(from the Ref Desk almanac…)
1947 President Truman signs Executive Order 9835 requiring all federal employees to have allegiance to the United States
I’m reasonably certain President Truman did so,
This guy, not so much…
Is EO 9825 still in force?
If so, Valerie Jarrett, Van Jones and many others have some ‘splainin’ to do!
THIS IS THE AMERICAN PARADOX.
How do we, as a Free, Constitutional Republic, with measures taken to preserve Free Speech and Dissent, ensure those charged with the custody of said Republic, continue to maintain her as such?
“Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?” – a lady bystander
“A Republic, if you can keep it.” – Benjamin Franklin
The President seems to think so…
President Obama Just Announced an Election Change That Would Transform the Face of American Politics
President Obama gave support to mandatory voting today at a town hall event in Cleveland. The President claims the drastic move would reduce the importance of money in elections and stop alleged voter suppression.
The Washington Times reports on the President’s claim that mandatory voting would change everything:
“It would be transformative if everybody voted. That would counteract [campaign] money more than anything. If everybody voted, then it would completely change the political map in this country.”
Click on the link to see the whole article.
Of course, if checking legal citizenship and investigating voter fraud are racist, and therefore banned, I wonder which party would win?
When people ask for whom or what party I’ve voted, I always respond, “The Australian Secret Ballot is one of our most cherished possessions!”
Of course, one part of the Australian method with which I disapprove in the mandatory part.
We’re AMERICANS – very little should be mandatory!
h/t Washington Times, RJReview
A professor at Granite State College and chair of the history department at the Derryfield School in Manchester, New Hampshire admitted to writing the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts in order to end white privilege. According to the response heard on the video, Dr. David Pook shocked the audience at an event at New Hampshire Institute of Politics when he made the following statement:
More at the link.
What is is about self-loathing, whether personally (low self esteem) or culturally (Americans who hate America, Jews who hate Jews, White folks who hate White folks or Black folks who hate Black folks)?
Perhaps I would feel differently, had I been born a poor Black child, instead of a lower-middle-class White. I’m more likely to give a random Black stranger I see on the street the benefit of a doubt than myself – low self esteem, and all.
I give girls and women preference, because that is how I was raised. Sometime to my own determent.
But I don’t believe in cultural affirmative action to level the playing field! I worked hard to get to my (marginal) station in life, and expect the same of others.
Regardless of their race or gender.
And I certainly don’t want government nudging society to some further self-loathing standard for the good of all (some).
h/t Theo Spark
(Just to show I don’t just go after leftist weasels. I go after weasels from the right side of the aisle, as well ! – Guffaw)
How did Senate Republicans violate the Logan Act? Well they did that by being war mongers. But more specifically, when 47 members of Congress signed onto a letter that was sent to Iranian officials in an attempt to undermine the peace deal with Iran, they clearly violated the act — and also all committed felonies. According to Cornell University, the act reads:
“Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”
You should go and read the whole essay. Republicans do just as many illegal acts as Democrats. It’s actually kind of surprising, with Democrats controling most of the media, that this isn’t being more trumpeted(!)
Of course, based on so many other actions, it does appear Democrats don’t know the law!
(This doesn’t mean I agree with most actions of the current administration, but even a broken clock is right twice in seven years! :-))
h/t Doc in Yuma
ProudHillbilly won the Internets with this!
So what’s the difference between these two photos, outside of the obvious that they were taken 50 years apart?
It’s what’s missing. Compare the number of American flags in photos from the two events.
“If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”
–Winston S. Churchill
There was a time when a President, the military and the population of The United States (by and large) stood tall and fought for the rights and lives of others. World War Two would be a good example. Japan had taken much of the Far East, and Germany much of Europe, and parts of Africa.
And was systematically exterminating Jews, gypsys, cripples, intellectuals and homosexuals.
Now I’m not all about being the World’s policeman. I would much rather be isolationist and let the rest of the World solve her own problems. The problem with that ideal currently is radical Islamic fundamentalists have brought the battle to us. It’s not just about 9-11, it’s about England, Syria, Iraq, Egypt and Spain, and anywhere persons are being religiously persecuted to the extent they are being raped, burned alive and beheaded.
The Nazis didn’t start with thousands of death camps, train schedules, IBM tabulating machines, and giant crematoria. They started small and worked up. It wasn’t until Kristallnacht in November of 1938 that they got organized enough to kill 91 Jews at one time.
