The WOJack Zone

Fees are the new taxes

WOJack — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 19:45:00 GMT

Fees are the new taxes

Published : Thursday, 15 Jul 2010, 12:18 AM EDT

Orlando - Lake Eola Fountain: The Silence is Deafening

WOJack — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 14:23:00 GMT

I appear to be a rare bird to be found in Orlando these days. As a native Orlandonian, born at Florida Hospital, I grew up playing as a child on the shores of Lake Eola. I find it very sad that both natives and the people who moved here to claim Orlando as their new home do not express their sense of belonging to this community by remaining so silent.

I hear, or not, way too much of this "silence" in many matters that effect our lives both here in Central Florida and our Country. The silence is defining. Change is inevitable but to not preserve history and the artistic beauty from days gone by is truly a sign of our loosing our sense of identity and is a great loss to all of us and our children and their children.

I suppose this one of the dangers of having such a "homogenized" and transplanted population is that it does not have any sense of "roots" to grow in. The people and businesses that live and work here in their chosen home, be they native or not, need to realize that we are all dependent on each other for our own welfare. I must be getting old as I find it hard to understand the apathy.

My step father helped to build that fountain. What kind of statement to the world is Orlando making when the City spends millions for a new arena to replace a perfectly good one? A waste of taxes payers money! Come on! Then, want to have patrons pay $20.00 a car to park at the new arena? The "Big Business" and "Governments" have their hands in the wrong pockets. How about getting priorities straight?

The funds for repairing the fountain should be small change to the Orlando/Orange County business community. Where are they? Are there no Orlando based corporations willing to contribute to our community? Will someone please fill me in on why there is such a vacuum on this issue here in Central Florida?

Yes, the economy sucks. No, to drain the pockets of the already over taxed residents is wrong on many levels but the repairs for such an historic Orlando icon makes good business sense for continuing to attract those all important tourist revenues not to mention the beauty it adds to what was once called "The City Beautiful". Is it?

Below is one of my recent photos and links to the FB Lake Eola page.

Lake Eola Fountain June, 2010

Some History

The park and pond were established in 1888 when the first parcel of land was donated to the City of Orlando by several different families. The area was officially declared as a park in 1892. Oddly, at times, the park was a zoo, a horse racetrack, tennis courts, a pier with a dance area, and the site of music broadcasting by a local radio station. The fountain was installed in 1912 at a cost of $10,000. A replacement, originally dubbed the "Centennial Fountain," was installed in 1957 at a cost of $350,000. The actual name of the fountain is the "Linton E. Allen Memorial Fountain". The iconic water feature is the unofficial symbol of Orlando. In late August 2009, lightning struck the fountain, rendering it inoperable. The city has a $1,000,000 insurance policy on the fountain, with a $500,000 deductible. Due to the city's current budget crisis, the fate of the fountain was unknown.[3] On October 15, 2009, Mayor Buddy Dyer announced the city will not only repair the fountain, but "also replace its cracked plastic skin and install a state-of-the-art system of lights and water jets" at a cost of $2.3 million. The work should be complete in 2010.[4]

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Lake-Eola/108166989211616?v=desc

America Is In A Societal Meltdown

WOJack — Fri, 09 Jul 2010 20:55:00 GMT

By Chuck Baldwin
July 8, 2010

This column is archived at
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=1862

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human
passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or
gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale
goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious
people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." So said
Founding Father and America's second President John Adams. And he was
absolutely right. And that is what is absolutely wrong with our country
today: America is in a complete moral, societal, and cultural meltdown.

Founding Father and America's first US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Jay
correctly summarized the reason our new nation (and the fight for its
liberty and independence) was successful. He wrote in Federalist 2, "With
equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased
to give this one connected country to one united people--a people descended
from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same
religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in
their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and
efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly
established general liberty and independence."

In other words, a united constitutional republic can only exist within the
framework of certain rather narrow and finite conditions. Remove those
conditions and the framework for liberty and limited government falls apart.
And the above statements by Adams and Jay succinctly summarize the
conditions necessary for freedom's framework.

"A Moral And Religious People"

At America's founding, the principles of Christian philosophy and ideology
were universally accepted. The vast majority of the colonists were
churchgoing, Protestant Christians who firmly embraced and respected the
sacred principles taught in the Holy Scriptures. In fact, the reason most
colonists placed such a high premium on education was so that children would
be able to read and study the Bible for themselves. It is more than
interesting that America's early educators all centered their curriculum
upon the Bible. Include in this august list Benjamin Harris, publisher of
the New England Primer; the "Father of American Education," Noah Webster;
along with one of early America's most successful school textbook authors,
William Holmes McGuffey.

Beyond that, when we talk about colonial America's love of worship, we are
not talking about what passes for "worship" in modern America. We are not
talking about these Disneyland entertainment villages known as
mega-churches. We are not talking about espresso Sunday Schools or glorified
social clubs. We are talking about a place where preachers were bold and
powerful proclaimers of truth and where people went to learn the Word of God
(and how to apply it to every walk of life--including politics), not wallow
in slurpy, sugary, shallow sermonettes that do nothing to prepare men for
Christian warfare.

I challenge anyone to compare any of the sermons by colonial preachers such
as Elisha Williams, Charles Chauncy, Jonathan Mayhew, Isaac Backus, Samuel
Sherwood, John Witherspoon, Jacob Cushing, Samuel Cooper, Samuel Langdon,
John Leland, Samuel Miller, Enos Hitchcock, Ebenezer Baldwin, or Jonathan
Edwards with anything preached by Joel Osteen or Rick Warren.

