4th of July 2015

4th of July 2015

Saturday, July 4, 2015

[VIDEO] Get in the July 4th Spirit with This Epic Independence Day Speech


While you gear up for July 4th, remember what this holiday is all about: patriotism, independence from Great Britain and kicking some alien butt. 

Or at least that's the lesson we got from 1996's Independence Day, which features one of the most inspirational speeches of all time. 

"We can't be consumed by our petty differences anymore," President Thomas J. Whitmore (Bill Pullman) tells a crowd of soldiers preparing to launch a worldwide attack against intergalactic intruders. 

"We will be united in our common interests. Perhaps it's fate that today is the 4th of July and you will once again be fighting for our freedom – not from tyranny, oppression or persecution – but from annihilation." 


"We're fighting for our right to live, to exist," he continues. "And should we win the day, the 4th of July will no longer be known as an American holiday but as the day when the world declared in one voice: 'We will not go quietly into the night! We will not vanish without a fight! We're going to live on! We're going to survive! Today we celebrate our Independence Day!' 


4TH OF JULY: FIVE PATRIOTIC MOVIES THAT PISS OFF THE LEFT

With the fascist left on a fascist rampage, why not add a little defiance to your 4th of July by watching five patriotic movies that piss off The Man. The Man of course being the dominant Left-wing political culture that is currently banning “The Dukes of Hazzard” and hoping to get its tyrannical hands on “Gone With the Wind.”

  1. The Green Berets (1968)
Because he loved America and freedom and didn’t want to see either lose a vitally important war, John Wayne spent a lot of his movie star capital directing and starring in “The Green Berets” for Warner Brothers. Critics blistered him in ways unseen until Mel Gibson dared bring the Gospels to life in “The Passion of the Christ.” Audiences, however, showed up in droves, and were treated to a marginal but entertaining movie, and most importantly, a prophetic one.
Edward-Faulkner-John-Wayn-009
In the film, Wayne predicts that if the Left wins and America abandons Vietnam, other countries will fall to communist tyranny, and our Vietnamese allies will be murdered and tortured.
And that is exactly what happened.
John Wayne was 100% correct, he had their number, and that makes the Left angrier than anything.
BONUS: Watch racist George Takei sell his left-wing soul for a small role in a right-wing propaganda film.

  1. The Alamo (1960)
John Wayne’s epic passion project nearly bankrupted him. Not because the film couldn’t attract an audience, it did (and a Best Picture Oscar nomination); the problem was that it cost too much.
3133
Duke felt that the events at the Alamo personified what America was about, and all the way back in 1960, he believed his beloved country could use a reminder that liberty sometimes requires sacrifice.
Although he had three Hispanic wives, Wayne was frequently accused of being a racist , so pay special attention to the way in which he portrays Santa Ana’s Mexican army. The caricature of greasy, drunken Mexicans would not appear in an Alamo picture until 2004— you know, when Leftists were firmly in charge of Hollywood.

  1. American Sniper (2014)
The Left really bared their anti-American, anti-troop backsides with this one. Clint Eastwood’s masterpiece respectfully and artistically tells the true story of Chris Kyle, the most decorated sniper in American history — a man whose bravery and multiple tours saved more American and innocent Iraqi lives than we can begin to count. Eastwood also had the courage to show the terrorist barbarians we were fighting in Iraq as exactly what they are — terrorist barbarians.
bradley-cooper-800-640x480
For seeing terrorists for what they are — savages — and calling them by name, the Left relentlessly smeared Kyle as a racist; a lowlife scumbag NBC reporter named Ayman Mohyeldin went so far as to smear Kyle as a racist serial killer.
Who knew America still made men like Chris Kyle? Well, there are plenty of them. Unfortunately, in order to hide their own shame in themselves, our media and popular culture either ignore or defame them.  Not Eastwood, though, and God bless him for it.

  1. Team America: World Police (2004)
The left only pretends to laugh.
1118574600alec_baldwin
While watching “Team America,”in order to keep a smile on their bitter faces, Leftists go to their inner-happy place where Christians are thrown alive off of tall buildings, Obama’s face has replaced that of Jesus on the Christian cross, and everyone in America gathers at 6 a.m. for calisthenics and a gay wedding.
BONUS: Matt Damon F.A.G.

