Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

The Wisest Mom — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 23:33:32 GMT

When the topic is Politics, almost everyone has something to say. Often times you’ll note the same bloggers, typically a small group of five or so people who spend a considerable portion of their days and nights at their computer, and in stanch support of one another. Excluding those retired, one must wonder if the others are gainfully employed, collecting Government assistance, (from the same Government they criticize so fervently), or if blogging is their full time occupation? They will seek out all political blogs and blatantly inform others how incorrect they are. Interestingly enough, seldom do you see solutions brought to the table from these bloggers when it comes to their preferred topic of Politics, most likely you will note the weapon being “cut and paste” as they become middlemen between the news media and blog. Some dare to pass off the thoughts as their own, but proper grammar quickly exposes them. Quickly you will note, these people are always correct. They, and only they, know what is right for America, nobody else could possibly have an opinion. If you do, however, have an opinion to voice, promptly they will tell you how ridiculous it is, seldom do they miss responding to anyone not thinking as they do.

Discussing politics is a broken record, and one of the easiest topics for blog. Little thought is required in the art of “cut and paste.” Criticism and complaining come easily, but these would be "crusaders" are weak in solution and implementation. Other than the criticism itself, most are worthless to the cause, capable only of transferring the news statistics and maligning all they are not in agreement with, or all they don't understand.

Than there is an entirely different breed, those who readily call themselves “Christians.” Of course, "only they" possess a close personal relationship with GOD. Like Moses before them, it is “only they” who could possibly hear the voice of GOD. "Only they" can hold GOD in their heart and “only they” shall be saved. Promptly they will inform you, it’s “only they” who shall enter the gates of Heaven. They have no issue speaking for GOD and telling you GOD’s plan, for it’s “only they” who understand and may work GOD’s plan. GOD has selected “only them” and nobody else could possibly have an equal relationship with GOD. They readily quote scripture for “only they” have read and understand the Bible. Disagree with them and instantly you represent the Devil, you are en route to Hell. It doesn’t matter what GOD oversees, these bloggers have spoken and so it will be!

Bloggers should be entirely honest with themselves. When other's posts are read, you don't find they hold value, nor do you feel they are particularly helpful, and certainly you don’t agree with anything else you may read outside the circle of political bloggers supporting a particular party? You want to promptly pound your keyboard and criticize what the poster has to say, or has said. You want to argue with that poster and attempt to claim superiority in intelligence and intent. You want to criticize and contradict anyone and anything not thinking as you do, or anyone who certainly can't be the Christian you are? You want to infer they are the Devil, because they don’t think or act as you?

Again bloggers should be honest with themselves. Do you ever wonder how many have taken a moment to look at Webster's definition of American? How about Citizen? And Allegiance? If Bloggers are citizens of America, surely they remember something as basic and traditional as our “Pledge of Allegiance”? Now for a bit of my own “cut and paste” as I spoke of earlier:

The Pledge of Allegiance

The Pledge of Allegiance was written in August 1892 by the socialist minister Francis Bellamy (1855-1931). It was originally published in The Youth's Companion on September 8, 1892. Bellamy had hoped that the pledge would be used by citizens in any country.

In its original form it read:

"I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

In 1923, the words, "the Flag of the United States of America" were added. At this time it read:

"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

In 1954, in response to the Communist threat of the times, President Eisenhower encouraged Congress to add the words "under God," creating the 31-word pledge we say today. Bellamy's daughter objected to this alteration. Today it reads:

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

Section 4 of the Flag Code states:

The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag: "I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.", should be rendered by standing at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. When not in uniform men should remove any non-religious headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart. Persons in uniform should remain silent, face the flag, and render the military salute."

Do most bloggers pledge allegiance to the flag and these United States of America, or do you banter between the parties, Democrat and Republican? Do you criticize your President, opposing parties, other posters thinking differently from you?

To the above, what solutions do you bring to the table? Excluding the time spent at your desktop or laptop, how much of your personal time as a citizen is dedicated to the cause of this government and country which you so readily criticize? How much monetarily do you dedicate, beyond the taxes we all pay? Besides criticism and repeated attempts to flaunt the political knowledge and superiority you believe you possess, what is it specifically that you do to rectify the wrongs you are complaining about?

How does division in America help America? How does negativity and belittling our current President and leader change the problems facing this great nation?

I have been a devote Republican over 35 years. There are pros and cons with either party, any intelligent person knows and wouldn't disagree. This shouldn’t come as a big surprise to anyone, there has always been debate between the parties and there always will be. Our answer is coming together and finding acceptable solutions. People’s opinions are not changed by bloggers, it’s he said, she said and everyone returns to their corners of land feeling and thinking the same as before the “on switch” of their computer was flipped.

I understand many of the concerns being expressed and some are quite legitimate. For us personally, Democratic rule costs us in taxation exorbitantly, more so than anyone could possibly fathom. That being said, we will stand behind our current President, be He or She Democrat or Republican, and do whatever we possibly can to demonstrate our allegiance to this great nation. How helpful it would be to any President if all Americans would do the same.

United we stand, divided we fall. Seems as if they knew what they were speaking of, even long ago. Working together is the answer. Again be truthful with yourselves, if we don’t do this, who will? How proactive are your blogs and what is it they have changed?

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Bags — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 17:10:29 GMT

It's easy for conservative, low tax Republicans to use "division" as a benchmark for disloyalty. Scholars like Montesquieu and Jefferson, on the other hand, always feared that excessive "unity" could easily lead to tyranny, as later exemplified by 20th century Germany. As for myself, I spent 26 years working in inner city schools, never earning more than $50,000/yr., having an Advanced Degree from Tufts University. I never once stereotyped myself; I preferred to vote on issues and candidates. Other than reading a history of the Pledge of Allegiiance, what have YOU actively done to help society as a whole?

