This is the small group (in the shade!) who we stood by for the first half hour we were there. I loved that lady's sign which reads, "90% Tax Increase for Congress!" YES!! Great idea!
*******
We asked a young girl who was sitting under a tree near us to take a photo of Donna and I. The girl took a great picture of us! Donna is such a beauty!
*******
This is a photo of some of the protesters across the street. It might be hard to read what is written on the signs. One of them says, "No Government Hell Care."
*******
Eventually, we decided to brave the heat and stand out in the sun on the corner across the street. A photographer brought this group together for a photo. The signs are great!
1. God Bless the U.S.A. and Israel
2. The Lord Giveth and the government taketh away
3. I'm 17 and I know the truth
4. A village in Kenya is missing its idiot. Deport Obama
5. Crap and Trade - It Stinks
6. Mary Bono - Shame on you for voting for Cap and Trade
7. Equal Opportunity Not Equal Distribution
8. Freedom From Government
9. Foreclose the White House
10. Taxed Enough Already
*******
After the photographer was done taking pictures, the crowd spread out again and Donna snapped this one. There is the familiar "OBAMA" acronym - One Big A** Mistake America sign. The young man in black held up a sign that reads, "Oh...now I see. Change means Socialism."
*******
Then, Donna took a photo of me with the "Don't Tread on Me" banner guy.
*******
One of the most sobering signs was held up by a young Christian man. "Freedom Dies When Americans Do Nothing." Notice the back of his t-shirt quotes a portion of John 14:6 - where Jesus is quoted as saying, "I am the Way, the truth and the life." The rest of that Bible verse tells us, "no one comes to the Father except by me."
If you look in the lower right hand corner you will see that we even had our own "Joe the Plumber" look alike at the protest!
*******
This is a photo of the truck that drove by the protest several times. One of the signs says, "Obama stop spending. No new taxes!"
AMEN!!
*******
Update: I should not be surprised by this, but the San Diego Union Tribune has NOTHING about the TEA Party Protest at Mission Bay yesterday!! Typical liberal leftist rag!!
At least the North County Times/The Californian included an article about the Temecula event.
The photos reminded me of additional signs that were being held by the protesters:
1. FIRE CONGRESS! OUR GANGSTER GOV'T -> DESTROYER OF OUR CONSTITUTION
2. D.C. = DISTRICT OF CORRUPTION
*******
Second Update:
Ha!! Stop Socialism: Photo of a hearse with a sign on the window reading “born free but taxed to death” [as it] drives past protesters lined up in front of the Federal Courthouse on Broward Blvd [in Fort Lauderdale].
This was one of many Republican-led protests against taxes, modeled after the Boston Tea Party (in spirit, anyway; there are no ships of tea to unload) demonstration against taxes keyed to the holiday. (Mike Stocker, Sun Sentinel / July 4, 2009)
*******
7/8/09 Update:
NewsBusters reports: CBS Highlights Tea Party Protests on July 4
Had a link to WorldNetDaily: Top TEA Party Speech Chosen
John Manning Speech: The Defenders of Liberty
Copy of speech:
The Defenders of Liberty
Posted: July 04, 2009
1:00 am Eastern
By John Manning
© 2009
Editor's note: Following is the winning entry submitted in WorldNetDaily's Independence Day tea party speech contest.
Fastened upon our ancestors by the despots of faraway lands, the Chains of Tyranny were linked by hereditary bondage, undeserved tribute and indentured servitude. By exhibiting gallant resolve and courage – in some cases against the face of certain death – our Minutemen forefathers gloriously threw off these chains just 233 short years ago.
Much has changed since that time. Yet today, we hear again the rattling and clanking of the Chains of Tyranny. The chains we hear are held not by foreign powers. Dreadfully, it is those among us, many of whom are our elected leaders, who possess the chains and toil endlessly to cast them across our backs. Now heavier and longer, the Chains of Tyranny have been wrought with new links – apathy masked by complacency, socialism fueled by internationalism, cults of undeserved celebrity and a reckless belief in the equality of results.
