World News Korner

“Independence or death”

(Jan. 2, 2014) — Similar to our Founding Fathers, citizens and patriots in America now find themselves increasingly denied freedom and liberty from a government leadership (A new Crown) that is focused on self-serving, power hungry, deception, and betrayal motivations…the ultimate goal of US Constitutional destruction.

While our Founding Fathers endured pain and suffering from the British Crown, there came a time when they declared “enough is enough.” Thus, the Declaration of Independence was drafted. We should read our Declaration of Independence and note the grievances that led to the decision of “independence or death.” America is under the heel of a new “crown,” enduring grievances of which are not far removed from conditions our Founding Fathers experienced. The Founders moved to action. Now is the time for American patriots to move to action.

Our nation of freedom and liberty was not secured by weakness nor cowering, but by personal strength, courage, and dependence on natures’ God and the laws of nature which are unalienable. While our Founding Fathers sought dialogue with the Crown, they were rebuffed with more pain, suffering to an intolerable level. America has been pleading with elected leaders for years to once again become servants to “we the people” as their oaths demand. Our elected leaders have rebuffed “We the People”…those that they have committed to serve.

Sheep dogs are guardians, protectors, guided by the laws of nature, to the point of laying down their lives for the sheep from wolf attack. Our Founding Fathers were sheep dogs, taking responsibility to gather sheep to the fold, protect, and resist the wolves with blood, body and life if necessary, to ensure the freedoms and liberties the laws of nature endow.

OPERATION AMERICAN SPRING is embracing the role of sheep dogs while the sheep remain protected in the fold. Much the same as our Founding Fathers, only a small minority (2-3 percent) of brave, freedom loving colonists actually participated in the efforts of Independence from the British Crown…they were the sheep dogs that resisted the wolves and gave us a nation. Operation American Spring participants will reflect the new sheep dogs to begin U.S. constitutional restoration. These modern sheep dogs are going to Washington, D.C. to post our grievances and demands. The wolves in government leadership must comprehend the people’s will. Our peaceful, non-violent approach for action will not tolerate being rebuffed, ignored or treated as unworthy or with disdain.

Operation American Spring, beginning on May 16, 2014 in Washington, D.C. will initiate the restoration of America as a Constitutional Republic, a Free, Lawful, and Sovereign Nation, with liberty and justice for all.

Harry Riley, COL, USA, Ret., 850-689-1818, hmriley@cox.net www.patriotsforamerica.ning.com

Source link. © 2014, The Post & Email. All rights reserved.

RELATED: Col. Riley Call To Action; Corrupt & Criminal Leadership Must Be Removed - DETAILS HERE.




Source

RELATED: AP Interviews Obama Brother: A Lot Of Stuff Obama Wrote Is Wrong - DETAILS HERE.





Source

Courtesy of the National Post:

Mayor Rob Ford became the first person to sign up for the 2014 municipal election race on Thursday, and quickly turned combative when asked how he would respond to questions about last year’s crack scandal on the campaign trail.

“Let them talk about whatever they want. I’m going to stick to my record. I want to see someone get a union deal like I did, get rid of the taxes like I have,” Mayor Ford told reporters at city hall.

Touting his attendance record at council meetings, campaign promises fulfilled and his leadership during crises such as the recent ice storm, Mr. Ford declared himself “the best mayor that this city has ever had.”

Is it wrong that I love this guy?

I mean I would not want him running MY city, but for political entertainment you really cannot beat Rob Ford.

I just wish OUR crazy politicians were more like him, more damaging to themselves, and less damaging to the country.

Boy Canada universal health care AND Rob Ford? How'd you get so lucky?

Source

Courtesy of Raw Story:

Bill Nye “The Science Guy” is scheduled to debate Creation Museum founder Ken Ham next month.

The former children’s television host and outspoken critic of creationist teaching will discuss whether the Bible-based version of Earth’s origins is a viable model Feb. 4 at the museum in Petersburg, Kentucky.

The debate starts at 7 p.m., and tickets will cost $25.

Ham, the president and CEO of Answers in Genesis, said he was excited to face off against Nye.

“It’s quite rare these days for such a well-known evolutionist to publicly debate a creationist – so we do expect a lot of media interest,” Ham said on his Facebook page.

There are many who are not terribly pleased that Nye is giving this guy the time of day, because it lends an air of credibility to something which should be treated with derision by any of those in the scientific community.

