We’re not just talking about being gung ho and badass which doesn’t even begin to describe these guys, we are talking about being shot in the neck and keep on fighting, we are talking about having half your head blown off and keep on fighting, we are talking about going out in the middle of a clearing to try and get a signal in order to call for some help for your troops, knowing full well you are going to die doing it and keep on fighting.

It was 4 against an estimated 100+. I’m not sure what the kill ratio was, but from what I read in his awesome book, Marcus alone killed about 30 or 40 of these guys.

Finally, Marcus crawled, hopped, walked, ran 7 miles in order to stay alive.

Basically this book should be standard reading for all high school students, so that they may appreciate what honor, courage, and patriotism truly is.

Here are some interviews with him which give a synopsis of what happened, but I guarantee you, you need to read the book to fully appreciate what these four guys went through.

In this video, he retells the story of how some punks went and killed his dog , randomly. It was just sheer bad luck that these morons went and killed this hero’s dog.

If you are like me and spend a large amount of time going from site to site, this birds eye view of the conservative blogosphere will surely save you some time.

Bookmark it and tell all your friends about it. http://www.republicanoperative.net/

I would forbid any politician to name any new building, road, or any other project in their name. Moreover, I would forbid them from naming any bills or laws in their own name as well.

I think this would curb their enthusiasm for spending more and will also serve to curb their outrageous egos. Does this make sense to anybody else? Honestly, sometimes I get the feeling they just want to see their names plastered everywhere for eternity.

So when can buildings and other things be named in their honor? When they are dead.

A Conservative philosophy seeks to conserve (preserve, uphold, embrace) the integrity of the U.S. Constitution as it was originally intended unless it is amended in the prescribed way.

The Conservative believes that our founders placed ultimate trust in the vast majority of people to make all their own decisions.
Conservatives believe that trust was well placed.

The founders believed that most of the people would make decisions that would be beneficial to the individuals themselves and their communities. Our founders reasoned that if all men had the freedom to make their own decisions (and reap the results of those decisions) a country would function more efficiently and be more prosperous for all.
The founders believed that the few who would abuse this liberty could be dealt with effectively by a judicial system that demanded accountability.
This is the Conservative philosophy.

The Liberal/Leftist believes that opinions about the “important” stuff can not be left to the individual. They believe that the few “elite” thinkers should make these decisions for the rest of us.
The Liberal/Leftist does not have a problem with individuals making decisions about what they consider inconsequential matters but the important stuff can not be trusted to the individual citizens.
Some Liberal’s disagree about which issues are important or inconsequential but the philosophy that the superior thinkers should make the important decisions is a Liberal/leftist philosophy.
It embodies a general lack of trust in the people and a general trust or faith in government.

It is entirely possible for a person to embrace a Liberal/leftist philosophy but arrive at a Conservative opinion; this does not make the leftist a Conservative.

As an example:
A “Pro Life” view on abortion is considered by most to be a “Conservative” view but many arrive at a Pro-Life opinion using a leftist philosophy.
I am referring to religious individuals who believe their God who they know condemns abortion. Therefore they should make the decision for everyone who does not know or believe this superior information; they believe the “important” stuff should not be left to the individual.

A person with a Conservative philosophy opposes the legalizing of abortion on Constitutional grounds. They believe faithfully preserving the right of all men to Life, Liberty & Property unless due process is applied is necessary to protect the integrity of the Constitution unless it is properly amended.

In this way it is possible for both political philosophies to arrive at the same opinion on an issue.

The Conservative believes that all the chipping away that has been done to the Constitution has made America worse and led to needless oppression of men who should be free.

The Conservative may be religious (I am) but the Conservative does not desire all his articles of faith to become “law”.
The Conservative believes that protecting the integrity of the Constitution is the only way he can be assured the liberty to worship God as his conscience demands, even though he knows that this liberty will result in some individuals making choices that he considers “sinful”.

Many believe that if they see a list of ten hot button issues and they agree with the recognized “Conservative view” on 7 or 8 of these issues then they are Conservatives in their philosophy.
If they align with the recognized “Liberal view” 7 or 8 times out of 10 then they believe they are Liberal/Leftist in their philosophy.

It is accurate (most of the time) to describe the opinion reached as Liberal or Conservative, but the method used to arrive at the decision is what determines the philosophy of the person who holds the opinion.

This is relevant because the U.S. Constitution is a philosophical document.
It establishes a structure for a Federal Government and places massive restrictions on that government but refrains from restricting the people almost entirely.
It demands that the Federal government provide for a common defense sufficient to defend against “all enemies foreign & domestic” but leaves the details about how best to accomplish that to the future representatives and their voters.
It describes the structure of the judicial branch but declares very few laws or consequences.
It does not require judges to be lawyers or have any legal education or experience.
It does not require Presidents or Congressmen to have any education at all and only the President is restricted by age or birth place.

