Category Archives: First Amendment

Jerry Buell suspended from Mount Dora High School, Facebook comments about gay marriage, Mount Dora, Florida, First Amendment rights

Jerry Buell suspended from Mount Dora High School, Facebook comments about gay marriage, Mount Dora, Florida, First Amendment rights

“If in the opinion of the People, the distribution or modification of the Constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation, for through this in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.”…George Washington

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln

The US Constitution has been trampled on again. Jerry Buell, a teacher at Mount Dora High School in Florida, was suspended for exercising his First Amendment Rights on his personal time.

From an email from American Family Association August 22, 2011.

“A Florida teacher has been suspended and removed from the classroom in Mount Dora, Florida, for comments made on his Facebook page against homosexual “marriage.” Liberty Counsel will be representing the teacher in court.

In response to New York’s passage of a same-sex marriage bill, Jerry Buell criticized the new law in a pair of Facebook posts. He wrote, “If they want to call it a union, go ahead. But don’t insult a man and woman’s marriage by throwing it in the same cesspool of whatever. God will not be mocked. When did this sin become acceptable?”

Just minutes later, he added, “I will never accept it because God will never accept it. Romans chapter one.”

This reference to Scripture and man-woman marriage has now been labeled as a “code ethics violation” by school officials.

Mr. Buell is currently subject to an Inquisition-type investigation. The school will not let him back into the classroom, says a school official, “until we do all the interviews and do a thorough job of looking at everything – past or previous writings.”

Says Mr. Buell, “It was my own personal comment on my own personal time on my own personal computer in my own personal house, exercising what I believed as a social studies teacher to be my First Amendment rights.”

It’s worth noting that Florida’s constitution prohibits recognition of same-sex marriage, the exact view Mr. Buell supports. In essence, he is now being accused of hate speech for expressing a view enshrined in the state constitution.”

From One News Now August 22, 2011.

“Harry Mihet, the Liberty Counsel attorney representing Buell, notes that the 22-year-plus veteran of teaching is a very popular and successful teacher.
 
“In fact, he was elected as teacher of the year last year precisely because he has an outstanding reputation — not only for being an excellent teacher, but also for loving each and every student who comes across in his classroom regardless of the student’s status or lifestyle or orientation,” the attorney shares.
 
Mihet says it is worth noting that the person who filed the complaint has never been a student in Buell’s classroom. The school is concerned that homosexual students might feel uncomfortable or somehow threatened in his classes. Mihet comes to his client’s defense.
 
“It is an outrageous insinuation that somehow being against homosexual marriage disqualifies you from being a public servant,” he responds. “[That's] an idea that is so repugnant to the Constitution and to the First Amendment freedom of speech, one of our most cherished freedoms that is supposed to enable us to speak out on matters of public importance.”
 
Mihet believes the school district’s response to Buell’s comments is unconstitutional. Liberty Counsel is demanding that he be immediately reinstated with an apology from the school district.”

Read more:

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Education/Default.aspx?id=1413842

It appears that not only do members of Congress need to read the US Constitution but also “educators.” The Constitution should be read in every school across the nation at the beginning of each school year.

Disappoint mints banned from University of Tennessee, Economy tanking, High unemployment rates, Hopium running dangerously low

Disappoint mints banned from University of Tennessee, Economy tanking, High unemployment rates, Hopium running dangerously low

From John Kass and the Chicago Tribune August 5, 2011.

“So what do you give a beleaguered president who just ate a mess of birthday barbecue with his friends from Chicago?

Disappoint-mints.

Yes, Disappoint-mints, the breath mints with President Barack Obama’s likeness on the cover.

After you chow down on some baby backs and corn and birthday burgers while roughly 9 percent of the nation is out of work and thinking about dog food recipes, there’s only thing that’ll freshen your barbecue breath.

Mints in a box with Obama’s face and the slogan:

“This is Change? Disappoint-mints.”

With the economy tanking and overwhelmingly high unemployment rates, and the nation’s supply of Hopium running dangerously low, who wouldn’t want something sweet and tasty?

