Aaron Miller Get’s CD1 GOP Endorsement, Will Run Against Tim Walz

by Jeremy Griffith
The American Millennium Online

Aaron Miller gets GOP nod. -source: Aaron Miller for Congress website

Aaron Miller gets GOP nod. -source: Aaron Miller for Congress website

It was a sad and rewarding day at the First Congressional District (CD1) Saturday April 5; sad because two contenders for the GOP endorsement were pealed away and a third strong candidate, Aaron Miller, emerged victorious. Now the real fight begins and Rep. Tim Walz-DFL is serious jeopardy coming from another military veteran.


The good thing about this weekend there at Southwest Middle School in Albert Lea was there was a great contest between three strong conservative Republican candidates, Mike Benson, the former State Representative, Jim Hagedorn, and Aaron Miller. After two ballots, Mike, for whom I have all the respect in the world, bowed out. On the third ballot Jim followed suit, even though Aaron didn’t have quite enough votes to carry the day. After that the seated delegates in the hall voted unanimously to give the endorsement to Miller.


Now a word about Benson and Hagedorn. These are two scrappy, respectable, honorable men who took the fight to Tim Walz who has a horrible legislative record. I like Mike because when I was going through my masters program in New Media Journalism, he was a wealth of knowledge and helped my build my final project around the failed Voter ID law amendment that he co-authored. We lost that fight, but the struggle for voter integrity lives on and Mike and State Senator Carla Nelson and others were warrior leaders fighting that fight, and I am so grateful for Mike’s assistance. He gave a concession speech Saturday after the third ballot that was so classy that I was in tears. They don’t make them like that any more. Thank you Rep. Benson for fighting for us here in Minnesota.


Now Jim Hagedorn was a Washington bureaucrat who was also the son of a well known congressman. Despite being an insider in the Washington beltway, which I  think hurt him in the eyes of some, he actually got legislation passed in his tenure there that reduced his agency’s budget and return substantial funds back to the taxpayer. I liked the happy warrior fight in Jim Hagedorn. He’s run twice now and he is a great debater and is always willing to take shots at the enemy. His quick wit is cutting and he get’s right to the heart of the matter. Despite that, he also was a very honorable soul who lived by the Ronald Reagan mantra, “thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican”. At the Olmsted County convention last month as I entered the Byron High School, I saw Jim Hagedorn and Mike Benson standing side by side campaigning together and handing out literature. I commented on this to Hagedorn when I said, “that’s neat! Campaigning right along with the enemy Jim?” To which Hagedorn replied, nodding at Benson, “That’s not an enemy, that’s just a competitor!”


I cast a ballot for each one of these men in turn as my duty as a seated alternate and I was saddened when I realized that both of my candidates lost. But that is politics and its now time to set our sights on the future and support the winner, a strong candidate in his own right.


Aaron Miller emerged the victor of that contest and deserves a look. He is a businessman, a family man and a 20 plus year veteran of the Army Reserve, having attained the rank of Sergeant Major, a capstone in any military career. Anyone who attains that rank, the highest pay grade of the enlisted grades, has been vetted by his peers and superiors to rise to that level and that is significant. He has significant experience in overseas deployments, progressed through the toughest leadership training in the world and has led his fellow Soldiers in combat.


Tim Walz, our current Representative in Congress, was also a Sergeant Major, briefly. He had the chance to serve in combat, but chose instead to occupy a post in the relative safety of Europe. We honor his service as a National Guard Soldier, in the very same division that I served, The 34th Infantry Division. But what we don’t appreciate is his record of service since then as a representative in Congress. More on that in a minute. With Aaron Miller as his challenger this time, Walz cannot run on his experience in the military. While impressive, it doesn’t compare to that of Sergeant Major Miller, who was a Civil Affairs background and multiple deployments in the dangerous combat zones of the Middle East. A garrison Sergeant Major simple doesn’t have the chops in my view to test well against a peer who actually led troops in theater. Period.