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Jeff — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 22:08:46 GMT

The wisest mom,

That is probably the longest question I've ever read. Most of your statement of course is a long discussion of "Your opinion". I agree with the greater part of it, where you discuss the assuredness of the posters. As a mom I'm sure you have discovered that your 2 year old child has an opinion. If you are blessed with multiple children then the opinion thing hits home all the more certain as you split them apart and tell them to stop fighting. It is ingrained in us, it is part of our psyche as human beings. To verify or to even vindicate our existence. We need to be right or why even bother?

Your comment on people not changing their minds is spot on. It has been my experience that true change comes over time, from a conviction we realize of our own accord I.E. I now believe the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. I use to vote republican. Things change as we move through time and we are effected by that change through our life experiences, then, translate our understanding from our unique perspective into belief.

I myself have been an active citizen in my community by coaching little league football and baseball for almost a decade. My wife and I will be helping out at the "Make-a-Wish Foundation" this Friday (Which happens to be my birthday). I'm helping at our area chapter of "Habitat For Humanity" just to name a few things. I'm retiring Sept 1st. I volunteered for a lay-off at work last month. I told the superintendent (Who was going to transfer me to another job) "Look I'm retiring in two months. Why don't you lay me off and keep someone with a family at home and a lot more concerns then I have at this point in my life. Besides it'll give me some practice before I retire to see if I'll like it or not. We both laughed and he said he'd give it some thought. Normally I wouldn't share this stuff, but, you don't know me from Adam so I don't see the harm.

For us personally, Democratic rule costs us in taxation exorbitantly, This is a statement you made. I'm not going to argue that democrats haven't from time to time raised taxes. They most certainly have. Isolating facts can be dangerous, because, they give us a false understanding of effect. If I was to say, "Republican rule adds to the National Debt exorbitantly", you would take offense to that statement. But both of our statements are factually and historically true I.E. Click here: UI Press | War and Taxes | Introduction An excerpt from article: Yet despite the country’s great loss of blood and treasure, there is little sense of sacrifice on the home front. Indeed, in its first six years, the Bush administration has requested, and Congress has approved, a series of major tax cuts. Lawmakers have lowered and flattened rates for the individual income tax, initiated a repeal of the estate tax, eased the burden on capital gains and corporate dividends, reduced the so-called marriage penalty, and enacted a slew of new deductions, credits, and other special-interest provisions. When combined with a steady increase in military, domestic, and entitlement spending, these cuts have turned a projected $5.6 trillion surplus over the 10-year budget window into a $2.7 trillion deficit.

There were many other sites I could have used, all saying the same thing. Where would a republican Senator go to repay that kind of deficit spending? Why didn't Bush and the republican congress make sure those wars were paid for? I have a hunch (See if you agree or disagree.) They would have to had cut so many programs that reelection would have been a dream of the past.

There are think tanks out there (On both sides) that weigh the risk of every decision that is made in any administration. When the rep's are in the dem's think of ways to discredit them. When the dem's are in the rep's think of ways to discredit them. It's a vicious cycle who's only casualty is truth. Those of us in society who are not privy to such "Knowledge" as to the extent of deceit by either group must choose sides (if we are disposed to that thinking) and hope we are right.

Thank you for standing behind our current president. I'm active in my union (That's where I got involved in Habitat for Humanity we sponsor homes that are being worked on.) As you stated "United we stand divided we fall". Our take on that saying goes like this "United we stand divided we beg." (It's a union thing) No matter which way you look at it those sayings are there to inspire people. Because the bottom line is "The Human Element".

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

EJ — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 03:03:15 GMT

I would dare to guess that the most active people on this site are as follows:

American Patriot is a gold digger who is supported by her man.

Dawg is on disability. Living off the taxpayersz

Pat is a senior citizen living off social security, reaping the rewards of old age.

Yet all critize the government, which 2 of them depend on for their money

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Jeff — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 17:52:31 GMT

Hey EJ,

What has 32 legs and 16 teeth?

The front row of a Willy Nelson concert.

You give to much credit to AP. She sits near the middle in the first row.

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 01:01:27 GMT

EJ,

You don't have anything intelligent to say........so you start bashing people.

If any one is on Social Security, maybe they worked all their life and payed into it for 40+ years. Maybe they served and risked their life for you.................so you could come on here and bash them.

This is a knowledged based site. So I guess the only knowledge you have is hate and bashing knowledge?

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 00:55:04 GMT

A Free Press For A Free People

Trial set for Obama's birth certificate dispute!

Arguments planned Jan. 11 for challenge to eligibility

A California judge today tentatively scheduled a trial for Jan. 26, 2010, for a case that challenges Barack Obama's eligibility to be president based on questions over his qualifications under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.

If the case actually goes to arguments before U.S. District Judge David Carter, it will be the first time the merits of the dispute have been argued in open court, according to one of the attorneys working on the issue.

In a highly anticipated hearing today before Carter, several motions were heard, including a resolution to long-standing questions about whether attorney Orly Taitz properly served notice on the defendants, which she had.

In a second ruling, Carter ordered that attorney Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation can be added to the case to represent defendants Wiley Drake and Markham Robinson, who had been removed by an earlier court order. Drake, the vice presidential candidate for the American Independent Party, and Robinson, the party's chairman, were restored as plaintiffs.

But the judge did not immediately rule on Taitz' motion to be granted discovery – that is the right to see the president's still-concealed records. Nor did Carter rule immediately on a motion to dismiss the case, submitted by the U.S. government, following discussion over Taitz' challenge to the work of a magistrate in the case.

Carter ordered a hearing Oct. 5 on the motion to dismiss and ordered arguments submitted on the issue of discovery.

