Limiting Free Speech – Trust Us – More About Who Can Be Natural Born Citizen – Mario Apuzzo – Lt. Col. Lakin – Good UCMJ Site – Military Coup? – TPM – The BOPAC Report

The BOPAC Report 

ChiBama Politics –

  

Obama Administration = Thugs, Thugs and More Thugs! The left had better be careful what they wish for!

Hopefully the left will take notice of this danger to us all. 

Congress about to limit political speech of bloggers? 

posted at 3:35 pm on May 19, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
 

The same sloppy legislative writing that created so many unintended consequences in ObamaCare also plagues the DISCLOSE Act, the effort in Congress to tighten spending rules in the wake of the Citizens United decision — and that’s the generous take on the situation.  Reason’s Bradley Smith and Jeff Patch warn that the perhaps-unintended consequences of legislative language will allow the FEC to regulate political speech online.  The fact that media entities like the New York Times have specific exemptions built into the bill makes the intent, or lack thereof, rather murky: 

Last week, a congressional hearing exposed an effort to give another agency—the Federal Election Commission—unprecedented power to regulate political speech online. At a House Administration Committee hearing last Tuesday, Patton Boggs attorney William McGinley explained that the sloppy statutory language in the “DISCLOSE Act” would extend the FEC’s control over broadcast communications to all “covered communications,” including the blogosphere. 

The DISCLOSE Act’s purpose, according to Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair Chris Van Hollen and other “reformers,” is simply to require disclosure of corporate and union political speech after the Supreme Court’s January decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission held that the government could not ban political expenditures by companies, nonprofit groups, and labor unions. 

The bill, however, would radically redefine how the FEC regulates political commentary. A section of the DISCLOSE Act would exempt traditional media outlets from coordination regulations, but the exemption does not include bloggers, only “a communication appearing in a news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine or other periodical publication…” 

In Citizens United, the Supreme Court explicitly rejected disparate treatment of media corporations and other corporations (including nonprofit groups) in campaign finance law. “Differential treatment of media corporations and other corporations cannot be squared with the First Amendment,” Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the majority. 

No legitimate justification exists for excluding media corporations from regulations on political speech applicable to other corporations, unless the goal is to gain the support of editorial boards funded by the New York Times Co. 

The response to this criticism has been both predictable and instructive.  Instead of actually discussing how Reason got the argument wrong in its initial reporting on the subject, a Public Citizen lobbyist (which supports the legislation) called it a death-panel argument.  Another group attempted to defend Congress by assuring us that the FEC would “most likely … stand by the 2006 Internet rules” and not investigate political bloggers. 

Most likely? Color me comforted….Continue Reading 

Natural Born Citizen –

 

 

 

  

 

 

I'm Sure There Are Many Soldiers Living This Nightmare. It's Time For The Joint Chiefs of Staff to Step To The Plate and Support Lieutenant Colonel Terry Lakin! Don't Be Military Sheep.

From the desk of Mario Apuzzo: 

Wednesday, May 19, 2010 

An Article II “natural born Citizen” Is Not the Same As an English Common Law “natural born subject” 

I have already written an essay explaining that the Founders and Framers relied upon natural law, the law of nations, and Emer de Vattel for their Article II definition of a “natural born Citizen” and not upon the English common law. That essay is entitled, ‘The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law’ as U.S. Federal Common Law Not English Common Law Define What an Article II Natural Born Citizen Is . This essay will address the related specific question of whether the Framers gave to the “natural born Citizen” clause the same meaning that the English common law gave to a “natural born subject.”…Continue Reading  

Lt. Col. Lakin’s Journey –

 

 

 

  

 

 

Dalai Lama has advice for Obama! America Must Demand Proof or Face the Consequences!

Here’s a site for those interested in more in-depth knowledge about Court Martial process. 

LTC LAKIN 

(A work in progress  –  5/13/2010 18:01:44)  Where-ever possible I have linked to items that are publically available on the web without having to go to LEXIS or WestLaw for example. 