Not that people on the Democrat side really care about that. Walz’s military credentials were only useful in pulling away center left Democrats and independents who prefer a moderate candidate with a history of service. It does nothing for the far left radicals that is Walz’s real base.


Unlike Walz, Miller appears to be a strong conservative who better represents the values of southern Minnesotans of the First District. Walz likes to claim the moniker of the Moderate from Mankato, but he is far from it. Every opportunity he has, he has voted for the far left agenda, voting in lockstep with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.


Let’s take a look at some of his votes recently. Walz says he is a veteran for veterans. But when it comes to veteran’s issues, his votes actually hurt. For example, when the sequester hit and the democrats partially shut down the government, full-time Army National Guard and Reserve Soldiers, without whom those reserve components would not run as sufficiently, were required to go to work for a month and not get paid. Republicans put together legislation that would pay those soldiers after the fact. Tim Walz voted against this bill.


Tim Walz also voted for the most recent budget, so that finally the democrats can be on record doing their jobs and passing a budget. But, that budget cut veteran’s benefits of retirees and medical retirees by 1 percent. Tim Walz signed on to that budget even though it hurts veterans.


And finally, Tim Walz has voted for the disastrous Affordable Health Care Act known as Obamacare that we know now hurts everyone across the board. Instead of extending coverage to the uninsured, it actually kicked the individually insured folks off their plans and forced them to get a more expensive plan from the government. This bill has been adjusted numerous times, contrary to the constitution, by the Executive Branch so that it lessons the pain on certain constituents during the election cycle so that it no longer resembles the bill as it was originally passed by congress.


Tim Walz owns this failure. He signed onto it and he owns it and that and many other reasons makes him vulnerable to a GOP challenger.


Aaron Miller during his acceptance speech following his endorsement said, “Someone said we should return Tim Walz to academia! Let’s not! Let’s just send him off to retirement where he can’t do any more damage!”


I agree! That’s why I think we should send Aaron Miller to congress this November and will do everything I can to support his candidacy!


Learn more about Tim Walz’s votes here.


Find out how you can support Aaron Miller here.

American Millennium creator Jeremy Griffith on the steps inside the Minnesota capitol in St. Paul. Griffith is a veteran of the Iraq war and part-time blogger. All opinions presented here are his own.

American Millennium creator Jeremy Griffith on the steps inside the Minnesota capitol in St. Paul. Griffith is a veteran of the Iraq war and part-time blogger. All opinions presented here are his own.

Diane Feinstein Can’t Keep Her Hands of My $5 Blog!

by Jeremy Griffith
The American Millennium

Diane Feinstein-D California, known for her obsessive pursuit to rid America of guns, has also set her sights on bloggers and amateur journalists. She along with Chuck Schumer support a Journalism Shield Law that would cover “professional” Journalists from having to reveal confidential sources but would not cover those of us who use the Internet to express our First Amendment Rights.


Her comments before a committee in congress the other day were chilling. In her view, special protection should not be conferred to anyone with a just a high school education and a $5 blog, but to regular journalists who earn a living writing for government approved news sources. What?! What did you say Diane, you fruitbat!?


You see, a proposed law would offer protection for journalists who quote anonymous sources so that a judge cannot demand that that journalist’s source be revealed in a court. That gives the government-approved journalist the freedom to write what they wish regarding some backwoods freedom party in Montana or Arizona or anywhere Liberals think of as remote and stockpile weapons and hand out copies of the constitution.


But If someone like you are me want to write a story using a confidential source about a politician who is benefiting from insider trading, or attempting to curtail our constitutional rights, or take away our guns, that blogger would be in trouble. Under the proposed shield law the blogger has no protection and can be hauled in front of the court to reveal their confidential source, also known as a whistleblower. If the citizen journalist reveals his source, that source can now become a target for scrutiny by the IRS, DHS and any other alphabet soup government agency the big government types want to throw at them as punishment for standing up to the government elites.


If that blogger or citizen journalist defies the court and does not reveal their sources, they open themselves up to contempt of court charges and can be thrown in jail. Their reputations can be then destroyed by the IRS, DHS and the rest of the alphabet soup agencies.


