June 5, 2013


Instead of showing endless loops of IRS employees wasting taxpayer dollars line-dancing — Breaking news: Government employees waste millions of your dollars every single day! — I think it would be more useful for the public to hear a few crucial facts about the exploding scandal at the Internal Revenue Service.

At Tuesday’s congressional hearings on the IRS, witnesses provided shocking details about the agency’s abuse of conservative groups.

The IRS leaked the donor list of The National Organization for Marriage to their political opponents, the pro-gay-marriage Human Rights Campaign. This is not idle speculation: The documents had an internal IRS stamp on them. The list of names was then published on a number of liberal websites and NOM’s donors were harassed.

The IRS demanded that all members of the Coalition for Life of Iowa swear under penalty of perjury that they wouldn’t pray, picket or protest outside of Planned Parenthood. They were also asked to provide details of their prayer meetings.

Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash. — who was ordered by the D.C. Circuit Court to pay more than $1 million to John Boehner in 2008 for the sleazy maneuver of publishing an illegally taped private conversation — blamed the conservative groups themselves. “Each of your groups was highly political,” he lectured them, noting that they wouldn’t have been asked any questions if they hadn’t requested tax-exempt status.

Even a fair-minded person — not to be confused with Jim McDermott — might hear about the IRS’ harassment of groups with “tea party,” “patriot” or “liberty” in their names and think: “How do we know the IRS wasn’t equally hard on left-wing groups?”

What might be more helpful than clips of IRS staff line-dancing would be for reporters, say at Fox News, to mention a few examples of the wildly partisan left-wing groups that the IRS has certified as tax-exempt.
Among the many left-wing groups with tax-exempt status are:

— ACORN (now renamed as other organizations, but all still tax-exempt), “community organizers” who engage in profanity-laced protests at private homes, dump garbage in front of public buildings and disrupt bankers’ dinners in order to get more people on welfare in order to destroy the capitalist system and incite revolution;

— Occupy Wall Street, which — in its first month alone — was responsible for more than a dozen sexual assaults; at least half a dozen deaths by overdose, suicide or murder; and millions of dollars in property damage;

— Media Matters for America, a media “watchdog” group that has never noticed one iota of pro-Obama bias in the media;

—, which ran ads comparing Bush to Hitler under its 501(c)(4) arm;

— The Center for American Progress, an auxiliary of the Democratic National Committee funded by George Soros and staffed by former Clinton and Obama aides to promote the Democratic agenda;

— The Tides Foundation, which funnels money to communist and terrorist-supporting organizations;

— The Ford Foundation, which has never found a criminal law that isn’t “racist.”

These groups are regarded by the IRS as nonpartisan community groups, merely educational, while dozens of patriotic, constitutional, Christian or tea party groups are still waiting for their tax exemptions.

That’s to say nothing of Planned Parenthood, PBS and innumerable other Democratic front-groups that not only have tax exemptions, but get direct funding from the government.

By contrast, the conservative groups being raked over the coals by the IRS actually were nonpartisan. The tea party forced sitting Republican senators off the ticket in Alaska and Indiana, and toppled “establishment” Republicans in Utah, Delaware, Nevada, Florida and Texas. Far from being a secretly pro-Republican group, the tea party has been a nightmare for Republicans.

Show me one instance where the Center for American Progress was more of a problem for Democrats than Republicans.

It is obviously in the interest of the left to show us liberal groups also harassed by the IRS, so it’s striking that they haven’t been able to produce one yet.

Instead, they hearken back to the Bush years to claim that the IRS once audited the NAACP, which is treated as ipso facto political harassment.

First of all, the NAACP doesn’t exactly have a sterling record of rectitude when it comes to organization funds. In the 1990s, the NAACP used tax-exempt contributions to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars of hush money to the mistress of then-executive director Benjamin F. Chavis Jr. — as detailed in enraged columns by Carl Rowan at the time.

Find a tea party organization that’s done that, and we’ll understand the IRS conducting a three-year proctology exam on the group.

Second, the Bush-era audit of the NAACP was prompted by a blindingly partisan speech given by NAACP chairman Julian Bond at an organization meeting in Philadelphia in July 2004. Bond attacked a slew of elected Republicans by name, denouncing the entire party as one whose “idea of equal rights is the American flag and Confederate swastika flying side by side.”

That’s what we call “black-letter law” on improper activity for a tax-exempt organization. As a 501(c)(3) group, the NAACP is prohibited from supporting or opposing any candidate for elective office.

The NAACP responded to the IRS’ letter by screaming from the rooftops that it was political payback. Consequently, Bush’s IRS commissioner requested that Treasury’s inspector general investigate the IRS’ tax-exempt unit for political bias. The IG’s report found no politics in the NAACP audit and — to the contrary — that more “pro-Republican” groups (18) than “pro-Democratic” groups (12) had been audited.

Nonetheless, the NAACP simply refused to cooperate with the IRS. There was nothing the Bush administration could do. No Republican was going to allow the NAACP’s tax-exempt status to be revoked on its watch. Two years later, the IRS simply issued a letter clearing the group.

Today, the NAACP openly engages in partisan activity, such as a current weeks-long protest of Republican legislators in North Carolina.

Finally, a tip to the Democrats trying to defend the IRS: As a devoted true-crime TV viewer, I can tell you that when you’re caught red-handed, it’s never a good defense to say, “Why would I be so stupid to kill my wife right after taking out a huge life insurance policy on her?”

You were that stupid and you got caught.


Obama in 2007: No More Spying on Citizens Not Suspected of a Crime

Obama in 2007: No More Spying on Citizens Not Suspected of a Crime

In August 2007 Senator Obama gave a foreign policy speech at the Woodrow Wilson Center in which he mapped out a five point plan for a new approach to foreign policy. Part of that approach was a promise to reign in government surveillance of “citizens who are not suspected of a crime.”

This Administration also puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we demand. I will provide our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our Constitution and our freedom.

That means no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens. No more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime. No more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war. No more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient. That is not who we are. And it is not what is necessary to defeat the terrorists. The FISA court works. The separation of powers works. Our Constitution works. We will again set an example for the world that the law is not subject to the whims of stubborn rulers, and that justice is not arbitrary.

This Administration acts like violating civil liberties is the way to enhance our security. It is not.

Beware False Prophets
Obama promised there would be “No more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime.” He went on to say “The FISA court works.”
Yesterday, the Guardian revealed a FISA court order mandating that Verizon hand over data on all phone calls inside the United States to the NSA. On one hand Obama seems to have been true to his word. Rather than using national security letters his FBI went through the FISA court.
But so what? What is the difference if, ultimately, the government is still collecting reams of data “on citizens who are not suspected of a crime.” Not just citizens plural but, apparently, every individual within America’s borders who has a phone (the surveillance is not limited to Verizon).
Does the FISA court order include calls made by members of Congress and the Supreme Court? Attorney General Holder refused to say in open testimony today.
Candidate Obama berated his predecessor not just over the process by which the information was obtained but over the government’s willingness to transgress the “civil liberties” of citizens in general. It was perhaps the one area in which candidate Obama seemed cognizant of the inherent dangers of big government run amok. The President should share with the American people what caused his obvious change of heart. One way or another it would be enlightening.


Class Assignment

  America’s Direction

Is America headed in the right direction? Wrong direction? Some right, some wrong? Write about what is right about America’s direction and what is wrong. Post your comments on the web and send me the link.

Class Assignment

Class Assignment

If you were in the White House Press Corps, what questions would you ask the President, and why? Post your 5-page essay on the web and send me the link at


‘Uhhh…Uh…Uhhh….People!’ Obama at Total Loss for Words When Staff Forgets His Speech

‘Uhhh…Uh…Uhhh….People!’ Obama at Total Loss for Words When Staff Forgets His Speech

President Obama strolled out to the podium today in San Jose, CA and was immediately at a loss for words. Not only did the President not have teleprompter, his aides forgot his speech.

“My remarks are not sitting here,” the President declared awkwardly. “I’m uhhh….people….oh goodness….uhhhh…folks are sweating back there right now.”

President Obama, who’s often mocked for an over-reliance on scripts, shifted uncomfortably smiling for several moments buying time. An aide sprinted out with a hard copy of the speech, tripping at one point, adding to the drama.


Read more:

Obama Long-Form Birth Certificate, Facts, Myths, Questions and Common Misunderstandings

Obama Long-Form Birth Certificate, Facts, Myths, Questions and Common Misunderstandings

1) The document that Obama released is his “original” long-form birth certificate.
FALSE, it is supposed to be an alleged “COPY” as indicated in the stamp text on the lower right quadrant of the document that reads, “this is a true copy or abstract.” Look up the definition of what “abstract” means.

2) Obama refused to release this or similar document for years,
a. despite over 50 lawsuits demanding it, and
b. a decorated Lt. Col. Terrance Latkin went to prison because of he questioned Obama’s eligibility to command but Obama refused then to provide it.
TRUE & TRUE. One must question the motives of a supposed President to withhold information regarding his eligibility for office for over 3 years.

3) Only shortly before the release of Obama’s document the
a. Former Hawaiian records clerk said to CNN that she had seen it, yet
b. The Governor of Hawaii, Neal Abercrombie (and friend of Obama’s family in Hawaii), stated that he had his people look for Obama’s long-form and they could NOT find it!
c. The former Elections official made a formal affidavit stating he looked for the Obama birth records and could NOT find anything, and that his superiors told them they did not exist.
TRUE, so it is even more suspicious that suddenly it then appears. So who was lying?

4) It says “Certificate of Live Birth” and not “Birth Certificate.”
TRUE, this is normal, it is what was used on the correct documents of the time period, see the comparative Nordyke Twin BCs for a day after Obama’s alleged birth date.

5) There is a page curl on the left side of the document.
TRUE, this appears on other BC “copies” from near that time period and is likely because the BCs were probably put in to a bound book in the archives. I do not consider that fact suspicious. However the shape of the curl does differ much from comparable BCs.

6) The lines in the background do not follow the curve of the left side of the document.
TRUE, However I don’t see this as a sole reason to call the document a fake, as I’d expect it to that as was supposed to be a scan that on would assume was printed on security paper. But wait, there is more…

7) The layers of the “.pdf” file of Obama’s document could be caused by scanning,
FALSE. While in some rare cases, depending on the scanning software, layering is possible. However even the layperson looking can zoom in on the image and see that the back ground changes under the main part, the large area of the “alleged” certificate. It is easy to see that it becomes more blurred and grayer, and this clearly indicates that this document was NOT scanned and simply printed on the security paper, but  IT IS in fact a layered image made on a computer. There’s more to it, but this info clears up the scanned layering argument. See image further below.

8) In one of the many layers of Obama’s document there is what looks like something was “Whited-Out”.
TRUE, another reason why the document is suspicious.

9) The lines of type near the curved edge do not seem to follow the curve.
TRUE. This seems to show that the lines of type or at least the first words appear likely to have been layered in by computer. See images further below.

10) The “M” in the time field appears to be of a different font and it’s darker.
TRUE. However, it appears to be preprinted on the other comparable BCs of that time period, but on Obama’s it does appear to be out of location. See images further below.

11) Out of alignment letters in the typing.
TRUE, but such can be common with old typewriters. This is not alone an indication of a forgery. However, this seems more pronounced in the Obama document than other BC’s, and a forger may “overdo” use such a thing to try to make a more believable look of a typed document. See images further below.

12) The lines do not all line up on the left margin like on those of the Nordyke Twins BCs and other BCs.
TRUE. This alone does not make the document a fake, but is does raise some questions. Look at the documents below, the age fields of the parents are not in line with the margin as in the other real BC for Nordyke from the next day in 1961. See images further below.

13) The “X”s in the boxes do NOT line up with the rest of the text.
TRUE, was the first to bring it up, see images below,
This occurs too often to be a typing error and likely those were filled in later.
 See image below.


nordyke birth certificate

14) The alleged birth hospital’s site mentions that it wasn’t called that back then, according to their website.
TRUE, however, the Nordyke Twins BCs, seen just above, list the same name, so it’s highly likely that the name of the birth hospital is NOT an issue.

15) The City listed says Honolulu, Oahu, and Not Honolulu, Hawaii.
TRUE. However, this would be a common error and is not reason alone for suspicion. In fact if you look at the Nordyke Twins BCs, each has it listed differently! See image above.

16) There are no baby footprints seen on the alleged birth certificates.
TRUE, some states do not or did not do that, according to comparables. Again it seems that this was not the practice then in Hawaii. The KENYAN BC that surfaced and is alleged to be Obama’s does have a footprint on it. CLICK IMAGE OR HERE FOR IMAGE of Kenyan hospital generated long-form BC.

17) His father’s race is listed as “African” but it would have been Negro back then. 
LIKELY: This is probably true, as more research is being conducted to obtain the long-form certificates to see if any others list “African” as a race back then. It is most unlikely as per the Hawaiian Government definitions of race for vital records in 1961 listed below.

“Race and color”
“Births in the United States in 1961 are classified for vital statistics into white, Negro, American Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Aleut, Eskimo, Hawaiian and Part-Hawaiian (combined), and “other nonwhite.” The category “white” includes, in addition to persons reported as “white,” those reported as Mexican or Puerto Rican. With one exception, a reported mixture of Negro with any other race is included in the Negro group; other mixed parentage is classified according to the race of the nonwhite parent and mixtures of nonwhite races to the race of the father. The exception refers to a mixture of Hawaiian and any other race, which is classified as Part-Hawaiian. In most tables a less detailed classification of “white” and “nonwhite” is used.”

above quote from =

18) The age for Obama’s father listed on Obama’s alleged certificate is “25”, yet the age on recently released immigration documents would make him “27” at the time of Obama’s birth. 
TRUE, There are extensive records released under the Freedom of information Act (FOIA), they can be viewed at. The age of Obama’s father being incorrect on the long form BC give more reason to question its authenticity, as it is the same age incorrectly published many places regarding Obama Jr.’s political career, yet we may be sure that Obama Senior’s wife would have known his age.

19) The record number on Obama’s is higher than that of both Nordyke Twins born the day after.
TRUE, this has been known since 2008 short form COLB, and it is still a good grounds to demand that the original document in Hawaii be made available for independent professional examination by various professionals as would occur with other Historical Documents. Paper Analysis, Printing ink Analysis, Writing ink Analysis, and Handwriting Analysis. Refer to images shown previously above.

20) The layers of the document reveal the last numeral “1” of the record number is of a different layer, different resolution and different pixel size.
TRUE, just zoom in on it or, better, an original of the day 1 release .pdf from 04/27/2011. Thousands of people downloaded it that day. You can view the layers using the Adobe Illustrator program. This was reported first on, This difference appears to be proof of document tampering and/or forgery, and is further grounds to demand that the original document in Hawaii be made available for independent professional examination by various professionals as would occur with other Historical Documents. Paper Analysis, Printing ink Analysis, Writing ink Analysis, and Handwriting Analysis.

21) Similar handwriting on Obama’s and the Nordyke Twins.
TRUE. This is most odd and is further grounds to demand that the original document in Hawaii be made available for independent professional examination by various professionals as would occur with other Historical Documents. Paper Analysis, Printing ink Analysis, Writing ink Analysis, and Handwriting Analysis.

22) The registrar’s signatures, when compared to another BC, do not seem to even look close.
TRUE, This was first noticed by Jim of and compared to the same name signature of another BC and results posted on that site.obama-registrar-signatures,

I found another signature for the registrar, it’s from another person’s BC, and it’s from near the same time period, and upon comparison of the registrar’s signatures (see image above), even the layperson can see the 2 signatures have several substantial differences. Look at the shape and style of the first character of both as they are drastically different. Look at the size of the loops in the “L”s, the closed loops in the “e” ‘s and how in the lower signature (real) the signer’s style has an upward lift at the end of the “L”. Also note on the real signature (upper), the pen lift at the end of the signature is to the right, on the suspect signature (lower) it curves around to the left.

So, it’s most odd and again is yet further grounds to demand that the original document in Hawaii be made available for independent professional examination by various professionals as would occur with other Historical Documents. Paper Analysis, Printing ink Analysis, Writing ink Analysis, and Handwriting Analysis.

23) “Stanley” in parenthesis is handwritten above Obama’s mother’s name.
TRUE. This doesn’t mean much, as her first name was really “Stanley,” which is typically a man’s name. She (if real) or a forgery (if faked) could have realized after the fact that they had to put in her real name. While not in itself indication of a forgery, it is a question as to the validity of the signature.

24) Snopes listed a different name for the doctor than that shown on the BC.
TRUE. However, that seems to have been scrubbed from Snopes.

25) There is NO indication at all of any embossed “seal”.
TRUE, this is most odd as even recent COLB short forms have such a seal. It is most unlikely that Hawaii would release such an important document without an embossed seal, especially considering it will become a Historical Document someday.

26) Obama mentions and it is PUBLISHED in Barrack Obama’s book “Dreams of my Father” on page 26, “I discovered this article, folded away among my birth certificate and old vaccination forms.”
TRUE. So it is highly suspicious that Obama would not simply release that sooner when asked for it for at least 3 years, but instead he allegedly requests a recent “copy” dated April, 25th 2011! This is more reason to not trust the document that was produced.

27) The border seems to be MISSING from the Obama WH alleged long-form BC but is on other Hawaiian BCs of that time period..
TRUE. Not sure how that could be explained.

28) The commas “,” are different, and differently spaced..
TRUE. On Obama’s alleged BC, the comma after the date month, is fat and different, the comma after Wichita, is lower and too close to the “a”, and the comma after the 4 in birth date it spaced too far. Compare to other BCs this is inconsistent with known authentic BCs.

29) Time is the same on Obama WH alleged long-form BC as on the alleged Obama long-form KENYAN BC.
TRUE CLICK IMAGE OR HERE FOR IMAGE of Kenyan hospital generated long-form BC.

30) There are at least TWO (2) different pixel sizes on the document, 
TRUE, This was another discovery FIRST exclusive on 4/27/2011.
This can NOT happen on a basic scan and this is pure PROOF that the document was faked on a computer.


This is a zoom in from the original image obtained directly from the website! then saved as a .jpg and with red text added. The image is otherwise unaltered.

This difference in pixels and/or “aliasing” can also be noticed in the typewritten words, “R” in Barack, “K” in Kenya, “S” in Stanley. Aliasing” can only be done on a computer.


31) There is evidence of different type on the document. 
TRUE, look at the “ap” on “Kapiolani” the “ap” is “kerned.” Kerning is how letters are put closer together to save space.

kerning, evidence

Kerning reference & Older typewriters could only type in blocks because of the shape of the keys, so “kerning” was not possible on those, and in 1961 even the “state of the art” typewriters were ‘IBM Selectrics’ that used a swiveling ‘ball’ and not blocked keys that was just released in 1961. These were expensive  then, and most small state government agencies did not get them for many years. Typical customers of those machines were high-level newspapers and printing companies. Reference IBM archive info for 1961 but kerning was not possible even on “state of the art” machines in 1961, so therefore it was not possible to have the “ap” so close together in 1961. I mention the IBM selectric because the ball type we very accurate so out of line characters were almost impossible, and even IF they could kern then (not possible), all that would prove is that the document was typed on 2 different typewritters of which would not make any sense and again make the document even more questionable. NO TYPEWRITER CAN KERN, because the typewriter can NOT know what letters are or will be next to the letter you are typing when you type it. A word processing machine can do that, because it makes adjustments to what you have typed previously as you go. Such was NOT available in 1961. Simply put, you can NOT have so many characters out of alignment and kerning on the same line or same words if it was typed on the same machine, and again kerning was NOT possible in 1961.

Kerning was also an issue regarding the famous faked documents in regard to President George W. Bush’s military record that was faked for CBS of which eventually several CBS staff were fired and famous reporter Dan Rather was forced to retire, so do not think for a second that the mainstream media does go along with forgeries that suit their agenda. Dan Rather later stated CBS fired him over it.

32) IF Obama really was born in Hawaii as his document states then he is eligible to be President of the United States.
FALSE. Obama’s document in fact supports that he is NOT eligible because it states his father’s birthplace as Kenya, and to be required for the Office of President by the US Constitution Article II, Section I, Paragraph 5, the person MUST be a “Natural born Citizen,” who must be born on US soil by parents who are BOTH US Citizens. If Obama’s father had became a US Citizen by naturalization before Obama’s birth, then Obama (if US born) may have been eligible. However, the US Government’s own immigration file on Obama Sr. shows that not only was Obama Sr. never a US Citizen or resident, but in fact it was recommended that he be deported. Obama Sr. left the US in 1964 and never returned to the USA.

Important video:

Soldier Told Not to Read Levin, Limbaugh or Hannity in Uniform

Soldier Told Not to Read Levin, Limbaugh or Hannity in Uniform
Posted in Top Stories | 0 comments
Jun 7, 2013
By Todd Starnes
A veteran member of the U.S. Army Band said he is facing retribution and punishment from the military for having anti-Obama bumper stickers on his car, reading books written by conservative authors like Mark Levin and David Limbaugh, and serving Chick-fil-A sandwiches at his promotion party.

Master Sgt. Nathan Sommers, a 25-year Army veteran and conservative Christian based at Fort Myer in Washington, believes his outspoken opposition to gay marriage prompted higher-ups to take a closer look at his beliefs. The recipient of an Army Commendation Medal and a soloist at the funeral of former First Lady Betty Ford, Sommers said his core beliefs are enough to mark a soldier for persecution in today’s military.
“It seems like with the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell – that the Christians have been the ones who’ve had to go underground and in the closet – for fear of retaliation and reprisals,” Sommers told Fox News. “Christians feel like they can’t be forthright with their faith. They have to hide.”
Ret. Navy Commander John Bennett Wells is representing the master sergeant. He said there is no doubt in his mind that the U.S. military is discriminating against Christians – and specifically his client.
“There’s no question about it,“ Wells told Fox News. “Because he is religious, because he feels that homosexual conduct is wrong for religious reasons, he is basically being persecuted.”
Lt. Col. Justin Platt, an Army spokesman at the Pentagon released a statement to Fox News noting that the military branch cannot comment on ongoing investigations or administrative actions.
“With respect to the political activities, soldiers are expected to carry out their obligations as citizens in accordance with applicable regulations,” Platt said.
Army documents obtained by Fox News indicate Sommers was told that his actions bordered on being disrespectful to President Obama and the “slightest inference of disrespect towards superiors can have a demoralizing effect on the unit.”
“You should strive to express your opinion while being aware of the overall ramifications of your statements,” the Army noted.
Sommers’ troubles began last April when he was told to remove pro-Republican, anti-Obama bumper stickers that were on his privately owned car.
The stickers read: “Political Dissent is NOT Racism,” “NOBAMA,” NOPE2012” and “The Road to Bankruptcy is Paved with Ass-Fault.” That sticker included the image of a donkey.
His superior officer told the solider that the bumper stickers were creating “unnecessary workplace tension.”
“The types of stickers on your car were creating an atmosphere detrimental to morale and were creating unnecessary workplace tension,” the officer wrote in an Army document obtained by Fox News. “A Soldier must balance their personal feelings with the mission of the U.S. Army. Even the slightest inference of disrespect towards superiors can have a demoralizing effect on the unit.”
Attorney Wells said once he got involved, the military backed off of filing a formal reprimand.
“He’s allowed to have those bumper stickers on his car,” he said. “The DoD regulation allows it. There was nothing obscene about it.”
During the summer months, Sommers came under fire for reading the works of Mark Levin, Sean Hannity and David Limbaugh.
Sommers was reading Limbaugh’s “The Great Destroyer” backstage at a U.S. Army Band concert at the U.S. Capitol. A superior officer told him that he was causing “unit disruption” and was offending other soldiers.
“I wasn’t reading aloud,” he said. “I was just reading privately to myself. I was told they were frowning on that and they warned me that I should not be reading literature like that backstage because it was offensive.”
In another episode, he had been caught backstage reading a copy of Levin’s “Ameritopia: The Unmaking of America.”
Sommers said he was told to refrain from reading the book “while in uniform or within sight of anyone from the band.”
“This is the first time since (my superior officer) indicated I had offended others with my choice of reading material, that I was officially counseled about it,” he said. “The statement took my breath away. I was speechless.”
In spite of those incidents, the Army promoted the soldier in September to the rank of master sergeant. But the promotion would also mark the launch of an effort by the military to punish the soldier.
His promotion coincided with a controversy surrounding Chick-fil-A. The company’s president told a reporter that he was “guilty as charged” when it came to supporting traditional marriage. Gay rights activists pounced- calling for a boycott of the Christian-owned company. And some Democratic officials vowed to block Chick-fil-A from opening restaurants in their cities.
In response to that, Fox News Channel host Mike Huckabee launched a national Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day to rally support for the restaurant chain.
“I was inspired by Gov. Huckabee’s appreciation day,” Sommers told Fox News. “And since I wasn’t able to participate in the event, I decided to serve Chick-fil-A at my promotion party.”
It’s a long-standing tradition within the U.S. Army Band for promoted soldiers to host a party for their fellow troops. So the soldier decided to have Chick-fil-A cater the meal.
“My family likes Chick-fil-A and we like what they stand for,” he said. “I can make a statement and at least express a religious point of view at my promotion party – theoretically without any fear of reprisal.”
The soldier also tweeted about the party: “In honor of DADT repeal, and Obama/Holder’s refusal to enforce DOMA act, I’m serving Chick-fil-A at my MSG promo reception for Army today.”
He also tweeted to radio host Mark Levin: “@Marklevinshow ‘luv ya, Mark! Fellow Virginian & MSG, Army. Being promoted today, serving Chick-fil-A @ reception in honor of DADT repeal.”
Both tweets were cited in an official military document.
“As a Soldier you must be cognizant of the fact that your statements can be perceived by the general public and other service members to be of a nature bordering on disrespect to the President of the United States,” the document stated.
Sommers said he paid for the party with personal money, not government funds.
“I had no idea a Chick-fil-A sandwich would get me in trouble,” he said.
He was later summoned by a superior officer, who the soldier said is openly gay, and was told that unidentified individuals were offended by the tweets and some considered them to be racist.
Sommers was reprimanded, threatened with judicial action and given a bad efficiency report. An investigation was also launched.
“It’s an obvious attempt to set him up and force him out of the military,” Wells said. “They recently did an NCO evaluation that effectively torpedoed his chance at promotion and he could be forced out of the Army.”
During the course of their investigation, the military unearthed a tweet from 2010 that included a derogatory word for homosexuals. The soldier admitted that he had retweeted someone else’s original tweet.
“Lordy, Lordy, it’s faggot Tuesday. The lefty loons and Obamabots are out in full force,” the retweet read.
The soldier was hauled in to explain himself before a superior officer.
“He explained to me that homosexual Soldiers were now afraid of me,” Sommers said. “He showed me a letter from an Army Band colleague that demanded that I publicly apologize (to) the band for my statements and that I should be removed from positions of leadership and influence.”
Sommers admitted the retweet was a case of bad judgment on his part, but he said he believes that a group of homosexual soldiers are on a witch hunt and they were “attempting to dig up any negative information they could in order to silence me or ruin my career.”
Attorney Wells said Sommers is taking a “courageous course.”
“He’s not going to abandon his beliefs,” he said. “It would be easy for him to stand up and say, ‘Oh, I’ve seen the light. Yes, I was wrong – and I’m going to do everything I can to embrace the political correctness and all will be forgiven.’”
But Wells said the soldier’s “conscience won’t allow him to do that.”
Sommers said he has worked alongside gay soldiers for quite some time and does not have a problem serving with them.
“My point is everybody has a right,” he said. “Christians also have a right to express their points of view and that’s what’s being squelched here. There is no tolerance or dissent from the military’s point of view.”
The soldier fears that the military is becoming less tolerant.
“Ironically, the liberals are preaching tolerance,” he said. “They are saying, ‘We can tolerate you.’ But if you have a certain belief that doesn’t align with what the military wants you to believe – particularly religious beliefs – you’re no longer welcome in the U.S. military.”
Attorney Wells said his client is not going down without a fight – and they are vowing to file a federal lawsuit and reach out to Congress if necessary.
Ron Crews, executive director of the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty said stories like this are becoming commonplace in the military post-repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.
“These stories are the ones that have not been told – about some of the more subtle ramifications of the repeal of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy,” he said.
One service member received a severe reprimand for expressing his faith’s religious position about homosexuality in a personal religious blog.
A chaplain was relieved of his command over a military chapel because he could not allow same-sex weddings to take place in the chapel.
And a chaplain who asked senior military officers whether religious liberty would be protected in the wake of the repeal of the law against open homosexual behavior in the military was told to “get in line” or resign.
Crews said they are sharing these stories to let other service members know there is a place to get help. He said Chaplain Alliance publishes a religious liberty palm card – explaining constitutionally protected liberties to service members.
“If you believe your religious liberties have been violated, here’s what you can do,” he said. “We will see that you get the help that you need.”
And what about Sommers?
“We’re going to stand with this soldier who did nothing wrong,” Crews said. “There is nothing wrong in saying he wants to celebrate DOMA – which happens to be federal law.
UPDATE: After this story was published, the Military District of Washington issued the following statement:
A public affairs spokesperson said Sommers did have the right to display a political sticker on his private vehicle.
“Accordingly, the Soldier was not prohibited from displaying a political bumper sticker. Instead, the Soldier’s supervisor discussed the appropriateness of the bumper stickers with him and potential perceptions of others in light of the regulatory guidance.”
“The Soldier is not, and never has been, “facing retribution and punishment from the military for having anti-Obama bumper stickers on his car, reading books written by conservative authors like Mark Levin and David Limbaugh, and serving Chick-fil-A sandwiches at his promotion party,” the spokesperson added.

Dictators Show Contempt for Rights

Fourth Amendment


Obama Dictatory

Obama Calls Reports On U.S. Government Surveillance ‘Hype’



Rubber Stamp Court

(“Government, say the word ‘terrorist’ and we will swoon at your feet.”)

Current membership, collecting government salaries as rubber stampers
Judge                                   Judicial district Date appointed                         Term expiry
Reggie Walton (presiding) District of Columbia May 19, 2007 May 18, 2014
Rosemary M. Collyer District of Columbia March 8, 2013 March 7, 2020
Raymond J. Dearie Eastern District of New York July 2, 2012 July 1, 2019
Claire Eagan Northern District of of Oklahoma February 13, 2013 May 18, 2019
Martin L.C. Feldman Eastern District of Louisiana May 19, 2010 May 18, 2017
Thomas Hogan District of Columbia May 18, 2009 May 18, 2016
Mary A. McLaughlin Eastern District of Pennsylvania May 18, 2008 May 18, 2015
Michael W. Mosman District of Oregon May 4, 2013 May 3, 2020
F. Dennis Saylor IV District of Massachusetts May 19, 2011 May 18, 2018
Susan Webber Wright Eastern District of Arkansas May 18, 2009 May 18, 2016
James Zagel Northern District of Illinois May 18, 2008 May 18, 2015