I read a recent article in the Washington times titled “Army lacks guidelines to deal with jihadists in ranks”. While I read I started to think about my past service in the Navy and how deeply Political correctness infected the rank and file from the lowly seaman to the CNO. The infection of PCness is the reason the Army and the other services lack guidelines to deal with Jihadists in the ranks. The attack on Fort Hood exposed this failure with deadly consequences. “Retired Army Gen. John M. Keane said this absence of guidance fostered a politically correct reluctance to investigate the man accused in the Fort Hood shootings, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan.”  The following Quoat from the Article is the Department of Defenses response to Gen Keane’s stament to Congress: “Lt. Col. Nathan Banks, an Army spokesman at the Pentagon, did not address the general’s statement about a lack of anti-jihad guidelines, except to say that the service is extremely vigilant about any potential activity with extremist organization among its soldiers. He concluded an e-mail to The Washington Times with: “It is the policy of the Army to provide equal opportunity and treatment for all Soldiers without regard to race, color, religion, gender, or national origin.”” . How politically correct can you get. We can thank the politicians and the weak kneed affirmative action generals and admirals supporting the social engineering experiment, for the deaths of 13 soldiers and civilians at Fort Hood at the hands of the enemy within.

       When I was in the Navy, I was required to attend what the Navy called “general military training” on a semi-annual basis. The training given was not on a military subject such as the Code of Conduct, Military regulations, Standard Operating Procedures, or the commands primary mission. All of my general military training was on, the Department Of the Navy’s ever changing zero tolerance sexual harassment policy, zero Tolerance DUI and DWI policy, zero tolerance discrimination policy, drinking responsibly during the holidays, the advantages of the designated driver, work site safety and home fire safety. In a nutshell, we where taught to use earplugs and safety goggles. I learned how dangerous electric heaters were and what a drunken sexist racist the evil white man is.

      I read that the Department of Defence is going to correct this  problem, here is a quoat from the article: “Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates announced departmentwide reviews of the shooting that will identify threats among service members, as well as new policies, changes and procedures.”.What I predict is that as with sexual harassment the military will create guidelines that makes their decision-making easy. With zero tolerance policies. Commanders do not have to make decisions on a case-by-case basis, just the same blanket cookie cutter decision no matter the situation. The Navy’s sexual harassment policy has ensnared many an innocent victim. One such victim was a male sailor wrongly charged with sexual harassment by a subordinate female sailor. According to him, on a day he assumed duty as the Officer of the Deck, a female sailor assumed duty as the rover wearing black panties while in her white uniform violating of uniform regulations. He could see her panties because her white uniform pants were just tight enough to allow them to be obviously seen. He rightfully ordered her to go and change her panties. The embarrassed female sailor then filed sexual harassment charges against him. Because of the zero tolerance policies unclear definition of sexual harassment, the Navy’s guilty until proven innocent stance and his supervisors fear for his own carrier, he was written up. He had to go before the Commanding Officer for a disciplinary hearing called a Captains Mast. His Commanding Officer had the sense enough to drop the charges against him and discipline the female sailor filing false charges. If the army and the rest of the military adopt a zero tolerance jihadists policy They will be called racist and intolerant of Islam by CAIR and get sued, so they will call it a zero tolerance of religious extremism policy or zero tolerance of religious intolerance and discrimination policy. This will no doubt lead to Muslims filing charges against Christians claiming intolerance and the PC Military Prosecuting many innocent Christians or non-Muslims in the same way that they did that sailor accused wrongly of sexual harassment, instead of truly intolerant Muslims.  

     I believe the Army will waste time preaching religious sensitivity and diversity at the ongoing general military training sessions. The PC commanders will proclaim the Islam is not a violent religious Ideology. They will preach that religious intolerance is a problem prevalent in all religions. They will show their poorly acted training films in which the evil white Christian male Sgt Johnson insults the Innocent Muslim Cpl Hasseim by calling him a terrorist or the evil Christian white male Captain Jones recommending evil Christian white male 2^nd Lieutenant Smith for promotion instead of the far superior and more qualified innocent Muslim 2^nd lieutenant Ahmed. Their training films will no doubt show a group of evil Christian white male and female soldiers standing around in an office bad mouthing Muslims while innocent Muslim Sgt Walaed is excluded from the group and his feelings are hurt by those mean brutes hateful and religiously insensitive words. They will not show a crazy Islamofacist soldier opening fire on a room full of innocent Christians and non-Muslims. They will not show Islamofacist nuts cutting off the heads of non-Muslim, Jewish or Christian infidels. They will not show a Muslim being brain washed by his Imam. Nor will portray a Muslim with the signs of having been radicalized. I know this because that is how the military handled sexual harassment with in the ranks.