This is by design. Diane Feinstein, a congresswoman, has made a career out of eliminating rights of the average American and consolidating power in Washington among a few political elites. She will use a tragedy like a school shooting in Connecticut to grab all the firearms from law-abiding citizens, making the rest of us defenseless, and then she’ll co-author laws aimed and diminishing our First Amendment Rights to publically criticize public servants like her.


Diane should be ashamed of her self. The Internet is one of the greatest inventions ever, thank you Al Gore. It allows all of us to make our opinions known to the world for very little money. I can use my Facebook, Twitter, Instagram or any other social media platform to share my viewpoint of the world around me. If I see a police officer beating a woman at a protest rally, I can instantly post photos or video on the Internet with my smart phone. If a politician says something ridiculous in a public forum, zap, it’s on my wall. If I’m really mad, like I am now, I can write an article including links and video to my blog so that all six of my readers can be made aware of what is pissing me off today. It’s totally awesome!


Here’s another benefit of the blogosphere: those of us underserved by the mainstream media can cover topics that not on the government approved story list. Here is a short list of stories covered in the blogosphere that don’t seem to get any attention from the MSM: Benghazi-gate, Fast and Furious, gun-running politicians, Obamacare Failures, the NSA spying, the TSA failure, the political gun grab, politicians and insider trading, illegal immigration and the border, the budget and budget deficits, the wars, and the list goes on.


It must be terribly frustrating for Diane and people like her to have this much freedom amongst the common people to criticize her when she has so little ability to counteract it, despite the fact that she has easy access to the mass media, and trained public affairs people on her staff. Despite this, poor poor Diane finds herself under assault for her radical leftist views and poor stewardship of the American political system. The shield law would be a good start to silence her stupid critics with their $5 blogs!


Liberals and big government types have tried this before with their so-called Fairness Doctrine aimed at silencing talk radio i.e. Rush Limbaugh. Thankfully it failed and now they are targeting you and me, who have easy access to the Internet. I have a suggestion for Diane. It’s time for you to retire. You don’t represent us; you don’t have any love for the constitution and the American People. It’s time to retire!


And if you have a blog or have a Twitter handle or a Facebook page, I would ask that you write about this topic and share it with your friends. Better yet, write directly to Diane Feinstein’s office and tell her what you think of her gun grabbing, First Amendment rights crushing governing style. Her contact info is below.


Senator Dianne Feinstein
United States Senate
331 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510

Phone: (202) 224-3841
Fax: (202) 228-3954
TTY/TDD: (202) 224-2501


Nick Bernabe who writes for The AntiMedia.org has written at length about this issue. You can access his illustrative article here. His article includes a link where you can go to sign a petition advocating against this outrageous law. I have included the link here.

Five Reasons Progressive Utopians Will Hate “Divergent”

by Jeremy Griffith
The American Millennium

Screen capture of the movie Divergent, in theaters now.

Screen capture of the movie Divergent, in theaters now.

The newest box office hit for the year is the Movie Divergent, which will have appeal to the younger set as well as those who are older, but Progressive Utopians will hate it and here are some reasons why.

The Hunger Games has new competition in the box office this year and it’s also a book-based dystopia where the rebels become the heroes and where a strong female character is the lead. I don’t know what the political affiliation is of this author, but I think that there are a great many reasons why the story has struck a chord and why progressives will hate it.

Here is the synopsis: the Earth has survived a cataclysmic global war. Only one urban center and its rural surroundings have survived: Chicago. Society has separated itself out into five basic factions; Erudite (intellectuals), Dauntless (the Brave), Abnegation (Selfless), Amity (peaceful), Candor (the Honest). At the age of 16, people are separated are allowed to choose for themselves (after an ability test) the faction they want to belong to for the rest of their lives. The main character, Betrice, later know as Tris, comes from the Abnegation faction. But after taking the test, she learns that she doesn’t fit anywhere as she has characteristics of all of the factions.