Note, there are some areas of Article 32, UCMJ, practice where I am rooting for LTC Lakin. 

The Article 32, UCMJ, hearing is currently scheduled for 0900, 11 June 2010, Rm.  134, Bldg. T-2, WRAMC.  The Article 32, UCMJ, appointing authority has granted a defense requested delay in the hearing from 6 May 2010 to 11 June 2010.  The delay counts as defense delay for the purpose of R.C.M. 707, which is the speedy trial provision applicable in non-custody case. 

…Continue Reading 

  

Military Matters –

 

 

 

  

 

 

Obama's New Commander-In-Chief Uniform to Battle Low Morale in Military!

Here’s an interesting tidbit online yesterday at Talking Points Memo. 

TPM News 

Full Text Of Newsmax Column Suggesting Military Coup Against Obama 

Here is the full text of John L. Perry’s column on Newsmax which suggests that a military coup to “resolve the Obama problem” is becoming more possible and is not “unrealistic.” Perry also writes that a coup, while not “ideal,” may be preferable to “Obama’s radical ideal” — and would “restore and defend the Constitution.” Newsmax has since removed the column from its website.
Obama Risks a Domestic Military Intervention 

By: John L. Perry 

There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America’s military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the “Obama problem.” Don’t dismiss it as unrealistic. 

America isn’t the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn’t mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through military eyes: 

# Officers swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Unlike enlisted personnel, they do not swear to “obey the orders of the president of the United States.” 

# Top military officers can see the Constitution they are sworn to defend being trampled as American institutions and enterprises are nationalized….Continue Reading  

  

Brothers and Sisters in the Military – When are you going to demand Obama establish that he is a Natural Born Citizen, eligible to serve as Commander In Chief?   

If your Oath to protect the Constitution is not important today, why don’t we just change the military oath of allegiance to reflect our current level of commitment?  

I, _______, do solemnly swear to protect ME and I will try to defend the Constitution as long as it doesn’t adversely impact the aforementioned ‘ME’. 

Obama Dreams About Government Run Health Care, Larry Sinclair, Birth Certificates, Natural Born Citizens While America Lives in a Nightmare.

 Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.
Albert Einstein  

  

Other  News –

 

 

 

  

 

 

Hillary Urged to Wear Burka When Negotiating With Taliban. It is aimed at getting American women prepared for what's coming!

From Hot Air: 

Quotes of the day 

posted at 10:43 pm on May 19, 2010 by Allahpundit 

A Pakistani court has blocked Facebook amid a growing row over a competition on the social networking website to design cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed. 

Plans for the “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” contest drew an angry reaction, provoking street demonstrations in the Muslim majority country. 

On Wednesday, Lahore High Court responded to a petition by the Muslim Lawyers Movement, ordering Pakistan’s internet regulator to block the entire site… 

Rai Bashir, a lawyer involved in the case, said the site was blasphemous…. 

The Universal United Church of OBamboozle! State Run Media Always Welcome!

From World Net Daily: 

Soros-funded group urges media run by government 

Marxist-led study has close ties to Obama White House officials 

Posted: May 19, 2010
  

NEW YORK – A George Soros-funded, Marxist-founded organization calling itself Free Press has published a study advocating the development of a “world class” government-run media system in the U.S. … 

From Free Republic: 

Prime Minister Netanyahu, you have millions of American's behind you. Ignore Obama's theatrics and protect Israel!

Some US troops in Afghanistan patrol with unloaded weapons 

Wednesday, May 19, 2010 4:53:30 PM · by Crush The US Report ^ | 19 May 2010 | Chris Carter 

Commanders have reportedly ordered a U.S. military unit in Afghanistan to patrol with unloaded weapons. Some soldiers are being ordered to conduct patrols without a round chambered in their weapons, The US Report has learned from an anonymous source at a forward operating base in Afghanistan. Our source was unsure if the order came from his unit or if it affected other units. On war correspondent Michael Yon’s Facebook page, commenters stated that this is a common practice in Iraq, while others said that it is occurring in Afghanistan as well. According to military protocol, “Amber” status requires weapons to… 

From American Thinker: 

We are family and we get to choose who's we! Chibama Politics & Obama's attack of Inspector General Walpin!