As a Conservative I am forced many times to support liberty for actions I disagree with because my Conservative philosophy is the trump card that I apply. These are frightening moments and one can only imagine how terrifying it must have been for the Founders.

There is no limit to the amount of “yeah but what if….” scenarios that can be dreamed up when you start imagining Free Men using only their own best judgment in making most choices in life.

In recent days I have been involved in numerous debates about some of these “scary issues”.

• Legalized drugs
• Speed limits
• Localizing environmental regulation responsibilities
• Gun control laws
• Health care provision
• Building codes and zoning restrictions on private property

Many people who argued with my positions on these issues consider themselves “Conservatives” and are greatly offended when I say otherwise.
They fail to see how all the arguments they made to support their opposition was based on the Liberal philosophy that people could not handle Liberty on important matters. Only the government should make those decisions.

Most of time I agreed with their facts & opinions, but I disagreed that they were in a small minority of people “smart enough” to render those opinions.

To oppose Liberty demands that one elevate themselves to a superior level of intelligence and a greater capacity to make wise judgments than most other people.

I refuse to believe that an appreciable number of Americans would become drug addicted, unsafe driving degenerates who build houses from cardboard, ignore their own retirement needs, ignore their local school curriculum and defecate into their drinking water if the government did not uses its authority to regulate all their decisions in these matters.
And thousands of other matters as well.

Our founders believed we could handle it and so do I.

“I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.” Thomas Jefferson.
Many know and love this famous quote until the time comes to actually risk the application of liberty to a scary subject, then they retreat to the other philosophy.

I am a Conservative, I am far more afraid of a regulated, nanny state America (today’s America) than I am of an America that embraces radical freedom.

It is far less important what side of the “right/left” divide our individual opinions land on than what philosophy we embrace. We can be divided & conquered if we focus on individual opinions, we will be unstoppable if we are unified in philosophy.

The left is winning because they have convinced most Americans to view every issue from a selfish perspective without regard for the philosophy our founders established in our Constitution.

Both sides now believe our personal opinions on most matters should cause us to fight for laws that will force our opinions on the rest. That is a leftist philosophy. Even if it arrives at a “right wing” position we still lose.

Until we embrace a Conservative philosophy we will never establish a significant enough majority to combat the current philosophy that rules both sides of the American political spectrum.
The Liberal/Leftist philosophy.

By -RET423

In 1988 a “Republican” was seen as a politician who would strive to get an overbearing government out of the individuals way.
A Republican would not take crap off of nations with inferior totalitarian styles of government.
A Republican would laugh at the ridiculous claims & ideas spouted by Liberal’s. He would never give those ludicrous ramblings credibility by responding in a serious way to left wing rants & accusations.
A Republican believed that American’s should take responsibility for their individual decisions, the good ones and the bad.
A Republican believed innocent human life is protected by the Constitution.
A Republican believed the job of the judiciary was to interpret law, not to write law.
A Republican believed the government that governs least governs best.
A Republican believed taxes should be lower & charity would then be greater & more effective.
A Republican believed that man was a part of nature; his existence was not destructive to nature.
A Republican believed that the U.S.A. was the world’s last best hope, not the world’s biggest problem.
A Republican believed America’s Christian roots were something to celebrate, not lament.
A Republican believed that competition, accountability & liberty was the best way to make prosperity available to the largest number of people.
A Republican was proud of America and saw no need to apologize for that feeling.

Reagan convinced an entire nation that the Republican Party believed these things so voting for a Republican was like voting for your own heart.
This was one of the few flaws I see in Reagan’s legacy, his belief that “thou shall not speak ill of a fellow Republican”.
Because of that policy most American’s thought that the description “Conservative” & “Republican” were synonymous. Those terms were not synonymous then, nor are they now.
Never has the fallacy of unquestioned party loyalty been displayed more clearly than at the GOP convention of 2004 when Democrat senator Zell Miller took the podium & spoke on behalf of the Republican incumbent George W. Bush #43
Zell Miller was a Democrat in the mold of J.F.K. He was an unapologetic anti Communist & lover of America, a supporter of lower taxes & personable responsibility. Zell Miller was motivated by the words “ask not what your country can do for you…….” And Zell Miller believed “thou shall not speak ill of a fellow Democrat”.

After several decades of quietly watching his party defecate on each & every principle he believed in we come to 2004. One of the most powerful Conservative & Patriotic voices at the GOP convention came from a member of the opposing party that few American’s had ever heard of, despite his several decades of service to this country.

My point is that the principles of J.F.K. were not synonymous with “Democrat”. For those ideas to live on would have required an uncompromising commitment to those ideas on the part of Democrat party members, even if it meant losing an election or two by refusing to slouch toward Socialism.