Like a Disappoint-mint.

They were on sale at the University of Tennessee bookstore for only $2.99 when an angry Democratic state legislator, Joe Armstrong, declared the mints were offensive.

He insisted that those offensive mints be removed from the shelves.

You’d think a Democrat would support a diversity of mints and champion equal opportunity of flavors, but with Obama in political trouble, tolerance becomes a casualty.

Armstrong got angry. The meek University of Tennessee caved. And those insensitive Obama Disappoint-mints were yanked off the shelves.

“… When you operate on state and federal dollars, you ought to be sensitive to those type of politically specific products,” the Knoxville News Sentinel quoted Armstrong as saying. “If it was a private entity or corporation or store, (that’s different), but this is a state university. We certainly don’t want in any way to put the university in a bad light by having those political (products), particularly aimed at defaming the president.”

Armstrong, who will be known henceforth as Mr. Free Speech, told the newspaper that pulling the mints off the shelves did not violate the First Amendment, because the mints were not “educational material.”

In other words, Armstrong is a complete moron and is just making up random stuff in the name of Obama.

“With a book or something of that nature, then fine, but (the mints are) sort of a discretionary product they have,” Armstrong told the News Sentinel. “It wasn’t viewpoint-neutral. Very specifically insulting to the president.”

We called Glenn Reynolds, professor of law at the University of Tennessee and boss of the widely read blog Instapundit.

“My first response is that there’s no candy exception in the First Amendment,” said Reynolds.

“… But it’s far more suppressive when a legislator travels down there in person and demands that they be taken off the shelf,” he said.

Reynolds said that with the election coming up, people will have to learn to be more thick-skinned.

That’s the noble ideal. But it seems to me that as elections near, skins tend to stretch thinner and thinner.”

“Obama insists that government can lift the country out of recession, but all the meddling has made it worse, and Thursday’s drop of more than 500 points in the Dow Jones Industrial Average highlights the futility.

So many Americans are nervous. And political hacks like Joe Armstrong are merely a symptom.

But all that can change.

All we’ve got to do is ban all the Disappoint-mints.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-met-kass-0805-20110805,0,7782665,full.column

Time Constitution article, One Document Under Siege, It’s the Constitution stupid, Tenth Amendment

Time Constitution article, One Document Under Siege, It’s the Constitution stupid,  Tenth Amendment
“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln

“If in the opinion of the People, the distribution or modification of the Constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation, for through this in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.”…George Washington
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it”…Joseph Goebbels

From Time June 23, 2011.

“Here are a few things the framers did not know about: World War II.
DNA. Sexting. Airplanes. The atom. Television. Medicare.
Collateralized debt obligations. The germ theory of disease.
Miniskirts. The internal combustion engine. Computers. Antibiotics.
Lady Gaga.

People on the right and left constantly ask what the framers would say
about some event that is happening today. What would the framers say
about whether the drones over Libya constitute a violation of Article
I, Section 8, which gives Congress the power to declare war? Well,
since George Washington didn’t even dream that man could fly, much
less use a global-positioning satellite to aim a missile, it’s hard to
say what he would think. What would the framers say about whether a
tax on people who did not buy health insurance is an abuse of
Congress’s authority under the commerce clause? Well, since James
Madison did not know what health insurance was and doctors back then
still used leeches, it’s difficult to know what he would say. And what
would Thomas Jefferson, a man who owned slaves and is believed to have
fathered children with at least one of them, think about a half-white,
half-black American President born in Hawaii (a state that did not
exist)? Again, hard to say.”

“Where’s the Crisis?

A new focus on the Constitution is at the center of our political
stage with the rise of the Tea Party and its almost fanatical focus on
the founding document. The new Republican Congress organized a reading
of all 7,200 words of an amended version of the Constitution on the
House floor to open its first session. As a counterpoint to the rise
of constitutional originalists (those who believe the document should
be interpreted only as the drafters understood it), liberal legal
scholars analyze the text just as closely to find the elasticity they
believe the framers intended. Everywhere there seems to be debate
about the scope and meaning and message of the Constitution. This is a
healthy thing. Even the framers would agree on that.”

