The Patriot Post Brief 5-3-2010

[nChrist]

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Brief 5-3-2010
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

The Foundation

"Let the American youth never forget, that they possess a noble inheritance, bought by the toils, and sufferings, and blood of their ancestors." --Joseph Story

Government
Secure the border first

"The American president has the power to control America's borders if he wants to, but George W. Bush and Barack Obama did not and do not want to, and for the same reason, and we all know what it is. The fastest-growing demographic in America is the Hispanic vote, and if either party cracks down on illegal immigration, it risks losing that vote for generations. But while the Democrats worry about the prospects of the Democrats and the Republicans about the well-being of the Republicans, who worries about America? No one. Which the American people have noticed, and which adds to the dangerous alienation -- actually it's at the heart of the alienation -- of the age. In the past four years, I have argued in this space that nothing can or should be done, no new federal law passed, until the border itself is secure. That is the predicate, the common sense first step. Once existing laws are enforced and the border made peaceful, everyone in the country will be able to breathe easier and consider, without an air of clamor and crisis, what should be done next. ... Not everything has to be settled right away. Only controlling the border has to be settled right away. Instead, our national establishments deliberately allow the crisis to grow and fester, ignoring public unrest and amusing themselves by damning anyone's attempt to deal with the problem they fear to address. Why does the federal government do this? Because so many within it are stupid and unimaginative and don't trust the American people. Which of course the American people have noticed." --columnist Peggy Noonan

For the Record

"Strangely enough -- for a bill that allegedly sticks it to Wall Street -- during the Senate Banking Committee hearing [last] week, Goldman Sachs chairman Lloyd Blankfein endorsed the Dodd bill. Someone should have asked him who from Goldman wrote it. In 2008, Goldman employees gave a record-breaking $1,007,370 to the Obama campaign. This year, the 'securities and investment' industry has already given twice as much money to the Democrats as to the Republicans. ABC News reports that 'the five biggest hedge fund donors all gave almost all their donations to Democrats.' Among the biggest recipients of hedge fund money were Senators Harry Reid (Democrat), Chris Dodd (Democrat) and Charles Schumer (Democrat). Even with the evidence right in front of their eyes, people still believe that it's the Republicans who are in Wall Street's pocket. How out of touch with reality would a comedy writer have to be to write the following joke for Jay Leno [last] week: 'The head of Goldman Sachs was going through security and was asked to empty his pockets -- and five Republican senators fell out.' Why didn't Barack Obama or Chuck Schumer fall out? Why not Rahm Emanuel, who worked for Goldman? Or Greg Craig, who used to work for Obama but just took a job with Goldman? The fact that anyone laughed at that joke proves that Republicans have a serious PR problem." --columnist Ann Coulter

Insight

"The [U.S.] Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals ... it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government ... it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen's protection against the government." --philosopher and novelist Ayn Rand (1905-1982)

Opinion in Brief

"President Barack Obama doesn't deserve the reputation he's had for his style and temperament and for being gracious, civil, bipartisan and post-racial. He is often ungracious, uncivil, hyper-partisan, race-oriented and vindictive. He mocks and ridicules almost for sport. More than any president in my memory, he often does not comport himself presidentially. Why does this matter? Well -- if I even have to answer that -- he is the face of America. ... He came into office with a reputation for being sophisticated, gentlemanly, above the political fray and open-minded. But it was a facade, facilitated by good looks, a seemingly pleasant demeanor and an extraordinarily fawning -- and forgiving -- media. He has been getting a pass on his unseemly conduct for way too long, which partially explains the disconnect between his personal likability and the unpopularity of his socialist agenda. ... He is exactly the opposite of who he billed himself to be: 'I will bring a new type of politics to Washington.' As a committed liberal ideologue, he is neither a uniter nor one willing to consider both sides of an issue. But it's not just his extremist views that are divisive. He is also often personally divisive, petty and mean-spirited." --columnist David Limbaugh