President barak hussein obama’s apology express

President Obama  has been disgracing our great nation since taking office. It is abominable to me that he has apologized to the world Muslim population on Al Arabia television, for defending ourselves from Islamofacist terrorists. He apologized to the world for the war on terror. How dare this pompous arrogant ass apologize to the very people that spawned the hatred that led to the Attack on 9/11.  He apologized to Europe for our supposed arrogance. He apologized for Guantanamo and Supposed CIA mistakes and the list goes on! His declaration that The USA is not a Christian nation is offensive to the American people.  He has exposed our interrogation techniques to the enemy and has labeled our CIA interrogation agents criminals. He has shown weakness to our enemy’s in North Korea, China, Iran and Russia. He should never bow down to anyone as he has to the Saudi King and more recently to the Japanese Emperor. When Obama submisivly bowed to the Saudi king sticking his but in the camera, showes his lack of class and taste! His indecisiveness on the war front and suicidal rules of engagement has cost lives and embolden our enemies in Afganistan, Iraq and aroud the world. He has given up far too much to Russia. He has denigrated his country by accepting the false notion that The United States is to blame for Iran’s nuclear program and the Proliferation of terrorism around the world, Because of his Muslim up bringing; He foolishly alienated our only ally in the Middle East, Israel. His desire to close Guantanamo shows his sympathy towards his fellow Muslims and his complete lack of understanding of who the enemy is. He and his administration thinks that veterans, Christians, gun owners, conservatives, right to lifers, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and anybody else that disagrees with his extreme views is the enemy. Obama doesn’t acknowledge that the islamofacist terrorists that would cut our throats for Allah Just because we exist, are the enemy. Nor does he believe the enemy is the islamofacist nut that would fly a plane in to building and kill thousands of Americans for 72 virgins in Allah land. This arrogant elitist Marxist pompous ass of a man Barak Hussein Obama is a disgusting shameful disgrace to the office of the President of the United States.

House and senate vote to deny federal funding for ACORN 

Seven Senators voted against de-funding ACORN

President Obama is one of ACORNS founding members

        It seems to good to be true, but the house and Senate voted to de fund ACORN. Good job on their part. Senators Roland Burris D-IL, Kirsten Gillibrand D-NY, Sheldon Whitehouse D-RI, Robert Casey D-PA, Patrick Leahy D-VT,  Traitor Dick Turbin Durbin D-IL, Bernard Sanders I-VT.  Some reports say that Congress is  pulling  HUD funding and others say that they are Pulling all federal funding. I do not know why ACORN should be getting HUD funding anyway. I would not hold my breath because President Barak Hussein Obama is one of ACORNS founding members  and beholden to them for their part in his election. 

       President Barak Hussein Obama may have much to fear if he turns his back on ACORN.  One could assume they know the truth about his place of birth, citizenship status he claimed on his Collage applications, and how long and deep his relationship with home grown terrorist William (Bill) Ayers is.  If  indeed, Barak Hussein Obama was not born in Hawaii, claimed foreign citizenship on his collage applications, and has indeed  been a long time close friend of bill Ayers,  they would have considerable leverage and sway over him. Lets not forget that ACORN has no low they will not go to. We have seen them commit voter fraud and now collusion with a would be pimp and his prostitute on hidden camera. Barak Hussein Obama and the Democrats have too much to lose if this really happens.  

       For The President this is a no win situation. should he veto the bill in support of ACORN,  he looses the support of more middle of the road and conservative voters. It would give conservatives  in the house and senate fuel to make accusations of corruption on his part.  should he sign the bill in to law, ACORN could make public anything they might know about Barak Hussein Obama and potentially cost him the Presidency and the Democrats their power. In light of the recent events involving ACORN, Congress may want to reconsider their decisions to end the voter fraud investigations. My prediction  is that BHO will veto the bill, Democrats won’t have the back bone to override it,  and  the main stream media will cover his butt.

Should Kim Jong Ill launch a missile at Hawaii rather or not it is a test, must be considered an act of war against the United States. I would go so far as to say that the threat alone is reason enough for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea in our own defense! President Obama is not even answering the challenge in public. Kim Jong Ill sees weakness in our President and is testing him. In the event of a launch by that despotic little dictator, President Obama must ask Congress for a declaration of war, if he does nothing, then Congress must declare war with out the Presidents request. If both do nothing, then the members of Congress and the President will have violated their oaths of office and will be derelict in one of their primary Duties to the American people. If it should become necessary, we the American people must demand congress declare war against North Korea, We must bring Kim Jung Ill to his Knees by leveling every city in his country. This sick nut is threatening us directly, and if the President Obama does nothing, then he must be removed from office or step down. If he cannot understand what North Korea is up to, and the appropriate way to handle this situation, he is not fit to run an ice cream truck much less the U. S. A.