The J.F.K. Democrats never made that commitment, as a result 48 years later they have drifted so far from those principles that they have chosen Barrack Obama (a Socialist) to represent the Democrat Party for President.
This man thinks (and has said) that our Constitution is an incredibly flawed document & he thinks America is a country that stands in the way of better nations improving the world with better ideas.
He is ashamed of America & befriends those who believe U.S. citizens deserve to be attacked and killed for our loyalty to the United States.
He apologizes for America to some of the most despicable monsters on the planet.

We Republicans are 28 years removed from Ronald Reagan’s nomination to represent the GOP. For the most part our members have kept the pledge to “never speak ill of a fellow Republican”, too bad that is about all we have been faithful to from the Reagan revolution.
We now give Liberals credibility by giving serious responses to their idiotic, illogical rants.
We now embrace generic talking points because we are not intellectually prepared to communicate our ideas freely.
A government solution to every problem is the first idea we embrace.
We support the growth, dependence & intrusion of government into almost every area of American life.

Reagan had no media sympathetic to his ideas but he spoke fearlessly with faith that the American people would hear him. Today we are terrified of “what the media will say” even though Republican’s today have many popular media outlets to help them communicate their ideas.

“The wicked flee when no one is chasing them”

We Republican’s are slouching toward Liberalism. Our unwillingness to burn down the “big tent theory” embraced by our leaders in the 90s has polluted the Conservative label to such a degree that most Americans cannot see a significant difference between the Socialism of the Democrats & the Socialism-lite of the Republican Party.
In 20 more years will we nominate a despicable anti American monster to represent us?
Do we even have 20 more years to find out?
If Conservatism has no courage or voices in our party what good is it to win an occasional election?
Will some other political party find an old relic from our glory days to speak eloquently at their convention some day?
Will people then say “Wow That guy is a Republican! Why?” Or “I never heard of him before, is that what Republican’s used to believe?

We cannot expect America to trust us with Congress & the White House if we refuse to discipline our own Party members & protect the philosophy we claim to embrace.
The moment we stop rewarding our members who “reach across the isle” and start backing those who promise to fight the Liberals & reverse the gains that the Socialist’s have made in recent decades, is the moment we will be victorious again.

That will be the same moment America will be victorious again.

We are fast approaching the time where our party can either choose to drop the priority of bipartisan compromises and declare political war on the left or risk an actual War Between the States.
The left has already declared war on Conservatives; we have just been unwilling to accept it.
The choice is ours, clean up own backyard and take advantage of the misery that will be widespread in 2010 with a strong, unapologetic Conservative message.
Or we can just pick up a few seats with our noodle spine leadership who feels the need to begin every sentence with “you know, I disagreed often with Ted Kennedy but he really was a great guy”.

I will not hang around like Zell Miller did & watch my Party crumble. I am an American Conservative first & a Republican second.
I pray I am not the only one left.

By RET423

I’m hoping to do more of these in the future since talking about politics and Obama and the rest of the scoundrels up in Washington makes me want to put a gun in my mouth. Obviously the list here is not complete, but I wanted to point out some women that are not often mentioned as “hotties”. Post any suggestion in the comments.

1.      Elizabeth Hasselback (Filarski-maiden name) rose to stardom upon appearing in the show Survivor.  Nowadays she is better known as the only good looking woman in the show, The View. Incidentally, she is also the only conservative there. So let’s see, she’s tough and conservative-that’s definitely hot.
2.     Angie Harmon- is an American fashion model and television/film actress. She became a well-known model in the 1990s and developed a career as a television star after roles on Baywatch Nights and Law & Order. She most recently starred in ABC’s Tuesday evening drama Women’s Murder Club. She and her husband, Jason Sehorn delivered a speech at the 2004 Republican National Convention.
3.      Megyn Kendall Formerly Megyn Kelly- I don’t know if she is a Republican per se, but she’s definitely a good journalist, which kind of takes being a Democrat off the table.  Megyn is a lawyer, once divorced, and incredibly hot when she’s aggressively interviewing someone.
4.      Martina Mcbride-A country singer and spokeswoman for the National Domestic Violence Hotline. She also works with the Kids Wish Network.  Here at RO we are fond of anyone that works with kids, the fact that she’s gorgeous is icing on the cake.
5.      Mary Katharine Ham-Is a writer at the Weekly Standard blog, we won’t hold that against her, since we believe here at RO that the two goons at the helm there Bill Kristol and Fred Barnes are part of the blue blood infecting the Republican Party. She was also columnist and the Managing Editor for the website Townhall.com. There is something very hot about geeky girls wouldn’t you agree?
6.      Angela Mcglowan- Is a Republican strategist and Author of the book Bamboozled. She is a regular at the Fox and Friends morning show. She has worked with Bob Dole, Roscoe Bartlett , and Representative John Ensign.  And in my opinion a very well spoken and beautiful woman.
7.     Andrea Tantaros-We noticed her for the first time not too long ago on Foxnews, you see, us here at RO don’t watch too much television.  She has worked on political campaigns including Communications Director for former Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld where she led the media operation against Weld opponent, former New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer
8.      Sara Evans – She began competing with other celebrities on the third season of ABC’s Dancing with the Stars with (professional) partner Tony Dovolani. Evans launched a new fan web site to provide behind-the-scenes material from her participation on the program. Evans was the first country music singer to ever participate in the show.
9. Jaclyn Smith- My favorite “angel” is known for her role in the hit TV series Charlie’s Angels and also for a huge clothing line.
10. Carrie Prejean- Last but not least is the woman who withstood the liberal wrath of the media and Perez fatboy Hilton. She was almost destroyed for giving her opinion on gay marriage, but luckily she stood firm and came out on top.

