Memorial Day: Remember With Honor

From Mike's Dad, Robert Stokely:

Memorial Day is a very special day. It was originally called Decoration Day: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memorial_Day


It is a day we have the opportunity to stop, even for a brief moment, and Remember With Honor the 1,000,000 or so men and women who gave their lives on the field of battle to found, protect and preserve our freedoms and American way of life. A high price was paid by each one of these men and women.

Some gave their tomorrows for us to have a new today each and every day. To say they were all in is an understatement. Those who had no children committed the tomorrows of future unborn generations who will now never be born.

And their families have paid a never ending price as well. When I have been asked what I think the cost of Freedom is, I answer a lifetime of love, for that is what the Families of the Fallen bear each day as they remember the loved one they lost. Memorial Day is a day for happiness and celebration, and well we all should, for a high price was paid that we might do so in freedom and security from the enemies who would wipe us off the face of the earth, but for the 1,000,000 who have gave their lives for you and I.

Some ask me from time to time how to make it better for the Families of the Fallen. I don't think there is but one real way to make it better, but that is not going to happen for no person has the power to give us back the loved one we lost. But it is helpful, at least to me, to know that people care what my son, SGT Mike Stokely, gave America and I would suggest others who have lost someone in war would feel the same way.The best way in my eyes to show you care is to Make it Matter. Love America as much as the 1,000,000 have shown they loved America. Live life fully and enjoy the freedom that has been preserved for you. And, when you get an opportunity, even if it is only a small one, care about someone around you, whether a stranger, friend or family member and give a little of yourself to make it better for them. And on this Memorial Day, if only for a brief moment, Remember With Honor 1,000,000 and those yet to come, who have made the sacrifice of a Lifetime of Love. They have entrusted their forever to you.

Robert Stokely
proud dad SGT Mike Stokely
KIA 16 AUG 05 near Yusufiyah Iraq
USA E 108 CAV 48th Brigade Combat Team Georgia Army National Guard
DUTY HONOR COUNTRY

We are the Land of the Free, because of the Brave, who volunteer to defend all that the Star Spangled Banner represents.


Remember them ALL - and their families - with honour. 

New Black Panther Party: 'Ballot' Or 'Bullet' As' Means Of Change'

By Susan Duclos

The New Black Panther Party is completely out of control and one has to wonder why the Obama administration has not brought charges against them and why they dropped previous charges against the group.

Quick background via The Daily Caller:

Following Obama’s election the group was charged with voter intimidation when their members were seen standing outside a Philadelphia voting precinct dressed in paramilitary garb, one welding a nightstick in what a witness and former civil rights lawyer described as “the most blatant form of voter intimidation I’ve ever seen.”

The Justice Department dismissed the intimidation charges against the group in 2009, a decision which lead to a U.S. Commission on Civil Rights investigation. Obama’s direct involvement in the case’s dismissal has been only been speculative.

The newspaper also contains articles about the Trayvon Martin case, blacks in science and updates on the group’s National Days of Action.

In late March the NBPP offered a $10,000 bounty for Trayvon Martin shooter George Zimmerman. The group has been denounced by more mainstream civil rights groups and is often labeled a “fringe” organization.

Now, the news is a  (NBPP) newspaper publication titled “The Ballot or The Bullet: which way for black people?”

The person they are complaining about this time... Obama:

“Mr. Obama’s policies have not corrected the economic troubles of America, they have gotten worse,” Kweli wrote. “The debt continues to expand [into the trillions], and the administration’s handling of international relations has hardened dialogue with foreign nations. Mr. Obama’s policies have been especially harsh to us the Black community. He [Obama] bailed out Wall Street and the auto makers but kept us at the top of the unemployment ladder.”

Key quote:

“Black America, you must decide who will best represent you in 2012. You must decide if you will choose the ballot as a means to change, or the bullet,” Shabazz wrote, adding that “demanding change does come by any means necessary.”

Read the whole thing over at The Daily Caller.

 The Blaze

In a separate piece (”The Ballot or the Bullet: Which Way for Black People?”) meant to advance those ideas, NBPP leader Malik Zulu Shabazz recalls glowingly how “the Black Masses rejected the Ballot as the only option”:

History recalls that after Malcolm’s prophetic words, Black Power and Black Nationalism replaced civil rights as the primary vision and ideology of the people and they placed non-violence and all strategies designed to make the white people more comfortable on the sidelines.

Insurrections occurred in a domino effect; 1965 Watts blew up and later Newark and Detroit blew up and over 120 American cities became major battlegrounds for Black Resistance. Some battlegrounds were violent, some non violent, but nevertheless, we battled with a fighting spirit.

Every gain and concession that the Civil Rights Movement extracted; every job, and appointment, legislation was obtained via the duress, pressure and threat of an explod- ing radical Black Movement, foretold by Malcolm X [...] . [Emphasis added]

He goes on to lament that “In present-day, most of the authentic prescient voices have transitioned“ and been ”assassinated, sabotaged, imprisoned [or] intimidated to the point of fear.” And just guess who he says is the only consistent, strong voice: Louis Farrakhan.

Anyone remember this?

A Tacoma seventh grader faced federal interrogation at school for what he posted on his Facebook page.  His mom said it all happened without her knowledge or permission.

Timi Robertson said she had just finished lunch with a friend Friday when she got a phone call from her son's school.