Moreover, they are now deceptively plated in gold. We have been assured, time and time again, by those who hold the chains that they "know better" and that to embrace their shackles would be "for our own good."
The threatened return of the Chains of Tyranny triggers that transcendent call for us to assemble here today.
Who are we?
We are the Defenders of Liberty!
Our hands reach across generations. We do not perceive the value of each other in abstract terms of race, gender, ethnicity or creed. We do not see ourselves as rich or poor. We spurn "identity politics" as a lazy and inadequate substitute for a guarded vigilance balanced by independent thoughts. For we are all individual citizens of America – black and white, man and woman, Mayflower descendent and newly naturalized – and we must all stand united to protect freedom's priceless but delicate charge!
We detest efforts by the holders of the Chains of Tyranny to corrupt the everyday meaning of things and turn us against one another.
Hope is not faith! Change is not reform! Taxation is not charity! Equality is not opportunity! Servitude is not freedom!
To this end, we reject the following confused ideas tinkered in minds that reason abandoned and faith no longer moderates: Inconvenient truths, audacities of hope, carbon footprints, unearned incomes and government-sponsored "recoveries."
We believe there is but one market – the free market – that, if allowed to run unfettered in a free society, can provide all men and women the opportunity to use the results of their work to better themselves, their families and their communities.
We know that public bailouts, no matter the intention, foster dependence, which in turn fornicates with servitude and begets slavery. For this reason alone, we would rather walk than drive a car made by any government! We would rather be paupers than be made rich by "public" money! We would rather drop dead than be cared for by Nurse Fed!
We further reject the guise of "universal health care" and recognize this abhorrent creature for what it is: a brazen attempt to seize illegally our wealth, control how we care for our mortal bodies, limit our access to the best medicines, stifle scientific progress and medical innovation, and transform our doctor's offices and hospitals into DMV-style waiting rooms.
The Defenders of Liberty will never stand by and ignore the attempts of others to cast off their own chains of servitude. We will not strike accords or offer bribes to dictators! We would rather cut off our hands before extending them to the harbingers of evil!
Speaking of evil, we know only those true rights: those that are unalienable and endowed by our Creator. We reject penumbral "rights" as false and dangerous ideas contrived in judicial cauldrons established only to massacre those who permeate the bookends of life.
And finally, we know that our sovereignty shall forever reside in We the People. For this we reassert that any government that limits the God-given right of her citizens to defend themselves automatically ceases to be a government – for such action shall void the social contract from which it was forged.
We are the True Patriots, left to guard perpetually that shining city upon a hill. We know of her, we dream of her, and yes, throughout history she has had a name: AMERICA! Let us rally around her, for we are the Defenders of Liberty! Let us hoist our flags, wave our banners and bear our arms! Let us be vigilant and fight any attempt to ravage her! For, as the envious eyes of the world are still cast upon us, we vow not to be the last to feel the sweet effervescence of her freedom!
God bless America!
Honorable Mention speech:
Don't tread on me!
Posted: July 04, 2009
1:00 am Eastern
By Paul Stepan
© 2009
Editor's note: The following received honorable mention in WorldNetDaily's Independence Day tea party speech contest.
Don't tread on me.
Those words, written on a drum at the battle of Bunker Hill are as significant today as they were in 1775. Today, the politicians in Washington are the redcoats. Today, our future liberties are as much at stake as the colonists who formed ranks atop the hill overlooking Boston Harbor.
Don't tread on me.
These words signify the independent spirit of our forefathers. Today, they are the rallying cry for a new generation of champions of independence and liberty who want nothing less than independence from the tyranny that is grasping the neck of the American people, choking liberty so that big government can prevail.
Don't tread on me.
The flag contains the coiled rattlesnake, which "… is found in no other quarter of the world besides America." No other country can compare to the American way, to the American spirit, to the American people. We must stop the tyrants in Washington and elsewhere from changing our way of life to satisfy some misguided diversity or politically correct guideline. We must be the rattlesnake, uniquely American.