1.It’s pretty cut and dry, if you aren’t a member yet, you can register (it’s free) .

2.Go to the Organize a Tea Party section and post the details.

3. Protest the hell out government intervention!

I would urge all of you to use this forum section in addition to other promotional methods you have of getting the word out.

Good Luck!

This tells me one thing, that while the mainstream media and some Republicans are suggesting we move to the left. The two prior list shows that in fact, we (republicans) are much more willing to move to the center/left. Ironically enough, the more we more to the center or left, the more elections we lose. But I’ll leave all that political analysis to the pundits. Now on to my own list of the dregs of the Republican party:

1.Arlen Spector -Good riddance, hope you lose re-election. We can thank Bush for backing you, even though you backstabbed him, the party, your constituents, the list goes on.

2.Bill Kristol -A staunch supporter of John McCain and contributor to the wussiness of the Republican party.

3.Fred Barnes- partner in crime of Bill Kristol and another douchebag Washingtonian RINO who supported the bailouts and said conservatives need to get with the program on government intervention.

4.Colin Powell- Long thought to be a reasonable Republican, this supposedly cool headed independent thinker is actually an opportunist and liberal who holds grudges. Nothing more to say here.

5.Charlie Crist- Current governor of Florida, aspiring Senator and future John McCain of the party. I voted for this guy because he talked a good game when he was attorney general and seemed to be a straight shooter. After he moved into Tallahassee… you know the story all to well.

6.John McCain- The culmination of mistakes over the years in the Republican party were manifested through this man. Do us all a favor and retire.


Obviously, there are more names to add to the list, I just wanted to get this out there and have you guys help me build the list.

Please add your suggestions in the comments section.

In every neighborhood there are weekly meetings, to inform of the latest directives and initiatives. Sounds harmless enough right? However, the main job of the CDR is to snitch out anyone that can be a potential enemy of the state. It is not uncommon for run of the mill commies or sympathizers to rat out a mother or father that says something critical of the ‘revolution’. But, if you are a member of the CDR, you have a duty inform on your neighbors. Uttering the word, “this system sucks” could get you many years in prison.

Here’s a write up that the Washington post did, last year on the CDR. Being a good student of Fidel, Hugo Chavez took note and initiated a similar program in Venezuela. Castrodeathwatch.com wrote about it a few months ago. Here’s an excerpt:

The new law requires people in the country to comply with requests to assist the agencies, secret police or community activist groups loyal to Chávez. Refusal can result in prison terms of two to four years for most people and four to six years for government employees.

Hmm, community activists? As if the word community weren’t vile enough in and of itself, now we have snitches purporting to be do-gooder communitarians informing on citizens who want nothing more than freedom. Sickening I know.

Which brings us to Barack The Messiah Obama as community organizer. Community organizing as I see it, is intended to train good little commies. Don’t believe me, just read the definition of community organizing by the Marin Institute.

My point is this, take into account his liberal voting record, his training as a community organizer, his many controversial acquaintances and it adds up to one big leftist soup sandwich. Think twice before voting for this kind of change.

Related Blogs

• Related Blogs on barack obama
• BARACK OBAMA: We Must Talk About the Economy!

• Related Blogs on fidel castro
• Oliver Stone’s Little Double Standard; Hint He Admires Fidel Castro
• Hugo Chavez arrives in Russia to say hello from Fidel Castro and …

When you call you will more than likely get a staffer who will ask how he can help. Just say you are calling to urge your congressman to vote no on the bailout. You’ll be asked for your email and address, but that’s only so they can spam you later for money.

Do it now!

Related Blogs

• Related Blogs on bailout

• Related Blogs on congress
• Don’t Let Congress Sell Us Out