POLITICALPYRO CONTRIBUTORS

They say… Whats good for the goose, is good for its gander… or if you like, If you can’t beat them join them.

As they blame Bush, ‘W’, GW… Which ever you prefer, for everything that is wrong with the world, I thought a bit of turn about, tongue and cheek was way over due. Hence the reason for the title of this post. Now, lets get to the meat.

Congress Needs to Beware of Growing Populist Anger

By Norman J. Ornstein | Roll Call
Wednesday, June 10, 2009

One of the main reasons why the Democratic Party lost control of the House in 1994 was that House Democrats responded too late to growing public dissatisfaction with their actions. The 111th Congress, though very active in its passage of legislation, needs to pay attention to the current rise in populist sentiment in the electorate. In order to effectively curb these feelings, Congress should implement reforms to increase transparency in government.

Why did the Democrats lose the House in 1994 after 40 years of rule?

One can make a case that the early stumbles of the Clinton White House, including the excruciating delay in enacting an economic plan along with the failure to get health care through, created a backlash against ineffective one-party government. One can make a case that former Speaker Newt Gingrich’s (R-Ga.) long-term plan to nationalize the Congressional elections, culminating in the “Contract with America,” finally provided a coherent and attractive alternative. But a critical element in the public backlash against the status quo in Congress was the populist anger at the elitism and corruption that the public saw engulfing Washington, D.C.

The first eruption of that populist anger came in 1989, with a pay raise for federal officials that had been endorsed by outgoing President Ronald Reagan, incoming President George H. W. Bush and all Democratic and Republican Congressional leaders from Speaker Jim Wright (D-Texas) to the aforementioned Gingrich. But that broad bipartisan support meant nothing to average voters struggling with a sluggish economy and stagnant wages.

remember vividly going to board the train at Union Station to attend the House Democrats’ retreat at the Greenbrier resort–the location itself was a public relations nightmare akin to auto executives flying private jets to D.C. to beg for public money. We had to run a gauntlet of angry protesters holding signs and hurling epithets.

The leadership needs to avoid any sense that it is protecting Members because of their personal ties to them.

That was followed in 1992 by the House Bank brouhaha, revealed by Roll Call, which showed that a slew of House Members had overdrawn their accounts at the House Bank. It did not matter that the “bank” was not a bank in the traditional sense, but a repository for Members’ paychecks until they could be deposited in other accounts, and that the only money in the bank was from the lawmakers themselves; the story created a firestorm emphasizing that Members of Congress played by a different set of rules than the rest of us, exempt from the constraints or fines that we face. Many superb lawmakers lost their next elections (or retired prematurely) as a direct consequence.

The next train wreck was predictable. For some good reasons related to separation of powers issues, Congress exempted itself from regulation by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency and other executive agencies. But to the public (and to the minority party), this was another clear case of an imperial, insulated, pampered and arrogant Congress applying onerous laws to others while exempting itself.

Throughout 1993 and 1994, I went regularly to the leaders in the House importuning them to act to solve this problem. The answer was easy: create an independent office within the legislative branch to enforce the laws where applicable to Congress, avoiding separation of powers issues. Tom Mann and I worked with Reps. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) and Dick Swett (D-N.H.) to come up with a bill creating an Office of Compliance. Early passage would signal a Congress ahead of the curve, moving to reform itself.

But the leaders did not think it was that big a deal and waited until the last days of the 103rd Congress to pass the bill–too late to avoid the surge in anger or to defend the indefensible, and they went into the 1994 election looking like they acted only after getting caught red-handed.

I raise all this history because it is déjà vu all over again. The populist anger is back, and not just in the United States–the reaction in Britain to parliamentary expense abuses is directly reminiscent of the reaction to the House Bank. So far, it has not been directed at Congress, in part because the 111th Congress has been so remarkably productive, in part because of the popularity of President Barack Obama, in part because of the ineptitude of the minority party leadership. But one can see the train wreck coming.

Some of the seeds go back to former Rep. William Jefferson (D-La.), preceded by Jack Abramoff and former Reps. Duke Cunningham (R-Calif.), Tom DeLay (R-Texas), Bob Ney (R-Ohio), Jim Traficant (D-Ohio), et al. Of course, some of the cases contributed mightily to the Republican loss of Congress after 12 years of rule, but all underscored a continuing public sense that Congress was more concerned with feathering its own nest than with the problems facing average Americans in their everyday lives.