Don't tread on me.
The snake has sharp eyes, and "may therefore be esteemed an emblem of vigilance." "She never begins an attack, nor, when once engaged, ever surrenders." We must be ever vigilant to shine the light on actions that violate our Constitution. We must engage the opponents of the America that our Founding Fathers envisioned. We must fight for our rights as Americans to live in a country free from the oppression of big government and the waste that is a natural result.
Don't tread on me.
There are 13 rattles on the snake, the same number as the original colonies. The rattles are united in a single purpose, the colonies were united in their efforts to become that shining beacon on a hill, and we must be united to bring back the vision and purpose of our Founding Fathers – liberty and justice for all.
DON"T TREAD ON ME.
Hat Tip:
WorldNetDaily
Posts
12 comments:
"Update: I should not be surprised by this, but the San Diego Union Tribune has NOTHING about the TEA Party Protest at Mission Bay yesterday!! Typical liberal leftist rag!!"
You rag on the MSM and then you're surprised when they ignore you?! Gimme a break, hostess!
Yes, you did show a great variety of signs: the only anti-Obama one was a retooled sign from Bush's time ("Somewhere in ____, a village is missing...")
"This was one of many Republican-led protests against taxes, modeled after the Boston Tea Party (in spirit, anyway; there are no ships of tea to unload) demonstration against taxes keyed to the holiday. (Mike Stocker, Sun Sentinel / July 4, 2009)"
Yep, that's as nonpartisan as it gets. Sounds more like the Party of No leading parties of Don't-Knows. But I understood that the RNC had no plans to get involved with TEA parties this time, and even Faux News (who sent some of their heavyweights out to the first rallies) had much lower-level coverage than last April. The other reason the rallies didn't get much coverage, of course, is all the buzz about Why Sarah Did It.
"When Republicans Collide": what fun.
That "Republican-led protests" paragraph was a quote from another website and was the opinion of someone who assumes (wrongly) that it is only Republicans demonstrating at the TEA Parties.
Ever hear of the PUMAs? They refused to vote for the usurper and crossed party lines to vote for McCain/Palin. Many of them are attending the TEA Parties.
But you keep on drinkin' that Obama Kool-Aid GM. As a familiar quote goes..."There is none so blind as those who refuse to see."
Yeah, it was. So if Mr. Stocker had it wrong, why did you quote it? You certainly didn't demonstrate that he was wrong--and his opinion is as valid (or invalid) as yours.
Do you think your GOPiss and vinegar is any better than Obama's Kool-Aid? You don't offer anything sweeter; just the same vitriol that you've poured out for the past decade or two.
There is also another quote that goes "O judgment, thou art fled to foolish beasts, and men have lost their reason." See, I know how to play the quote game too. I'm not impressed.
"You rag on the MSM and then you're surprised when they ignore you?! Gimme a break, hostess!"
Call me crazy, but I thought that the theory of the media was to report the news, not push an agenda.
"You don't offer anything sweeter; just the same vitriol that you've poured out for the past decade or two."
One thing that embracing a conservative viewpoint offers is freedom. You are correct in saying that isn't really sweeter. Freedom is hard work. Apparently, many Americans desire not freedom but a life where the government will take care of them, and so they voted for a man who offered to do that. All it took was a few decades of liberals convincing various groups what victims they were and they would never make it without the help of government. It's sad, but if that's what people really want our system allows them to elect it.
I wonder how they'll respond when the government runs everything and it still sucks? Who will they blame then? Certainly not themselves since they've been told that nothing is their fault.
GM, it's ironic that you shared that particular quote. Upon first glance, one could say that about any ideology.
However, the Bible speaks of wisdom from God - and how such wisdom often trumps man's intellect and reason - especially when man leaves God out of the equation.