Tris is encouraged to hide this truth from her friends and family, everyone in fact and when the selection process occurs, she chooses to belong to the Dauntless. As the story progresses, the secret she hides crops up and threatens to destroy her and her family.

The plot thickens when the girl finds out that the Erudite faction is planning to usurp Abnegation as the ruling government class. They plot to use the Dauntless class to eliminate Abnegation and only the Tris and her friends can stop them.

There is a lot of action and great effects in the movie, but the story is what makes this story a hit I think. And now, my reasons why progressive Utopians will hate it, (and why it won’t be winning any awards at Oscar time!)

  1. Socialist Utopias don’t work and will ultimately fail. The government has established an artificial social order and rewards those who conform to that social order. Those who don’t are punished and live below the social order abandoned by the society that swore to help them. A few of those who “diverge” from the norm eventually find themselves fighting that society that becomes self-destructive.
  2. In a society where only an elite minority hold all the power, eventually the disenfranchised masses will rebel. Social utopians always say they are doing what they do to help society, but really it’s just about retaining power. When another group finds themselves being disenfranchised, as always happens eventually, there is a rebellion and the social order changes once again. The pendulum swings.
  3. Control of education, media and government are essential for Socialist Utopias to maintain control. Without all three, society will eventually slide into chaos. Progressives always try to quash debate. There can be no free will in society and everyone must conform to the big government ideal. In order to do that they must ostracize those who do not conform and praise those who do. Education institutions are used to brainwash the masses, media is used to put out propaganda messaging, and the boot of the military/police will quash any resistance. But when there is a chink in the armor in anyone of the three, or all at the same time, progressive societies begin to fail.
  4. Power comes from the barrel of a gun! The ultimate power of the state is maintained through the use of force. Power is taken away when the populace arms itself. This is the truth that the NRA has known all along.
  5. Free will and diversity are the signs of a healthy society, not conformity. The state without diversity is stagnating, but when there is free will, communication, knowledge and culture, society grows and thrives. Automatons who lack diversity, free will and debate, sicken and eventually dies. A society that struggles against itself will grow stronger because of that struggle, and thrive.

I haven’t read the series of books upon which this movie was based, but my interest is intrigued now, so I think I will pick it up. I recommend this movie to my friends. If you loved Hunger Games, you’ll love this one two. I honestly cannot pick which series I like the best.

Poor progressives, you’ll just have to go see Noah instead. This movie is not for you.

Watch a trailer of this exciting new movie here.

A graphic of the different factions in the new thriller movie "Divergent".

A graphic of the different factions in the new thriller movie “Divergent”.


God’s Not Dead – A Movie Review

by Jeremy Griffith
The American Millennium

godsnotdeadI saw the movie “God’s Not Dead” featuring Willie Robertson from Duck Dynasty, Kevin Sorbo from Hercules and the Christian Pop music group Newsboys; and I have comments on it. But first: a story.


I was in Egypt one time, making a climb to the top of the traditional site of Mount Sinai. (There are reasons why I don’t believe Moses received the Ten Commandments on this particular mountain in the Sinai Peninsula, but I’ll save that for another column.) The tour guide told us it would be enjoyable for us to ride 75% of the mountain climb via camel back and then climb on foot the rest of the way. “There are steps,” she said, about 250 of them. “Too steep for the camel! You just have to make it the rest of the way yourself,” she said. The ride down via camel back was not recommended, as the steep downward incline would be uncomfortable for most westerners. That’s because the saddles they put on the camel are made wide enough only for the ass of a teenaged girl and not for a full-grown man. The guide neglected to tell us that, but that is exactly what we found out.


I was traveling with three other people, two young women and an older heavy-set man. We had been together for our trip through Israel where we were with a larger group touring the Holy Land. The main body of the group departed after that trip and a smaller group stayed on to go into Egypt. I remember the girl because I had a huge crush on her. Her name was Yasmina and she was Mexican. Her younger sister was with us and sadly I don’t remember her name. Yasmina spoke great English, but her sister spoke not a word, so we didn’t talk much. The other gentleman’s name, sadly escapes me.