There was a time that I would have agreed with that, but considering that ignoring Creationists has allowed them to insert their superstitious bullshit into our public school science books, I no longer feel we have the luxury of ignoring them.

Having said that I wish that somebody a little more aggressive were going to face off with Ham who I consider a child abuser of the highest order. What Ham teaches very young, and I mean VERY young, children about Evolution is incredibly harmful to their respect for science and their trust in their teachers.

He cripples their rational thinking skills and turns them into magical thinkers instead of the kind of curiosity driven explorer that every child is naturally.

So while I LOVE Bill Nye, I know he is going to treat Ken Ham with respect and kindness, because Nye is a real sweetheart.

However I believe that Ham deserves to be kneecapped in front of a large audience and that he should leave the stage struggling for every breath after being debated into a near catatonic state

If Christopher Hitchens were still alive he would be my first choice, as he would happily call Ken Ham a fraud and a POS to his face.

Believe me I am still going to watch video of the debate when it becomes available (I watch similar debates all of the time) but I just hope that Nye bloodies Ham somewhat, because there are few Biblical charlatans who deserve it more.

Update: It does not appear that Ken Ham has much trepidation in facing off against Bill Nye:

“A debate with Mr. Nye, nationally known for his children’s TV program and for promoting evolution, will be one of our major events in 2014 to highlight how children and teens are being influenced by evolutionary thinking," declared Ham. “This year, our AiG theme is ‘Standing Our Ground, Rescuing Our Kids.’ Having the opportunity to hold a cordial but spirited debate with such a well-known personality who is admired by so many young people will help bring the creation/evolution issue to the attention of many more people, including youngsters.”

Ham added, “I hope to show Mr. Nye and our debate audience that observational science confirms the scientific accuracy of the Genesis account of origins, not evolution.”

The article goes on to say that Ham's organization is willing to debate Evolutionists "with credentials," but admits that it rejects challenges from "mocking, strident Evolutionists." Which reinforces my concern that they see Bill Nye as too nice to humiliate them during the debate.

I am fervently hoping they are wrong in that assumption.

Source

Courtesy of Politico:

The recent backlash against the tea party in Congress and the public could provide an opening for religious conservative leaders. They believe that, with a few tactical adjustments, they can capitalize on donor dissatisfaction with establishment outfits like Rove’s Crossroads and fiscally conservative operations like the one connected to the billionaire industrialist Koch brothers. Between them, the Rove and Koch networks combined to raise an unprecedented $750 million for their 2012 efforts.

Socially conservative groups, meanwhile, mostly missed the boat on the explosion in unlimited outside group spending in the post-Citizens United world.

“There are enough people out there that are pro-life and pro-family that have the resources to fund political efforts on those issues, and for a variety of reasons they just haven’t stepped up and so we have to do a better job of getting them to step up,” said Bauer, who’s been working with Cannon and others to increase coordination among socially conservative groups. Their leaders, according to Bauer, are increasingly concluding “that we’ve been behind the curve and that we need to do a better job of strategic fundraising and working together in order to get more traction on these issues.”

That was the subject of an informal strategy session on the sidelines of the Ritz summit including Bauer, South Dakota businessman Bob Fischer, Tennessee donor Joe Gregory, operative Pam Pryor, fundraiser Richard Norman and others. Among the topics discussed was coaxing support from megadonors aligned with the Koch and Rove networks, partly by highlighting the paltry 2012 rate of return of the groups in those networks.

Other ideas included the retreats, which are in some ways patterned off the twice-a-year seminars organized by the Kochs, as well as identifying a handful of key 2014 races where they could have a major impact, which would allow them to raise more in 2016 to back a socially conservative presidential candidate to take on presumed Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton.

And here I thought Christmas was over, and yet the gifts keep right on coming.

This of course is the same group of nuts that was behind George Bush's campaign, the ones that traditionally use the platform of God, guns, and gays to energize their base. A base by the way that is shrinking every election cycle.

They are also often blamed for the selection by McCain of Palin as his running mate, as sort of a bridge between his more establishment conservatism and their radical religious agenda.

So if these idiots are successful, and actually do have some input into who is nominated in the 2014 and 2016 cycles, we could see fewer Chris Christie's and Rand Paul's and more Michele Bachmann's and Mike Huckabee's.

And that is in the era of legalized pot, same sex marriage, and blowback against the war on women.