"I answered it, and it's the school security guard who's giving me a heads up that the Secret Service is here with the Tacoma Police Department and they have Vito and they're talking to him," Robertson said.

After Osama bin Laden was killed, 13-year-old Vito LaPinta posted an update to his Facebook status that got the Feds attention.

"I was saying how Osama was dead and for Obama to be careful because there could be suicide bombers," says LaPinta.

A week later, while Vito was in his fourth period class, he was called in to the principal's office.

"A man walked in with a suit and glasses and he said he was part of the Secret Service," LaPinta said. "He told me it was because of a post I made that indicated I was a threat toward the President."

The Tacoma school district acknowledged a Secret Service agent questioned Vito and that it was a security guard who called Vito's mom because the principal was on another call. The school district said they didn’t wait for Vito’s mother to get there because they thought she didn't take the phone call seriously.

"That's a blatant lie," Robertson said.

The teen’s mom says she rushed to Truman Middle School immediately and arrived to discover her son had already been questioned for half an hour.

"I just about lost it," she said. "My 13 year-old son is supposed to be safe and secure in his classroom and he's being interrogated without my knowledge or consent privately."

Will the Secret Service take the NBPP threat as seriously as they took a good faith warning, by a child, towards Obama, and interrogate this group for inciting violence?


New Black Panther Party Spring Newspaper

(Changes have been made to this post)

Laughable Liberals Still Attempting To Intimidate The Supreme Court

By Susan Duclos

Some quotes from George Will on Liberals attempting to put "the squeeze" on Chief Justice John Roberts.

Concluding that Kennedy might be disposed to overturn the mandate, some Obamacare defenders decided that Roberts’s vote will be decisive. They hope to secure it by causing Roberts to worry about his reputation and that of his institution.

Recently, for example, Vermont’s Pat Leahy, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, delivered a Senate speech defending the constitutionality of what he calls the “personal responsibility requirement.” (This is his Orwellian appellation for the mandate, whereby government coercion nullifies personal choice regarding insurance.) After 37 years in the Senate, Leahy probably no longer knows when he sounds insufferably patronizing, as he did when he said that during oral argument he thought that Roberts “seemed well aware of the significance of [the Obamacare] decision.” And “I thought I saw a chief justice who understands the importance of this case to all Americans.” And Roberts “seemed to understand” the deference owed to Congress.

Will concludes:

Leahy tutored Roberts about “appropriate deference” to “the elected branch,” vacuously admonished him to be “a chief justice for all of us” and absurdly asserted that the mandate is “consistent with the understanding of the Constitution” that “the American people have had for the better part of a century.”Jeffrey Rosen of George Washington Law School, writing in the New Republic, topped Leahy’s rhetorical extravagance by saying this is Roberts’s “moment of truth” because, if the court overturns Obamacare 5 to 4, Roberts’s “stated goal of presiding over a less divisive court will be viewed as an irredeemable failure.”

Oh? Viewed by whom? Perhaps by people who consider it “ideological” and somehow reprehensible that in the last full term, Justices Roberts and Sam Alito voted together 96 percent of the time, but who consider it principled and admirable that Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan voted together 94 percent of the time. Like-minded justices agree. So?

Why, exactly, would it be less “divisive” for the court to uphold the broadly disliked Obamacare 5 to 4 than to overturn it 5 to 4? But whether Obamacare is liked or detested is entirely irrelevant. The public’s durable deference toward the Supreme Court derives from the public’s recognition that the court is deferential not to Congress but to the Constitution.

Concerning which, it is cheeky of Rosen, a liberal, to lecture Roberts about jurisprudential conservatism, which Rosen says requires “restraint,” meaning deference to congressional liberalism. Such clumsy attempts to bend the chief justice are apt to reveal his spine of steel.

After the Supreme Court heard arguments for and against the individual mandate, many were left with the feeling that the Supreme Court wasn't buying the Obama's administration's arguments.

Obama attempted to intimidate the Supreme Court first, polls finding that majority of Americans agree with the assessment that Obama's public words were an attempt to intimidate. Then the Obama administration continued with their intimidation campaign by threatening "Medicare reductions" if the High Court overturns Obamacare.

The Supreme Court ruling on the individual mandate's constitutionality is expected some time in June.

No one knows how the Supreme Court is going to finally rule, but the good thing about the Supreme Court is strong arm tactics like the liberals are attempting  do not work as well on positions that are lifetime appointments, so  judiciaries can be left to do their business with no threat of losing their jobs, therefore they cannot be intimidated.

Progressives Keeping It Classy With Death Threats

By Susan Duclos

American Power:

I called out commenter "Ten Bears" for his genuinely asinine defense of Elizabeth Warren's alleged Cherokee ancestry. After a couple of iterations with Steve M. --- and after I linked the video of Michelle Obama boasting of Barack's "Kenyan birth" in 2007 --- I get threatened with death. Here's the key comments at the thread.

'Nuff said.

RNC Video- Obama's 'Worst Week Ever?"

By Susan Duclos

RNC- The Republican National Committee (RNC) is out with a new web video "Worst Week Ever?" that summarizes a rough week for President Obama's reelection. After doubling-down on attacking the free market and Mitt Romney's business record, Barack Obama and his campaign team hit a brick wall when Democrat after Democrat started coming out against their tactics. He also found out on Tuesday that "uncommitted" can be a tough primary challenger. President Obama had a bad case of the Mondays-every day this week.

[WATCH]