  1. Gone With the Wind (1939)
Although I’ve adopted the South as my home, I’m not a fan of the Confederacy, am relieved the North won the Civil War, and have never considered “Gone With the Wind” patriotic.
I still don’t.
Picture-1
But now that the fascist left wants to ban this 1939 masterpiece, the act of watching “Gone With the Wind” is now a patriotic.
Remember when dissent was patriotic — you know, before Barack?

Inside The Fight To Save A Beloved World War I Memorial From Demolition

Editor’s Note: Freelance war reporter Alex Quade, who usually covers U.S. Special Forces on combat missions down-range, uncovers this story of a political battle on the home front.
HONOLULU — As America celebrates the 4th of July, and the world commemorates the centennial of World War I, one U.S. state is in danger of losing a memorial to its veterans killed in action.
The city of Honolulu is considering demolishing its official memorial to the fallen of World War I and moving a portion of the memorial across the street to the site of a separate remembrance plaque. Ten thousand service members from the then-Hawaiian territories fought in the Great War; 101 were killed.
Descendants of those killed are fighting the city over the fate of the Waikiki War Memorial Natatorium. First opened in 1927, the salt water swimming pool fell into disrepair after years of neglect and was closed in 1979.
Naomi Weight Honolulu Roll Of Honor
World War I veteran descendant Naomi Weight (Photo: Screenshot/Alex Quade/The Daily Caller)
Waikiki War Memorial Natatorium Arch
Waikiki War Memorial Natatorium arch (Photo: Screenshot/Alex Quade/The Daily Caller)
Despite being listed as a “national treasure” by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and recognized by the World War I Centennial Commission and American Battle Monuments Commission as unique among our national war memorials, it is under threat by interests who want to tear it down to make way for a beach and who cite the high cost of repairing it.
Before passing away, Senator and Medal of Honor recipient Daniel Inouye even weighed in on this situation, saying: “I am fully supportive [of] current efforts to preserve, restore, and improve this historic landmark.”
This is the story behind the fight to save the memorial and honor those who served.

TIME FOR THE STATES TO DECLARE INDEPENDENCE FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

“Take this Supreme Court decision and shove it.”