Is it any wonder, then, that one cannot really distinguish the conduct and
attitudes of professing Christians from those who make no Christian
profession? Is it any wonder that churchgoing "Christians" seem to be as
unkind, as deceitful, as lazy, as greedy, as unthankful, and as immoral as
those who make no pretense regarding their unbelief? In fact, in some cases,
those with no Christian profession put professing Christians to shame in
matters of basic morality, decency, and civility. Why? One reason is the
fact that the Church as a whole is no longer "the pillar and ground of the
truth." Rather, it is more commonly regarded as being a Big Business
enterprise that is focused more on political correctness and entertainment
than it is on possessing real conviction or spiritual power.

Add to the collapse of spirituality in America's churches the collapse of
morality in America's culture. We're talking about old-fashioned, basic
morality. How is it that so many Americans seem to be so ignorant about the
simplest moral principles? When did greed and ambition replace a desire for
honest character? When did comfort and ease replace conviction for (and
understanding of) good government? How is it that even "conservatives" have
come to look to Washington, D.C., for answers to State or even personal
problems? How is it that the fear of God is no longer relevant when choosing
our civil magistrates? How can businessmen continue to sacrifice the sacred
principles of liberty on the altar of financial profits? Are money and
wealth really more important than liberty and peace? How can politicians
blatantly disregard their oaths to the Constitution? How can they continue
to grovel before special interest groups--and even foreign interests? How
can they--so willingly and easily--violate the liberty principles enshrined
in the Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence?

Without an understanding of (and an appreciation for) basic morality,
America will collapse. Money and military might cannot and will not replace
the time-tested foundations of morality and fidelity. The collapse of basic
morality portends the collapse of America itself.

"One United People"

Contrary to what one hears from the politically correct crowd today,
unity--not diversity--is the key to America's greatness. Jay said that early
America was united with the same ancestors, language, religion, and
principles of government, manners, and customs. And he was right.

By and large, America was a Christian nation, speaking the same language,
reading the same Bible, worshipping the same God, understanding (and
respecting) the same form of government (a constitutional confederation of
free, self-governing states), and embracing the same concepts of culture
(law, nature, manners, etc.).

No more!

Thanks to decades of federal dictation, public school indoctrination, and
media and entertainment propaganda, the principles that once united us now
divide us. And divided we are! I would even argue that America is hopelessly
and helplessly divided. We are no longer united in our understanding of (or
appreciation for) Christianity; we are no longer united in our English
language; we are no longer united in our respect for our ancestors; we are
no longer united in our respect for God's Word; we are no longer united in
our respect for the principles of federalism or constitutional government;
and we are no longer united in our appreciation for the fundamental
principles of self reliance, morality, and freedom.

In other words, it is "crystal clear" that America is in the midst of a
complete and total spiritual, societal, cultural, moral, and political
meltdown. And what is also abundantly obvious is that as long as Washington,
D.C., continues to lord it over us (and who or what is going to stop it?),
it is only a matter of time before the final collapse occurs. And at that
point, freedom lovers will be fighting against their own countrymen for
their very lives and liberty.

Accordingly, I think all this talk about "saving America" is largely a
complete waste of time and energy. Instead, we need to be talking about
saving our individual states (and the truth is, probably at least half of
the states are beyond repair), saving our families, saving our communities,
and saving our individual freedoms. To continue to focus on "saving America"
or "changing Washington, D.C.," etc., is utter foolishness! Washington,
D.C., is not going to change; it is beyond redemption. Forget it! Circle the
wagons around your State; cement your convictions; prepare your family;
ready your resolve; and start planning for life after death--the death of
liberty and law in America--because the meltdown of American society and
culture has already begun.

P.S. Many readers of this column also read my son's, Tim Baldwin's,
hard-hitting columns. Therefore, I am pleased to announce that Tim's wife,
Jennifer, just gave birth to a beautiful baby girl. If you want to send a
note of congratulations to them, this is Tim's email address:

tim@libertydefenseleague.com

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these
editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by
credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=19

(c) Chuck Baldwin

NOTE TO THE READER:

Chuck Baldwin is a syndicated columnist, radio broadcaster, author, and
pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which America
was founded. He was the 2008 Presidential candidate for the Constitution
Party. He and his wife, Connie, have been married for 37 years and have 3
children and 7 grandchildren. See Chuck's complete bio at:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=6

This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender
includes contact information and a method of removal.

To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=450

To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=457

Chuck Baldwin's commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished,
reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not
charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact
and that full credit is given and that Chuck's web site address is included.

Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or
advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for
permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an
interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

Readers may also respond to this column via snail mail. The postal address
is P.O. Box 37070, Pensacola, Florida, 32526. When responding, please
include your name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all
respondents will be added to the Chuck Wagon address list.

Please visit Chuck's web site at http://chuckbaldwinlive.com

Oil/Water samples from Gulf...VERY TOXIC

WOJack — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 16:21:00 GMT

Illegal Immigration Costs U.S. $113 Billion a Year, Study Finds

WOJack — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 16:08:00 GMT

By Ed Barnes

Published July 06, 2010

FoxNews.com (For the rest of the article)

he cost of harboring illegal immigrants in the United States is a staggering $113 billion a year -- an average of $1,117 for every “native-headed” household in America -- according to a study conducted by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).

