Brian Lancaster at Jumping in Pools reported on Obama’s college thesis, written when he was at Columbia. The paper was called “Aristocracy Reborn,” and in the first ten pages (which were all that reporter Joe Klein–who wrote about it for Time–was permitted to see), the young Obama wrote:
“… the Constitution allows for many things, but what it does not allow is the most revealing. The so-called Founders did not allow for economic freedom. While political freedom is supposedly a cornerstone of the document, the distribution of wealth is not even mentioned. While many believed that the new Constitution gave them liberty, it instead fitted them with the shackles of hypocrisy.”
Yep, this arrogant asshole thiknks he is smarter than Thomas Jefferson. His historical ignorance is astonding in it's depth and ignorance. Blacks were still slaves and he though the re-distribution of wealth should have been included.
You need no further proof that Obama is a far left moron.
I deciding to spend a little time chasing it, hunting it down. In fifteen minutes of browsing, I found that conservatives in Minnesota did indeed show interest in the topic. Take, for instance, blogger and Senate District 15 GOP Secretary Leo Pusateri.
There are other examples in the state. Read about Mr. Pusateri's interest in the controversy and that of other two other conservative Minnesotans below the fold.
Mr. Pusateri currently blogs at Psycmeister's Ice Palace and Freedom Dogs, as well as cross-posting at True North.
He's brought up questions about Obama's birth certificate a number of times. Here's one such post, from his personal blog in July 2008begins:
It appears that Obama's alleged birth certificate has been deemed a forgery, calling to question whether Obama was born in the United States, which would be a Constitutional prerequisite for his ability to legally run for President.In a February post at Freedom Dogs, he wrote:
A cultural and spiritual awakening...is this why the agenda media were willing to overlook and/or gave short shrift to many of the Obama scandals, from his friendships with Tony Rezko, Rev. Wright and William Ayers, to the flak over his birth certificate?That should give readers a flavor of his take on the matter.
Yes, we have the SEIU in Minnesota. Would you expect anything else from our "progressive" state. If you would like to make your voice heard on the brutal tactics employed by SEIU staff at the St. Louis and Tamps townhalls, here are some SEIU events being held in Minnesota this month.
Cross posted and comments welcome at Conservative Cravings.
While I have no idea how many SEIU members might do business with this relatively small bank chain, I do know that if I were a member I would not feel all that welcome at a business whose employees actively campaign against my organization.SGT Thul doesn't qualify under Section 888. Art. 88 of UCMJ because he is not a commissioned officer. However, being a non-commissioned officer, he should understand that to question one's superiors publicly is not allowable within a disciplined military. All concerns are to be taken up with that person off-line. I assume SGT Thul is a NG member, which means he can participate in political discourse in solely a civilian manner while not on orders. This being said, the display of a military web address is to assign a type of authority to the speaker and his sentiments that he does not have the right to assign. SGT Thul has a right to operate his blog (as long as he is not on state or federal active duty) but does not have the authority to list a .mil or .gov web address for contact about the content of his speech. I believe his unit commander and first sergeant would find his listing of the address as an action unbecoming of a non-commissioned officer.
Both claim that I am using my official Army email address to launch these 'attacks'. While it is true that I used my army.mil email to register this blog (I was in Iraq at the time and the army.mil email was simply the safest and most reliable email in a combat zone) it is also true that that information isn't available to the casual reader. In fact, if you look over this entire blog, including my profile, you wont see any Army email address. I have been blogging for 2 1/2 years now, including 12 months of active duty time. This issue has never come up before, nor have I ever been censored by the military in what I say. I do censor myself for OPSEC and military discipline, but I have never been told by the military that anything I have said on this blog was inappropriate.
And I have never been anything but respectful to elected officials when I agree or disagree with them. In contrast with so many bloggers and commenters who regularly use foul language and hurl insults at politicians they disagree with, you will more often than not find me addressing politicians by their titles. Just as I do when in uniform, I respect the rank even if not the man.
You will notice at the bottom of the image that the official military email address is displayed pretty prominently below the attack piece he wrote about Congressman Walz.
You will notice that Mr. Thul happens to run TWO blogs. Why is this important? Well, the only way that blogger would display both of these blogs on one profile is if the exact same email address was used to create both. That means that Mr. Thul is using his official military email to sign in to and post on his own blog as well as a blog titled "Steele County Republican Party". That brings up the question of whether this particular blog is the OFFICIAL blog of the Steele County Republican Party. If it is, does this make matters worse for Mr. Thul?
I went directly to the source, Mr. Thul, but he doesn't seem very eager to address my questions about the proper and improper use of military email. Mr. Thul tried to pin this back on myself for not addressing his post but as I told him, my inquiry into the use of military email resources dates all the way back to April of this year so his argument that it is just a way to avoid addressing his particular issue doesn't hold much water. You can click on the image to the left or click on the above link to see that Mr. Thul has yet to answer any of my questions.
4.1.2.3. Allow or cause to be published partisan political articles, letters, or endorsements signed or written by the member that solicits votes for or against a partisan political party, candidate, or cause. This is distinguished from a letter to the editor as permitted under the conditions noted in subparagraph 4.1.1.6.
[Click image for larger view]