new Rasmussen Poll indicates that a growing number of Americans want state governments to tell the Supreme Court to get out of the business of rewriting laws and telling American citizens how to live their lives.
In a new poll, Rasmussen reported the percentage of Americans who want states to tell the Supreme Court it does not have the power to rewrite the Affordable Care Act or force sovereign states to authorize gay marriages has increased from 24 percent to 33 percent after last week’s Constitution-defying decisions by the court.
A closer look at the poll results indicates that popular sentiment for state defiance of the federal government extends beyond just the Supreme Court’s latest decisions.
“Only 20% [of likely voters] now consider the federal government a protector of individual liberty,” the Rasmussen Poll finds. “Sixty percent (60 %) see the government as a threat to individual liberty instead,” it adds.
“Take this regulation and shove it,” and “take this grant and shove it,” are two additional battle cries which appear to resonate with a growing popular sentiment, especially in “flyover country,” those 38 states outside the dozen in which President Obama won more than 56.2 percent of the vote in 2012.
(In descending order of support for Obama, those twelve states are: Hawaii, Vermont, New York, Rhode Island, Maryland, Massachusetts, California, Delaware, New Jersey, Connecticut, Illinois, and Maine. Arguably, three additional states where President Obama won between 54 percent and 56.2 percent of the vote in 2012 could be added to this list: Washington, Oregon, and Michigan.)
One hundred and fifty years after the end of the Civil War, it is becoming increasingly clear that there are two Americas—one where the principles of constitutionally limited government and individual liberty are still revered, the other where statism and the trampling of individual rights are on the rise.
The Tea Party movement arose in 2009 to restore those principles of constitutionally-limited government. But despite electoral victories that placed Republicans in control of the House of Representatives in 2010, and the Senate in 2014, it is undeniable that the Republican establishment those elections empowered is instead aligned with the forces of statism.
The majority of the members of the Supreme Court itself are also clearly part of the “elitist” camp of anti-constitutionalists. As Breitbart’s Thomas Williams noted, and Justice Scalia himself pointed out in his scathing dissent in the gay marriage decision, not a single member of the nine member court is of the Protestant faith. Not a single member has graduated from a law school other than Harvard, Yale, or Columbia. Nor has a single member done anything other than practice some version of corporate law with “big law” firms, sit on a federal court, work for the federal government, or work in left-wing academia.
With the entire apparatus of the federal government now aligned against constitutionally limited government, some traditionalists have given themselves over to despair and defeatism. That negative view, however, fails to understand the solution provided to usurpations of power by the central government found within the Constitution itself, with origins in the Declaration of Independence, whose signing on July 4, 1776 we celebrate today.
As Rasmussen Reports noted, “The Declaration of Independence, the foundational document that Americans honor on the Fourth of July, says that governments derive their authority from the consent of the governed, but just 25% believe that to be true of the federal government today.”
Even more significantly, however, the recent Supreme Court decisions are a complete rejection of the concepts of state sovereignty articulated in the 10th amendment, the last element of the Bill of Rights, the promise of whose passage by the First Congress was key to the ratification of the Constitution.
The 10th amendment, ratified along with the other nine amendments of the Bill of Rights on December 15, 1791, reads as follows:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
The concept of popular resistance to the unconstitutional encroachment of the federal government on the rights of individuals and states has been gaining momentum over the past several years.
Conservative radio host Mark Levin, for instance, has advocated on behalf of an Article V Convention of the States to propose new amendments to the Constitution for ratification by the states that would limit federal powers.
Conservative author and intellectual leader Charles Murray has also advocated for a type of civil disobedience to resist unlawful federal regulations through the use of well funded legal challenges to the most egregious of those regulations.
Both concepts have merit, but ultimately lack the power and effective counter-attack available through the simple mechanism offered by the 10th amendment—widespread resistance to federal overreaches by the state governments themselves.
Bolder, constitutionally based resistance at the state level, is a practical and viable remedy, one that already has broad popular support among conservatives.
As Rasmussen Reports noted:
[T]he voters who feel strongest about overriding the federal courts – Republicans and conservatives – are those who traditionally have been the most supportive of the Constitution and separation of powers. During the Obama years, however, these voters have become increasingly suspicious and even hostile toward the federal government.
Fifty percent (50%) of GOP voters now believe states should have the right to ignore federal court rulings, compared to just 22% of Democrats and 30% of voters not affiliated with either major party. Interestingly, this represents a noticeable rise in support among all three groups.
Fifty percent (50%) of conservative voters share this view, but just 27% of moderates and 15% of liberals agree.
Widespread resistance at the state level, however, will require two elements: strong governors and strong state legislatures willing to vigorously assert their 10th amendment rights.
At the local level, we’ve already seen the first indications that a movement may be afoot. In Tennessee, for example, the entire Decatur County Clerk’s Office resigned rather than enforce the recent gay marriage decision announced by the Supreme Court.
Isolated pockets of resistance are springing up around the country.
And yet, even among “The Great 38 States”—flyover country where President Obama either lost or won less than 56.2 percent of the vote in the 2012 election—leadership at the executive level is lacking.
The next electoral battle for the preservation of the constitutional republic will be fought not only for the highest office of the executive branch in 2016—it will also be fought in the gubernatorial races of those “Great 38 States” where the vast majority of voters still believe in America, and still believe in constitutionally limited government.
Freedom of the individual states from the usurpations of the federal government does not mean secession from the constitutional republic. It is, instead, the surest realistic mechanism that remains to preserve the constitutional republic.
By limiting the role of the federal government to the exercise of that very narrow set of specifically “enumerated powers” ascribed to it in the Constitution, state governments can guarantee that our constitutional republic will continue to flourish for generations to come.
The alternative is a constitutional republic in name only, a dystopian oligarchy where words have no meaning, right is wrong, good is bad, truth is deception, and the rule of law is invented anew each day by the ruling class of federal royalty.
As for that dirty dozen of liberal blue states, like California, New York, and Massachusetts? Let them continue on their path of reckless spending and experience the fate of modern Greece.
Meanwhile, the rest of us can continue to choose liberty.

What Is Proud American?