The study, a copy of which was provided to FoxNews.com, “is the first and most detailed look at the costs of illegal immigration ever done,” says Bob Dane, director of communications at FAIR, a conservative organization that seeks to end almost all immigration to the U.S.

FAIR's opponents in the bitter immigration debate describe the organization as "extremist," though it is regularly called upon to testify before Congress.

Governor Jan Brewer's statement regarding federal lawsuit against Arizona

WOJack — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 15:00:00 GMT

Yesterday at 5:56pm

Today I was notified that the federal government has filed a lawsuit against the State of Arizona. It is wrong that our own federal government is suing the people of Arizona for helping to enforce federal immigration law. As a direct result of failed and inconsistent federal enforcement, Arizona is under attack from violent Mexican drug and immigrant smuggling cartels. Now, Arizona is under attack in federal court from President Obama and his Department of Justice. Today's filing is nothing more than a massive waste of taxpayer funds. These funds could be better used against the violent Mexican cartels than the people of Arizona.

The truth is the Arizona law is both reasonable and constitutional. It mirrors substantially what has been federal law in the United States for many decades. Arizona’s law is designed to complement, not supplant, enforcement of federal immigration laws. Despite the Department of Justice’s claims in paragraph 62 of today’s lawsuit, Arizona is not trying ‘to establish its own immigration policy’ or ‘directly regulate the immigration status of aliens.’ Arizona Revised Statutes § 11-1051(E) states that the federal government, along with local law enforcement officers authorized by the federal government, can only determine an alien’s immigration status. Subsection (L) of that same section goes on to state that the law ‘shall be implemented in a manner consistent with federal laws regulating immigration.

The irony is that President Obama’s Administration has chosen to sue Arizona for helping to enforce federal immigration law and not sue local governments that have adopted a patchwork of ‘sanctuary’ policies that directly violate federal law. These patchwork local ‘sanctuary’ policies instruct the police not to cooperate with federal immigration officials.

The best thing government can do is to create a stable, predictable environment, governed by an easily understood set of rules or laws. We do not need to make this more complicated than it already is. We must first and foremost create a secure border. Enhanced trade, economic opportunity and freedom will surely follow.

I am pleased that President Obama and the Department of Justice did not pursue the baseless claims of illegal racial profiling in the lawsuit. When signing S.B. 1070, I said, ‘My signature today represents my steadfast support for enforcing the law — both against illegal immigration AND against racial profiling.’ Arizona’s law expressly prohibits unconstitutional racial profiling. However, words are not enough. For this reason, I ordered the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board (AZPOST) to develop training on the new law for Arizona’s police officers. AZPOST has completed the training course and has published it for the all world to see at http://www.azpost.state.az.us/SB1070infocenter.htm . AZPOST has done its job professionally and served Arizona well.

I will not stop fighting to protect the citizens of Arizona, and to defend Arizonans in federal court. I have set up a legal defense fund to pay the substantial legal fees that Arizona has been, and will be, forced to incur as a result of all of these lawsuits. Contributions to the Border Security and Immigration Defense Fund can be made at http://www.keepazsafe.com/. My legal team will not hesitate to assert the rights of the State of Arizona in this matter. Arizona will ultimately prevail against the lawsuits – including this latest assault by the Obama Administration. Our laws will be found to be constitutional – because that is exactly what they are.

Happy Secession Day

WOJack — Sun, 04 Jul 2010 17:28:00 GMT

For entire article click here

by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

Perhaps the best evidence of how American history was rewritten, Soviet style, in the post-1865 era is the fact that most Americans seem to be unaware that "Independence Day" was originally intended to be a celebration of the colonists’ secession from the British empire. Indeed, the word secession is not even a part of the vocabulary of most Americans, who more often than not confuse it with "succession." The Revolutionary War was America’s first war of secession.

America’s most prominent secessionist, Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration, was very clear about what he was saying: Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and whenever that consent is withdrawn, it is the right of the people to "alter or abolish" that government and "to institute a new government." The word "secession" was not a part of the American language at that time, so Jefferson used the word "separation" instead to describe the intentions of the American colonial secessionists.

NUGENT: Black-robers need to read the Constitution

WOJack — Sun, 04 Jul 2010 16:35:00 GMT

The words are so simple this rocker knows what they mean

By Ted Nugent

5:57 p.m., Thursday, July 1, 2010

Click here for the entire article link

"Like many real Americans across this great country, while we are relieved and pleased with the McDonald v. Chicago ruling of five Supreme Court justices, I am appalled that any clear-thinking human being, much less an American sitting on the Supreme Court of the United States, could possibly believe that individual Americans have no right to self-defense. That four of the nine justices believe this is a monumental indictment against the very precepts of the American experiment, the premise of God-given individual rights and a cruel bastardization of our sacred U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights."

"We'd better get crackin', America. The Supreme Court indecision on the Second Amendment (and I don't want to hear about the close call) is further proof that the American way is being attacked like never before. I hope all Americans are raising hell like I am, letting elected officials know that we are deeply offended by the course America is on. Fedzilla in all its ugly forms is beyond out of control. The Mao Zedong fan club is moving forward at a breakneck pace to disassemble fundamentally the American dream. It must be stopped."

Which Caliber Works Best for Self-Defense?