“If the Constitution was intended to limit the federal government, it
sure doesn’t say so. Article I, Section 8, the longest section of the
longest article of the Constitution, is a drumroll of congressional
power. And it ends with the “necessary and proper” clause, which
delegates to Congress the power “to make all laws which shall be
necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers,
and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of
the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.” Limited
government indeed.”
“It is true that the framers, like Tea Partyers, feared concentrated
central power more than disorder. They were, after all,
revolutionaries. To them, an all-powerful state was a greater threat
to liberty than discord and turbulence. Jefferson, like many of the
antifederalists, did think the Constitution created too much
centralized power. Most of all, the framers created a weak Executive
because they feared kings. They created checks and balances to
neutralize any concentration of power. This often makes for disorderly
government, but it does forestall any one branch from having too much
influence. The framers weren’t afraid of a little messiness. Which is
another reason we shouldn’t be so delicate about changing the
Constitution or reinterpreting it. It was written in a spirit of
change and revolution and turbulence. It was not written in stone. Its
purpose was to create a government that could unite and lead and
govern a new nation, a nation the framers hoped would grow in size and
strength in ways they could not imagine. And it did.”

“Some opponents of birthright citizenship argue that illegal immigrants
are not under U.S. jurisdiction and therefore their children should
not automatically become citizens, but this argument doesn’t hold up
under scrutiny. Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina has suggested
he might offer an amendment to overturn the principle of birthright
citizenship. I’ve always thought it odd that a nation united not by
blood or religion or ethnic identity but by certain extraordinary
ideas is a nation where citizenship is conferred on the basis of where
you were physically born. It’s equally strange to me that a nation
that was forged through immigration — and is still formed by
immigration — is also a nation that makes it constitutionally
impossible for someone who was not physically born here to run for
President. (Yes, the framers had their reasons for that, but those
reasons have long since vanished.)”

“The Constitution
works so well precisely because it is so opaque, so general, so open
to various interpretations. Originalists contend that the Constitution
has a clear, fixed meaning. But the framers argued vehemently about
its meaning. For them, it was a set of principles, not a code of laws.
A code of laws says you have to stop at the red light; a constitution
has broad principles that are unchanging but that must accommodate
each new generation and circumstance.”

“We can pat ourselves on the back about the past 223 years, but we
cannot let the Constitution become an obstacle to the U.S.’s moving
into the future with a sensible health care system, a globalized
economy, an evolving sense of civil and political rights. The
Constitution, as Martin Luther King Jr. said in his great speech on
the Mall, is a promissory note. That note had not been fulfilled for
African Americans. But I would say the Constitution remains a
promissory note, one in which “We the People” in each generation try
to create that more perfect union.”

Read more:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2079445,00.html

The primary motive for this article was to make money for Time. I get that.

However, the article is so full of half truths and lies mingled with some truths, lib speak and orwellian speak, it is difficult to react to it in a rationale manner. I do not want to be the proverbial person arguing with the fool .

First, “Here are a few things the framers did not know about:”

What is their point? The founders were intimately familiar with tyranny and far more hardships that I hope that we ever know.

Second, “Tea Party and its almost fanatical focus on
the founding document.”

In typical left wing fashion they insult decent Americans who uphold and defend the Constitution. Is breathing, drinking water and eating fanaticism?

Third, “If the Constitution was intended to limit the federal government, it
sure doesn’t say so.” The founding fathers realized that the original Constitution focused too much power in the federal branch and added the Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments. The Tenth Amendment alone makes it clear that the Federal government is not all powerful.

Fourth, “is also a nation that makes it constitutionally
impossible for someone who was not physically born here to run for
President. (Yes, the framers had their reasons for that, but those
reasons have long since vanished.)” In typical left wing arrogant fashion, they know more than the out dated old fuddy duddies.

