The articles linked below were published in November 2007, long before Ron Paul voters helped escort Obama to the whitehouse. Using the excuse of not voting for the lesser of two evils (Obama vs McCain) they wasted their vote on Ron Paul.

» The Ron Paul Campaign and its Neo-Nazi Supporters

Paul supporters complain endlessly that the "mainstream media" is censoring or ignoring their candidate. They should be careful what they ask for. If Paul wants to be taken seriously, he must stop cowering behind the internet and face these questions. Until then it is only reasonable to presume that Paul is happy to wallow in well-financed obscurity accepting the support of some of the worst enemies of freedom and liberty within American society.

» The Odd Alliance Supporting Ron Paul

The Communists crow, "Ron Paul of Texas is driving some of the other Republicans crazy...." They make some mild criticism of Paul's position on the gold standard, but don't say even a single word about Ron Paul's KKK supporters or racist statements tied to Paul. These are the same Communists who regularly call George Bush a fascist.

The CPUSA shacking up with Ron Paul is not new

One Ron Paul meetup discussion thread reads: "Watch what you write cause American Thinker is taking your excerpts." Underlining the fact that the Paulistinians' banning each other are engaged in a cover-up, not a clean-up.

The Paultroons can spot a Zionist gang wiring explosives in the World Trade Center from 1000 miles away, but they didn't notice the ‘conspiracy' behind postings like, "Must Dr. Paul capitulate to our Jewish masters' demands?” - and hundreds of other anti-Semitic comments spread all over the internet by Paul supporters.

Refusal to condemn is endorsement. Unspoken endorsement.

Ignoring Ron Paul's unspoken endorsement of anti-semites, white supremists and truthers places his supporters squarely in the company of those groups.

Here, go read this, cause I have a rant bubble that's about to pop:
» Matthis and collateral ignorance

So, if you were a teacher and you invite a guest lecturer to speak to your students, wouldn’t you want them to be subject matter experts? Why would a teacher have IVAW Matthis explain the “Collateral Murder” video to his/her students then?

That’s what’s happening across the country today. Three people are touring the country and speaking at high schools in a program called “We Are Not Your Soldiers” - Matthis Chiroux, Robin Long and Emma Kaplan. Matthis and Robin Long refused to deploy to Iraq, Emma is a tool of Maoist World Can’t Wait. None of them has ever been to the wars, yet some teachers feel that they have the expertise to talk about the war to their students.

One young woman started crying, saying her dad was in the military and she wanted to join but now she didn’t want to. Matthis had asked a question and this young woman raised her hand and said, “My dad was probably in a helicopter like that killing children.

Students were asked what they thought caused the war, a number of them replied: Imperialism.

Here's my Rambling Rant:

Imperialism. Not decades of deadly attacks on America by islamic terrorists, culminated in 9/11 ... but Imperialism. America's imperialism. That's the lesson being taught your children - that bad things happen to America and it's our own fault for illegal invasions and occupations and arrogance and being rich and not spreading our wealth and supporting our friends and treating communist tyrants with disrespect and our constant endeavors to improve life.

So, who is this Matthis Chiroux and IVAW? For the third time, I offer this video:

Chiroux is a bitter, flag-burning communist tool, busily kicking at the foundations of our Republic. Like thousands of his fellow leftists, there's piss in his veins instead of blood.

But I'm just a character assassin. I attack good solid people for vindictive purposes. Like Adam Kokesh. He's a fine, upstanding, ex-Marine, Iraq veteran, conservative candidate for congress. I'm a meany for bringing up the fact that Kokesh is a ring leader of the IVAW flag-burners and has spent the last several years hanging out with CodePink, ANSWER and every other communist-funded organization.

I'm a pawn of the globalists (I'm told) because I don't like another famous politician that endorses the exact same anti-American sentiments expressed by Chiroux and Kokesh. Ok, to be fair, Ron Paul hasn't ever had the nads to proclaim his disdain of our military (or be specific on his anti-semitic policies or deny/affirm 9/11 trutherism, chem-trails, stealing oil from Afghanistan* and Iraq, plus a plethora of insane conspiracy theories). He just allows his minions to do it without calling them on it, which in my mind is endorsement.