If the case survives that challenge, a pretrial hearing has been scheduled for Jan. 11 and the trial for two weeks later.

More to come...

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 16:59:12 GMT

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 17:04:59 GMT

African Culture Site Jeanne Egbosiuba Ukwendu
BellaOnline's African Culture Editor

Luo Tribe History and Culture

The Luo tribe is Nilotic tribe descended from pastoral nomads who migrated south from Southern Sudan to the land around Lake Victoria near the end of the 15th Century. They migrated in at least five waves starting approximately 1500 AD. The Luo gradually displaced the Bantu-speaking tribes living in the region that were the ancestors of the modern Luhya and Kisii (Gusii) tribes. By the 1840's the Luo had formed a tight knit society with ruodhi or regional chiefs or kings.

The Luo tribe currently lives in western Kenya, northern Tanzania, northern and eastern Uganda, and southern Sudan. The Luo tribe makes up 12% of Kenya's population and is the third largest tribe behind the Kikuyu and Luhya tribes. The Luo tribe consists of 12 subgroups or sub-tribes. They are also known as Lwo, Jaluo or Joluo.

The Luo generally speak three languages: Dholuo (their mother-tongue or tribal language) Swahili, and English.

Marriage and death are considered important rites of passage. At one time, polygamy was very common within the Luo tribe. Men were allowed to marry up to five women. Even today, dowry (in a ceremony called Ayie) is paid by the groom to the bride's family for the bride. The dowry usually consists of cattle and/or money. Traditionally, marriages were arranged by matchmakers, but this practice has also fallen out of favor.

Traditionally, the Luo believe in an afterlife and supreme creator, Nyasaye. They also have a strong ancestor cult. The Luo have many traditional rituals. The first major ritual is called "Juogi". This is the naming ceremony and occurs sometime between birth and age two. An ancestor will appear to a family member in a dream and the child will be named after that ancestor. Only good ancestors have the power to apper to family members in dreams. Children are rarely named after bad ancestors. Today most Luo tribe members are Christian.

The Luo tribe does not practice male circumcision. Instead the removal of the six lower front teeth is done in an initiation. This practice has fallen out of favor.

FAMOUS MEMBERS OF THE LUO TRIBE INCLUDE:

BARACK OBAMA - U.S. Senator from Illinois, U.S. President Elect

Jaramogi Oginga Odinga - Vice-President to Jomo Kenyatta from 1963 to 1966

Raila Amolo Odinga - Opponent to Mwai Kibaki in the 2007 Kenyan presidential elections. Currently Prime Minister of Kenya.

Ayub Ogada - Singer, composer and performer on the nyatiti also known as the Luo lyre.

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 00:42:42 GMT

Obama Set to Force ObamaCare while His Eligibility Trial Date Set?

By Sher Zieve Wednesday, September 9, 2009
As rumors that Obama plans to—again—resuscitate his hard line Marxist push for his government-controlled ObamaCare (the so-called “public option” that is no option at all) down the throats of the American people during his Wednesday night speech, something else is looming on the horizon for the dictator-in-chief.
While Obama was delivering his “love me and support me” speech to our nation’s children, the hearing on a motion for discovery regarding the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to even occupy the Office of the Presidency of the United States—Keyes v Obama—was underway.
Note: All other efforts from multiple other attorneys handling multiple other cases have been denied by courts that strongly appear to have been intimidated by Obama‘s DOJ.

On Friday 7 September, the US Justice Department advised federal Judge David O. Carter to dismiss the case on their previously highly successful (if bogus) “standing“ argument; which claims that—even if the merits of the case are correct—plaintiffs cannot show they have experienced harm.

Instead, on Tuesday, Judge Carter heard Attorney Orly Taitz’ motion and set a tentative and expedited trial date for 26 January 2010.

The date is tentative as Judge Carter will be addressing the ObamaAttorneys’ motion to dismiss the case on 5 October. If Obama’s motion to dismiss is not granted, Taitz’ discovery hearing will take place that same day and the case challenging Obama’s eligibility will proceed.

As Obama has reportedly spent between $1-1.5 Millions to hide his school and true birth records, this would be the first time We-the-People would have access to them.

Note: As of this writing not one of the major news outlets (aka Obama’s State-run media) have reported anything at all on Judge Carter’s ruling.

In the meantime, however, Dictator-in-Chief Barack Hussein Obama continues his attempts to force draconian and Orwellian ObamaCare and Cap and Trade down our throats. Not only is he not listening to the American people he is overtly telling us ‘I don’t give a damn what you want. This is MY country and no longer yours! I’m in power, now.’

In the meantime, the ObamaCongress has just announced that it will work to raise the debt (aka theft from and gutting of the USA) ceiling above $12 Trillions. In other words, Obama’s and his minions pilfering from and to be implemented total control over the American people is still well underway. Folks, not only is it not time to end our fight, it’s time to amplify it!

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

wwww — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 04:28:22 GMT

You might be a Birther if... you now have a feeling in your gut that the narrative used to elect a president was a bit off the mark in substantive ways. You may have been a moderate, who bought candidate Obama's conciliatory voice of moderation and intelligence, as eloquently displayed again and again on the campaign trail. But now that you've witnessed one leftist power play after another coming from the President, you're thinking you may have been misled. At the very least, you may be a Birther if you simply would like the president, who promised you transparency, to actually deliver a modicum of the stuff.