WOJack — Fri, 02 Jul 2010 15:23:00 GMT

by Greg Perry
by Greg Perry
Recently by Greg Perry: A US Census Worker Came To My Home Today – Poor Lady...

The smallest caliber on earth is the one in your hands when you're being attacked.

The biggest caliber on earth is the one in the bad guy's hands when you're being attacked.

What caliber has good stopping power? The answer is that 100 Caliber is good for stopping power and a rocket-grenade launcher is not too shabby either.

But Seriously?

The best caliber is the one you will carry with you. If a full-sized 1911 .45 caliber sidearm is too much to lug with you everywhere, then you will go places without it. And the way the world's chaotic randomness seems to work, you will have left that beautiful 45 caliber home the day the baddies hold up Starbucks with you in the path of the cash register.

So the most reasonable answer is this: The best caliber is the largest one you will consistently carry.

What About the Little .380?

Well, James Bond carries a Walther PPK which shoots .380. Who are we to argue with 007?

People often ask me about which caliber they should carry. The first rule of a gun fight is always have a gun! That is why owning a gun that is too large for you to have with you at all times is ridiculous. Carry the largest caliber you will carry consistently. If that is a .22, or .380, or .38 Special, or 9mm, or .40, or .45, then great – carry that!

Stopping Power

Many myths abound about caliber and stopping power. Most are just myths. Nobody would dare say a 9mm has greater stopping power than a .45 and yet many have been shot with a .45 and were hardly fazed and many have been shot with 9's whose heart beat lasted less than a half second afterward.

A .22 right between the eyes turns off the lights far faster than a .50 caliber to the stomach.

I would rather be missed by a .45 than hit by a .22!

After the first rule – always have a gun – the answer for you is truly what are you comfortable with? A .380 has more recoil ("kick") than a .45 shot out of a full-sized 1911. Can you handle the recoil? Do you have problems with one or more hands or arms that might make a difference?

In other words, there is no best caliber for everybody. And the larger caliber does not mean better. It all depends. So do what is best for you and when you do that you will have the best caliber for you. Stop getting caught up with caliber; get on the range and start practicing with whatever you have to carry.

The Arguments Will Continue If I Have My Way

One reason I am asked about caliber a lot is because I make fun of 9mms. I like to go around repeating things I've heard and sayings I've made up such as, "A 9mm is well and good until somebody loses an eye," or "A 9mm is fine as long as you're not trying to shatter glass or shoot through cloth."

I'm a .45 bigot and I used to carry a .50. I like to tell people, "It doesn't matter what caliber you carry as long as it begins with a 4."

But I like to kick beehives as I walk by just to keep things stirred up too. When I'm having fun dissing "small" calibers it's just to keep things stirred up.

And 9mm is my biggest joke target. (And .223's, aka 5.56, the rifle caliber most-loved by foreign enemies of the United States. I'll let you figure out why that is funny unless you own an AR-15.)

My Biggest Kept Secret

The biggest secret on earth (don't tell anybody) is that I bought a 9mm for my wife to carry! I trust 9mm to be enough protect her.

The man I've learned most about guns from on earth, Gabe Suarez, carries only a 9mm. If it's good enough for Gabe Suarez then I can't say too much against it.

Considerations

I prefer a .45 because of the low recoil and the huge stopping power, but especially in the hot summers of Oklahoma concealing a huge .45 isn't the easiest thing in the world. And yet, some drugged-up baddies can go a long time after being shot by anything less than a .40. Running at you with a knife, for example, inertia will keep many of them running towards you after you've put lots of shots through them. Very few can run towards you after a .45 round or two... and yet...

More and more baddies wear bullet-proof vests in their "businesses." Hitting someone between the eyes is all well and good until you've seen how difficult it is to hit a moving target. The best thing we can hope for is a chest shot – or "center of mass" as they call it – and hopefully the baddie drops or we get a chance to put one between his eyes in the old "double tap" (more accurately known as a "deliberate pair" according to the Father of Modern Defensive Pistolcraft, Jeff Cooper who founded the world-renown Gunsite).

To be sporting you should always shoot two warning shots in the chest before putting one between his eyes.

And yet, all joking aside, any shot on any given day by anybody of any caliber might have no effect, partial effect, or full effect and one cannot predict what will happen. One can only make educated decisions ahead of time.

And always bring that gun to the gun fight. Since you are probably not a prophet who can predict when you'll find yourself in the middle of such a fight, always have your gun.

Ammunition Quality Means As Much or More than Caliber

Whatever caliber of weapon you choose, get the best ammo you can find for your gun. Find a gun shop you trust and ask them for your top options. Routinely check out the gun magazines to see what new ammo has recently been tested for self-defense effectiveness. Don't be cheap here! Don't worry about paying a lot for each box. Practice with a few rounds to get a feel for the ammo every once in a while.

Then get lots of cheap ammo. By "cheap" I mean buy it by the case for a good quantity discount and places such as AmmoMan.com usually has great prices and free shipping. Practice with the cheap stuff but keep a spare magazine loaded with the good stuff to carry.

Keep your carry gun clean and well-oiled (not overly oiled). This is what you protect your family with. Practice with it.

If hitting a target out to about 15–18 yards is difficult with the weapon you choose to carry (18 yards and beyond can be difficult for smaller guns), your sights might need adjusting. Also, a Crimson Trace laser sight might be your best answer. Crimson Trace laser sights allow smaller guns to hit where you aim as long as you hold steady as you press the trigger (never squeeze... press back until it fires).