Throw in Illinois’ former Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D) and Sen. Roland Burris (D), a case getting more and more putrid. Add the Congressional bailouts of banks and their executives and the auto industry, amplified especially by the American International Group bonuses. The scapegoats now are AIG and auto and bank executives, but that can switch in an instant to politicians.

Now throw in the PMA Group and Reps. John Murtha (D-Pa.) and Peter Visclosky (D-Ind.). The Murtha case, of course, goes well beyond PMA, to include throwing sensitive national security-related earmarks with abandon to companies in his district that were inept or corrupt and to rewarding or punishing companies that used the right lobbying firm or did the right business with Murtha’s relatives. Include also executive officials in the Defense Department and elsewhere giving no-bid contracts to companies with ties to Murtha and his family members to curry favor with the powerful lawmaker. I can’t sort out from this vantage point what is illegal or not, but it all stinks to high heaven.

Simply asking whether the ethics committee is investigating the issue is not enough. I hope the committee is acting, and I believe that the leadership of the panel, under Chairwoman Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) and ranking member Jo Bonner (R-Ala.), is finally functional. I also am truly encouraged by the start of the new Office of Congressional Ethics, also with top-flight leadership.

But if Congress wants to avoid the kind of public anger that engulfed the political process in 1994 and 2006, it needs to go much further. The leadership needs to avoid any sense that it is protecting Members because of their personal ties to them. And Congress needs to enact further reforms to make the earmarking and contracting process work better.

The House might start with Rep. Jeff Flake’s (R-Ariz.) idea to delink earmarks from campaign contributions. My own idea to create independent commissions to rank needs and projects in Congressional districts akin to Senators’ judicial selection panels would help. And addressing the issue of contracting–which is what Cunningham did, getting bribes in return for steering sensitive defense and intelligence contracts to the corrupt companies offering the bribes–is critical for reform.

Every contract issued by the federal government needs to be put online before the contract takes effect, with a special scrutiny for every no-bid contract. There must be guidelines for making sure the process is above-board and sanctions for those who award contracts that do not meet the guidelines.

The current Democratic Congress is comparatively well-regarded by the public for its performance. Democrats are certainly in no immediate danger of losing their majority or even losing many seats in 2010. But public opinion is fragile here, and it would not take much to ignite that populist outrage. Acting now is smart politics–and very good policy.

Norman J. Ornstein is a resident scholar at AEI.

Concerning Nancy Pelosi

Facts:

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s home House District includes San Francisco.
Star-Kist Tuna’s headquarters are in San Francisco, Pelosi’s home district.
Star-Kist is owned by Del Monte Foods and is a major contributor to Pelosi.
Star-Kist is the major employer in American Samoa employing 75% of the Samoan workforce.

Paul Pelosi, Nancy’s husband, owns $17 million dollars of Star-Kist stock.

In January, 2007 when the minimum wage was increased from $5.15 to $7.25, Pelosi had American Samoa exempted from the increase so Del Monte would not have to pay the higher wage. This would make Del Monte products less expensive than their competition’s.

When the huge bailout bill was passed, Pelosi added an earmark to the final bill adding $33 million dollars for an “economic development credit in American Samoa”.

Pelosi has called the Bush Administration “corrupt”.

Concerning Barry Soetoro

- missing items for background check

• Your Occidental College records
• Your Columbia College records
• Your Columbia Thesis paper
• Your Harvard College records
• Your Selective Service Registration
• Your medical records
• Your Illinois State Senate records
• Your Illinois State Senate schedule
• Your Law practice client list
• A Certified Copy of your original Birth certificate
• Your embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth
• Your Harvard Law Review articles that were published
• Your University of Chicago scholarly articles
• Your Record of baptism

aka - Barack Obama Denied National Security Clearance

Barack Obama cannot be Trusted with Classified Information

How can the President of the United States be denied a basic security clearance? How can the Commander and Chief of the most powerful military be denied access to classified information? Barack Obama would be denied the necessary security clearance for President if he was held to the same standard as everyone else. If you can’t pass a Secret level background investigation, which is required for many soldiers, you should not be eligible for the Presidency.

What is a Security Clearance?

