Here, you are urged and encouraged to run your mouths about something important.

Saturday, February 4, 2012

Military tells Catholic Chaplains to Zip it

After the Catholic Church was told by the HHS (Kathleen Sebelius) that they would be required to carry insurance that offers contraception and abortions, Bishops wrote letters that were read aloud by priests in their respective churches. Those letters were stinging in their outrage, which reflected directly on Obama.

Now, the military has informed Catholic chaplains not to read those letters to Catholic troops.

Via the Business Insider:
All the bishops in the country sent out a letter to be read in their parishes promising that the Church "cannot-and will not-comply with this unjust law."

Even Archbishop Timothy Broglio, who is in charge of Catholic military chaplains sent out the same letter.

But after he did, the Army's Office of the Chief of Chaplains sent out another communication forbidding Catholic priests to read the letter, in part because it seemed to encourage civil disobedience, and could be read as seditious against the Commander-in-Chief.

More than one Catholic chaplain who spoke to us off the record confirmed that many chaplains disobeyed this instruction and read the letter anyway. Others sought further instructions from their Archbishop.
So, in addition to the Obama administration's insistence that the Catholic Church engage in behavior fundamentally antithetical to its core beliefs, it has forbidden the Church to raise these objections with its followers who are in the most physical danger.

I seem to remember the Catholic Church taking the path of least resistance during the Obamacare debate. Here we have another, in a looooooooong line of examples, that shows where that path leads - to a much uglier place that is much harder to get out of.

h/t Weasel Zippers 

Obama's Georgia Eligibility case Transcends Birtherism

Look, I've stayed away from the Birther cases as much as anyone but this story transcends that issue by a country mile. It's not about the location of Obama's birth. It's about his being above the law. First, to re-cap. In a case brought by five plaintiffs, it was argued that Barack Obama should be off the primary ballot in Georgia. Last month, Judge Michael M. Malihi denied a request by Obama's attorney to quash the subpoena that required the president to appear before the court for the January 26th hearing.

Obama responded by thumbing his nose at said judge and did not appear. In a sane world, that translates to a default judgment for the plaintiffs. That did not happen. Instead, in what could have been seen at the time as a show of respect for the office of the President, Malihi ruled that he would reserve judgment and allow both sides to present summaries as to why the court should rule in their favor.

Obama's attorney, Michael Jablonski, then went to the Secretary of State for Georgia, Brian Kemp, who had the authority to review Malihi's decision. Kemp, in essence, told Jablonski that his client (Obama) needs to respect the decision, saying:
“If you and your client choose to suspend your participation in the …proceedings, please understand that you do so at your own peril.”
Malihi has now ruled in favor of Obama. As I said, this story transcends "birtherism." A defendant has defied a judge's ruling that said defendant appear before the court and said Judge responded by ruling in the defendant's favor.

Via WND:
An administrative law judge in Georgia today ruled that Barack Obama’s name can be on the state’s 2012 presidential election ballot because he was born in Hawaii, is “native born” and thus also is “natural born” as required by the Constitution.

He cited a little-known determination by an Indiana judge.

“The Indiana court determined that a person qualifies as a natural born citizen if he was born in the United States because he became a United States citizen at birth,” wrote Michael Malihi, an administrative law judge in Atlanta.
Those who dismiss this Georgia case risk doing what Democrats did in defense of Bill Clinton during the Impeachment hearings. "It was just sex," they said. No, it was about perjury.

It's important here not to get bogged down in the "tin-foil hat" aspect often attributed to Birthers.

This can't get any simpler. It's not about the validity of Obama's Birth Certificate; it is about a defendant kissing off a judge by not showing up when ordered and then having said judge rule in the defendant's favor.

HERE is an article written by one of the plaintiffs, Laurie Roth.

Report: Fast and Furious "Fix is in" and Boehner is behind it

As I readied myself for what promised to be a bombshell of a hearing on February 2nd, I thought Attorney General Eric Holder would have his toughest test yet. He would now be in front of the committee that Darrell Issa chairs - the House Oversight Committee. In every Fast and Furious hearing Issa had been involved in, he stood out as the top bulldog, the fieriest and most knowledgable about the case. On February 2nd, he had the gavel and much more evidence with which to go directly at Holder.

As I watched the hearing, I was struck by how tame Issa was compared to previous hearings. There were congressmen on the committee who went at Holder hard - Gowdy, Meehan, Buerkle, and Labrador to name a few - but Issa was conspicuously soft. I thought, "Why?" This was the guy who had all of the goods, collectively. He could have personally delivered a mortal blow to Holder's tenure; he might have even exposed a White House connection. Instead, he seemed to put his gloves down.