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 23:32:11 GMT

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 23:33:41 GMT

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 02:50:17 GMT

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 00:41:41 GMT

'Bin Laden' tape harangues Obama

Bin Laden has avoided capture since the 2001 attacks on the US
An audio message purportedly by al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden has been released on an Islamist website.
The message, entitled "a statement to the American people", was about 10 minutes long and was accompanied by a still image of Bin Laden but no video.
In the message, a voice tells the US president that he is "powerless" to stop the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The message comes just two days after the US marked the eighth anniversary of the 11 September attacks on America.
'No real change'
In the recording, the voice discusses what motivated the al-Qaeda network to launch the 11 September attacks. He explained that they were, in part, fuelled by US support for Israel.
"The time has come for you to liberate yourselves from fear and the ideological terrorism of neo-conservatives and the Israeli lobby," the voice in the tape says.
"The reason for our dispute with you is your support for your ally Israel, occupying our land in Palestine."
The voice believed to be Bin Laden also speaks of how the conflict between al-Qaeda and the US may end.
"If you stop the war, then fine. Otherwise we will have no choice but to continue our war of attrition on every front [...] If you choose safety and stopping wars, as opinion polls show you do, then we are ready to respond to this," it says.
In the message, the al-Qaeda leader accuses the new president of failing to fundamentally change foreign policy because of his decision to retain key figures from the previous administration, including Defence Secretary Robert Gates.
"If you think about your situation well, you will know that the White House is occupied by pressure groups," he says.
Bin Laden is thought to be hiding in mountainous terrain on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.
In his last known message, in June, Bin Laden had said that US President Barack Obama had planted the seeds of "revenge and hatred" towards the US in the Muslim world.

NOTE: HE SAYS THAT OBAMA HAD PLANTED THE SEEDS OF REVENGE AND HATRED TOWARDS THE US IN THE MUSLIM WORLD.
BEING THAT OBAMA IS MUSLIM THEN DOES HE HATE AMERICA ALSO???????????????????

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 00:42:33 GMT

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 00:44:01 GMT

Obama Mid-East plans in jeopardy

By Roger Hardy
BBC Middle East analyst

President Obama is hoping to re-launch Middle East peace talks
One of US President Barack Obama's most important foreign policy initiatives is in jeopardy.
The Netanyahu government in Israel has approved the building of 455 new homes for settlers in the West Bank - in defiance of Mr Obama's call for a complete settlement freeze.
One former US diplomat with extensive experience of the Middle East calls it "a huge slap in the face" for the Obama administration.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is trying to have it both ways.
He wants to appease the settler lobby by allowing new construction, and to appease the Americans by finalising an agreement on a temporary freeze.
But he is in danger of satisfying no-one.
The White House has been quick to condemn the new announcement.
A Palestinian spokesman, Saeb Erakat, said the Israeli decision "nullifies any effect that a settlement freeze, when and if announced, will have".
Even the settlers and their supporters are unimpressed.
One Israeli analyst - quoted by the French news agency AFP - called the announcement "a sedative given to the settler lobby before proceeding with the painful operation of freezing settlements".
Good intentions
On the Middle East, as on other issues, Barack Obama entered the White House full of good intentions.
WEST BANK SETTLEMENTS

Construction of settlements began in 1967, shortly after the Middle East War
Some 280,000 Israelis now live in the 121 officially-recognised settlements in the West Bank
A further 190,000 Israelis live in settlements in occupied East Jerusalem
The largest West Bank settlement is Modiin Illit, where 38,000 people live
There are a further 102 unauthorised outposts in the West Bank which are not officially recognised by Israel
The population of West Bank settlements has been growing at a rate of 5-6% since 2001
Source: Peace Now

Challenge of Israeli settlements
The Bush administration had neglected the peace process. He would revive it.
Mr Bush had shunned Iran and Syria. Mr Obama would talk to them.
But like other presidents before him, he has discovered how resistant the region's problems are to solution.
Mr Obama, and his tireless Middle East special envoy George Mitchell, are still struggling to achieve some sort of breakthrough before 23 September.
That's when the president is expected to address the new session of the UN General Assembly.
He would like to use the occasion for a three-way meeting in New York with Mr Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.
This would set the seal on the re-launch of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.
Question of credibility
But, with little more than two weeks to go, the pieces of the puzzle are stubbornly refusing to fall into place.
Mr Mitchell is due to return to Israel in a few days, for one more shot at finalising a settlement freeze.
But even if there is deal, this will not be the "complete" freeze Mr Obama has been calling for. The signs are that it would be temporary - for six to nine months - and would exclude Jerusalem.
Would that entice the Arabs into the game?
Mr Abbas says that without a meaningful freeze he won't resume talks.
The Arab states would be reluctant to take even modest steps towards normalising relations with Israel, as the Americans are urging them to.
Failure in the Middle East would damage Mr Obama's credibility.
As he grapples with the domestically difficult issue of healthcare and with an unpopular war in Afghanistan, many would conclude that he had bitten off more than he can chew.

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 16:23:15 GMT

BORN IN THE USA?

Soldier ordered not to challenge Obama's eligibility?

Army doctor claims she was barred from answering judge's call to court

Posted: September 14, 2009
9:23 pm Eastern

By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Military litigation team attending emergency hearing
Capt. Connie Rhodes, who claimed her superiors had prevented her from attending her previous, emergency court hearing, finally stood before a judge today to question the constitutional eligibility of her commander in chief.
Rhodes, a medical doctor and Army officer, filed suit in U.S. District Court in Columbus, Ga., earlier this month, requesting a restraining order preventing her deployment overseas on the basis that the top of the chain of command, President Barack Obama, has not demonstrated himself to be a natural born citizen under the U.S. Constitution.
The injunction application states, "Plaintiff Captain Connie Rhodes, M.D., F.S, submits and charges that the current de facto president never provided any evidence of his eligibility, and Connie Rhodes, M.D., F.S., submits that she cannot lawfully act under his authority."
The court documents continue, "Plaintiff contends, that in reality, to force her to serve under this illegitimate commander in chief, this secretary and Department of Defense appointed by an imposter or ineligible, fraudulently elected, illegitimate usurper would constitute involuntary servitude or judicially sanctioned rape of her individual autonomy."
Join the petition campaign to demand President Obama resolve the questions over his birthplace by revealing his long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate!
But when Judge Clay Land – the same judge who earlier dismissed a similar case filed by Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook – ordered Rhodes to appear and testify before him in an emergency hearing last week, Rhodes didn't show.
She claims she had requested leave, but her superiors denied it, meaning she would be considered AWOL – and therefore subject to court martial and imprisonment – if she left to appear before the judge.
The following video, after a scene with lawyers for both sides approaching the court, shows Rhodes' attorney, Dr. Orly Taitz, reading Rhodes' statement claiming she was barred from attending