Having served in the U.S. military, law enforcement, and as a civilian government contractor, I’ve had my fair share of background investigations. The United States government employs a multitier security clearance paradigm.

Confidential – Unauthorized disclosure could cause “damage to national security.”
Secret – Unauthorized disclosure could cause “serious damage to national security.”
Top Secret – Unauthorized disclosure could cause “exceptionally grave damage to national security.”

Each level of access requires a progressively more in-depth background investigation before the clearance is obtained. The President of the United States should be able to flawlessly pass the most extensive investigation and a polygraph test. Both are required for workers in some Special Access Programs classified Top Secret.

The purpose of the clearance is to determine an individual’s honesty, trustworthiness, reliability, financial responsibility, criminal activity, emotional stability, foreign influences, family associations, drug use, mental health, judicial proceedings, employment history, traits of character, and loyalty to the United States. This collective data is used to evaluate your ability and willingness to safeguard national secrets. Based on the facts about Barack Obama, he fails to satisfy the minimum requirements for even a basic secret clearance. His background investigation would have “Red Flags” shooting up in so many places; the issuing panel would deny him a clearance outright.

Obama’s Answers on the Security Clearance Application

Instead of going through all the Security Clearance Application questions, I’ll examine the questions that would deny Barack Obama a Secret Clearance.

List foreign national relatives whom you or your spouse are bound by affection, obligation, or close and continuing contact.

Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. of Kenya, and Lolo Soetoro, the Indonesian oil manager his mother married. These two foreign relatives would probably initiate a Defensive Security Services or Department of Defense investigation that would take roughly a year to explore. I’m not sure how many degrees of separation are involved, but Obama Sr. and Soetoro’s associations are not friendly to the United States. However, they are not the primary concern.

Barack Obama’s brother, his kin Abongo Obama, is a militant Muslim who has been quoted saying, “A black man must liberate himself from the poisons of European cultures and western values.” Obama’s paternal cousin, Raila Odinga is also a Muslim extremist who recently lost the Kenyan Presidential election to a Christian. How can such relations exist between the President of the United States and radical Muslims?

Have you ever been an officer or a member or made a contribution to an organization dedicated to the violent overthrow of the United States Government and which engages in illegal activities to that end, knowing that the organization engages in such activities with the specific intent to further such activities?

Have you ever knowingly engaged in any acts or activities designed to overthrow the United States Government by force?

These two questions go hand and hand. Having gone through the interview phase of the clearance process a number of times, I can’t image the look on the face of the investigator nor the sheer amount of time it would take to explain Barack Obama’s anti American ties.

Sen. Barack Obama served as a paid director alongside a confessed domestic terrorist and granted funding to a controversial Arab group that dubbed the creation of Israel as a “catastrophe.” The founder of the Arab group in question, Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi, also has held a fundraiser for Obama. Khalidi is a harsh critic of Israel, has made statements supportive of Palestinian terror and reportedly has worked on behalf of the Palestine Liberation Organization while it was involved in anti western terrorism.

Barack Obama also served on the Wood’s Fund board with William Ayers, a member of the Weathermen terrorist group which sought to overthrow of the U.S. government and took responsibility for the bombings of New York City Police Headquarters in 1970, of the Capitol building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972. Bill Ayers has killed hundreds of civilians, police officers, and was recently quoted saying, “I don’t regret setting bombs, I feel we didn’t do enough.”

I would deny a security clearance for anybody that even shook these men’s hands, never mind launching a campaign from Ayer’s living room.

Have you illegally used any controlled substance, for example, marijuana, cocaine, crack cocaine, hashish, narcotics (opium, morphine, codeine, heroin, etc.), amphetamines, depressants (barbiturates, methaqualone, tranquilizers, etc.), hallucinogenics (LSD, PCP, etc.), or prescription drugs?

Barack Obama has specifically admitted to using marijuana and cocaine in his book “Dreams From My Father.” He even confesses pursuing heroin, but was scared of the drug dealer. A clearance question such as this is used to test someone’s ethical fortitude to stand up for what is right, legally forbidden, and ultimately make correct decisions. Obama fails this test with his weakness to deny temptation.

Would anyone question your honesty?