Once you determine the gun you will have with you and can shoot best, and once you get high-quality ammunition to carry, I would not worry further about caliber.

The Every Other Bullet Trick

Consider getting both hollow point and ball ammo if both are available in a high-quality ammo you select for carrying. If you stack your magazine so that every other round is hollow and every other round is ball, you have a great set of rounds on hand for various conditions.

Depending on layering of clothing and leather outer garments, sometimes hollow-points don't penetrate. The ball ammo doesn't always tear up the body enough to damage and stop big or drugged-up attackers.

By using both, you get the best of both worlds as you shoot to end the attack.

July 1, 2010

Greg Perry [send him mail] is the pistol-packing author of more than 75 books. He loves to combine his favorite hobby – guns – with his second favorite – online auctions – by teaching others how to buy and sell firearms, knives, and ammo in online auctions legally and easily! eBay may not respect your freedoms but the free market does. You can comfortably buy and sell weapons-related items in a simpler-than-eBay environment by getting his profit-boosting book, Guns Galore! How to Buy and Sell Guns, Knives, and Ammo in Online Auctions Easily Without eBay!

Pentagon nominates Medal of Honor for living soldier, an Afghanistan Vet, first since Vietnam War

WOJack — Thu, 01 Jul 2010 15:22:00 GMT

BY Aliyah Shahid
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Thursday, July 1st 2010, 7:41 AM

Sosa/U.S. Navy

The Pentagon has nominated a living soldier to win the prestigious Medal of Honor.

Related News

It's time to honor the living.

For the first time since the Vietnam War, the Pentagon has nominated a living soldier to be awarded the Medal of Honor, according to the Washington Post.

The soldier, whose name has not been released, courageously ran through a wall of enemy fire in Afghanistan's Korengal Valley in 2007 in effort to push back Taliban combatants that overtook his squad.

The brave soldier's actions saved the lives of about six of his comrades, said U.S. military officials.

The nomination must now be reviewed by the White House.

Awarding a recipient is a tedious process. Recommendations, which include eye-witness accounts, can run in the thousands of pages. The process is so guarded that even the soldier's family does not know the White House is considering him for the medal.

President Barack Obama last awarded the Medal of Honor posthumously in September to family members of Sgt. 1st Class Jared Monti, who was killed while trying to save an injured U.S. soldier.

The presentation of the award would be significant for Obama, whose military relationship has come under intense scrutiny. Last month, Obama fired Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, over remarks the top commander in Afghanistan made criticizing the president and his national security team.

Six posthumous Medals of Honor have been awarded for bravery for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

In recent years, lawmakers, military officers and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates have criticized the Pentagon for not awarding the Medal of Honor to living soldiers.

Geoff Morrell, a Pentagon spokesman, said Gates “finds it impossible to believe that there is no one who has performed a valorous act deserving of the Medal of Honor who has lived to tell about it.”

Read the entire story from the Washington Post here.

Criminal Investigation of BP Staged Oil Spill Vital

WOJack — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 12:40:00 GMT

Obama Can Shut Down Internet For 4 Months Under New Emergency Powers

WOJack — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 12:31:00 GMT

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, June 25, 2010

Link to article

‘Kill switch’ bill approved, moves to Senate floor

President Obama will be handed the power to shut down the Internet for at least four months without Congressional oversight if the Senate votes for the infamous Internet ‘kill switch’ bill, which was approved by a key Senate committee yesterday and now moves to the floor.

The Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act, which is being pushed hard by Senator Joe Lieberman, would hand absolute power to the federal government to close down networks, and block incoming Internet traffic from certain countries under a declared national emergency.

Despite the Center for Democracy and Technology and 23 other privacy and technology organizations sending letters to Lieberman and other backers of the bill expressing concerns that the legislation could be used to stifle free speech, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee passed in the bill in advance of a vote on the Senate floor.

In response to widespread criticism of the bill, language was added that would force the government to seek congressional approval to extend emergency measures beyond 120 days. Still, this would hand Obama the authority to shut down the Internet on a whim without Congressional oversight or approval for a period of no less than four months.

The Senators pushing the bill rejected the claim that the bill was a ‘kill switch’ for the Internet, not by denying that Obama would be given the authority to shut down the Internet as part of this legislation, but by arguing that he already had the power to do so.

They argued “That the President already had authority under the Communications Act to “cause the closing of any facility or station for wire communication” when there is a “state or threat of war”, reports the Sydney Morning Herald.

Fears that the legislation is aimed at bringing the Internet under the regulatory power of the U.S. government in an offensive against free speech were heightened further on Sunday, when Lieberman revealed that the plan was to mimic China’s policies of policing the web with censorship and coercion.

“Right now China, the government, can disconnect parts of its Internet in case of war and we need to have that here too,” Lieberman told CNN’s Candy Crowley.

While media and public attention is overwhelmingly focused on the BP oil spill, the establishment is quietly preparing the framework that will allow Obama, or indeed any President who follows him, to bring down a technological iron curtain that will give the government a foot in the door on seizing complete control over the Internet.

As we have illustrated, fears surrounding cybersecurity have been hyped to mask the real agenda behind the bill, which is to strangle the runaway growth of alternative and independent media outlets which are exposing government atrocities, cover-ups and cronyism like never before.

Indeed, China uses similar rhetoric about the need to maintain “security” and combating cyber warfare by regulating the web, when in reality their entire program is focused around silencing anyone who criticizes the state.