Oh this ought to be good.

Source

"I got this."

Courtesy of Logan Daily:

Lend me your ears. I have come to praise President Obama and bury the myth that Republican presidents are better for the economy than Democratic presidents. Not only do Democrats produce superior economic results but they blow Republicans out of the water in the comparisons.

Let's turn the mic over to Bob Deitrick, a principal at Polaris Financial Partners in Westerville, Ohio. Deitrick crunched 80 years of numbers. Politically, 1929 to 2009 were exactly divided — 40 years under Republican presidents and 40 under Democrats.

He put his extraordinary findings in a book, "Bulls, Bears and the Ballot Box."

Because President Obama was in office for only three years at the time of the writing, Deitrick and his co-author left him out. But Deitrick now has enough of an Obama track record to have recently declared in a Forbes interview, "By all measures, President Obama has outperformed every modern president."

His findings were so lopsided in favor of Democrats I had to ask him whether he is one. He said no. "I really was apolitical until 2000," start of the George W. Bush era. That's when he saw massive mismanagement of the economy at the expense of his middle- to upper-middle-class clients.

"The average retail investor got slammed, where hedge funds were allowed to take advantage of everyone else," he told me.

The best overall economic performance pre-Obama was that of John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson (whom Deitrick put together because of Kennedy's early death). No. 2 was Bill Clinton, with Franklin D. Roosevelt in third place.

The top six included two Republicans. Dwight Eisenhower ranked fourth, and Ronald Reagan sixth, edged out of fifth place by Harry Truman.

Were it not for Herbert Hoover, George W. would have ended up last.

Here's an interesting calculation: Suppose that in 1929, you put $100,000 in a 401(k) fully invested in stocks. Under the 40 years of Republican presidents, you would have ended up with only $126,000. Under the Democrats, you would have amassed a retirement nest egg of $3.9 million! (All numbers are adjusted for inflation.)

If you added Obama, the Democrats' number would be much bigger

Obama's greatest successes, Deitrick says, are the auto rescue plan and the Wall Street reforms, which revived faith among investors. The annual compound return on stocks has averaged between 25 and 30 percent (depending on the index) since the lows of March 2009.

Deitrick says he's perpetually shocked that Democrats don't trumpet their economic triumphs. You don't have to be a Democrat to wonder why.

I'm a Democrat and I definitely wonder why.

One of my main irritations with President Obama is the fact that he does not like to brag about what he has accomplished. (Hell George Bush strutted around like a peacock saying "Mission Accomplished" only a few months into a war that was only just beginning.) Even during the campaign he seemed hesitant to talk about why he should be reelected.

So that leaves it to us to remind people that this President really is quite extraordinary. Sure there are certainly policies and actions to criticize but overall he is really quite accomplished.

And looking at how substantially the economy is impacted by whichever party is in the White House, it seems like a given that we need to make sure that the next President is also a Democrat.

You hear that Hillary?

Source

Filed on appeal almost a year ago, a legal challenge against Barack Obama remains lurking in the hallways and offices of the Alabama Supreme Court, where at least two justices already have indicated an interest in the radioactive issue of Obama’s constitutional eligibility to serve as president.

Court officials confirmed to WND today that the case brought by attorney Larry Klayman, who founded Freedom Watch, and most recently hit the headlines for a successful fight against Obama’s program run by the National Security Agency to spy on Americans, remains on the docket.

It’s been fully briefed, but the justices haven’t announced yet whether they will hear oral arguments on the dispute, even though Klayman asked for an opportunity.

The case raises some of the same arguments that appeared earlier in dozens of local, state and federal court cases over Obama’s first term.

They all argue in some fashion that because of the lack of details about Obama’s birthplace, he might be ineligible to be president under the Constitution’s requirement. That is thought to have been defined by the Founders as someone who was born of citizen parents in the country.

If the parents’ citizenship is a qualifier, Obama by his own admission fails, since he reports his father was a Kenyan student who came to study in the U.S. but never was a U.S. citizen himself. In fact, the senior Obama already was married, in Kenya, before he met and married Obama Jr.’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham.

This case is brought on behalf of 2012 Constitution Party presidential nominee Virgil Goode and Alabama Republican Party leader Hugh McInnish, who are asking Alabama’s highest court to force Secretary of State Beth Chapman to verify that all candidates on the state’s 2012 ballot were eligible to serve.