My friend Donna mentioned that some people she knows voted for Obama for one reason; they wanted a black man as president. They shoved aside all of their morals, values, and beliefs (apparently, one was a Republican who happens to be black) and allowed their own desire for a black man to be president trump all other reasons to vote for a person to be president. Is that wise? IMHO - NOPE!!
From what I have read, Obama's heritage is 50% white, 33% Arab, and 7% black-African. So, in reality, did these people compromise their core beliefs to elect a "black man" as president? Or, was it more likely the idea of him being black (partially) that skewed them in the direction of voting for him?
the "hope" and "change" mantra of the campaign didn't reveal just what type of change would be placed upon the people. Now we see that it wasn't anything new - just a throw-back to Marxism/socialism/tyranny of the past that has failed, time and time again.
Just as that one young man's sign at the TEA party protest stated: "Oh...Now I see. Change means Socialism."
Too many young, college aged students don't know the dangers, errors, tyranny, and loss of freedom that Socialism ushers into a country. Why? Because they have only known freedom (in most cases) here in the United States.
Russian immigrants (like Orly Taitz, for example) have lived under the rule of tyranny in the former Soviet Union. No wonder she is so fierce in her lawsuit attempts against Obama. She knows what the U.S. Constitution says about the position of POTUS. Obama cannot be a "natural born citizen" due to his father's Kenyan/British nationalism - and the fact that he never became a U.S. citizen means that Obama Jr. wasn't born to 2 U.S. citizen parents. At best, Obama is a naturalized citizen (like Arnold S.) At worst, he is an illegal alien.
The fact that Obama is a usurper makes all of the Marxist policies being inflicted upon America that much worse. He isn't eligible for the postion of president in the first place. The man is a liar.
GM - have your read my latest post on Obama's college paper where he expresses that he's an anti-American, anti-military kook who wanted total nuclear disarmament in the 1980's? What did you think of that and what are your thoughts about what Obama is doing in Russia now?
I think he has done so many treasonous actions - it's so discouraging to millions of people here in America. But that's what we get when people elect someone like this rabid, leftist Marxist and terrorist/North Korea/Iran appeaser.
Who said anything about pushing a political agenda, Mr. Baker? Has it occurred to you that maybe it wasn't really news? The press had a famous dead black man (actually, two of them) and a state governor who jumps ship halfway through her term (that shows a lot of commitment to the people, huh?). Even in California, where celebrities and celebrity politicians litter the ground, that's news, not a collection of protestors who couldn't agree on what they were protesting.
"Apparently, many Americans desire not freedom but a life where the government will take care of them, and so they voted for a man who offered to do that. All it took was a few decades of liberals convincing various groups what victims they were and they would never make it without the help of government."
Actually, what it took was about three decades of Republican "rule"--if by rule, one means plutocracy. When you believe "government is not the solution to the problem, government is the problem", well then, clearly government is evil; let it starve. After the Class of '94 took office, and especially after 9/11/01, conservatives rediscovered the benefits of government; witness the all-new DHS, the "Patriot" Act, and wiretapping a great number of citizens, including members of the military corresponding with their spouses. Oh, and that pretty color-coded threat alert. Sure, the government will take care of you. Please remove your belt and put it on the conveyor. Please remove your shoes and put them on the conveyor. You're quite right, Mr. Baker: many Americans desire not freedom but a life where the government will take care of them, and so they voted for a man who offered to do that. Twice. We're all living with the results now.
"I wonder how they'll respond when the government runs everything and it still sucks? Who will they blame then? Certainly not themselves since they've been told that nothing is their fault."
They'll respond the same way they always have. "Throw the bums out" is a perennial battle cry on the streets, no matter who's in office.
The quote does apply to any ideology, hostess. It works on the Inquisition; it works on the Ku Klux Klan; it works on the Weathermen; it works on the Posse Comitatus; it works on Aum Shinri Kyo; it works on the Red Guards; it works on FEMA. Try it!