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 16:24:27 GMT

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 15:49:11 GMT

The Pledge of Allegiance

Pledge of Allegiance, by Red Skeleton

When you pledge allegiance to the flag, you promise loyalty and devotion to your nation.

I pledge allegiance...
You promise to be true
...to the flag...
to the emblem of your country
... of the United States of America...
a nation made up of fifty states and several territories, each with certain rights of its own
... and to the republic...
a country where the people elect representatives from among themselves to make laws for them
...for which it stands...
the flag represents the United States of America
... one nation under God,...
a country whose people are free to believe in God
... indivisible,...
the nation cannot be split into parts
... with liberty and justice...
with freedom and fairness
...for all. ...
for every person in the country - you and every other American.

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 13:46:14 GMT

The events of 9-11-01. The Song is "Only Time" by Enya, and the speech is President Bush on the night of September 11, 2001. Comments are now disabled, because of all the stupid ones that I was getting. This video isn't about President Bush, and I don't care if you liked him or you didn't. This video is about what happened that day and the many people that were lost. To all of the people that made positive comments: Thank you. It was appreciated. I've also had several people ask me to send it, but I'm sorry to say that I do not have it anymore. I got a new computer since then, and I've already gotten rid of the old one.This was someone else's post.

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 18:50:29 GMT

What would you say if I gave you 11 reasons why the elections in 2010 wi ll be the most important in the history of the United States ?

1. What if I had told you in October 2008, before the last presidential election, that before Barack Obama's first 100 days in office, the federal government would be in control of both the mortgage and the banking industries? That 19 of America 's largest banks would be forced to undergo stress tests by the federal government which would determine if they were insufficiently capitalized, so they must be supervised by the government? Would you have said, "C'mon, that will never happen in America ."

2. What if I had told you that within Barack Obama's first 100 days in office the federal government would be the largest shareholder in the US Big-Three automakers: GM, and Chrysler? That the government would kick out the CEO's of these companies and appoint hand-picked executives with zero experience in the auto industry and that executive compensation would be determined, not by a Board of Directors, but by the government? Would you have said, "C'mon, that will never happen in America !"

3. What if I had told you that Barack Obama would appoint 21 Czars, without congressional approval,   accountable only to him, not to the voters, who would have control over a wide range of US policy decisions. That there would be a Stimulus Accountability Czar, an Urban Czar, a Compensation Czar, an Iran Czar, an Auto Industry Czar, a Cyber Security Czar, an Energy Czar, a Bank Bailout Czar, and more than a dozen other government bureaucrats with unchecked regulatory powers over US domestic and foreign policy. Would you have said,"C'mon, that will never happen in America !"

4. What if I had told you that the federal deficit would be $915 billion in the first six months of the Obama presidency - with a projected annual deficit of $1.75 trillion - triple the $454.8 billion in 2008, for which the previous administration was highly criticized by Obama and his fellow Democrats. That congress would pass Obama's $3.53 trillion federal budget for fiscal 2010... That the projected deficit over the next ten years would be greater than $10 trillion. Would you have said, "C'mon, that will never happen in America !"

5. What if I had told you that the Obama Justice Department would order FBI agents to read Miranda rights to high-value detainees captured on the battlefield and held at US military detention facilities in Afghanistan . That Obama would order the closing of the Guantanamo detention facility with no plan for the disposition of the 200-plus individuals held there. That several of the suspected terrorists at Guantanamo would be sent to live in freedom in Bermuda at the expense of the US government. That our returning US veterans would be labeled terrorists and put on a watch list. Would you have said, "C'mon, that will never happen in America !"

6. What if I had told you that the federal government would seek powers to seize key companies whose failures could jeopardize the financial system. That a new regulatory agency would be proposed by Obama to control loans, credit cards, mortgage-backed securities, and other financial products offered to the public. Would you have said, "C'mon, that will never happen in America !"

7. What if I had told you that Obama would travel to the Middle East, bow before the Saudi king, and repeatedly apologize for America 's past actions. That he would travel to Latin America where he would warmly greet Venezuela 's strongman Hugo Chavez and sit passively in the audience while Nicaraguan Marxist thug Daniel Ortega charged America with terrorist aggression in Central America . Would you have said, "C'mon, that will never happen in America !"

8. Okay, now what if I were to tell you that Obama wants to dismantle conservative talk radio through the imposition of a new "Fairness Doctrine." That he wants to curtail the First Am endment rights of those who may disagree with his policies via internet blogs, cable news networks, or advocacy ads. That most major network television and most newspapers will only sing his phrases like state-run media in communist countries?

Would you say, "C'mon, that will never happen in America !"

9. What if I were to tell you that the Obama Justice Department is doing everything it can to limit your Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms. That the federal government wants to reinstate the so-called assault weapons ban which would prohibit the sale of any type of firearm that doesn't require the shooter to pull the trigger every time a round is fired. That Obama's Attorney General wants to eliminate the sale of virtually all handguns and ammunition, which most citizens choose for self-defense. Would you say, "C'mon, that will never happen in America !"