And lastly, my ending response to the article ending.

“A constitution in and of itself guarantees nothing. Bolshevik Russia
had a constitution, as did Nazi Germany. Cuba and Libya have
constitutions. A constitution must embody something that is in the
hearts of the people. In the midst of World War II, the great judge
Learned Hand gave a speech in New York City’s Central Park that came
to be known as “The Spirit of Liberty.” It was a dark time, with
freedom and liberty under threat in Europe. Hand noted that we are
Americans by choice, not birth. That we are Americans precisely
because we seek liberty and freedom — not only freedom from oppression
but freedom of speech and belief and action. “What do we mean when we
say that first of all we seek liberty?” he asked. “I often wonder
whether we do not rest our hopes too much upon constitutions, upon
laws and upon courts.”

If you read the above carefully, they make my point. That is, we had a upheld, intact Constitution that allowed Learned Hand to speak. Perhaps if the good citizens of Nazi Germany had rested their ” hopes too much upon constitutions, upon laws and upon courts” a disaster could have been avoided.

It’s the Constitution stupid!

Not a suggestion.

Ed Koch Palin defense, Palin highly intelligent, We should denounce unfair false and wicked charges

Ed Koch Palin defense, Palin highly intelligent,  We should denounce unfair false and wicked charges

I heard Rush Limbaugh mention recently that Ed Koch, former mayor of New York City, had not only defended Sarah Palin, but praised her. God bless Ed Koch.

From Real Clear Politics january 18, 2011.

“As I see it, in the current battle for public opinion Sarah Palin has defeated her harsh and unfair critics.

After the January 8 shooting of U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords and the murder of six others in Tucson, Arizona, some television talking heads and members of the blogosphere denounced her and held her in part responsible for creating a climate of hatred that resulted in the mass attacks.

 
An example is Joe Scarborough and his crew on the “Morning Joe” show, which I watch and generally enjoy every morning at 6:30 a.m. when I rise to start the day. Because Palin designated Congresswoman Giffords and others for defeat in the November elections by the use of crosshairs on website maps of the Congressional districts, they blamed Palin for creating an atmosphere that caused Jared Loughner (whom everyone now recognizes as being mentally disturbed) to embark on the shooting and killing spree.”

“How dare Sarah Palin, cried the commentators, use that phrase to describe the criticism of her by those who blamed her for creating the atmosphere that set Loughner off in his murderous madness. Some took the position that it proved their ongoing charges that she is not an intelligent person and probably did not know what the phrase meant historically. In my opinion, she was right to denounce her critics and use blood libel to describe the unfair criticism that she had been subject to.”

“Why do I defend Palin in this case? I don’t agree with her political philosophy: She is an arch conservative. I am a liberal with sanity. I know that I am setting myself up for attack when I ask, why did Emile Zola defend Dreyfus? Palin is no Dreyfus and I am certainly no Zola. But all of us have an obligation, particularly those in politics and public office, to denounce, when we can, the perpetrators of horrendous libels and stand up for those falsely charged. We should denounce unfair, false and wicked charges not only when they are made against ourselves, our friends or our political party but against those with whom we disagree. If we are to truly change the poisonous political atmosphere that we all complain of, including those who create it, we should speak up for fairness when we can.

In the 2008 presidential race when Sarah Palin’s name was first offered to the public by John McCain as his running mate, I said at the time that she “scared the hell out of me.” My reference was to the content of her remarks, not to her power to persuade voters.

It was McCain who lost the presidential election, not Palin. Since that time she has established that she has enormous power to persuade people. A self-made woman who rose from PTA mother to Governor of Alaska, she is one of the few speakers in public life who can fill a stadium. Her books are enormous successes. Her television program about Alaska has been a critical and economic success. When Sarah Palin addresses audiences, they rise to their feet in support and applause. She is without question a major leader of the far right faction in the Republican Party and its ally the Tea Party.