ISIS has kidnapped 90 Assyrian Christians this week. They beheaded 21 Christians last week. They’re a new government, recently formed. They’re starting small and already talking about working up.
We can wait. Unless some miracle happens, we will wait. But we shouldn’t expect the outcome to be anything other than the obvious. It’s the same evil manifesting itself under a new name.
It will be the Jews, the Christians, the homosexuals, the intellectuals, Muslims from different sects and any one who doesn’t go along. They will die, deaths by every mutilating, degrading means, wiped out along with the ideas, thoughts and dreams they had. They will be erased. And when it gets rolling, we will not be able to say we didn’t see it coming because they are proud of it and they are posting for the world to see. (WARNING! Graphic images). (Borepatch)
And our President claims it’s fundamentalist American Christians who are more dangerous than ISIS !
Now, I’m not a fan of those whack-jobs who protest at military funerals. Or their fellow travelers. And they claim to be fundamental Christians. They even announced a protest at Leonard Nimoy’s funeral!
But, I’ve not seen any of then burn someone alive or behead them on International television.
It’ll only get worse before it gets better.
And offering them employment isn’t the answer, Mr. President!
(I believe the ‘and helpless’ part was photoshopped in, and unnecessary.)
Of course, they may be part of a conspiracy to lure in unwitting bank robbers to their death, but I doubt it.
h/t David Codrea
Or perhaps I should have worded it the former Republic’s government policy…
It was recently announced that the BATFE was moving to ban certain ammunition familiar to users of the AR-15 rifle, specifically:
In a move clearly intended by the Obama Administration to suppress the acquisition, ownership and use of AR-15s and other .223 caliber general purpose rifles, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives unexpectedly announced today that it intends to ban commonplace M855 ball ammunition as “armor piercing ammunition.” The decision continues Obama’s use of his executive authority to impose gun control restrictions and bypass Congress.
It isn’t even the third week of February, and the BATFE has already taken three major executive actions on gun control. First, it was a major change to what activities constitute regulated “manufacturing” of firearms. Next, BATFE reversed a less than year old position on firing a shouldered “pistol.” Now, BATFE has released a “Framework for Determining Whether Certain Projectiles are ‘Primarily Intended for Sporting Purposes’ Within the Meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(c)”, which would eliminate M855’s exemption to the armor piercing ammunition prohibition and make future exemptions nearly impossible.
Now, aside from petty power and control, why would they bother to do this? Because they see a future where armored troops are engaging the
citizenry serfs for power and control? Perhaps.
But I think it’s that time ‘honored’ reason – because they can. And have.
Which brings us to the larger question. Should anything be BANNED in a Free Republic? Or should the marketplace be the controlling factor?
Possessing, manufacturing or distributing child pornography is essentially banned. This doesn’t stop possession, manufacture or distribution. How about drugs? Substandard (or poisonous/dangerous) products from overseas? Or those domestically produced? Remember cyclamates and hexaclorophene?
Perhaps it’s a bit callous of me, but I think the marketplace should be the deciding factor. If you don’t want cyclamates, poisons or substandard foreign crap, don’t buy it! Child pornography harms children in the production prima facie, so banning that is acceptable and appropriate. Drugs? If you are an adult, it should be up to you. But, driving under the influence or committing crimes to support your habit is another thing altogether. Then you are bringing others into the mix. Without their permission.
If you inadvertently purchase something harmful, sue the bastards! But, you have a responsibility – you should be an informed consumer.
Now, to the proposed ammunition ban. The ‘sporting purposes’ argument. Obviously, the Second Amendment is not about hunting.
Their regulation and argument is invalid.
“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy,which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy.The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture,sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of theProphet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement,the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong tosome man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinctionof slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Muslims mayshow splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it.No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militantand proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step;and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it hadvainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.”Sir Winston Churchill; (Source: The River War, first edition, Vol II, pages 248-250 London).
Or perhaps the decade!
Would that that were true; their ultimate goal is really to make the world Leningrad.
(Cold Fury – Mike)
The post continues to be quotable.
Progressivism, especially in its well-heeled coastal expressions, is not a philosophy — it’s a lifestyle.
The difference (from conservatives) is that progressives, blazing with self-righteousness, believe themselves entitled to make their preferences a matter of law.
And that’s the Left in short: A lifestyle so good, it’s mandatory.
Perhaps YOU SHOULD GO AND READ THE WHOLE THING?
(No, I’m not requiring you do so…)