10. What if I were to tell you that the Obama plan is to eliminate states rights guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment and give the federal government sweeping new powers over policies currently under the province of local and state governments and voted on by the people. That Obama plans to control the schools, energy production, the environment, health care, and the wealth of every US citizen. Would you say, "C'mon, that will never happen in America !"

11. What if I were to tell you that the president, the courts, and the federal government have ignored the US Constitution and have seized powers which the founders of our country fought to restrict. That our last presidential election may have been our last truly free election for some time to come. I know, I know what you will say: "That will never happen in America !"

If we don't do everything in our power to stop this madness

in 2010...May God have mercy on our souls.

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 18:52:53 GMT

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 16:00:56 GMT

Subject: Something Happened: HB 1388 PASSED

You just spent $20 MILLION to resettle and move members and supporters of Hamas, the terrorist organization into the United States. We are giving them free housing, food, the whole enchilada.*

Whether you are an Obama fan, or not, EVERYONE IN THE U. S. needs to know....

Something happened.... H.R. 1388 was passed, behind our backs. You may want to read about it.. It wasn ' t mentioned on the news... just went by on the ticker tape at the bottom of the CNN screen.
Obama funds $20M in tax payer dollars to immigrate Hamas Refugees to the USA . This is the news that didn ' t make the headlines...

By executive order, President Barack Obama has ordered the expenditure of $20.3 million in "migration assistance" to the Palestinian refugees and "conflict victims" in Gaza .
*The "presidential determination", which allows hundreds of thousands of Palestinians with ties to Hamas to resettle in the United States , was signed and appears in the Federal Register.

Few on Capitol Hill, or in the media, took note that the order provides a free ticket replete with housing and food allowances to individuals who have displayed their overwhelming support to the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) in the parliamentary election of January 2006.

Let's review....itemized list of some of Barack Obama ' s most recent actions since his inauguration:

His first call to any head of state, as president, was to Mahmoud Abbas, leader of Fatah party in the Palestinian territory.

His first one-on-one television interview with any news organization was with Al Arabia television.

His first executive order was to fund/facilitate abortion(s) not just here within the U. S. , but within the world, using U. S. tax payer funds.

He ordered Guantanamo Bay closed and all military trials of detainees halted.

He ordered overseas CIA interrogation centers closed.*
He withdrew all charges against the masterminds behind the USS Cole and the "terror attack" on 9/11.

Now we learn that he is allowing hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refuges to move to, and live in, the US at American taxpayer expense.
These important, and insightful, issues are being "lost" in the blinding bail-outs and "stimulation" packages.

Doubtful? To verify this for yourself: www.thefederalregister.com/d.p/2009-02-04-E9-2488* <http://www.thefederalregister.com/d.p/2009-02-04-E9-2488>
PLEASE PASS THIS ON... AMERICA NEEDS TO KNOW

WE are losing this country at a rapid pace.

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Sweet Gypsey — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 19:19:09 GMT

Subj: Violence as a tool???


                 Something a Friend Sent of Interest"

Good morning friends,

    As I was watching a beautiful sunrise over the Albermarle Sound this morning I made a mistake. I cut on the news.
I listened to the various talking points and realized not a hell of a lot had changed since yesterday. I am not sure if that is good or bad? However, right when I was getting ready to head into the little town of Edenton to sit in the coffeeshop and check my emails, (they have high speed wireless and at the cabin we are still on dial-up) a story caught my attention.

   If I understood correctly they have passed legislation in Massachusetts that will make it legal for the police, or any other approved agency, to come into your home and vaccinate you and your children against the H1N1 virus. They will have, quote unquote, the right to vaccinate you against your will. The state will shoot into your body a vaccine that has been about as thoroughly vetted as Van Jones. If a drug company develops a new drug how long does it take to test this new compound under the old rules? If I am not mistaken you are talking years of trials, data, and analyzes How long have the various companies been working on this vaccine? Months! Not years, months. Is this a recipe for a potential disaster outweighing the effects of the H1N1 virus. I wouldn't want to bet my Granddaughters life on it. Nor my wife's, my sons, or mine. No sir, no way, not on my watch.

   On the ride to town I couldn't shake this nagging feeling that there may be more to this story than making a shamble of our constitutional rights. Hopefully I am wrong but follow the logic.

    I think that we are in uncharted territory with this dramatic shift to the left in our government. I also believe that America is rejecting this shift with a rising continueium. The left knows this, so we must ask ourselves, "What is their next play?". What is the next strategy?. Right now they are playing the Race Card. You know, "White Guilt", and all that it implies. As I walked into the Edenton Coffee shop it hit me like a ton of bricks.

      "THEY WANT TO FORCE ACTS OF VIOLENCE!!! It sounds crazy doesn't it? But think about it".

    The group that I have sent this email too, and I know you all, are all Americans. I also know that if someone were to have the balls to even try and come into your home, vaccinate you against your will, that the potential for a nasty outcome would be great. I know it would be for me personally.

     Let's assume for arguments sake that the Governor of Massachusetts signs this legislation. Let's say for arguments sake that the policy of forced vaccinations is attempted to be carried out. Let's assume that some American, or Americans, decide to stand up for their rights and act upon their decision. Could we not agree that this action would most likely lead to some sort of violence? Am I stretching, or can you see this too?

   The question to ask is, "How would the event be used by the radicals?". How would they spin the outcome into their agenda? How will they leverage these events to their advantage of more control? Would this be an EMANUEL CRISIS? How will the media treat such an event. My god, look what they have done with Jimmy Carters outlandish statements. Heaven forbid, but they would have a field day with this.Also if my assumption is right, would be painting true American's as radical right wing nut jobs, while demanding their heads on sticks. Screaming about freedoms while in essence giving and emboldened left more fuel for their socialist fire. For God's sake, look at the distortions and lies they have spread about the March On Washington. Simply amazing. Thank the good Lord I was there, and can distinguish fact from spin. If not, after listening to them, would probably want to put my own head on a stick.