We started climbing the mountain at around midnight and we could not see the path, it was pitch black. For a dollar the camel drivers, Muslims all, would put us on the camels. (For a dollar more they would get us off again at the end of the ride. If you’ve ever ridden a camel you know why. In the rocky terrain of Egypt, it’s dangerous to jump off a tall camel because you risk spraining an ankle or breaking a leg. It’s too far to drop on rocky terrain.)


We mounted our camels in the dark and proceeded up the mountain. I’ve only been more scared one other time and that was when I was deployed to Iraq. Visibility was limited and that’s a good thing. Those mountain paths were dangerously narrow and there are shear drop offs. I hate to think what the climb would have been like if I had done it during the day. I lost the girls and the old man in the dark and I feared that I would not see them ever again. As it grew light towards the top of the mountain, five hours later, I dismounted the camel and started to look for them. I debated on whether or not to stay where I was or to proceed to the top where there would be more people. I decided that we all had the same goal in mind and that would be to get to the top before dawn and so I proceeded on. The so-called steps going up the last quarter of the mountain were not as advertised. They are not ‘steps’, they are rocky crags whose sole purpose is to leap out at one and snag the unwary traveler in an attempt to break a leg. I climbed carefully and eventually, I made it! It was surprisingly cold in the desert at night and I could see my breath, when I could see at all. It was very bitter. I called for Yasmina and realized that, since I did not remember the name of the younger girl, I couldn’t call for her. What would happen if I found the younger girl, but not the older sister? I was in panic mode. I hoped for the best and kept calling for Yasmina, hoping the women were together. I figured the old man was on his own. Suddenly I heard my name being called and when I turned around, Yasmina appeared out of the morning mountain mist. He sister was with her. I gave them a hug, happy to see them, and we proceeded up the top of the mountain. The old man was nowhere to be found. We hoped he just stopped along the way and we would catch up to him on our way down. We agreed to keep an eye out for him.


We hung out at the top of the mountain and waited for the sun to rise, as was the tradition and when the light touched the mountain, we drank in the view for a few moments, said a prayer and then proceeded down the mountain. It was a very moving event for all of us. We huddled there together and paid another Muslim a dollar US for the blanket he had conveniently brought for us.


On the way down, we commented to our Muslim guide if he had seen our older companion. He laughed and told us he turned around early. It turns out he was too fat for the saddle, (some saddle, it had wooden prongs front and back that dug into your flesh on both sides, keeping you in your seat better than a seatbelt. No wonder the old man turned around and demanded to be taken home! It was painful enough for me, let alone a man of his size. Ouch!) As we lamented amongst ourselves on the failure of our friend to reach the top, the Muslim guide laughed again. We inquired as to the reason to his laughter and were shocked at his response. He said, “Your spirit might be willing, but your body has to climb the mountain!” I wondered if the Muslim man who had been our guide was aware of the proximity of his comment to the comments of our Lord Jesus to the disciples as they lay sleeping in the garden of Gethsemane: “The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak!”


And now, my review of the movie. I was hoping that it would be a good, but frankly I feared a weak script and a laughable plot. Religious movies don’t always do well in the box office and I feared I would be wasting my money on a flop. The previews were good, so I was hopeful. Happily, the movie was much better than I expected it to be. The script was surprisingly solid, the story was satisfactorily dramatic to be entertaining, and the biggest surprise of all, the scriptural background of the story was solid and not overdone. I was happy to see in the credits that the movie had an apologetics research team that assisted in the script; and from what I saw, they earned their money!


The story unfolds like this: a Christian student, Joshua Wheaton, finds himself in a college philosophy class with an avowed atheist instructor, Professor Radisson played by Kevin Sorbo. The professor begins his class by declaring that God is dead, or more to the point did not ever exist in the first place, quoting the famous quote from philosopher Frederic Nietzsche who said, “God is dead”. He offers to skip an entire section of the class, which he finds tedious if all of the students will stipulate their agreement on paper that God is indeed dead. All of the students, not wanting a bad grade in a class meant to be an elective, agree: all except one, Joshua. He declares that he is not willing to sign his name to a document and that is when the gauntlet is thrown. The professor allows the student to make appearances before the class on three separate occasions to argue his case on why God in the student’s view is not dead.