The real agenda behind government control of the Internet has always been to strangle and suffocate independent media outlets who are now competing with and even displacing establishment press organs, with websites like the Drudge Report now attracting more traffic than many large newspapers combined. As part of this war against independent media, the FTC recently proposing a “Drudge Tax” that would force independent media organizations to pay fees that would be used to fund mainstream newspapers.

"We mean nothing to BP or the government"

WOJack — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 14:36:00 GMT

We Must do something about this! Hold our elected officials accountable! Spread this around as much as you can! "The truth shall set you free!"

Kindra Arnesen, Louisiana

Not On The Evening Skews - Los Zetas in the Crosshairs

WOJack — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 14:23:00 GMT

Some interesting insight on the details of the "Border War".

Sen. LeMieux: "Oil is washing ashore of my state!" (Excerpt)

WOJack — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 12:48:00 GMT

OR "How many ways does the Federal Government Fail us?"

I approve of Senator LeMiex's efforts but it seems to fall on deaf ears in the halls of our Federal Government. WE must hold these bastards accountable!

Brewer to Obama: Warning Signs Are Not Enough

WOJack — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 12:30:00 GMT

Five Months of Packing Heat

WOJack — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 14:10:00 GMT

Five Months of Packing Heat

by Manuel Lora
by Manuel Lora
Recently by Manuel Lora: War, Secession, and Libertarianism

Several months ago I made the decision to apply for a permit to carry a concealed weapon, because I wanted to have another level of protection for me and for my family as we go about our business around town.

I will not talk about the permit process, whether you should get one, or about any libertarian implications of licking the state’s boot to obtain permission to carry metals and chemicals on one’s person. You are on your own about that. Instead, I will simply, and briefly, go through the various trials and tribulations that I went through.

Because I live in hot and humid Florida, chances are I will (perhaps literally) never wear a jacket or any sort of second layer. And because at present I work from home, my daily attire is extremely informal: a t-shirt and shorts almost every day of the year. This eliminates OWB (outside the waist band) carry. Realistically speaking, this left me with two options. I could carry IWB (inside the waist band) or in a pocket.

For two reasons, the classic IWB method did not work for me. First, I am still working on losing a few more pounds. Thus, even a small firearm would have "printed" on a shirt, and become unconcealed. The state of Florida has declared – oh, the humanity! – that visible firearms are an abomination and a crime. The other has to do with comfort. Though not a firearms newbie, I am still quite a beginner at carrying concealed. I preferred to start off with something simple. While I am aware that IWB might in the long run be more desirable (a faster draw being an advantage), for now it would not do.

Pocket carry ended up being my choice, though I concede that it was mostly by default (where else could I hide a gun?). These days I carry a Ruger LCP. It’s a light pistol – perfect for the pocket. Initially I considered the back pocket. However, sitting on a gun did not seem like the best of ideas. Indeed, when I ran it past a friend, he said that back pocket carry would "scare the bejeesus" out of him. So front-pocket carry it was.

I tried a couple of pocket holsters before settling for a DeSantis Nemesis pocket holster. It fits comfortably in shorts or jeans pockets, and the trigger guard is well protected. I have no complaints about this purchase so far. Since my pistol of choice is fairly thin, no one can tell that I am carrying a concealed weapon. It just looks like I have a wallet in that pocket.

Besides the LCP, I have another gun that I plan on carrying: a S&W 638 (I must thank Dick Clark for his recommendation in "Buying Your First Handgun"). The 638 has a shrouded hammer. When looking at revolvers, I wanted something that would be safe when carrying. An exposed hammer might have risked getting snagged in clothing. To minimize the risk I went with the 638. Like the LCP, I will carry this gun in my pocket using a Don Hume holster. While it protrudes more than the LCP (it is a revolver after all), the S&W will not cause a stir in public.

Some parting thoughts

While preparing to start carrying, I spent some time reading books, web articles, blog entries and even watching YouTube videos. Many of those sources implied that people who carry guns have an extra responsibility to avoid escalating conflicts should they be involved in one. Failure to do so could literally have fatal consequences. Decent human beings already have such responsibility. Escalating a conflict can often be a form of aggression. To be clear, one has the right to defend oneself from aggressive violence but no right to start it (or to escalate it for that matter). The presence of a gun on you changes nothing.

I’ve been packing for a bit now. Let me share some impressions:

I’ve learned to keep my hands out of my pockets; there is no reason to be reaching around in there.
Keys, phone, wallet and pistol – they all come with me now. After years of putting everything in the same pockets I am instantly aware when anything is missing. Even after a few months, the same is true with the carry gun. Though I try not to forget to leave home without it, the lack of weight reminds me if I do.
(Front) pocket carry is not intrusive when driving.
Finding the correct holster is worth the investment in time, money and, if necessary, returns. Non-trivial amounts of effort went into finding the one with the right balance of comfort, functionality and material.
Find and test self-defense ammo.

If you have decided to carry a gun for self-defense, do it every day. Even in cities with high crime, the chances of ever needing to use a firearm for self-defense are extremely low. However, it’s better to have it if you ever do need it.

Finally, be smart about it. Don’t go out there shooting yourself (or others) in the foot (or in other places). The last thing we need as an already-maligned group is bad press.

June 25, 2010

Manuel Lora [send him mail] works at Cornell University as a TV and multimedia producer. Visit his blog.