Mike Vanderboegh, the guy who broke the Fast and Furious story originally before CBS' Sharyl Attkisson picked it up and gave it a much wider audience, seems to be pretty convinced that the fix is in and that House Speaker John Boehner is behind it.

Via Sipsey Street:
Several sources tell Sipsey Street that the committee's work has been slowed by the intervention of Speaker of the House John Boehner, with some saying plainly that "the fix is in."

Several sources close to the investigation, have "gone dark," no longer speaking on conditions of anonymity because they have been warned that to do so will be at the risk of their jobs, Prior to the hearing, this silence was represented to some that the committee was ready to exercise a "nuclear option," in the phrase of one, so Holder would have no warning of any evidence said to have been gathered by the investigation.

Considered in the cold light of day, such reports have to be considered as the worst hyperbole, if not deliberate disinformation. "Some 'nuclear option,'" said one. "More like a Black Cat" (a small firecracker).
One thing Vanderboegh has developed over the last year is strong credibility. He has sources that talk to him and events unfold as he predicts seemingly far more often than not. Here, he quotes someone reportedly very familiar with the investigation:
As for yesterday (Feb 2nd) . . . (it was) a plea bargain of sorts where both sides save face. The Committee will accept the scalps of Breuer and Wienstein, DOJ will release enough of the (documents) to condemn them, claim cooperation (thus giving the appearance of recognizing congress's oversight authority), and Holder will survive - looking like a "leader" for offering them up (along with a few lower level ATF and DOJ folk). The Committee will chalk one in the "Win" column for oversight and holding people accountable. DOJ will have the same for cooperating and accountability. All sides win, all checks and balance intact and working fine, all powers respected and then they move on to the next act of political theatre. The only ones left to sweep up the mess, are the American and Mexican peoples - ignorantly secure in our beliefs that the system works and that our government is actually for us, by us, and of us.
The Obama administration is, by far, the most corrupt in the history of the United States. It has put the Republic in serious danger. If there was a White House connection to Fast and Furious, Boehner COULD have gone down in history as the man willing to do the right thing by leading the effort to expose it, by truly unleashing Issa and standing with him.

Instead, if these reports are true, he has decided to allow the dismantling of America to continue.

Perhaps we're learning why Boehner cries so much. It's not that he's an emotional guy. Maybe it's because he knows he's in a position to make very, very hard choices and knows that he's not strong enough to make them.

This could mean a serious primary challenge for Boehner.

Read it all.

Report: Iran working with al-Qaeda

When US federal district judge ruled, after eight years, that Iran and Hezbollah were behind 9/11 and worked closely with al-Qaeda to coordinate the attacks, it was shockingly not all that newsworthy. It meant that Iran hit the United States in the same way that Japan did at Pearl Harbor. It was a bombshell met with virtual silence.

Now, we have real time evidence that Iran is currently working with al-Qaeda at a time when the former is threatening terror attacks on American soil.

Via Fox News:
U.S. officials say they believe Iran recently gave new freedoms to as many as five top Al Qaeda operatives who have been under house arrest, including the option to leave the country, and may have provided some material aid to the terrorist group.

The men, who were detained in Iran in 2003, make up Al Qaeda's so-called management council, a group that includes members of the inner circle that advised Usama bin Laden and an explosives expert widely considered a candidate for a top post in the organization.
Of course, there are libertarians out there who don't want to believe any of this.
Skeptics caution that intelligence on Iran's activities is limited and worry that some policy makers might use provocative reports to justify military action against Tehran. Iran has denied any connection with Al Qaeda.

U.S. officials believe there have been recent indications that officials in the Iranian government have provided Al Qaeda operatives in Iran limited assistance, including logistical help, money and cars, according to a person briefed on the developments.
If those "skeptics" ever read about Havlish v. Iran,  et. al, their skepticism would be more than assuaged.

You can read all about Havlish HERE. 
Accuracy in Media
American Spectator
American Thinker
Big Government
Big Journalism
Doug Ross
Flopping Aces
Fox Nation
Fox News
Free Republic
The Hill
Hope for America
Hot Air
Hot Air Pundit
Jawa Report
Jihad Watch
Michelle Malkin
Naked Emperor News
National Review
New Zeal Blog
News Real
Pajamas Media
Red State
Right Wing News
Say Anything
Stop Islamization of America
Verum Serum
Wall Street Journal
Washington Times
Watts Up With That
Web Today
Weekly Standard
World Net Daily

Blog Archive