I'm also guilty of plain ole sour grapes because I still insist that some 'liberty' candidates separate themselves and their campaigns from the likes of Chiroux, Kokesh, Paul and the nuttiest conspiracy theorist of them all - Alex Jones.
That's not asking too much, is it? I mean, I mean, if you've got a section on LibertyCandidates.org amongst fellow 'liberty' candidates like Steve Susman (click that link, you gotta see it to believe it**), and imagery like this:

then is it a conclusionary jump to assume that you sip the same koolaid? Especially when your profile states stuff like

Terror is a tactic, and not something against which we can declare "war". As such, it is an oxymoron.

The "war on terror" is not a constitutionally declared war***, and as such is illegal. It is simply a branding exercise to get the American people to accept further government intrusions into our lives and business.

I've heard those sentiments before. They came out of the mouths of leftists and the communist dupes of ANSWER, MoveOn.org and CodePink. Think to come of it, that could have been a quote from Sean Penn or Danny Glover, both trophy-holders of the Hugo Chavez Butt-Kissing Contests.

What am I to assume when a Republican candidate for congress' campaign staffer has these stickers on their car?

Ya see, B.J., I have a serious problem with sending a Republican to congress that walks and talks like all the leftist communists that I've spent the last several years battling.
Prove me wrong. Publicly denounce and proclaim. If you do, you'll get my support (for what it's worth), but you'll also lose a substantial portion of your lunatic base. But prove me wrong, I'd like that very much.

* by the way, Afghanistan doesn't have any oil.
** in case Susman removes his nutty post about chem-trails, I have screen caps and transcripts saved.
*** The Constitution, Article I, Section VIII states, in part:
"The Congress shall have Power to ....
... To declare War, ..."
Is that the basis of the statement that all wars are illegal if not declared? If it is, then that statement is wrong; 'shall have power to declare war' does not translate to 'and shall do so if and when we ever have to kick some butt'. That section also states that congress shall have the power to borrow money on the credit of the United States. Does that mean congress is required to borrow money, whether or not we need it?

From House and Senate Cloakroom at Heritage Foundation:

It’s crunch time on health care. The Budget Committee will meet Monday to start marking up a shell of a Reconciliation Bill. The Rules Committee will then meet as early as Wednesday to hollow out whatever the Budget Committee passed and then insert a new bill from Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) office. The Majority is still planning to use the “Slaughter Rule” that would allow the House to pass the Senate health care bill without voting on it.

RED ALERT: We Are Now Living Under Martial Law -- House Democrats Appear Set to Pass Senate Bill Without Voting On It

Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY) is preparing to pass the health care overhaul through the House of Representatives without a vote, as was originally reported by the National Journal's Congress Daily. Mark Tapscott observes that such a maneuver would be the penultimate refutation of the people's will.

In the Slaughter Solution, the rule would declare that the House "deems" the Senate version of Obamacare to have been passed by the House. House members would still have to vote on whether to accept the rule, but they would then be able to say they only voted for a rule, not for the bill itself.

Thus, Slaughter is preparing a rule that would consider the Senate bill "passed" once the House approves a corrections bill that would make changes. Democrats would thereby avoid a direct vote on the health care bill while allowing it to become law!

From the United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 7

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively...

Mark Levin:
... this clause goes to the heart of this Republic.

This clause goes to the heart of how our representative body, that is Congress, makes laws. And so I want you to [observe] how particular the Framers were... They have to pass a Bill to present it to the President...

This is one of the most exacting clauses in the Constitution.

And, to the best of my knowledge, which extends over three decades, no Congress has previously tried to institute policies without actual statutes.

Here we have the President of the United States and Congressional leaders actually talking about the possibility of a brazen and open violation of one of the most fundamental aspects of our Constitution and Republic! How we actually make laws!

Let me be as clear as I know how. If this is done, this will create the greatest Constitutional crisis since the Civil War. It would be 100 times worse than Watergate.

...
This is a crucial lesson for those of you who... aren't sure what your beliefs are, or if you have any beliefs. Or aren't sure if you even care. We have an effort underway by the one of the most powerful chairmen in Congress, the woman who heads the Rules Committee, ...openly discussing gutting Congress. Gutting Congress.