Obama’s lies regarding his recollection of policies supported and the reality of what he actually did endorse are too numerous to count. However, these lies are unfortunately common in today’s politics. An article written in a conservative blog has outlined 26 more personal deceptions Obama has made to the American people. How can anyone trust this guy with confidence?

Barack Obama’s Patriotism and National Security

Obama during National Anthem

Although not a question on the Security Clearance application, “Are you a Patriotic American” should be.

The National Anthem is playing and Barack Obama is the only person on the stage not inclined to put their hand over their heart. The hand over the heart is symbolic of your respect and love for your country. Of all people, the President of the United States must be the most devote patriot in the nation. If you are not a patriot, how are you to provide unconditional national security? Three other instances come to mind that have me question how loyal he is to the U.S. and if he even loves this country.

Reverend Jeremiah Wright
I bet most of us have heard about Reverend Jeremaiah Wright’s radical anti American preaching and Barack Obama’s consistent attendance of this man’s sermons, but did you know Reverend Wright officiated Barack and Michelle’s wedding and even baptized their kids? It appears to me that Wright is a significantly influential person in the Obama family’s life. Do we want a President who has been barraged and apparently supports their religious leader’s lectures containing anti American propaganda, such as…

“We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye.”

“We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost.”

“The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three strike law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’ No, no, no, God damn America, that’s in the Bible for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme.”

“In the 21st century, white America got a wake-up call after 911. White America and the western world came to realize that people of color had not gone away, faded into the woodwork or just ‘disappeared’ as the Great White West kept on its merry way of ignoring black concerns.”

“Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run!…We [in the U.S.] believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God.”

“Barack knows what it means living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people. Hillary would never know that. Hillary ain’t never been called a nigger. Hillary has never had a people defined as a non-person.”

“Hillary is married to Bill, and Bill has been good to us. No he ain’t! Bill did us, just like he did Monica Lewinsky. He was riding dirty.”

“The Israelis have illegally occupied Palestinian territories for over 40 years now. Divestment has now hit the table again as a strategy to wake the business community and wake up Americans concerning the injustice and the racism under which the Palestinians have lived because of Zionism.”

“God Damn America”

- Reverend Jeremiah Wright

I don’t care that Obama now condemns Wright’s remarks. He never denounced the man before, and continued to attend Wright’s church for over 20 years.

Michelle Obama
Michelle ObamaThe person you marry is your closest confidant and Barack Obama has recently said that Michelle is one of the people he listens to and respects the most. Michelle has been quoted saying, “Our souls are broken in this nation”; “For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country”; and “…as a member of the black community, I am obligated to this community and will utilize all of my present and future resources to benefit the black community first and foremost” to name a few. As a President’s closest adviser and the country’s first lady, take pride in how far this nation has come, and work toward the benefit of all not just your ethnicity. Can this woman, with such animosity toward ancestral shortcomings, come into the present and forget about skin color? Isn’t that what Martin Luther King Jr. meant by, “…all men are created equal” and “…not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character?” Michelle’s narrow vision, obvious unwillingness to conform to unity and equality, and her desire to benefit the black community instead of the community at large is not first lady material.

Not visiting the troops
As a former enlisted soldier having been deployed twice and a current government contractor, Obama’s recent neglect to visit our country’s courageous troops is insulting. He had time to woo German citizens and play basketball, but opt out on supporting wounded soldiers. Retired Lt. Col. Joe Reypya had me nodding in approval when commenting on Obama’s decision, “”The most solemn duty of a commander in chief is to fulfill his responsibility to the men and women who serve this country in uniform. Barack Obama … broke that commitment, instead flitting from one European capital to the next…For a young man so apt at playing President, Barack Obama badly misjudged the important demands of the office he seeks. Visits with world leaders and speeches to cheering Europeans shouldn’t be a substitute for comforting injured American heroes.”

I could go on and on about how this man is not fit for office, but my point in this post is to express my opinion that the potential Commander and Chief of the United States could not receive a Nation Security Clearance to even hold a low level intelligence position within the government. How can he be President? Better yet, how is he even a Senator?

Could Barack Obama Get a Security Clearance?

Obama has been in the middle of two international communist networks – one in Hawaii and one in Chicago.

The Hawaii network included communists Frank Marshall Davis, who was Obama’s personal mentor; actor/singer Paul Robeson; and labor leader Harry Bridges. The network was judged a security threat to the United States and the subject of a congressional hearing on the “Scope of Soviet Activity in the United States.”