My black acquaintance Malik says, after seeing signs comparing Obama to Hitler at the recent TEA parties (I didn't bother to mention your own words), is of the opinion that the reverse is true of your friend Donna's; those who hate Obama do so because they they cannot stand the fact that a black man is President of the United States. He believes that's the real reason behind all those 'secret Muslim' stories, the dire warnings that he 'pals around with terrorists' and why some seek so diligently to prove that he wasn't even born in the U.S. No leader of this nation should have skin that color that didn't come from a sun lamp.
GM - have your read my latest post on Obama's college paper where he expresses that he's an anti-American, anti-military kook who wanted total nuclear disarmament in the 1980's? What did you think of that and what are your thoughts about what Obama is doing in Russia now?"
Yes, I did. I also read about a fellow from Tarsus or some such place, who was once very active in persecuting ethnic minorities. Reports say he changed his mind about that, later. What's your point?
There were similar 'kooks' who protested our Pershing II IRBMs stationed in Britain and Germany. They knew they'd be targets once the shooting started, and did not want to be. That didn't mean the Brits or Germans hated Americans--just American military policy. There was a lot of that in the '80s, but you wouldn't have noticed that, right? What were you doing in 1983?
Christine, I was IN the military in the 1980s, and I would have welcomed total nuclear disarmament myself, if I'd believed that the USSR would do it too. (That's what "total" means--EVERYBODY who has 'em gets rid of 'em.) I know enough about nuclear weapons to know that only a sociopath would want to use them; I've seen films of the tests, read accounts and seen pictures of the victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and I sincerely hope I never hate anyone enough to do that to them. In 1945, we greatly shortened the war by using them--but no one had any real idea of their power. We don't have the excuse of ignorance now, and the weapons owned by the nuclear-armed nations are FAR more deadly.
Of course, it does fit nicely with the Christian concept of smiting the wicked with hellfire, so I can see how it might appeal to you. But you really don't wanna go there.
My thoughts on what Obama is doing in Russia now? What is he doing that other US presidents haven't done? Even Reagan, fervent anti-Communist that he was, was never afraid to TALK with them. I for one would prefer even a neutral Russia to an enemy Russia. Wouldn't you? We lived through that scenario for most of our lives; do you want to go back to that?
"But that's what we get when people elect someone like this rabid, leftist Marxist and terrorist/North Korea/Iran appeaser."
Obviously, all that "blessed are the peacemakers" stuff is just modernistic BS to you. The more you spew, the more I think that Malik may be on to something.
"And they'll know that we are Christians by our love."
GM,
Your comments are very liberal. By that I mean they are long on insult and short on fact. To wit:
"Actually, what it took was about three decades of Republican "rule"--if by rule, one means plutocracy. "
Plutocracy, at least as defined by Wikipedia, is rule by the wealthy or having wealth provide power. Considering that for the most part there were more wealthy Democrats in Congress over the span you mention than Republicans, it seems you have little foundation. As for the private sector, take an example from presidential legal funds. When Billy Boy started having troubles and got a legal defense fund, I believe that approximately two-thirds of the money collected donations were large amounts from very few millionaires. George Soros is still bankrolling liberal think tanks. Conversely, when Bush started raising money, the bulk of his contributions were small from a large range of Americans. According to the data available, if anyone is pushing plutocracy, their symbol looks a lot like Eyore.
"After the Class of '94 took office, and especially after 9/11/01, conservatives rediscovered the benefits of government; "
A rediscovery forced upon them as the Clintons took great pains to reduce the assets and effectiveness of the intelligence community, putting up barriers against information sharing, and ultimately making us vulnerable to attack. This of course doesn't even mention the fact of how Clinton was offered Bin Laden and passed, gave little if any effective answer to multiple terrorist acts against the US outside of the country. And, while I am still concerned about some of the issues of the patriot act, I note that it seems to have been used effectively to thwart terrorist attacks. Compare that with Bill Clinton, whose first security related act was to illegally obtain confidential FBI records, not of terrorists, but of political opponents. And isn't it odd that the "freedom-loving liberal Obama" now defends the Patriot Act as a valuable tool against terrorism.
