a subject. By no action of your own and only by reason of your existence, you are now coerced to action for the benefit of the State.
What was done is Unconstitutional or more simply stated, against the law and most importantly, immoral.
Our fundamental relationship with the government has changed and the change is for the worse.
Links;
GOP Challenges Constitutionality
IRS to Enforce Health Reform
For your vewing plesure:
March 16, 2010
America’s First Woman President: Barack Obama
America’s First Woman President: Barack Obama
This is funny and profound on so many levels.
Thanks for the heads up from cmblake6.
Thanks for the heads up from cmblake6.
March 15, 2010
IRS visits Sacramento carwash in pursuit of 4 cents
IRS visits Sacramento carwash in pursuit of 4 cents Read more:
"It was every businessperson's nightmare.
Arriving at Harv's Metro Car Wash in midtown Wednesday afternoon were two dark-suited IRS agents demanding payment of delinquent taxes. "They were deadly serious, very aggressive, very condescending," says Harv's owner, Aaron Zeff.
The really odd part of this: The letter that was hand-delivered to Zeff's on-site manager showed the amount of money owed to the feds was ... 4 cents. "
And a sexy car wash photo because .... well Just because.
Arriving at Harv's Metro Car Wash in midtown Wednesday afternoon were two dark-suited IRS agents demanding payment of delinquent taxes. "They were deadly serious, very aggressive, very condescending," says Harv's owner, Aaron Zeff.
The really odd part of this: The letter that was hand-delivered to Zeff's on-site manager showed the amount of money owed to the feds was ... 4 cents. "
And a sexy car wash photo because .... well Just because.
March 11, 2010
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) More RINO's to hunt.
Story: Senator Graham’s Inexplicable National ID Support
When Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) teams up with Chuck "The Schmuck Schumer" only bad thing can happen, and the latest is his idea of a national work ID card complete with biometrics. The idea behind the card is to somehow regulate identify and track illegal aliens who work in the country. Why should every American have to get a n ID card to work? How long until we have to pay for it. When does it become a national work licence? (What about the friggin thousands of laws that are not enforced?) Lindsey Graham is now just another reason as to why I will never give to the National Republican Party.
No, Senator, that’s not all you’re saying. You’re saying that native-born American citizens should be herded into Social Security Administration offices by the millions so they can have their biometrics collected in federal government databases. You’re saying that you’d like a system where working, traveling, going to the doctor, and using a credit card all depend on whether you can show your national ID. You’re saying that bigger government is the solution, not smaller government."
When Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) teams up with Chuck "The Schmuck Schumer" only bad thing can happen, and the latest is his idea of a national work ID card complete with biometrics. The idea behind the card is to somehow regulate identify and track illegal aliens who work in the country. Why should every American have to get a n ID card to work? How long until we have to pay for it. When does it become a national work licence? (What about the friggin thousands of laws that are not enforced?) Lindsey Graham is now just another reason as to why I will never give to the National Republican Party."Senator Graham’s take is equally simple: “We’ve all got Social Security cards,” he said to the Wall Street Journal. “They’re just easily tampered with. Make them tamper-proof. That’s all I’m saying.”
No, Senator, that’s not all you’re saying. You’re saying that native-born American citizens should be herded into Social Security Administration offices by the millions so they can have their biometrics collected in federal government databases. You’re saying that you’d like a system where working, traveling, going to the doctor, and using a credit card all depend on whether you can show your national ID. You’re saying that bigger government is the solution, not smaller government."
"Let me see your papers please".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