This is the main thread of the story but there are about three other threads loosely tied to the main thread that ties all of the characters together. The student Joshua risks a bad grade from a hostile professor who threatens to ruin Josh’s chances of getting into law school later. Josh’s girlfriend gives him an ultimatum to stop with the challenge or she will leave him, fearing Josh will ruin both their futures. There is a Muslim girl who runs amok of her father because she is secretly a Christian. Another student from China is caught up in the story and intrigued by Josh’s refusal to back down from the professor’s challenge. All of the different threads of the movie are interesting and the writing is tight and never boring. I actually found myself enjoying it, laughing at some parts, crying at others and wanting to cheer once or twice.


Duck Dynasty reality star Willie Robertson and his wife make a cameo in the beginning of the movie and start one of the more dynamic threads of the show. A female reporter from a liberal blog confronts the couple outside their church and asks a bunch of ambush questions aimed at making the reality stars look stupid. Robertson is gracious and agrees to answer the reporter’s questions about fame, hunting and faith.  In the course of the contentious interview, Robertson makes a bold claim of faith, which is one of the moments that made me feel like cheering. He says that money and fame is fleeting, but Jesus is eternal! He says, quoting the Bible, he that declares me (Jesus) before men, I will declare before my Father (God the Father), and he who denies me before men, I will also deny before my Father. That passage is important later in the film and is part of the core messages of the film.


We’ll get back to that in a minute, but let’s continue with the rest of the reporters’ thread. She finds out later that she is diagnosed with late stage cancer and will likely die because of it. She tells her boyfriend, a successful businessman of her tragic news and he breaks up with her because of it, leaving her devastated. Oh it was good for a while, he says, but her personal issues can’t bother him, he says.


Later, as her life is falling apart, the girl buries herself in work. She plans another ambush interview, this time with Christian pop artists, the Newsboys. She pops in on them unannounced at their dressing room right before a concert. In one of the more moving moments in the film, the Newsboys find out that the contentious ambush reporter is dealing with a serious, perhaps life threatening disease. Far from casting her off as an offensive non-believer, the group offers to pray for her healing.

I won’t talk about all the different threads of the movie and how they turn out, but I will say this: it was entertaining as anything I’ve seen in film and worth viewing. I also recommend that you bring a non-believing friend. It might be a good way of putting the seed of faith in the mind of that non-believer.


I’m happy to report that the movie has breached the top five best grossing films of the weekend despite being shown only in limited a limited number of theaters. Christians who see this film will be entertained and won’t go away offended that the scriptures have been misquoted or maligned.


There is an important subtext to this movie that should not be lost on the viewer. At the end the producers reveal a number of lawsuits students and student groups have filed against their universities because of religious persecution on the behalf of faculty. Our institutions of higher learning are plagued with liberals and atheists who want to crush religious faith from their students, who will find the college atmosphere increasingly caustic as a result. College students should be encouraged by this film to stick to their faith despite the animosity they will find from fellow students and faculty.


Another review I read snarkily analyzed the reasons why this film is so successful. I feel that review, which you can read here, misses the point entirely. It’s good that the movie is in the top five, but it wasn’t made just to get revenue from a sympathetic choir. The goal of this film is not to make money, but to win souls for Christ and I feel that it has a good chance for reaching out to unbelievers who are on the fence when it comes to faith.