The Gipper

"American strength is ... a sheltering arm for freedom in a dangerous world. Strength is the most persuasive argument we have to convince our adversaries to negotiate seriously and to cease bullying other nations. But tonight the security program that you and I launched to restore America's strength is in jeopardy, threatened by those who would quit before the job is done. Any slackening now would invite the very dangers America must avoid and could fatally compromise our negotiating position. Our adversaries ... respect only nations that negotiate from a position of strength. American power is the indispensable element of a peaceful world; it is America's last, best hope of negotiating real reductions in nuclear arms." --Ronald Reagan

Re: The Left

"At a time when the American taxpayer is on the hook for trillions in current and future federal spending -- when the Congressional Budget Office warns that the current rate of federal spending is 'unsustainable' -- liberal Democrats in Congress have earmarked over $68 million of taxpayer dollars for a Boston shrine to the late Senator Edward Kennedy. In a detailed report, the Boston Herald describes the planned Edward M. Kennedy Institute as a 'temple for Ted Kennedy built with pork.' According to their account, congressional Democrats -- especially ... John Kerry and Edward Markey -- have been cramming earmarks for the project into various government funding bills. The Herald found that Kerry and Markey even intend to siphon $28.9 million of the institute's funding from the Defense Department budget, with almost $19 million of that amount already signed into law. ... I believe that establishing Teddy's Temple with millions of taxpayer dollars is meant to serve twin purposes. First, it is intended to enshrine the pretense that one's politics is more important than any other aspect of one's personal character. ... Second, Teddy's Temple is a means to an even broader end. That end is to elevate his liberal ideology to the status of an official, government-approved 'ideal.' You can be sure that the 'good citizenship' propagated at his shrine will translate into speeches, writings, video clips, totems, classes, and materials extolling his liberalism generally, and his advocacy of socialized medicine specifically -- all paid for with your hard-earned dollars." --columnist Robert Bidinotto

Faith & Family

"After Billy Graham led a rally in Washington in 1952 and called for a day for the nation to pray, President Harry Truman signed the National Prayer Day proclamation in 1953. The Freedom from Religion Foundation filed against the proclamation in October of 2008. Have they won? Federal judge Barbara Crabb says they have. The ruling will not be enforced until any and all challenges to it are dealt with, including any opposition the Justice Department decides to muster against the decision. The White House says that President Obama still plans to issue the proclamation for May 6 of 2010. With mid-term elections looming only months from now, any decision to drop the day would surely add to the growing dissatisfaction with the Obama administration. ... U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb in Madison, Wisconsin, said the proclamation 'violates' the First Amendment rule that prohibits laws respecting the establishment of religion. When President Ronald Reagan made the day permanent in 1988, no one could have seen the anti-Christian attitude that would prevail only two decades later. Our national identity and our Christian roots are being ignored, denied or challenged on every level." -columnist Michael Bresciani

[nChrist]

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Brief 5-3-2010
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

Culture

"America's tyrants have now turned their attention to salt. ... Why do food processors put a certain quantity of salt in their products? The answer is the people who buy their product like it and they earn profits by pleasing customers. The FDA has taken the position that what the American buying public wants is irrelevant. They know what's best and if you disagree, they will fine, jail or put you out of business. Tyranny knows no bounds. Let's say that the FDA orders Stouffer's to no longer put 970 mg of sodium in their roasted turkey dinner; they mandate a maximum of 400 mg. Suppose Stouffer's customers, assuming they continue buying the product, add more salt -- what will the FDA do? The answer is easy. They will copy the successful anti-tobacco zealot template. They might start out with warning labels on salt. Congress will levy confiscatory taxes on salt. Maybe lawsuits will be brought against salt companies. State and local agencies might deny child adoption rights to couples found using too much salt. Before a couple can adopt a baby, they would have to take a blood test to determine their dietary habits. Teachers might ask schoolchildren to report their parents for adding salt to their meals. You might say, 'Williams, they'd never go that far in the name of health.' In 1960, you might have said the same thing about tobacco zealots but yet they've done the same and more." --George Mason University economics professor Walter E. Williams

Reader Comments

"I read with absolute horror the details in Mr. Alexander's essay 'Army Preps for Tea Party Terrorists.' Now that I've calmed down, I would like to propose some modifications and would encourage the military officers involved to re-run the exercise: (1) remove any references to alcohol -- guns and alcohol do not mix, (2) the armed and assembled protesters are not violent in intention, but are openly carrying arms as both a civil disobedience measure, and for self defense (not offense against the government), and finally (3) since the protesters' goal is restoration of Rule of Law and Essential Liberty, and all those in the Armed Forces have taken an oath to Support and Defend, mobilize forces to meet and merge with the protesters ... combining forces in order to establish a restoration of this great nation's intended (not current) form of self-government." --Jason