I repeat my earlier comment that she “scares the hell out of me.” Nevertheless, she is entitled to fair and respectful treatment. The fools in politics today in both parties are those who think she is dumb. I’ve never met her, but I’ve always thought that she is highly intelligent but not knowledgeable in many areas and politically uninformed. I don’t believe she will run for president in 2012 or that she would be elected if she did. But I do believe she is equal in ability to many of those in the Republican Party seeking that office.

Many women understand what she has done for their cause. She will not be silenced nor will she leave the heavy lifts to the men in her Party. She will not be falsely charged, remain silent, and look for others – men – to defend her. She is plucky and unafraid.

While I disagree with her and I am prepared to oppose her politically, in the spirit of longed-for civility I say, Ms. Palin you are in a certain sense an example of the American dream: You have the courage to stand up and present your vision of America to its people. Your strength and lack of fear make America stronger and are examples to be emulated by girls and boys, men and women who are themselves afraid to speak up. You provide the example that they need for self-assurance.”

Read more:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/01/18/palin_defeated_unfair_critics_at_nyt__msnbc_108561.html

Purpura et al. v. Sebelius et al, Standing v US Constitution, First amendment rights, Legalese cited to perpetuate legalese

Purpura et al. v. Sebelius et al, Standing v US Constitution, First amendment rights, Legalese cited to perpetuate legalese

“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”…First Amendment US Constitution

From  Birther Report January 17, 2011.

“Government files their motion to dismiss in Purpura et al. v. Sebelius et al.. The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey by Nicholas Purpura and Donald Laster of the Jersey Shore Tea Party Patriots and the New Jersey Tea Party Coalition. Other plaintiffs in the lawsuit include the Colts Neck Tea Party, Jersey Shore Tea Party Patriots, Jackson Tea Party Patriots, Bayshore Tea Party Group and Ocean County Citizens for Freedom. The lawsuit alleges the healthcare bill is unconstitutional on 15 separate counts including Obama’s ineligibility. Full brief embedded below. More background on the case can be found here. The lead plaintiffs discuss their lawsuit here, the video is also embedded at bottom of this post.

The government argues the plaintiffs lack standing and the court does not have jurisdiction…”

Read more:

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/01/government-files-motion-to-dismiss-in.html

Notice from the Table of Authorities:

“Kerchner v. Obama,
612 F.3d 204 (3d Cir. 2010)”
“Lightfoot v. United States,
564 F.3d 625 (3d Cir. 2009)”

They are attempting to use legalese, “standing”, applied in earlier cases to substantiate further legalese and thus attempt to trump the First Amendment and effectively block attempts to redress government for grievances by petition.

Obama speech writer excels, Rhetoric doesn’t match actions, Obama camp continues Orwellian hate speech, Orwellian word smithing

Obama speech writer excels, Rhetoric doesn’t match actions, Obama camp continues Orwellian hate speech, Orwellian word smithing

“We control life, Winston, at all its levels. You are imagining that there is something called human nature which will be outraged by what we do and will turn against us. But we create human nature. Men are infinitely malleable.”…George Orwell, “1984″

The speech that Obama gave in Tucson recently was appropriate. The pep rally setting and actions of some in the audience were not. Obama’s speech writer did a good job and Obama read it well. However, these are just words, and as we know, actions speak louder than words.

The Citizen Wells blog began comparing our world, increasingly controlled by the Obama camp by mid 2008, to that of “1984” by George Orwell. The equivalent themes of lies being broadcast on the screens inside each home, the altering of history and hate speech, were all too reminiscent of a Orwellian society.

Sarah Palin, like Goldstein in “1984” and the Jews in Nazi germany, has been the focus of much of the hate emanating from the Obama camp.

Reprinted from Citizen Wells November 20, 2009.