Life is like that mountain I climbed in Egypt. God does not dwell on the mountain, any more or less than he dwells on any mountain or valley or anywhere at all. God’s spirit, the Holy Spirit, dwells everywhere in the universe in equal measures. That’s what it means to be omnipresent. All of us on this Earth are on the mountain, making the climb. All of us are climbing for different reasons and different goals. Muslims, Christians, Atheists, Jews, Pagans, we are all there. As Christians, we like to stick with our own group. That’s ok, but we shouldn’t shy away from interacting with others on our way to the top of the mountain. Jesus gave us the great commission, which was to be prepared at any time to share the good news of our faith to anyone we interact with. We shouldn’t shut our selves away in our own little group, eyes closed and keep everyone else away. We are to interact and give a satisfactory answer to the person who questions our faith. This movie is one of many good vehicles for sharing that faith with an unbelieving world.


It’s ironic that in the Holy Places of the world, Jerusalem, Nazareth, the Holy Mountain of Moses, where ever, thousands of pilgrims gather. But in equal or greater numbers there are non-believers there too, like the Muslims I encountered in Egypt. They don’t see those places as Holy. In fact, one of my guides said he absolutely hated the mountain. Why does he stay in a place he hates? Money! The economy in that place is supported by religious tourists who spend their money on camel rides to the top of a desolate rock with a small chapel at the summit. These guides are the same people who tried to sell me a splinter of the True Cross for a dollar and to my female companions a single square of toilet paper for the same price so they could relieve themselves behind a rock. I missed an opportunity to witness to them, it occurs to me. I should have said something like this to them, “A Christian would offer the whole role for $5 and build an outhouse for the women and make a heck of a lot more money than you are making now. Let me share this secret and others and talk a little bit about why I have faith that Jesus Christ is the son of God!” Classy huh? In the end it’s not about winning over that hardhearted Muslim. Maybe you will, maybe you won’t. But perhaps you’ll plant a seed in that heart that another further down the road will later reap. You never know, but you should try regardless.


Remember that scripture that Robertson quoted, it has a role in a later scene of the movie. Josh is in a church on or near his campus praying. He has no idea what to do, he just knows he wants to make a solid case for his class on his faith and he doesn’t want to screw it up. A young pastor give him some encouragement, and gives the young student some Bible passages to read as a start. One of them is Matthew 10: 32-33 read here. Quote:

32 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.

33 But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven. KJV

The other advice the pastor gives is this, which I think is so important. He said, “don’t try too be clever.” Just deliver your argument in a thoughtful and respectful manner. You might win, you might lose, but in the end, you are just trying to plant seeds. You won’t necessarily be the one to reap what you’ve planted.


This movie is not about winning revenue; it’s about winning hearts, which is why the Hollywood box office doesn’t get it. The mindset of the big studios is like this: Oh, why do those wacky Christian Occultists love movies about their imaginary skygod friend? Maybe we should make one of those so we get them in the theaters and take their money? Why don’t they like sex and violence like the rest of us? So they’ll make disaster films like that freakshow based loosely on the Biblical Noah, staring Russell Crowe, because they want to get your money. Don’t waste your time on a $100 Million flop that insults your intelligence as well as your faith. Go see “God’s Not Dead” and bring that non-believing friend or co-worker. You might be surprised and glad that you did.

Learn more about the move “God’s Not Dead” on their website here. 

Jeremy and friends in Cairo

Jeremy and friends in Cairo

Humvee Mounted TOW Missiles could turn the tide on an overwhelming Russian Armor Force

by Jeremy Griffith
The American Millennium

Humvee mounted anti-tank TOW missile system

Humvee mounted anti-tank TOW missile system.

The defense of Ukraine depends heavily on whether or not they are able to defeat the awesome power of the Russian armor and motorized Infantry. That’s why I recommend the US support Ukrainian independence by flooding the region with Humvee mounted TOW missile teams.

The first job I received as a newly minted Second Lieutenant in the Army National Guard was as an anti-tank platoon leader. I trained as an Infantry officer at Ft. Benning Georgia, so when I came to the anti-tank company, it was kind of a disappointment. The other disappointment was that the unit was using the horribly underpowered ITV, Improved TOW Vehicle; basically a M113 Armored Personnel Carrier with a TOW Missile system mounted. It was a horrible system since the M113 was a carrier left over from the Vietnam War and horrible to keep maintained. It would have been much more effective if we had used Humvee mounted TOWs, with uparmorned or unarmored Humvees, it makes no difference.