   I just reread what I have written. It is baffling. Ten years ago my biggest concern about government was if Clinton was going to get some type of STD and if "Little Willy" was going to fall off. Now, keep in mind the legislation I have written about, to the best of my knowledge HAS PASSED through both houses in Mass.. A quick fast forward to today, and I wish the biggest worry on my plate was Bill Clinton's sex life. But it isn't. I am concerned that my front door is going to end up being a piece of splintered wood for the fireplace. Followed by an unwanted jab in the arm with a substance unknown. Sound Orwellian?? Hell, that's because it is! This stuff is frightening.

   Hopefully I am wrong in my thinking, but there are just to many facts to ignore. I am not going to cast caution to the wind. Nor turn a blind eye to what is occurring. I am just going to keep the faith, I think it is something a lot of them have discarded.

          B.

             "Thank you all for taking the time to read this"

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Whirlwindflower — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 21:38:33 GMT

NOTE HE SIGNED THIS RIGHT AFTER TAKING OFFICE!!!!!!!!!

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement NOTICE: Part II DOCID: fr04fe09-106 DOCUMENT SUMMARY:
[[Page 6115]]
Presidential Determination No. 2009-15 of January 27, 2009

Unexpected Urgent Refugee and Migration Needs Related To Gaza
Memorandum for the Secretary of State
By the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including section 2(c)(1) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962 (the ``Act''), as amended (22 U.S.C. 2601), I hereby determine, pursuant to section 2(c)(1) of the Act, that it is important to the national interest to furnish assistance under the Act in an amount not to exceed $20.3 million from the United States Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund for the purpose of meeting unexpected and urgent refugee and migration needs, including by contributions to international, governmental, and nongovernmental organizations and payment of administrative expenses of Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration of the Department of State, related to humanitarian needs of Palestinian refugees and conflict victims in Gaza.
You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

(Presidential Sig.)
THE WHITE HOUSE,
Washington, January 27, 2009
[FR Doc. E9-2488
Filed 2-3-09; 8:45 am]
Billing code 4710-10-P
Presidential Documents

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Yechielshlipshon — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 23:26:14 GMT

I have no way of predicting the future, but right now, we, the People of these United States of America, face an immediate problem. Read, read the reference, then do what is legal and Constitutional to protect our rights and the Republic!

This is not a joke! The Constitution on the USA is in danger of being abolished, or at the very least, modify beyond the protective umbrella we, have accepted as our due, along with several charished rights of each and every citizen. This is being done under the color of Law. The following is only one example of this reversal of our freedoms-read, study the references and act in the legal and constitutional ways still open to us. A key phrase here may be " Fw: Guns listed on your next tax return
...

Wednesday, September 23, 2009 7:52:28 PM
From:
Yechielshlipshon

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: "unechereami@aol.com"
To: LEENUNES@GMAIL.COM; ray@aberdyfarm.com; currybryan7@aol.com; moments521@yahoo.com; sidecar8@msn.com; deb@aberdyfarm.com; gina@hcc.necoxmail.com; gggcma@verizon.net; Nomad010957@yahoo.com; ronk3sc@charter.net; psbaconhcc@cox.net; vtreid@yahoo.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 8:55:48 AM
Subject: Guns listed on your next tax return

    Joe, one of my most unliked federal agencies is the IRS...... if they are in charge of my reporting my hunting guns i am going to be really teed off....... don;t mind sending something to the sherrif but not to that organization..........

                            Subject: Fwd: Fw: Guns listed on your next tax return
                            To:

                                            Now 'all Guns' must be listed
                                            on your next (2010) tax return!
                                            As if we didn’t have enough to get upset about!
                                            If you have a gun, I hope it isn't registered!
                                            Senate Bill SB-2099 will require us to put on our 2009 1040 federal tax form all guns that you have or own. It will require fingerprints and a tax of $50 per gun.

                                            | This bill was introduced on Feb.. 24, 2009, by the Omama staff. BUT . . this bill will only become public knowledge 30 days after the new law becomes effective !   This is an amendment to the Internal Revenue Act o f 1986. This means that the Finance Committee has passed this without the Senate voting on it at all.     Trust Obama ? ...... you must be kidding !
                                            |

                                            The full text of the IRS amendment is on the U.S. Senate homepage,U.S. Senate You can find the bill by doing a search by the bill number, SB-2099.
                                            | You know who to call; I strongly suggest you do. Please send a copy of this e-mail to every gun owner you know.|


                                            Obama's Congress is now starting on the firearms confiscation bill. If it passes, gun owners will become criminals if you don't fully comply.

                                            It has begun . . . Whatever Obama's secret Master Plan is....this is just the 'tip of the iceburg!'

                                            Very Important for you to be aware of a new bill HR 45 introduced into the House. This is the Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sale Act of 2009.|

                                            Even gun shop owners didn't know about this because the government is trying to fly it under the radar as a 'minor' IRS revision, and, as usuual, the 'political' lawmakers did not read this bill befre signing and approvi ng it !

                                            To find out about this - go to any government website and type in HR 45 or Google HR 45 Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sales Act of 2009. You will get all the information.

                                            Basically this would make it illegal to own a firearm - any rifle with a clip or ANY pistol unless:

                                            -It is registered -You are fingerprinted -You supply a current Driver's License -You supply your Social Security # -You will submit to a physical & mental evaluation at any time of their choosing -Each update - change or ownership through private or public sale must be reported and costs $25 - Failure to do so you automatically lose the right to own a firearm and are subject up to a year in jail. -There is a child provision clause on page 16 section 305 stating a child-access provision. Gun must be locked and inaccessible to any child under 18. -They would have the right to come and inspect that you are storing your gun safely away from accessibility to children and fine is punishable for up to 5 yrs. in prison.