"You're quite right, Mr. Baker: many Americans desire not freedom but a life where the government will take care of them, and so they voted for a man who offered to do that. Twice. We're all living with the results now."
Interesting, and of course ridiculous. Looking at the Constitution (though I know doing so would jeopardize your status as a liberal) you might find that defending the nation from foreign attack is a legitimate function of government. Seizing property and wealth for expansion of power, seizing control of the healthcare system at the expense of others, attempting climate control, regulating who gets to go to college and which businesses succeed, not so much. Those are the province of tyrannts.
"Obviously, all that "blessed are the peacemakers" stuff is just modernistic BS to you. "
Actually, I am sure that Christine, like most Christians, takes it quite seriously. Unlike liberals, we simply have a memory on the subject. For example, we recall Chamberlain's announcing "peace in our time" as he bought promises by giving up the freedom of others and built up the enemy to the point where he was almost unstoppable. We remember the "concessions" Clinton obtained by sharing info with North Korea, only to find that they had continued to work on their nuclear capability. They took what he offered and laughed at the fool no doubt. No we have a new "peacemaker" in office. I think North Korea has already fired off more missiles on Obama's watch than he did the entire time Bush was in office. You also have major league turbulence in Iran and China. Meanwhile, I know that we are well into double digits on the number of times that Obama has expressed "concern." About the hardest stance he has taken so far has been in defense of another tyrant attempting to override the constitution in Honduras. The modern liberal idea of "peacemaker" is "dictator." Granted, they keep things quiet. All that is missing is freedom.
"My black acquaintance Malik says, after seeing signs comparing Obama to Hitler at the recent TEA parties (I didn't bother to mention your own words), is of the opinion that the reverse is true of your friend Donna's; those who hate Obama do so because they they cannot stand the fact that a black man is President of the United States."
Which is quite typical of (attempting) debate with the modern liberal. They have little knowledge or logic to present, so they label their opponents as something abhorrent to them (racist, sexist, homophobe, etc.) and then they feel they no longer have to defend their positions. I guess that shows they've been paying attention. It's gotten them what they want for most of the last three decades, but it's left them morally and intellectually bankrupt. From my experience, the most bigoted conservative in the country would be hard pressed to match the bigoted onslaught received by Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell, Condeleza Rice, or Sarah Palin by the "tolerant" liberals of America.
Keep 'em coming, GM. I'll be here all week. And while you are at it, why not explain why if liberals are such whizzes at economics that Michigan is a disaster and California is just about to go belly up?
"Who said anything about pushing a political agenda, Mr. Baker? Has it occurred to you that maybe it wasn't really news? "
No. Considering the crap that passed for stories during the Bush administration of anything that had a hint of criticism for the administration (Cindy Sheehan anyone?), no, it did not occur to me that several thousand protesters, part of a continuing movement across the US, was not news. That some news organizations have an agenda to downplay such protests, now that occurred to me.
"I also read about a fellow from Tarsus or some such place, who was once very active in persecuting ethnic minorities. Reports say he changed his mind about that, later. What's your point?"
You know GM, when you make those kinds of statements, it's difficult to know how much is ignorance and how much is simple religious bigotry. Let's do a simple compare and contrast, shall we?
Paul, formerly Saul of Tarsus, saw the light, literally, on the road. Immediately afterward, he worked dilligently for the rest of his life to promote the Christian faith, risking death many times and dying in captivity for the sake of the gospel. He backed up his positions with action.
Obama expresses an anti-American sentiment early in his adult life. You're right in that things could have changed. Let's look at the record though:
Continued attending Marxist and anti-American church until it became a political liability.
Did not show symbolic respect for military with civilian salute or flag pin until it became a political liability.
Has avoided trips to visit military memorials, graveyards, etc.
Presently working to impose revised framework of Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty ahead of Senate ratification in direct violation of the Constitution.
All that, coupled with the fact that just about every major policy he pushes weakens the US economy, and I don't see much reason to think he has changed.
Post a Comment