DoJ trial attorney in Black Panthers case resigns in protest
May 19, 2010
Will the veil of secrecy finally be lifted on this case? More 

From Atlas Shrugs:

Coddling Terrorists, Persecuting Navy Seals and CIA, Persecuting Israel, Socialist Takeover of Industry, Political Correctness Allowing Ft. Hood Massacre – Will this be the next thing we see from Obama and Eric Holder?

 

May 20th is Muhammad Day — Everybody Grab Your Crayons! – Atlas …

 

From CitizenWells:

 

 Blagojevich trial, Supreme Court request, Defense asked asked the US Supreme Court to delay corruption trial, Rod Blagojevich, Robert Blagojevich

The Obama Bradley Effect Complexity

The Obama Bradley Effect Complexity

(Race is only a small part.)

In politics and polling there exists a phenomenon known as the “Bradley Effect”. It came in to being during the 1982 campaign of Tom Bradley, a black politician, who was running for Governor of California against George Deukmejian, a white politician. The polls leading into the election showed Bradley with a lead, as did the exit polls. However, once in the ballot booth, many voters pulled the lever for the white candidate. Deukmejian won the election. Voters had told pollsters one thing and when push came to shove, they did another.

In this election, even though pollsters are attempting to compensate for the Bradley Effect through sly questioning, some are saying that scope of the effect could reach as high as 5 – 10 percent of potential voters. Unfortunately, this is being attributed solely to Obama’s race. I would like suggest that if we have a variance between the polls and the vote count, the cause will be much more complicated than simply race.

I think there are probably no less than five considerations that may give rise to some degree of deception on the part of voters.

Race

I’m sure that there will be a small portion of the voting public that will not vote for Senator Obama because he is black and may lie to avoid being thought of as racist. (The hardcore racists are probably already reflected in the polls.) Thankfully, in this day and age, this will represent only small percentage of the population because most people are beyond race as a reason to exclude someone from elected office. However, my worry is that the media and the black community may see or try to portray any difference between polling and the actual numbers as being completely about Obama’s race. That would be a shame, because such a portrayal would almost certainly be a misrepresentation of the actual situation.

So what are the other possibilities that could show up as a difference between polling and actual votes?

A Tarnished Republican Brand

The media, the left, and the Republican Party itself have been extremely effective in damaging the Republican brand. The media with its obvious visceral dislike for President Bush takes every opportunity to shape the news in the least favorable light towards the Republican Party; and, their vilification has worked. In some circles, instead of thinking of Republicans as the party of small government, integrity, fiscal responsibility, national security and state’s rights; they are thought of big spending, big government, morally bankrupt, war mongers. Even though, the vast majority of Republicans in their personal and public lives remain true to the highest principles of what it means to be Republican, the public image (mis)portrayed daily in the media over the past dozens of years is the one the general public sees. This vilification has been so relentless that it is easy to imagine some Republicans saying they would vote for Sen. Obama so maybe the media and pollsters might give them absolution. However, once in the voting booth, their heart of hearts may kick in and they will not be able to pull the level for such an inexperienced, naïve, corrupt, unpatriotic politician who will move the United States towards socialism.

The Blue Dog and Conservative Democrats

This will be a group from which I expect some volatility come Election Day. Democrats who consider themselves part of the center politically may be somewhat hesitant to tell a pollster that they will not be voting for Senator Obama, the Democrat. When the Blue Dogs actually face the choice in the voting booth of surrendering the Democratic Party to the extreme left wing or waiting another 4 years for a better option, we may see many pull the lever for Senator McCain.