Obama covered up the true identity of Frank Marshall Davis in his book, Dreams From My Father.

The Hawaii communist network was organized directly by and from Moscow.

The Chicago network included identified communists and socialists, was committed to a communist victory in the Vietnam War, and took instructions from the communist Castro regime in Cuba.

In addition to communist terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, who were members of the communist terrorist Weather Underground, the Chicago network includes many veterans of the communist Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) who now proclaim themselves “Progressives for Obama.”

Bill Ayers, who helped launch Obama’s political career, has traveled to Venezuela on several occasions and is an enthusiastic backer of the brand of communism being practiced and promoted by Hugo Chavez.

It appears that Obama actually worked for Ayers in a Chicago educational reform program that dispensed millions of dollars of grants.

One of the leaders of “Progressives for Obama” is former SDS leader Tom Hayden, who wrote a letter to a communist Vietnamese official during the Vietnam War hoping for a “victory” over the U.S.

The SDS openly promoted communism, the regimes in Hanoi and Havana, and condemned alleged U.S. “imperialism.”

The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), a group that included a convicted espionage agent for communist East Germany, backed and promoted Obama’s political career.
Illinois State Senator Alice Palmer, who picked Obama as her successor, has a record of involvement in communist front activities.

Obama campaign strategist David Axelrod, as well as Obama himself, have not explained why Ayers, Dohrn, then-State Senator Alice Palmer, and Dr. Quentin Young came together at the Ayers/Dohrn home to launch Obama’s political career.
Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley, a client of Axelrod, issued a controversial and misleading statement defending Obama’s relationship with communist terrorist Bill Ayers.

Patrick Henry Revolution

Hon. James David Manning, PhD says we need a revolution. Discusses Michael Savage banned from the UK and the secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano.

Time Marks of Note:

0:35 ~ The NEW Terrorist List

1:04 ~ First Bit of Manning Common Sense

1:49 ~ What Going on Up In There

2:17 ~ Whats Happening Here in America

2:47 ~ He’s Taken Down Your Jesus

3:17 ~ Whats Going on Out There

4:06 ~ Wake Up Media

4:12 ~ Going Under the Bus… Jeremiah Wright, Katie Couric…

4:58 ~ The Obama Bank

5:33 ~ Don’t you Hear the Sounds of Revolution in My Voice

5:51 ~ We Have a New Tyrant

6:26 ~ Obama’s Megalomaniac

6:43 ~ Patrick Henry Get on Over Here

7:14 ~ Wake UP!… The Start of the Big Finish

8:25 ~ Building Up Steam…

9:09 ~ The Fevered Pitch of Despair

Rumblings of Outrage: DHS Continues to Tick Off Combat Veterans

The recently disclosed Department of Homeland Security report on “rightwing extremism ” that taints veterans returning from Afghanistan and Iraq as potential terrorists is really ticking off both active duty and veterans. Go here to read a Veterans Today article about it, and here to read the American Legion’s letter in response.

And that outrage has not subsided. Below are more videos that have been posted on youtube by veterans responding to the DHS smear.

First up, is the active duty combat arms soldier who sounded off, amazed and outraged that he is considered a threat, and reminding the DHS personnel that they took the same oath that he did, to defend the Constitution. We have posted this before, but it sets up the responses by the veterans, who were responding specifically to this active duty soldier’s video:

In response to that, the following Army veteran builds on the above soldier’s statement by pointing out that DHS and the elites it serves consider veterans a threat precisely because all veterans swore an oath to defend the Constitution:

And below is a former Army Staff Sergeant, a paratrooper and combat veteran who served in both Afghanistan and Iraq until just last year, adding his well considered, but rather colorfull thoughts. Note, his video contains some VERY strong language:

And here is an Army Ranger, Apachegrunt, who just got out of the Army three days before making this video, adding his thoughts. Once again, some very strong language here and this Ranger does not mince words:

“Surrender is not a Ranger word”

Among some other choice and colorful words for the DHS, he points out the fact that his oath is to the Constitution, not to anyone or anything else, and just because his service is ended that doesn’t mean his oath is canceled. Toward the end of the video, the Ranger holds up his Soldiers Code card:

SOLDIERS CODE

I. I AM AN AMERICAN SOLDIER – A PROTECTOR OF THE GREATEST NATION ON EARTH – SWORN TO UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES.