“What has been will be again,
       what has been done will be done again;
       there is nothing new under the sun.”…Ecclesiastes 1:9 (NIV)

“I took with me certain simple criteria with which to measure.
That which made for more life, for physical and spiritual health, was good;
that which made for less life, which hurt, dwarfed and distorted life, was bad.”…Jack London

“Before the Hate had proceeded for thirty seconds, uncontrollable exclamations of rage were breaking out from half the people in the room.”
“the sight or even the thought of Goldstein produced fear and anger automatically.”
“He was an object of hatred more constant than either Eurasia or Eastasia.”
“There were also whispered stories of a terrible book, a compendium of all the heresies”
“In it’s second minute the Hate rose to a frenzy. People were leaping up and down in their places and shouting at the tops of their voices”… George Orwell “1984″

 

 

Lies

Leftists

Liberalism

 If you are offended by references to the Bible, good versus evil or anything that is not politically correct, you are in the wrong place.

Everyone is tap dancing around the attacks on Sarah Palin. People with the best of intentions speak of her as a conservative female threatening the philosophies and positions of those on the left. Let’s call this what it is. This is a classic struggle between good and evil, right versus wrong.

The modern day Democrat Party is controlled by far left socialists who are driven by a message of hate. Hate George Bush, Hate America and recently Hate Sarah Palin. The Beatles, in their song “Revolution”, had this to say:

“But when you want money
for people with minds that hate
All I can tell is brother you have to wait”

“You say you’ll change the constitution
Well, you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it’s the institution
Well, you know
You better free you mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of chairman Mao
You ain’t going to make it with anyone anyhow”

It seems the leftist Democrats have covered all the bases. Hate, change the Constitution and carrying pictures of  Chairman Mao (Anita Dunn).

Sarah Palin is not a perfect person, her humanity prevents that. She is, however a good person who loves her family, her country and follows her moral compass, her concept of God, the creator of all. She is against many of the ideological positions that have slowly taken hold of this country.

Sarah Palin represents what is right about this country. She tries to live her life by doing the right thing. She apparently intimidates those who believe:

  • Women should follow the dictates of the Democrat Party.
  • Abortion is always ok and should not be reserved for the lesser of evils.
  • There is no God.
  • There is no right or wrong.
  • The founding fathers and US Constitution are out of vogue and not relevant to modern issues.
  • European countries should be emulated.
  • A Government option will improve health care.
  • Global warming is real and is mainly the fault of Americans.
  • An endangered fish is more important than endangered humans.
  • Drilling for oil is always wrong.
  • Terrorists are regular criminals with constitutional rights.
  • Patriotism, Religion and Guns are not fashionable.

I am next going to refer to Jesus of Nazareth. The life and tenets of Jesus are known by Christians, Jews and Muslims, so most of you should understand what I am about to write. While Sarah Palin cannot be compared to Jesus on one level, reactions to the good in Sarah Palin and other children of the light are paralleled in the reactions to Jesus, his teachings and actions.  The hypocrites and evil doers of Jesus’ time attacked him and demanded  his crucifixion.

The modern day hypocrites have put Sarah Palin under a microscope. They employ legions to fact check her statements and her new book and gave Barack Obama a free ride on his books and election campaign. As Jesus would state, they look for a speck in Palin’s eye and ignore the beam in theirs.
I wish to make an important point. It is ok to disgree with Sarah Palin. Since Palin embraces American values, she would be the first to agree. It is not ok to trash, lie about and attack Sarah Palin. This is wrong (remember, most of us believe in right and wrong.) When you attack Sarah Palin, you attack America and decent Americans and we are not going to take it anymore.

This is fair warning to those, and I do not care who you are, who viciously attack Sarah Palin. If you are a company like NewsWeek, that belittled Palin with the sexist magazine cover, we are going to boycott you. If you are a politician, we are going to run you out of office. If I personally hear someone attack Palin, I am going to quietly get in their face and ask why they hate America. I suggest you do the same.

Generally, I do believe we should pray for those who have lost their way. However, there is a concept called righteous indignation. A response, sadly lacking in many of those who profess to be Christians. And how ironic. Jesus, who was all about love for thy neighbor, entered the temple, saw the moneychanger’s wrongful acts, and overturned the tables in righteous indignation.

The lesson is simple. We must rise up in righteous indignation and say no more to attacks on Sarah Palin and others.