FNC
You’re a proud American … we’re all proud Americans. Proud American is an call to action – and invitation – by Fox News to all its loyal viewers to celebrate our nation and what makes us proud to be Americans. Proud American showcases the very best of our country - from salutes to our military veterans and those currently serving overseas, to profiles of our brave men and women in law enforcement, to simple acts of kindness, generosity and patriotism in our community.
So, let’s share our pride! Tune in to Fox News and look for specialProud American features on all our programming from now through July 4.  Show us how proud of an American you are! Share your videos, pictures, tributes and shoutouts on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, using #ProudAmerican.
Use #ProudAmerican and everyone will get to see that you are a very Proud American right here!

Support Grows for States to Ignore the Federal Courts

Following last week’s controversial U.S. Supreme Court rulings on Obamacare and gay marriage, voters believe more strongly that individual states should have the right to turn their backs on the federal courts.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 33% of Likely U.S. Voters now believe that states should have the right to ignore federal court rulings if their elected officials agree with them. That’s up nine points from 24% when we first asked this question in February.  Just over half (52%) disagree, down from 58% in the earlier survey. Fifteen percent (15%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Perhaps even more disturbing is that the voters who feel strongest about overriding the federal courts – Republicans and conservatives - are those who traditionally have been the most supportive of the Constitution and separation of powers. During the Obama years, however, these voters have become increasingly suspicious and even hostile toward the federal government.

Fifty percent (50%) of GOP voters now believe states should have the right to ignore federal court rulings, compared to just 22% of Democrats and 30% of voters not affiliated with either major party. Interestingly, this represents a noticeable rise in support among all three groups.

Fifty percent (50%) of conservative voters share this view, but just 27% of moderates and 15% of liberals agree.


(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.

The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on June 30-July 1, 2015 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

Earlier this year, 26% of voters told Rasmussen Reports that President Obama should have the right to ignore federal court rulings if they are standing in the way of actions he feels are important for the country. Forty-three percent (43%) of Democrats shared this belief, while 81% of Republicans and 67% of unaffiliated voters disagreed.

The more a voter approves of Obama’s performance, the more likely he or she is to say that states should not have the right to ignore the federal courts.

Higher income voters are more likely to oppose letting states ignore federal court rulings than those who earn less.

Support for ignoring the federal courts is up among most demographic groups, however.

Most voters have long believed that the Supreme Court justices have their own political agenda, and they still tend to feel that that agenda is more liberal than conservative.

A plurality (47%) of voters continues to believe the federal government has too much influence over state governments, and 54% think states should have the right to opt out of federal government programs that they don’t agree with.  Even more (61%) think states should have the right to opt out of federally mandated programs if the federal government doesn’t help pay for them.

The Declaration of Independence, the foundational document that Americans honor on the Fourth of July, says that governments derive their authority from the consent of the governed, but just 25% believe that to be true of the federal government today.

Only 20% now consider the federal government a protector of individual liberty.  Sixty percent (60%) see the government as a threat to individual liberty instead.

Additional information from this survey and a full demographic breakdown are available to Platinum Members only. 

Please sign up for the Rasmussen Reports daily e-mail update (it’s free) or follow us on Twitter or Facebook. Let us keep you up to date with the latest public opinion news.


[VIDEO] Condoleezza Rice and violinist Jenny Oaks Baker perform ‘Amazing Grace’

video posted to YouTube Thursday shows former secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on piano accompanying Utah violinist Jenny Oaks Baker in a spectacular rendition of “Amazing Grace.

The song is for sale on iTunes. According to Fox 13 Salt Lake City, the money raised by sales of the tune will go to the Wounded Warrior Project

“It was such a joy and a privilege to perform ‘Amazing Grace’ with Dr. Rice,” Baker explained of the collaboration. “It is my favorite song to perform and I am thrilled that we are able to pay tribute to all the soldiers who have given so much for America.”

Take a listen below.


Another Independence Day Star Is Coming Back For The Sequel

Independence Day 2

Vivica A. Fox will reprise her role as Jasmine in the sequel, director Roland Emmerich announced. The previously announced Jessie Usher (Survivor's Remorse) will play her son. Also in talks to join the second movie: Charlotte Gainsbourg (Nymphomaniac). Original stars Jeff Goldblum and Bill Pullman will also be back, joined by new star Liam Hemsworth. See the tweet below. [Digital Spy]
Tweet text

Popular Posts