Get Judge Roy Moore’s classic book about his battle for liberty, “So Help Me God: The Ten Commandments, Judicial Tyranny, and the Battle for Religious Freedom.”

Klayman, in a brief, argued that the secretary of state, “having the power to certify candidates, can surely de-certify – in effect disqualify – them if they are found to be ineligible.”

He pointed out that, for example, California Secretary of State Debra Bowen rejected Petra Lindsay on the 2012 California primary ballot because she was 27 years old. The U.S. Constitution requires that the president be at least 35.

Of significance to the case is the fact that two of the justices have expressed interest in the truth of the dispute.

In an earlier case, the justices in that very court denied a petition filed by McInnish to require Obama submit an original birth certificate before he could be placed on the state’s 2012 ballot.

At the time, Justice Tom Parker filed a special, unpublished concurrence in the case arguing that McInnish’s charges of “forgery” were legitimate cause for concern. [...] - Much More Continued @ WND.

FLASHBACK: AL Supreme Court: Serious Questions About Authenticity Of Obama's Birth Certificates - DETAILS HERE.




Source

- image credit: one old vet -

Yahoo News reports: 11 GOP Attorneys General Say Obamacare Fix Is Illegal

The White House is facing legal backlash from 11 Republican attorneys general who say the President is breaking the law by making changes to Obamacare without first going through Congress.

West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey sent a letter on Thursday to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius questioning the constitutionality of the president’s latest executive action that allowed insurance companies to continue offering plans that had been cancelled. The letter, signed by attorneys general from Republican-dominated states including Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas and Virginia, called the rule change “flatly illegal under federal constitutional and statutory law.”

“We support allowing citizens to keep their health insurance coverage, but the only way to fix this problem-ridden law is to enact changes lawfully: through Congressional action,” the letter said. “The illegal actions by this administration must stop.”

The rule change was announced two weeks after millions of Americans received cancellation notices from their insurers, despite President Obama’s continuous promise, “If you like your plan, you can keep it.” The president’s promise was named “Lie of the Year” by fact-checking website Politifact, since insurance companies were not allowed to continue offering plans that did not meet the new law’s standards.

The Republican attorneys general argue that President Obama’s rule change violates both the separation of powers between the branches of government and his responsibility to execute laws faithfully.

“We are deeply concerned that this Administration is consistently rewriting new rules and effectively inventing statutory provisions to operationalize a flawed law,” the letter said. “And the irony, of course, is that the changes being put forth to fix the disastrous exchanges will ultimately destroy the market and increase health insurance premiums for customers who played by the rules.” [...] - Continued/Video @ Yahoo News.




Source

Courtesy of the Daily Mail:

Duck Dynasty’s Phil Robertson may have emerged victorious from his recent spat with A&E, but the millionaire patriarch is already plotting revenge on the TV network behind his hit show and reportedly has a plan in the works to move his family - plus millions of dollars of advertising and merchandise revenue - to another broadcaster.

Humiliated by A&E’s recent attempt to silence his conservative religious message, Robertson - whose Duck Commander business is worth an estimated $15 million - is secretly plotting to form his own TV production company so he can jump ship to a Christian channel more in keeping with his views.

Robertson, 67, recently served a short suspension from the hit show after he made homophobic and racially insensitive comments in an interview with GQ.

But a massive outpouring of support from Conservative supporters including Sarah Palin convinced A&E to take Robertson back or risk losing their most important cash cow.

The Season 4 premiere of Duck Dynasty last August drew a record 11.8 million viewers and total revenues for 2013 are estimated at $885 million.

Yeah well if Robertson moves his show to a strictly Christian network he can kiss a demographic that size goodbye. And the same will be true for his income.

However on that last point the Robertson clan may have a solution. Guns.


The wily businessman is set to capitalize even further on his huge popularity with conservatives with the launch of his own line of Duck Commander guns, reports CNN Money.

The Robertson clan have teamed up with Mossberg to create nine different shotguns, as well as two semiautomatic rifles and a semiautomatic pistol.

The shotguns come in a 'waterfowl pattern' camouflage design and Mossberg has already begun shipping them to distributors.

I'm sure they will fly off the shelves, and right into the hands of angry Duck Dynasty fans. Well great so the next school shooting, work place murder, or mall massacre can work as product placement for the Duck Dynasty camouflage gun set.