II. I WILL TREAT OTHERS WITH DIGNITY AND RESPECT AND EXPECT OTHERS TO DO THE SAME.

III. I WILL HONOR MY COUNTRY, THE ARMY, MY UNIT AND MY FELLOW SOLDIERS BY LIVING THE ARMY VALUES.

IV. NO MATTER WHAT SITUATION I AM IN, I WILL NEVER DO ANYTHING FOR PLEASURE, PROFIT, OR PERSONAL SAFETY WHICH WILL DISGRACE MY UNIFORM, MY UNIT, OR MY COUNTRY.

V. LASTLY, I AM PROUD OF MY COUNTRY AND IT’S FLAG. I WANT TO LOOK BACK AND SAY THAT I AM PROUD TO HAVE SERVED MY COUNTRY AS A SOLDIER.

Notice what comes first in the Soldiers Code.

And here is another veteran, of the 1st Cavalry Division, who lays out the many different types of people now put on the government’s “list” as potential terrorists (he discusses veterans being added to the list at 7:20 of part I):

Part I:

Part II:

We commend these men for standing up and speaking out - speaking truth to power as the left used to like to say.

Note that none of them are part of some “extremist organization” (whatever that means). They are individuals, speaking their own minds, and they are offended and angry and they see that what is really going on is that the DHS considers them a threat simply because they know how to fight and because they swore an oath to defend the Constitution.

With the latest DHS smear document, the Domestic Extremism Lexicon, labelling “constitutionalists” and “patriots” as extremists (which means the same thing as “terrorists”), it is clear that if you dare to support the Constitution, and dare to quote the founding fathers of this nation, and take the Constitution seriously, then you will be considered an “extremist” and a threat to the powers that be among the political elite.

This is the tactic used by all governments that turn oppressive: use vague, broad brushed labeling of people as “enemies of the state” to marginalize them and increase the artificial divide between the people and the police and military, and then use that labeling and marginalization to make people afraid to speak up, to chill their speech, and silence them out of fear of being singled out for persecution. The DHS reports are such broad smears that they basically boil down to “anyone who doesn’t agree with us is a potential terrorist.” The final stage of persecution is to actually apply all the powers of the state against anyone who does dare to speak out, arresting them on trumped up charges of terrorism, for example. We are still in the smear and marginalization stage, and are also begining the chilling of speach stage, but we can see where this is headed.

But as these veterans point out, the DHS smears of veterans, constitutionalists and patriots is backfiring just as badly as Obama’s suggestion that disabled and injured veterans pay for their own medical care. Nothing is waking up the people, and especially the veterans, like these leaked government “reports.” This is not Germany, the USSR, or communist China. This is America, and attempts to chill our speech and marginalize us only make us stronger and more resolved to speak out.

JOIN US ON THE WASHINGTON D.C. MALL ON JUNE 13, 2009 FOR A HUGE SUPPORT THE TROOPS RALLY AND OATH KEEPERS “MUSTER ON THE MALL”

Speak out is exactly what we will do on the DC Mall on June 13, 2009 as Oath Keepers holds our muster on the mall, at the invitation of Gathering of Eagles and Pro Troop Events. Go to www.protroopevents.org for more details on that rally.

We still have a relatively strong First Amendment to protect our right to assemby and free speech, and we need to use that powerful tool of peaceful revolution and restoration while we still can. It’s time to turn the tide. It’s time to stand on the mall in DC and “shout our oaths in the tyrant’s face.”

It’s time for all of us to stand up and speak out. See you on the mall on June 13!

Stewart Rhodes

And this from Jerry:

I would think that should the DHS continue with these accusatorial allegations, they just might come to be real. Our returned military would make a great base of manpower for militia groups bent on taking back our country from “One Worlders” who would surrender our sovereignty to the corrupt United Nations.

The DHS may cause multiplication by trying to enforce subtraction.

Think about it: Who would you rather follow, the wimpy concessionist liberal socialists or the Constitutionally strong defenders of America justice and principles?

Jerry

And lets Not forget What Manning Has to Say about DHS:

A Message For Homeland Security: