I have to wonder if Scott, who I am ashamed to say is at my alma mater, actually took the time to find out about the conduct of those peace-loving humanitarians and “pro-Palestinian” activists? Because I’m not convinced the truth reflects the same thing he seems to be talking about in his quote:
Kinda puts a different perspective on the peace-loving pro-Palestinian activists the legacy media have come to know and love, doesn’t it?
Dead Confederate and Union soldiers lying side by side in a trench.
Sometimes, even in solemn remembrances, origins fade in the passage of years. The honored dead are no more or less sacred based on the time and place in which they fall, but a trip to the beginning can be sobering in the context of current events. I recently was in an exchange with a brother who expressed that he is of a mind to meet intimidation with violence. The roots of this intimidation are firmly planted in the philosophic dichotomy in our current political culture, namely the conflict between those who seek to establish government control or determination of nearly every aspect of our lives, and those of us who refuse to be dispossessed of the notion of a limited government that serves us and not an expansive government that we all serve. The passions on both sides frequently burn stronger than the bounds of restraint might contain, and the actions of those seeking a paternal government often seem calculated to elicit a strong response, if only so they can claim justification for the taking the powers they crave.
This weekend, many will pause to think of the honored dead. For some it is a father, a mother, a sister or brother. A grandparent, a childhood friend, former neighbor, or a nameless, faceless person from the past to whom a debt of gratitude is owed that can never be personally repaid in full. Every flag-draped coffin and alabaster headstone represents a sacrifice made by someone who did not fail when their country asked. They represent sacrifices freely made in the service of freedoms that do not exist in any other country in the world, and so made, have forever earned the descriptors of “honored” and “sacred”. They still exist as examples to future generations that some ideas are worth fighting for.
While there were several reasons for the conflict that spawned this holiday, for many, it will ultimately be about the incompatibility of a nation founded on the freedom that God granted to all men, and the state of bondage in which some of its citizens retained thousands of others, and the liberation that came of that conflict was the correct result to dispense with that contradiction. However, the conflict also concerned issues of federalism, and the idea of separation of powers, and unfortunately, too many have acted as if the resolution of that conflict to resolve those issues. It did not, and could not have done so, while allowing this country retain the character which its architects clearly intended.
As a result, there is exists a schism today, between those who believe that the federal government has jurisdiction over any matter it chooses to exercise jurisdiction over, and that the individual’s rights, central to the grant of authority set forth in the Declaration of Independence, is subject to the supremacy of collective rights as determined by the nebulous and non-objectably definable “general welfare”, and that this “general welfare” is not even determined by national concerns, but by international (and unelected) consensus. This conflation purports to create ambiguity where in truth none exists. There is no question who is right; one is either a citizen of this nation, or a citizen of the world. It is not possible to be both without having an inherent conflict of interest between the two, yet this division still exists, and a clash between these beliefs leaves its mark on the actions of politicians and on the effects on our citizens.
These clashing beliefs have the same potential as the conflict over slavery, because the resolution means no less than defining who we will be as a nation, or even whether we will continue to exist as a nation. These are also ideas that are worth dying for. Some would like that conflict now. Others would like to see if the issue can be resolved without resorting to that cost. It is no shame to fight for the ideals you believe in without taking the life of a countryman. There is no surrender in meeting them point for point in a free and open forum. History and fact are on our side. We all lose when we abandon that field, because should we do so, fathers, mothers, brothers and sisters, aunts, uncles, and cousins,…Americans…will find themselves divided by the sword. Before any one of us submits to passion and rushes headlong into such a breach, we all need to consider the honored dead, not just from modern conflicts, but those of the War Between the States. Consider their courage, committment, resolve, and sacrifice, and give due consideration to the ideals for which they paid the only price that is solely the individual’s to pay, and whether the ideals for which you burn also honor their sacrifice or make it in vain, and whether you have given your last full measure short of surrendering to a terrible resolve.
Dead soldiers at Gettysburg. Casualties for both the Union and Confederates after three days of fighting were greater than 50,000.
…Then Donald Douglas’ Photos of Saturday’s Illegal Immigrant March in Phoenix speaks volumes, and none of it is good.
Of course, if we were relying on the legacy media to inform us that socialists and members of the reconquista movement were so open about their intentions in a major American city, we’d never know about it, and then we might be inclined to believe that those evil racists in Arizona just hate brown people and have legalized profiling and harassment of innocent people who just want to do jobs no American will do, and are tired of living in the shadows because we don’t provide them with citizenship the minute they come across our border.
As you’ve no doubt heard, rather than stay in DC and visit Arlington National Cemetery on Memorial Day, the President opted to travel to Chicago, back to his house in the old neighborhood:
Byron Yorkcovered a minor bruhaha that occurred while the Obama family was enjoying BBQ at friend and treasurer for Organizing For America, Marty Nesbitt’s house
President Obama’s home is in the same Chicago neighborhood as Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan. On Saturday night, the overlapping of Obama’s and Farrakhan’s worlds made for a strange, and sometimes testy, encounter between the Secret Service, the press corps covering the president, and the paramilitary security force, the Fruit of Islam, surrounding Farrakhan.
The encounter was written up — for distribution to the press, not necessarily for publication — by the New York Times’ Jackie Calmes. It began a little after 4:00 p.m. when Obama and his family walked to the nearby home of longtime friend Marty Nesbitt for a backyard cookout. It just so happens that Nesbitt lives across the street from Farrakhan.
After an initial misunderstanding, one of the Secret Service guys explained to the Fruits of Islam guys that they weren’t interested in what was going on at Farrakhan’s house…
It might be assumed that an assurance from the Secret Service would be enough to satisfy any security-minded guardian of Louis Farrakhan. But not in this case. Calmes continues:
The man is back to pacing and talking on his cell, walkie-talkie in hand.
A co-pooler searched the Internet for the address and found it listed on a Web site called NotForTourists and another called Taxexemptworld.com. Indeed, another pooler found a county Web site that confirmed this property is tax exempt for being a religious institution.
Reinforcements arrived — three men in T-shirts reading “Wide or Die!” One surly man has been staring daggers at us. Asked if this is Minister Farrakhan’s house, he just stared at your pooler. Asked again, he said, “I don’t have no comment.”
At nearly 8 p.m. local time we are still holding while POTUS and family remain at the Nesbitts.
More time passed. The men in T-shirts were joined by even more men, from the Fruit of Islam, Farrakhan’s security force.
I’ve been meaning to do this for awhile – a weekly hymn post, offered for your enjoyment. Worship music happens to be one of my favorite types of music, and I think even the non believers amongst you can enjoy the peace and serenity found in these songs. (If not, don’t listen!)
Today is Trinity Sunday in the Catholic Church, so I thought I’d share this lovely rendition of Holy Holy Holy by Sufjan Stevens:
Not that that’s a problem for this slippery White House, as Captain Ed explains:
This looks more like an ex post facto attempt to shoehorn the known facts into any kind of exonerating framework than the truth. And the ambiguous statements surrounding this release also sound like an attempt to leave as much wiggle room as possible. Oh, we didn’t mean the Intel Board, a rebuttal will almost certainly insist. We had a number of options in mind for Rep. Sestak. The intel board was just a brainstorming suggestion.
A spokesman for Rep. Darrell Issa, who is pursuing the Sestak matter in his role as ranking Republican on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, sends the following reaction:
Are we to believe that Rahm Emanuel, a former Member of Congress himself, dispatched President Clinton to maneuver Admiral Sestak out of the Senate Primary by dispatching him with an unpaid appointment that Congressman Sestak couldn’t even accept if he wanted to? What’s more likely, that two of the most politically sophisticated people in American political history didn’t do their due diligence or that the narrative told by the White House is a not-so-brilliant work of fiction?
So what’s next. Will the MSM pursue this story? Because the Repubs are pretty much powerless to do anything about it unless the media keeps up the pressure. Yesterday, on Fox New’s Special Report, Charles Krauthammer, (after running through a whole host of additional questions that need to be answered ) predicted that after this weekend, the press will cover “Obama’s backside”, and the “story will peter out”.
An aside…I’ve been reading rumors that Admiral Sestak was not at all popular in the Navy. RealClearPolitics in a report that was mostly complimentary of Sestak, noted last June:
Sestak’s Navy career ended in a less-than-ideal fashion. In July 2005 – within a week of Adm. Michael Mullen’s swearing-in as chief of naval operations – Sestak was dismissed as deputy chief of naval operations due to a “poor command climate,” according to the Navy Times. (Mullen was later named chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, meaning that the two men now periodically face off in Congressional hearing rooms.)The ouster represented a stunning (albeit temporary) reversal of fortune for Sestak. But for the most part, Washington players today don’t hold the ouster against him – if they even know about it in the first place.
“Once your title is ‘the Honorable,’ it’s left at the water’s edge,” said Mackenzie Eaglen, a national security specialist at the conservative Heritage Foundation and a former Congressional aide. The ouster “really only comes up in defense circles.”
A much more pointed appraisal of Vice-Admiral Sestak can be found at Military Corruption.com,a site run by Editor and Chief, Glenn MacDonald Maj USAR (Ret):
It took the new Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Mike Mullen, less than 24 hours to dump one of the most disliked officers among the Navy’s top brass. Vice-Admiral Joe Sestak, an arrogant and obnoxious “bully-boy,” who delighted in being rude and unreasonable and getting away with it, found he was expendable the minute his mentor went out the door.
Rumsfeld “yes-man” and weaselly politician Vern Clark will not be missed by many Navy personnel. In fact, hopeful messages are flooding the office of MilitaryCorruption.com that “maybe, somehow,” the Navy has finally gotten a CNO who will “put sailors first” and correct the many mistakes of his predecessor.
It was Clark, a leftover from the Clinton Administration, who promoted Sestak to his third-star and made him deputy chief of naval operations for Warfare Requirements and Programs. Those who dared to complain about Sestak’s abusive “management style” were ignored or punished.
By sacking a previously untouchable top-ranking admiral, Mullen has fired a shot across the bow to others like Sestak that their days are numbered too.
Here’s Military Corruption.comon the Sestak bribe, (written some time before yesterday’s news dump):
we have learned that a high-ranking emissary from the White House, either Rahm Emmanuel, or one of his top staffers, offered Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.) the job of Navy Secretary if the abrasive former flag officer would give up his campaign to be elected U.S. Senator from the Keystone State.
At work here, is Sestak’s huge egomania. One of the most despised Navy admirals in modern history, Sestak’s temper tantrums are legend, and the staff turnover in his congressional office, the frequent subject of water-cooler gossip on Capitol Hill. Apparently the highly-conceited congressman thinks he can still brutalize human beings, much as he did in the Navy. His primary claim to fame in those days was “sucking up” to both Bill and Hillary Clinton.
This might explain why the White House would have used Clinton to talk to Sestak.
Jack Cashill has the entire nasty, dirty, low-down scoop on the Clinton/Sestak connection in this must read piece at the American Thinker: