How not to have Miranda Rights if you are a Citizen

A year ago Time Magazine published an article "Tears Of A Clown" about how people like Glenn Beck were crazy for saying this nation was headed towards Fascism.

Around that same time, Homeland Security was issuing a memo saying that Tea Party people were thought of as Terrorists.

Our new Supreme Court Appointee and Attorney General Eric Holder has stated that IF a citizen is thought of as being a Terrorist they do not have to be read their Miranda Rights. The Obama Administration has stated that people have no 1st Amendment Rights when it comes to Cell Phones and EMail. No warrant necessary for someone to "look into" an American Citizens Cell Phone Log or EMails. Another point is that with no Miranda Rights, said citizen can be held (interrogated) indefinitely without charges.

Is it not interesting how we have had The Fort Hood shooter (Muslim Extremist), The Christmas Bomber (Muslim Terrorist), the Times Square Bomber (Muslim Extremist), Jihad Jane (Muslim Convert Extremist) and the University of Alabama Shooter (Former Obama Campaign Chair and Left Wing Extremist) just in the past year. We are told by the President and Attorney General not to "rush to conclusions" regarding these people.

Yet Tea Party people are considered Domestic Terrorists. Since the advent of the Tea Parties there has yet to be a single act of violence recorded either on audio or video. There is audio and video of people being beaten at Tea Party protests by SEIU Purple Shirts. But those were the "evil" Tea Party people being beaten and called the "N" word by the SEIU Purple Shirts.

Consider that this tactic began under President Clinton with the supposed "Malitias" like Randy Weaver and Waco. Those evil "Rugged Individualists" were in the headlines while the bombings of the U.S.S. Cole were quickly removed from the front page. Did anyone hear of these "Malitias" until President Obama, Attorney General Holder (who was Janet Reno's second in command and ordered Weaver's wife to be shot through the front door while nursing her baby to her breast) once again brought them to the forefront.

Well, I'm afraid I get it. Hope you do, too. I pledge non-violence ala Martin Luther King, but unfortunately, the other side has shown that human life is cheap and people are expendable for the greater Party Good.

The Gulf Oil Spill In Perspective

The Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico has made headlines, been talked about and reviled by all the "talking heads" now for over a week. I find it strange how the reporting has gone for a few reasons.

1) Isn't it strange how this occurred right after President Sotero.. I mean President Obama said drilling was okay.
2) How did this happen? I have seen nothing regarding an investigation as to the cause of this explosion and subsequent disaster. Everytime someone tries to bring it up the subject is changed to the oil spill itself.
3) Follow the money time. This particular Oil Rig was found to be "Unsafe" in 2007 under President Bush. Just when it was to be shut down, numerous prominent Democrats intervened for British Petroleum to "give it a break, it can be fixed". Once again in 2009 the same rig was found to be "Unsafe". This time it is President Sotero....I mean President Obama's regime and this problem is swept under the rug. Why? Could it be the more than $16 million in Campaign Contributions given to Barry....I mean Barak?

Now this President wants once again to halt all U.S. drilling in the Gulf. Nevermind that BP is a British Company and in exchange for ?favors? China, Vietnam and Venezuela have Oil Rigs close to that one i the Gulf, along with numerous rigs just outside the 3 mile limit. Interesting, no?

Now, let's look at this "unprecedented" disaster as it has been called. From none other than the New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/04/us/04enviro.html

"The ruptured well, currently pouring an estimated 210,000 gallons of oil a day into the gulf, could flow for years and still not begin to approach the 36 billion gallons of oil spilled by retreating Iraqi forces when they left Kuwait in 1991. It is not yet close to the magnitude of the Ixtoc I blowout in the Bay of Campeche in Mexico in 1979, which spilled an estimated 140 million gallons of crude before the gusher could be stopped.

And it will have to get much worse before it approaches the impact of the Exxon Valdez accident of 1989, which contaminated 1,300 miles of largely untouched shoreline and killed tens of thousands of seabirds, otters and seals along with 250 eagles and 22 killer whales."

Please understand, I am not making light of this. I am just wondering if this comes under Rahm Imanuel's statement of "no crisis go unused" to push the Socialist Political Agenda of this Administration.

Another point, lest we forget;

The ruptured well, currently pouring an estimated 210,000 gallons of oil a day into the gulf, could flow for years and still not begin to approach the 36 billion gallons of oil spilled by retreating Iraqi forces when they left Kuwait in 1991.

As we watch the disaster in the Gulf, it’s important to remember that the biggest oil spill in the history of man was not caused by an evil oil company trying to cut corners for profit. It was created by the dictator that the left tried to stop Bush from removing from power. In fact, the current oil spill would have to continue, every day, for about 470 years before it would reach the levels of Saddam’s intentional spill.

This isn’t entirely shocking considering that according to the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, “natural oil seeps contribute the highest amount of oil to the marine environment, accounting for 46 per cent of the annual load to the world’s oceans.”

This reaction by the Administration to this particular spill, the timing of it and the fact that other countries are still drilling nearby just makes me wonder.