     The slave owners of old and the employers of illegals today are much the same. Employers today make the same dire Prophesies sopprting their deeds as the  slave owners of old  did.  Employers of  illegal workers and those that support illegal immigration say that with out it our economy would collapse. The south  made the same argument in support of slavery. They said ”cotton rice and tobacco would become unprofitable if slavery ended abruptly and that chaos would ensue”. Advocates of Illegal immigration and employers say that it is morally right to employ these people because they are better off working here illegally than working in their own country. Slave owners and southern Politicians said “that Slavery brought Christianity to the heathen from across the ocean”. Slavery was, according to this argument, a good thing for the enslaved. John C. Calhoun said, “Never before has the black race of Central Africa, from the dawn of history to the present day, attained a condition so civilized and so improved, not only physically, but morally and intellectually.” they also said “ by comparison with the poor of Europe and the workers in the Northern states, that slaves were better cared for. They said that “their owners would protect and assist them when they were sick and aged, unlike those who, once fired from their work, were left to fend helplessly for themselves”. The arguments made for the Slavery in the south and for illegal migrant workers are all the same, we have been here before, and we have not learned from history.

          Once again we in the United States are faced with slavery, This time our Federal Government is on the side of the slave owners. It has done every thing it can to facilitate it. The slaves this time are more willing to come, but they are disadvantaged just the same.  At first the U.S. Government supported the slavery in the south but eventually under pressure changed its tune. It remains to be seen what our first black president will do about this newer form of slavery.  eventually though the Fedreal Government will have to change its tune for the survival of the Nation. 

Note: the quotes in this article are taken from Lesson 27f  The Southern Argument for Slavery (ushistory.org)

We all know that the California Supreme Court usurped the will of the people of the state of California when they voted to declare the gay marriage ban, (voted in to law by the people) unconstitutional. The court sited the equal protections clause of the California State Constitution.

The fact is marriage is not a right specified in any constitution; therefore marriage bans can be made law. The equal protections clause doesn’t apply to the gay marriage ban in California. To understand why it doesn’t apply, we must look at the Constitutions of the state of California and the U. S. Constitution, in context, and how each relates to the other.

California Sate Constitution article 1 section 7 states:

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
Equal Protection
ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS

SEC. 7. (a) A person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or
property without due process of law or denied equal protection of the
laws; provided, that nothing contained herein or elsewhere in this
Constitution imposes upon the State of California or any public
entity, board, or official any obligations or responsibilities which
exceed those imposed by the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th
Amendment to the United States Constitution with respect to the use
of pupil school assignment or pupil transportation. In enforcing
this subdivision or any other provision of this Constitution, no
court of this State may impose upon the State of California or any
public entity, board, or official any obligation or responsibility
with respect to the use of pupil school assignment or pupil
transportation, (1) except to remedy a specific violation by such
party that would also constitute a violation of the Clause of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution, and
(2) unless a federal court would be permitted under federal
decisional law to impose that obligation or responsibility upon such
party to remedy the specific violation of the Equal Protection Clause
of the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution.
Except as may be precluded by the Constitution of the United
States, every existing judgment, decree, writ, or other order of a
court of this State, whenever rendered, which includes provisions
regarding pupil school assignment or pupil transportation, or which
requires a plan including any such provisions shall, upon application
to a court having jurisdiction by any interested person, be modified
to conform to the provisions of this subdivision as amended, as
applied to the facts which exist at the time of such modification.
In all actions or proceedings arising under or seeking application
of the amendments to this subdivision proposed by the Legislature at
its 1979-80 Regular Session, all courts, wherein such actions or
proceedings are or may hereafter be pending, shall give such actions
or proceedings first precedence over all other civil actions therein.

Nothing herein shall prohibit the governing board of a school
district from voluntarily continuing or commencing a school
integration plan after the effective date of this subdivision as
amended.
In amending this subdivision, the Legislature and people of the
State of California find and declare that this amendment is necessary
to serve compelling public interests, including those of making the
most effective use of the limited financial resources now and
prospectively available to support public education, maximizing the
educational opportunities and protecting the health and safety of all
public school pupils, enhancing the ability of parents to
participate in the educational process, preserving harmony and
tranquility in this State and its public schools, preventing the
waste of scarce fuel resources, and protecting the environment.
(b) A citizen or class of citizens may not be granted privileges
or immunities not granted on the same terms to all citizens.
Privileges or immunities granted by the Legislature may be altered or
revoked.