And be certain you are clear about this.

This is a struggle between good and evil.

 

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”… Ephesians 6:12.

Brad Miller exploits tragedy, NC Congressman reveals agenda, Miller Obama camp hypocrite

 Brad Miller exploits tragedy, NC Congressman reveals agenda, Miller Obama camp hypocrite

“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

****  Updated 7:23 PM  ****

From the Greensboro News & Record January 10, 2011.

“Congressional republicans spoke to rallies in which there were large banners showing pictures of human beings stacked like cord wood at Dachau,” Miller said, mentioning images showing President Barack Obama compared to Adolf Hitler.

“Sprinkled throughout the rallies were signs promoting violence,” Miller said. “And they said not word of criticism. Not a word of protest.”

Miller said he’s predicted violence for more than a year and a half, and that violence broke out at the Tucson, Ariz., public meeting where Giffords , a Democrat, was shot in the head.

“I think the American people need to hold their politicians accountable for embracing extremist, violence-prone fringe elements,” he said.

“Americans have in the past.”

Many conservatives say it’s just talk, and that any attempt to blame them for Gifford’s shooting is a cynical attempt to exploit a tragedy for political gain.”

I found no link on the internet.

Congressman Miller stated:

“I think the American people need to hold their politicians accountable for embracing extremist, violence-prone fringe elements,”

Yes, Brad Miller, we have been trying to hold the Obama camp accountable for years. Where were you?

Where were you when Jon Voight and his family were attacked for asking simple questions in 2008?

Did you demand an investigation when the New Black Panther Party, linked to Obama, threatened voters in Philadelphia?

Did you demand an investigation when Lou Dobb’s house was shot at in 2010?

Let’s not forget the game plan of Obama’s cousin Raila Odinga, who Obama campaigned for:

“Ethnic Tensions/Violence as a last Resort
To discourage voter participation in hostile areas”

“Use ODM agents on the ground to engineer ethnic tensions in target areas”

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/09/06/obama-community-organizer-obama-and-michelle-public-allies-raila-odinga-odm-party-michelles-boot-camps-for-radicals-investors-business-daily-glenn-beck-orwellian-social-change/

Oh, I almost forgot the beating of a black man by Obama SEIU thugs.

And who could forget this Obama quote “I want you argue with them and get in their face,”

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/09/23/obama-saul-alinsky-lucifer-community-organizer-ridicule-socialists-mccain-raila-odinga-odm-rules-for-radicals-alinsky-method-ridicule-older-people/

Brad Miller, did you not read about the army of paid bloggers of the Obama camp who spread misinformation and attacked those questioning Obama?

I began learning about the Nazi like tactics of the Obama camp early in 2008. My first question, “Where was Obama on November 4, 1999″ got unexpected results. That was my first experience of the backlash from questioning the messiah, Obama. The more questions that I asked, the more serious the attacks which evolved into multiple death threats. Just for asking simple questions.

I am a student of history and a big fan of George Orwell and his insightful book, “1984.” The parallels to Nazi Germany and the totalitarian mind controlling regime of Big Brother were clearly apparent by mid 2008.

Here are some Citizen Wells articles on why the Obama camp resembled Nazi Germany.

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/11/14/tps-article-patdollardcom-something-monumentally-large-afoot-writer-tps-obama-camp-acorn-voter-fraud-nazi-germany-student-of-history-winston-churchill-warning/

Here are some Citizen Wells articles revealing the parallels to 1984.

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2009/10/27/obama-administration-1984-regime-george-orwell-described-obama-camp-thought-police-anita-dunn-david-axelrod-rahm-emmanuel-revisionist-history-attacks-fox-news-citizen-wells-open-thread-octob/

Brad Miller, you are impuning the reputation of NC with your left wing hypocritical comments.

Brad Miller you had better by God shape up or we are going to ship you out.

****  Update  *****

An excellent source of Obama violent rhetoric.

http://www.therightperspective.org/2010/06/12/a-history-of-obamas-violent-rhetoric/