And if this is done, this is about as close to martial law as you'll ever get... So Louise Slaughter, a Representative from New York, is discussing, in essence, martial law. Now I can tell you, if they pursue this process, and try to impose this kind of a law, without actually passing a statute, that I will be in a race -- with scores of others -- to the courthouse to stop this.

I can't think of a more blatant violation of the U.S. Constitution than this. And the liberal media has essentially ignored it!

...It's not only absurd on its face -- that these power-hungry ideologues, party-first-country-second types, would make the claim that the House voted on something it never voted on... that's not only absurd on its face, it's blatantly unconstitutional!

After spending most of the last decade in the company of communists and anti-American groups like CodePink, ANSWER, Moveon.org, SDS and IVAW, Adam Kokesh is now a conservative republican running for congress.

Donkey Doodle!

Adam thinks we are stupid, or more specifically, he thinks New Mexico conservatives are stupid enough to believe that he has changed colors. Does he expect forgiveness for his association with commies, America-Bashers and Troop Haters? If so, he's forgotten to actually ask for it.

» Say NO!! to IVAW's Adam Kokesh, "Republican"?!!!! for Congress?

Note that Kokesh has the endorsement of Ron and Rand Paul? Does that means he's abandoned his old anti-war commie buds to hang with 9/11 truthers and Jew Haters. No way! Why would he? Truthers and anti-semites mix rather well with communists.

» DPNM: “Who is Adam Kokesh to lecture anyone on corruption?”

» Mullins: Kokesh’s actions “dishonor the military”

Kokesh has a national base of Tea Party advocates, but Mullins describes himself as an organizer in the Farmington Tea Party movement.

Wrong. Kokesh has a national base of Tea Party Infiltrators and usurpers.

Established on February 10, 2010 : American Patriots Against Kokesh

Dear News & Observer,

This is news worth reporting.

Jan 9, 2010

A federal judge ruled against the Council on American-Islamic Relations today in its lawsuit against a father and son who carried out a six-month undercover investigation of the D.C.-based Muslim group, denying a request to conduct discovery ? an examination of its opponent's witnesses, facts and documents ? prior to hearing a motion to dismiss the case.
CAIR is suing P. David Gaubatz and his son, Chris Gaubatz, for allegedly stealing sensitive internal documents and making recordings of officials without consent. Chris Gaubatz, who posed as a Muslim in an internship with CAIR's national office in Washington, took some 12,000 pages of documents destined for a shredder in an attempt, he said, to expose the group's ties to Islamic jihad and terrorism. His father is a former Air Force special agent with extensive Middle East experience who researches the spread of radical Islam in the U.S. and its threat to national security.

Get the whole scoop at Judge Rules Against CAIR

In your report don't forget to cover the fact that the CAIR chairman is NC State Senator Larry Shaw (D-Fayetteville).

Watching and Waiting for the story in the N&O,
Ross 'Bubba' McDowell

The enemies without, and within.

Hundreds gathered in New York City yesterday in protest of the show trial of KSM.

Amercians Rally in Thousands to Protest Eric Holder’s Terror Trial Decision

NEW YORK, DECEMBER 5, 2009 — Today, several thousand protesters gathered at Foley Square in New York City to rally against Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and 4 other 9/11 co-conspirators as civilians in federal court.

Report at UrbanInfidel
KSM Trials Protest New York City

Report at Gathering of Eagles NY
AAR – 911 Families Rally Against Trials In New York




Report at Looking At The Left
9/11 Families Rally Blasts Obama’s Show Trial Travesty
With an interesting study of the jury pool of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed’s peers - including a cluster of AlexJonesian moonbats.

Demonstrators at the Saturday event included the actor Brian Dennehy and a number of people who lost friends and relatives in the 9/11 attacks.



Report at Atlas Shrugs
9/11 Families, Patriots, Americans Rally against NYC terror trials
Anger at the Obama administration ran hot in the crowd. One person held up a sign calling Attorney General Eric Holder "disgraceful and despicable." Another sign said "Obama/Holder ... Jihad from within."

Report at Silent Majority
911 Never Forget Us Rally says”No” to KSM Terror Trial in NYC