Dearborn Police: Defending Islam against the Constitution

WOJack — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 19:14:00 GMT

This is Your country. This is My country. This is Our country! Do not sit by and let it be taken from you! WAKE UP!

Freedom's Real Enemies

WOJack — Sat, 19 Jun 2010 15:25:00 GMT

By Chuck Baldwin
June 11, 2010

This column is archived at
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=1708

Politicians in Washington, D.C., love to manufacture a crisis. The crisis
generates fear within the citizenry, thereby allowing the federal government
to centralize more and more power. During a crisis, the citizenry becomes
much more forgiving of federal abuses and accommodating of federal
encroachments than it otherwise would be without a crisis. Hence, we have a
federal "war on drugs," and a "war on poverty," and a "war on terror," and
an "oil crisis," and an "energy crisis," and a "domestic terrorism crisis,"
and an "education crisis," and a "border crisis," and an "economic
crisis"--Blah! Blah! Blah!

You can mark it down: every major crisis that America has faced over the
last several decades has been either manufactured or facilitated by policies
and activities originating in Washington, D.C. But at the same time that DC
is creating these crises, it categorizes any ideological group it finds
distasteful as a convenient scapegoat. These convenient scapegoats can
include "angry white guys," "tea party extremists," "a vast right-wing
conspiracy," Constitution Party or Libertarian Party "extremists," "Second
Amendment extremists" (gun owners), "pro-life extremists," ad infinitum, ad
nauseam.

Yet, while DC's elitists are plotting America's next crisis and figuring out
whom to categorize as America's next "extremist," some real enemies are
waging war against the freedoms and liberties of our once-great republic.
And, ladies and gentlemen, these enemies are much more subtle, a lot closer,
and much more dangerous than almost anything you are being told about.

Here are some of freedom's real enemies:

Big Cities

When the United States was a much smaller--much more agricultural--nation,
our freedoms were mostly intact. The mass exodus out of rural America into
urban America has been a bane of freedom--and it will continue to be so.

Thomas Jefferson addressed this issue astutely when he wrote in a letter to
James Madison, "When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in
Europe, we shall become corrupt as in Europe." (Source: The Jeffersonian
Cyclopedia, A Comprehensive Collection of the Views of Thomas Jefferson)

Jefferson spoke again of this danger in a letter to Benjamin Rush. He wrote,
"I view great cities as pestilential to the morals, the health, and the
liberties of man. True, they nourish some of the elegant arts, but the
useful ones can thrive elsewhere, and less perfection in the others, with
more health, virtue and freedom, would be my choice." (Source: Ibid.)

Big cities are most always more liberal, more socialistic, more utopian, and
more centralist. Citizens living in big cities readily submit to the
machinations and designs of Big Government with much greater regularity than
do their rural counterparts. In states where a handful of big cities
dominate State politics, Big-Government policies almost always take over the
politics of the entire State. If you doubt that, just speak with
freedom-loving citizens in New York, Illinois, or Maryland.

Consider, specifically, the freedom most necessary to preserve our
liberties: the right of the people to keep and bear arms. People in states
that are less populated enjoy much greater liberty than do people in heavily
populated states. For example, Boston's Gun Bible (BG ranks the states
according to the degree of gun ownership (and possession) protection in each
State. It is no coincidence that the states with sparser populations are
much freer than states with denser populations.

Here is BGB's breakdown of the most and least free gun ownership states:

Most Free States:

1. Vermont
2. Idaho and Kentucky (tie)
3. Louisiana and Alaska (tie)
4. Wyoming
5. Montana

Least Free States:

1. New Jersey
2. Illinois
3. Hawaii
4. Massachusetts
5. New York

Population density in the "most free" states is less than 50 persons per
square mile, while in the "least free" states it is more than 460 persons
per square mile. Case closed!

While big cities will typically tolerate much more in the way of
licentiousness and sexual perversion, they are also the first to tolerate
Big-Government socialism. Without a doubt, Thomas Jefferson was right: big
cities are "pestilential to the morals, the health, and the liberties of
man."

If you want to live free in the future, you will probably need to leave the
big city--and perhaps the states that are dominated by big cities.

The National News Media

For the most part, the national news media is no friend of freedom. About
all most of them know of the US Constitution is the part about the "freedom
of the press" (from the First Amendment, of course). Watch any of the Big
Three television network newscasts on any weekday evening, and what will you
see? You will see the exact same stories regurgitated over and over
again--even with the exact same spin! And that spin is most always tilted
toward bigger and bigger government. This goes on night after night, week
after week, month after month, and year after year. But this is all just
coincidental, right? Get real!

The cable news networks are not much better. About the only difference
between cable networks is that CNN will provide cover for Big Government
Democrats while viciously attacking all things Republican, and FOX NEWS will
provide cover for Big Government Republicans while viciously attacking all
things Democrat.

Face it: the national news media is intoxicated with Two Party Politics.
They really don't care nearly as much about the fundamental tenets and
principles of liberty as they do about whether a Democrat or Republican wins
office. Washington's media elite are wined and dined by the same party
politicians that they cover on television or in the newspaper. (What a
racket!) Do you really think any major media news personality is going to
risk losing his or her job (which is exactly what would happen) by asking
too many questions, or boring too deeply, or straying too far off the
reservation? Once again, get real! All of these guys and gals know exactly
where the line--and the "third rail"--is located. And they all will stay
clear of both! It's not about reporting the news, or defending liberty, or
anything of the sort. It is about pleasing their big corporate
sponsors--corporate sponsors who are in bed with the elites from both major
political parties, by the way!