                                            If you think this is a joke - go to the website and take your pick of many options to read this. It is long and lengthy. But, more and more people are becoming aware of this. Pass the word along. Any hunters in your family pas s this along.|

                                            This is just a "termite" approach to complete confiscation of guns and disarming of our society to the point we have no defense - chip away a little here and there until the goal is accomplished before anyone realizes it.

                                            This is one to act on whether you own a gun or not..


:





                                            Please.. copy and send this out to EVERYONE in the USA , whether you support the Right to Bear Arms or are for gun control. We all should have the right to choose.
                                            Oh nooooooooo!


                                            http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/blairholt.asp

                            images[5]




RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Yechielshlipshon — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 23:37:33 GMT

Also, thanks to Whirlwind flower, this has just come to my attention: The President who is now redoing the legal and ethical system of our country has a birth certificate, after all. He was born in Mombasa, Kenya. At the time, Kenya was a British protectorate. If he cannot prove that the USA had legal jurisdiction, there, at the time of his birth, he is not legally the president of the United States of America.

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Avaloyuru — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 17:39:16 GMT

This was an interesting post, not really so much a question really. But I do agree with a few points. The bashing does seem to abound on here, but that's actually all over the web if you look. Also, the point about the "cut and paste" practice. I can understand inserting a link (or a few) to show where you obtained your information if you are quoting someone. But when there are extremely long posts containing material that seems more like a repeat of a news editorial, the post can be very difficult to read all the way through on a computer screen.

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

Michael Joel Held — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:01:39 GMT

Very thoughtful, enlightening, and entertaining. I enjoyed it very much. Michael Joel Held

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

American Patriot — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:18:32 GMT

Those old farts who live with Bush Derangement Syndrome, I feel sorry for.Reallity is so hard to come by.It's time to come down out of the hills.Bush has out of office for 9 months.I can seee where you might think like that since Little "o" hasn't done diddle squat,except get a dog and has his wife ho-ing in the garden.

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

IamQweenBee — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 07:43:34 GMT

Jeff and EJ,

Way to go! LOL! Great posts! I am sure the author of this particular post is referring to the Obama haters. They are the only ones who come here spewing venomous opinions and NOT facts. Then, they get angry when you debunk their theories.

Let's face it Wisest Mom, we ALL cut and paste at times. Since none of us are reporters...we provide news articles to back up our statements. REPUTABLE NEWS ARTICLES!!! Not any of that stuff from FOX! I see absolutely NOTHING wrong with that unless some have a problem with reading the truth. LOL

Whirlwind,

Are we back on Obama's citizenship now? That was clarified 5 months ago. Where have you been? LOL

RE: Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Bush-Riddle me this.

American Patriot — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 17:44:15 GMT

HILLARY GOES WEAK-KNEED ON IRAN SANCTIONS

A squishy, misguided, weak-kneed liberalism has emerged in Hillary Clinton's comments about the kind of sanctions that would work best in halting Iran's nuclear program. Rather than take the one step that would really be effective - cutting off the flow of refined gasoline to Iran - she instead insists that we need to target the Iranian leadership with sanctions.

Her husband wisely rejected the same kind of advice in deciding on the sanctions to impose on Serbia during the Bosnia war, opting for broad based economic sanctions to deter aggression. The sanctions were incredibly effective and the mere threat of their re-imposition in 1996 was enough to bring Serbian dictator Milosevic to his knees.

But now Hillary says sanctions must target Iran's Revolutionary Guard "without contributing to the suffering of the ordinary [Iranians], who deserve better than what they currently are receiving."

But the impotence of sanctions that do not go for the jugular is obvious and the abysmal record of targeted sanctions aimed at Iranian leaders is enough to discredit the entire process. However, sanctions can be effective - immediately - if they strike at a nation's most vulnerable point.

The House of Representatives has approved a resolution at the end of December which imposed sanctions against Iran, banning any company from doing business in the United States if it supplied oil products to Iran. Co-sponsored and pushed by Illinois Republican Representative Mark Kirk (who deserves support in his bid for a Senate seat), the measure has real teeth and is now pending before the Senate.

Hillary's comment about avoiding sanctions which "contribute to the suffering" of the people of Iran can only be interpreted as a push-back against the sanctions that have passed the House.

This kind of weakness, on which criminal regimes like Iran's thrive, is just the kind of impotence which liberal governments display. From Munich to today, leaders have found it difficult to wage war against those who threaten world peace or even to impose serious sanctions against them. The argument is always the same: It will hurt ordinary people.

Well, so will atomic bombs.

Unless we inflict enough damage on Iran to force it to stop its weapons program, we are leaving Israel exposed and vulnerable to almost certain destruction.

Iran, despite having the second largest deposits of oil in the world, lacks refining capacity and must import 40% of its gasoline. The threat of a cutoff is the ultimate weapon, short of force, to be used in compelling Iran to abide by the resolutions of the international community and refrain from producing nuclear weapons.

Hillary's comment can only have brought a sigh of relief to the lips of the Iranian mullahs. It sends the clear signal that the Obama Administration lacks the toughness to impose real sanctions and its disapproval can be safely disregarded in Teheran.

If gasoline imports were curtailed, the "ordinary" Iranians would blame their own government. They know that Iran has been isolated from the world by its own government and surveys show this cutoff rankles the population mightily. They are very worried about getting the cold shoulder from the rest of the world and worry about the consequences for their already blighted and fragile economy.

A gasoline shortage can only stoke the fires of rebellion so brilliantly flaring forth on Iranian streets and can only bolster the courage of those who brave gunfire and police clubs to express their demands for liberty.

Hillary: Don't go squishy on us now!