"I live here on Fort Knox and I had not seen much about this exercise, but my neighbor is a company commander here and had told me about this whole thing. From talking to him, he says he received both of these 'Intel updates' himself. Whether or not this plaid out in actual drills (I have no idea what the plan was or what happened), these emails were sent out to commanders here on post in these units. If the professional fighting force of this country is going to remain subordinate to its civil authority then it must refrain from even appearing to enter into the current political debate. As a citizen and as a military officer, I am concerned about what types of 'real' choices I might be forced to make down the line if such exercises are allowed to continue." --Samuel

"Hot Dog! I always have to give good reason to the CFO (my wife) on why I need another gun. I have been authorized to buy four ... thanks to The Patriot Post!" --Traveller

"Mark, for the first time in my memory, and this is reading The Patriot Post three times weekly for several years, this is the first time I ever saw you mistakenly and quite embarrassingly miss the point about the military exercise that you (in one day) investigated and wrote your 'mea culpa' today. We all make mistakes, but I have to think reactions and second thoughts to your original column yesterday caused you to look more into this mess and come up with the truth today. That second look and investigation should have been conducted BEFORE you wrote your original piece. Thanks." --Charlie

Editor's Reply: This was neither a retraction nor correction, but supplemental information regarding my essay, "Army Preps for Tea Party Terrorists." I was contacted by senior Command staff at Ft. Knox on the afternoon of the date of publication. They confirmed that there was a security exercise at Ft. Knox last week, and that an officer in the security loop altered the scenario "in order to make it more realistic." The fact is, this scenario for the exercise was described in my essay, exactly as it was circulated at Ft. Knox. The Command staff informed me that the alterations were not approved at the Command level and that the individual who circulated the scenario through official channels will "receive appropriate counsel." The facts are, the scenario was written, it was circulated for the exercise among both military and civilian participants, and the officer who authored it is now subject to discipline. Further, Command staff at Ft. Knox have provided assurances this type of scenario would not find its way into official circulation again. In regard to the verbatim scenario documentation we posted, even though those documents were not classified, Command staff asked that we remove them for specified security reasons. As our mission is not only to uphold our Constitution by holding those in positions of authority accountable to their oaths, but also to support our uniformed Patriots, I agreed to remove the documents from our Web site as requested by Ft. Knox command staff.

Reader's Reply: Mark, I happily accept and thank you for your answer and full explanation and hereby retract my e-mail. To me, this is just the kind of honest and forthright handling we have come to expect from yourself and the entire Patriot Post." --Charlie

From the Left: "Tea Partiers haven't acted as terrorist to this date but they have acted in a hateful and racist manner. While that dose not speak for all of the members it dose cast a huge shadow on the group as a whole. I think they pose a threat to this country and I am glad to see we will be ready." --Ellen

The Last Word

"Speaking of health care, who exactly are those 31 million uninsured people who would have died in the streets if Pelosi hadn't strong-armed ObamaCare through Congress? So far as I can figure, there are two groups who make up the 31 million. The first group consists of young people who don't wish to blow their money on something as unsexy as health insurance when they could be spending it on booze and recreational drugs, and the second group is made up of illegal aliens. So it is for their sake, Obama set out to destroy the world's finest health care system and gobble up one-sixth of the nation's economy. Welcome to his world. Furthermore, while I have my own bone to pick with insurance companies, why should they be required to insure people who have what the feds are calling pre-existing conditions? On the face of it, that sounds like a condition that existed before it existed, and reminds me of a pre-heated oven. But if what they mean by the term is that someone waits until he has AIDS or leukemia before he goes looking for health insurance, how is that any different from waiting until your house is ablaze before shopping for fire insurance?" --columnist Burt Prelutsky

(Please pray for our Armed Forces standing in harm's way around the world, and for their families -- especially families of those fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who granted their lives in defense of American liberty.)