What was it Robertson said about A&E again?

"A&E messed with the wrong redneck." Oh yeah.

Source

Source

Courtesy of RT:

The US has been voted as the most significant threat to world peace in a survey across 68 different countries. Anti-American sentiment was not only recorded in antagonistic countries, but also in many allied NATO partners like Turkey and Greece.

A global survey conducted by the Worldwide Independent Network and Gallup at the end of 2013 revealed strong animosity towards the US’s role as the world’s policeman. Citizens across over 60 nations were asked: “Which country do you think is the greatest threat to peace in the world today?”

The US topped the list, with 24 percent of people believing America to be the biggest danger to peace. Pakistan came second, with 8 percent of the vote and was closely followed by China with 6 percent. Afghanistan, Iran, Israel and North Korea came in joint fourth place with 5 percent of the vote.

The threat from the US was rated most highly in the Middle East and North Africa, those areas most recently affected by American military intervention. Moreover, the survey showed that even Americans regard their country as a potential threat with 13 percent of them voting the US could disrupt global status quo.

I cannot tell you how much I want to get all indignant and say "Nuh uh!" But honestly I can't do that.

We are indeed the biggest threat to world peace and only a nationalist moron from America, or as we call them, a Republican, would think otherwise.

I hoped against hope that once we had Obama in the White House our policies would change so that the rest of the world would respond to us with respect instead of fear, however to my great frustration that simply has not been the case.

At least not yet.

Source

Courtesy of The Daily Beast:

Never mind the increasing evidence—64 percent of white evangelical Protestants reject the science, and professors at Christian colleges are attacked if word gets out they teach it.

Evolution did not fare well in 2013. The year ended with the anti-evolution book Darwin’s Doubt as Amazon’s top seller in the “Paleontology” category. The state of Texas spent much of the year trying to keep the country’s most respected high school biology text out of its public schools. And leading anti-evolutionist and Creation Museum curator Ken Ham made his annual announcement that the “final nail” had been pounded into the coffin of poor Darwin’s beleaguered theory of evolution.

Americans entered 2013 more opposed to evolution than they have been for years, with an amazing 46 percent embracing the notion that “God created humans pretty much in their present form at one time in the last 10,000 years or so.” This number was up a full 6 percent from the prior poll taken in 2010. According to a December 2013 Pew poll, among white evangelical Protestants, a demographic that includes many Republican members of Congress and governors, almost 64 percent reject the idea that humans have evolved.

The connection between acceptance of evolution and political affiliation has grown stronger over the past three years, exacerbating the polarization now plaguing Congress. Among Democrats, acceptance of evolution increased by 3 percent, to 67 percent, while among Republicans it decreased from 54 percent to 43 percent.

The trajectory is not encouraging, especially as it runs in parallel with a steady increase in the evidence for evolution—evidence now piled so high that not even one evolutionary biologist at any of America’s research universities rejects the theory. Evolution is as widely accepted in biology departments as gravity is in physics departments.

So how is it that 64 percent of America’s “white evangelical evangelical Protestants,” an unusually powerful and wealthy demographic, remains so strongly opposed to evolution?

Well that is pretty simple actually, because they are taught to believe rather than to think.

Because they are a wealthy and powerful demographic they are targeted by the Republicans and Religious Right to keep them as undereducated as possible. After all wasn't it Sarah Palin who eschewed the virtues of a college education and suggested a trade school for young people instead?

You know, like beauty school for instance.

And when they are not attacking educators living in "ivory towers" they are going after anybody who is living their lives directed by logic rather than faith.

"How will you know how to solve your problems if you do not reach out to God for guidance?"

I don't know, perhaps by educating yourself and learning how to deal with complications that may arise in your life? Just crazy enough to work.

But the Religious Right realizes that time is not on their side. Not with Google providing immediate access to information about virtually any question that one could ask, and with science making incredible discoveries on a daily basis.

Soon there will come a day when nobody will feel the need to rely on faith to provide answers, nor religious affiliations to provide a sense of community. Instead we will all be connected by the technology that mankind created to facilitate a global community, and have our needs met, in a far more satisfying way, via logic and science.

And nothing frightens those who make a living spreading ignorance, and fear, and divisiveness more than realizing their days are numbered.

If Creationism shows up at all in a science textbook then this is the only acceptable way for it to be included.

I could live with this.




Source

I think I prefer the original.

Source