United States constitution amendment 13, 14, 15 state:

Amendment XIII
Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.
Note: A portion of Article IV, section 2, of the Constitution was superseded by the 13th amendment.
Section 1.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States , or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Amendment XIV
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.
Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Section 2.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,* and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
Section 3.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Section 4.
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
Section 5.
the Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
*Changed by section 1 of the 26th amendment.
Amendment XV
Passed by Congress February 26, 1869. Ratified February 3, 1870.
Section 1.
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude –
Section 2.
The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

In context it’s clear to me, the equal protections clause of the California State Constitution was intended to ensure that the states laws passed by Ballot measure or by the state legislature were to apply and be enforced equally on all citizens of the state. So a law banning gay marriage applies to all citizens and is to be enforced equally to all citizens.
My point is further amplified by the 14th amendment to the U. S. Constitution. The intent of the 14th amendment can be best understood in context with the 13th and 15th Amendments. In a nut shell, the 13th amendment freed the slaves, the 14th amendment declared all peoples born or naturalized including the former slaves within the United States, Citizens of the whole United States, and a Citizens of the State in witch they reside. As citizens under the 14th amendment the slaves became equal citizens to the rest of the population of the United States, thus they were to be equally protected under the law. Remember Slaves were considered property under the law prior. The 15th amendment gave the slaves the right to vote. All three amendments were for the sole purpose of ending slavery and the disposition and treatment of former slaves. So the California Supreme Court was wrong in its application of the equal protections clause. I believe the California Supreme Court grasped at any thing they could to support gay marriage and made up an argument they believed the MSM would buy,

Both the U. S. Constitution and the California State constitution state the same thing in their respective equal protections clauses, California’s clause has further subdivisions to allow exceptions to the clause with respect to bussing students to other schools out side their districts. California’s constitution is subordinate to the U.S. Constitution.

     O. J. has been convicted on all counts, and the race racketeers Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are not crying injustice or even a tear for him. Some may say: “he is guilty, Why should they care?” Answer: They did not care that the so called “Jena 6″ were guilty of beating another teen within inches of his life. They also did not care that Crystal Gail Mangum falsely accused the Duke Lacrosse team of rape. Al Sharpton knew and did not care that Tawana Brawley’s Case was a hoax! So Why not take up  Simpsons case? Answer: There is no money in it for them.

      I do not know if O. J. was responsible for killing his wife. As an American I beleive as our founding fathers did; A man is innocent until proven guilty. I lived in LA When O. J. Was Arrested for murder. The LA DA and LAPD had a reputation for going easy on the Celebs. Both desperately needed to prove otherwise. O. J. Was the perfect opportunity. They were so desperate that Detective Mark Ferman planted a glove as evidence and was caught. the Jurors found him not guilty. This out come did not fit the agenda of either Al or Jesse, because his case proved that the Justice system isn’t racist. O. J. having been rich allowed him to buy the best lawyers around and beat the charges. No racism equals no money for Al and Jesse.  Simpson’s current conviction, I believe is a Justice served conviction on his murder case, and not an armed robbery and kidnapping case, we will have to see during the appeal. I believe that O.J. had no other choice but to do what he did if in fact the memorabilia was stolen from him. Why do I say that? Answer:  No cop or DA would take any complaint he made against the dealers seriously, and would not want to be seen on his side in the media. What else is he to do?  Once again Al and Jesse Don’t want to go near O. J. because there is not sympathy for him in the media, or in the black community. Again, no racism, no media sympathy equals no money for Al and Jesse.

       Liberals are still to this day livid that President George W. Bush beat Al Gore in 2000. Al knew he lost and tried to steal the office via the courts. Even the liberal Supreme Court would not Allow it. The day the Supreme Court ruled in President Bushes favor was a great day in American history! That day America got a lesson in the responsibility that comes along with rights! We have the right to vote and the responsibility to get a fresh ballot punch card if we make mistakes. we have a right to vote and a responsibility to get help punching the “chad” if needed. We have a right to vote and a responsibility to follow the simple laws and rules at the polling place. If we forgo the responsibilities we must live with the consequences. Al gore sued to abdicate our responsibility for the outcome in the 2000 election. Thank all mighty God he lost.