Former Clinton Supporters

As someone who considers themselves an Independent, I’ve had the recent opportunity to get to know several Clinton supporters and I have been pleasantly surprised by their thoughtfulness, civility and compassion. I met these folks when I started blogging just a few months ago in support of Larry Sinclair’s right to have his allegations against Sen. Obama heard and investigated by the media. (The media continues to avoid doing their jobs.) As a result, it is not hard for me to imagine former Clinton supporters who are Democrats with a capital D having a hard time telling a pollster that they would not be supporting the Democratic nominee. However, when they get in the voting booth I imagine many will be thinking back and remembering the disrespectful treatment Ms. Clinton received from Sen. Obama and the media.

The media turned on Sen. Clinton before our eyes and Sen. Obama went so far a to flip her a bird while pretending to scratch his nose. I would bet you a dollar to a donut that both of the Clintons will be voting for McCain no matter what they say publicly.

Through this blogging experience, I have also observed first hand the cult like brutality and nastiness of Obama’s internet thugs who patrol the internet trying to quell opposition. They have released opposition blogger’s sensitive personal information, social security numbers, identities, caused blogs to be shut down, and have made other serious threats, including death threats against Mr. Sinclair. Consequently, I am very concerned that Sen. Obama will give these thugs and people like Rev. Wright, William Ayers, Farrakhan, etc. legitimacy.

The Media’s Unbridled Support and Their Creation of Superstar Status for Senator Obama Implies that the Election is Already Won

As unfortunate as it is, some people want to be perceived as being on the winning side. So at this stage, when a pollster asks Mary and Tom who they are voting for – if they are insecure and/or approval driven, they may just say Obama because media is supporting him and they believe he will win. However, once they’ve made their public declaration for Obama, they are safe. In the privacy of the voting booth, common sense will have an opportunity to rear its marvelous head and require them to vote against Obama because of all the unanswered questions about his life and experience. The questions the media have tried to down play, not report and/or cover-up. The sounds of the hate speech from the Senator’s spiritual advisor, Rev. Wright, will come thundering against the curtain. All the allegations of corruption circling around Tony Rezko and his friends will put an odor in the air. The images of the Senator befriending a Pentagon bomber, William Ayers, may raise again the issue of just how patriotic is this man. The total unfairness of the media’s fawning over Senator Obama may tweak the conscience of the voter and urge him or her to say no to the liberal media’s malicious tampering. The allegations of Larry Sinclair that he and the Senator did cocaine and engaged in consensual gay sex in 1999 will beg the questions: When did he stop using drugs? If the Senator is not faithful in his relationship with Michelle, how faithful will he be to America?

The Idea of Being a “Progressive” Seems Appealing at First Glance

Lastly, the thought of a Progressive making steps towards something better seems attractive. However, when one really looks at what it means to be a “Progressive” it should make most American’s recoil. This political ideology has its roots in the early part of this century with President Wilson. What it is really about is the idea that they, “The Progressives”, have evolved to a place of understanding and enlightenment about what is best for all of us. The people that I have encountered who truly buy into this ideology are many times closed minded and condescending because they do believe that they know best. Senator Obama’s statement about rural American being bitter and clinging to their guns and religion totally reflects the “Progressive’s” view of most of us. Further, Progressives unfortunately do not hold the Constitution in as high of regard as most Americans because they believe it was written in time long past – for a time long past; and now, it can and should be changed or interpreted as needed to facilitate their goals.

However, I can easily see how some voters might want to be identified as progressive; because, you know, it’s progressive and Obama’s progressive so they will vote for him because everyone must want to progress. The closer the election gets, I can only hope that these people will discover just how destructive Senator Obama’s agenda will be to our economy, security and founding principles. No. Regrettably, I think they will probably vote just as they told the pollster because once they progress how can they not progress, because Obama says he progressed and everyone must want to progress. I think these people probably make up the cult.

As anyone can see, I am not a supporter of Senator Obama. However, my non-support is entirely because of his policies and what I have discovered about him; and has absolutely nothing to do with his race. In my opinion, Senator Obama should lose this election because he is not the best person for the Presidency of the United States.

However, if Senator Obama does lose, I do sincerely hope that all people will consider the possibility that many factors may have contributed to any differences between the polls and the actually votes. As much as some may want it to be, race is not that big a deal today.

Thank God.