As long as the American people continue to allow the national news media to
manipulate and spin the news, our liberties will continue to erode.

Big Business

In fact, Big Anything can be freedom's enemy: Big Business, Big Labor, Big
Media, Big Cities, and Big Religion. Big Anything!

However, the rate and degree to which Big Business has been able to advance
during the last half of the twentieth century--and now into the twenty-first
century--is especially problematic for the survival of liberty. Dear friend,
it is a mistake to equate Big Business with freedom. Big Business has little
to do with capitalism and free enterprise and much to do with monopolism and
globalism. Big Business does not want to compete with private enterprise; it
wants to crush it! Big Business sees Big Government as a friend and partner.
In fact, Big Business and Big Government are conjoined twins. They grow and
live as one.

Accordingly, it is no accident that when the Bilderbergers got together a
few days ago at the Hotel Dolce in Sitges, Spain, for their super-secret
meeting, the list of attendees included the cabal of super-elites from Big
Government, Big Business, Big Academia, and Big Media. People such as Bill
Gates (Microsoft), Roger Altman (former Deputy Secretary of the US
Treasury), Martin Feldstein (Harvard University), Niall Ferguson (Harvard
University), Philip Gordon (Assistant Secretary of State for European and
Eurasian Affairs), Donald Graham (The Washington Post), Richard Holbrooke
(Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan), Robert Hormats (Under
Secretary for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs), Henry Kissinger
(former Secretary of State), Klaus Kleinfeld (Chairman and CEO, Alcoa),
Craig Mundie (Microsoft), Peter Orszag (Director, Office of Management and
Budget), Charlie Rose (Producer, Rose Communications), Robert Rubin
(Co-Chairman, Council on Foreign Relations; former Secretary of the
Treasury), Eric Schmidt (CEO and Chairman of the Board, Google), James
Steinberg (Deputy Secretary of State), Lawrence Summers (Director, National
Economic Council), Christine Varney (Assistant Attorney General for
Antitrust), and Paul Volcker (Chairman, Economic Recovery Advisory Board).
And please remember that these are only the names of those that were
published. The complete list of attendees is top secret and never released.
For example, was Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner there? He is a
Bilderberg (and CFR) member.

But of course, this meeting--complete with the tightest security and secrecy
possible--is only for the purpose of social fellowship and clubmanship,
right? That the world's most interconnected business, governmental, and
media elites would meet outside the viewing and listening of everyone is
supposed to be dismissed as irrelevant and insignificant, right? Well, if
you get your news from ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, or FOX NEWS, that is exactly what
you are being led to believe.

Yet, Big Business has been conspiring with Big Government for the purpose of
personal aggrandizement (at the cost of liberty, of course) for
decades--probably centuries. Remember, it took an act of Congress to stop
old Prescott Bush (George H.W. Bush's father and G.W. Bush's grandfather)
from sending financial assistance to Nazi Germany. Know, too, that
international bankers today are supporting governments (some that are openly
hostile to the United States) in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. Again,
Big Business and Big Government are conjoined twins--an interconnected body
that grows in unison at the expense of our liberties.

Freedom has many more real enemies that could be added to this list, of
course; and maybe in the future we can talk more about them. For now,
recognize that our liberties are hanging by a thread in this country. And
the next time you hear someone in Washington, D.C., or the national news
media railing against the latest "crisis" that requires Big Government to
fix, please remember who the real enemy is.

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these
editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by
credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=19

(c) Chuck Baldwin

NOTE TO THE READER:

Chuck Baldwin is a syndicated columnist, radio broadcaster, author, and
pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which America
was founded. He was the 2008 Presidential candidate for the Constitution
Party. He and his wife, Connie, have been married for 37 years and have 3
children and 7 grandchildren. See Chuck's complete bio at:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=6

This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender
includes contact information and a method of removal.

To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=450

To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=457

Chuck Baldwin's commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished,
reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not
charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact
and that full credit is given and that Chuck's web site address is included.

Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or
advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for
permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an
interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

Readers may also respond to this column via snail mail. The postal address
is P.O. Box 37070, Pensacola, Florida, 32526. When responding, please
include your name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all
respondents will be added to the Chuck Wagon address list.

Please visit Chuck's web site at http://chuckbaldwinlive.com

U.S. Tax System: ‘Oh, it’s completely voluntary,’ says Harry Reid

WOJack — Sat, 19 Jun 2010 12:24:00 GMT

What a load of crap ....

wojack

Huntsville Conservative ExaminerHank Richards

A leading member of the Senate argues in this video that the U.S. Tax System is completely voluntary. Yes, you read that correctly. In the most Orwellian bit of doublespeak ever offered, including anything printed in the classic 1984 itself; this leading Senator says with a straight face that our tax system is completely voluntary. You may have to go to jail or pay penalties, but he says, ‘it is a voluntary tax system.’ **

Everyone in America needs to watch the video to see if the Senator makes sense. The scariest part is he somehow believes what he is saying.

Representative Hank Johnson of Georgia, who worried the Island of Guam, might tip over if we deployed 10,000 soldiers and their families, might not be the dumbest Congressman after all.

How can our Republic survive if there are politicians like these running our country?

( link for the rest of the article )