Now I know it looks like I didn’t sell that well in the previous paragraph, but I’m telling you, it’s the TOW weapon system that is the key, not the vehicle. If you combine the TOW, (Tube Launched Optically tracked Wire guided anti-tank missiles) to the Humvee platform, you get a tank killing weapon system that is highly maneuverable and hard to defeat. I think this system would be the equivalent of Stinger Missiles against Russian Helicopters in Afghanistan.


I recommend the US send as many of these systems to Ukraine as possible and expert trainers to train the Ukrainian military in their use. In six to eight weeks of training, you could have effective TOW teams ready to defend against the tank threat of the Russians. You can augment this capability through the use of anti-tank land mines in a defense in depth against Russian tanks and armored personnel carriers.


Russian BTR 90s drive in convoy in the occupation of Crimea in Ukraine. The Russians, like the US, are far too dependent on their armored vehicles.

Russian BTR 90s drive in convoy in the occupation of Crimea in Ukraine. The Russians, like the US, are far too dependent on their armored vehicles.

Nothing would say “Fuck You” to Russia more than US Humvees with TOW missiles in the hands of Ukrainian National Guard and Army units and it would speak volumes to the former Soviet Republics who are looking to us for leadership and support.


Let a Russian BTR or BMP roll over the berm in their arrogance and find a well-trained TOW crew there waiting for them. The Russians, like the US, are way too dependent on their armored vehicles. So when they roll into a place, they in their arrogance feel like their enemies will just fold in awe of them. I want to see burning Russian tanks in the news. Let’s see how popular Vlad Putin is then, when his tanks are on fire and his men are dying on foreign shores.

The Ukraine has every right to their independence. They aren’t like the muslim countries we’ve made the mistake in supporting in the past. They’re much more sophisticated and westernized. The potential for a Jeffersonian Republic taking root there is far more likely than in any muslim country. Like Poland, Ukraine could be the new battle ground of a new cold war. The US has a huge opportunity in this moment and should take the lead.  I would gladly volunteer for the duty of training those Ukrainian soldiers. Unhappily, our president doesn’t have the brass to do it. This, is how I would defend Ukraine if I was president. We’ll see what happens.

The Author in Kuwait

The Author in Kuwait



Top 14 Scenes from Bible Retool “Son Of God”

by Jeremy Griffith
American Millennium Online

Diogo Morgado as Jesus in "Son Of God".

Diogo Morgado as Jesus in “Son Of God”.

I saw “Son Of God” in theaters this week and I liked it. I would recommend it to any of my friends. It had all the tear-jerking drama of the greatest story ever told without the gratuitous gore and blood of Mel Gibson’s “Passion of The Christ” which came out a decade ago. While the acting was solid, it wasn’t quite up to par with “Passion”, but the viewer would be engrossed in the story without being grossed out.


I have to say, I found it hard to divorce the steely-eyed film critic from the Bible believing Christian I am, but I gave it a go this last Monday. I found it hard after a while to see through tears and I wondered if it wasn’t because of my faith in the story rather than the eloquence of the drama as portrayed. As I sat in the dark watching this film, I complied a best of list of 14 or so great scenes I think made this film a good one, if not great, and I added a short list of scenes I thought were not up to par. I found myself comparing the film to Passion of the Christ from film director Mel Gibson. The acting in this film wasn’t quite as good as Passion, the cinematography was excellent, the acting was good most of the time and there were just a few scenes I felt really didn’t cut it for me. Overall I thought this film would be of interest to Christians, who would appreciate the story told without all the messy gore brought to us by Gibson’s movie. I have no idea how this film would affect non-believers who are not familiar with the story in scripture.


Compliments go to Roma Downey who was one of the producers of the film and also portrayed the mother of Jesus in the film. I thought she did an outstanding job in the film and really connected with the audience. She really did a good job convincing the audience that she could be the mother of Jesus. That is not the most important work she did for this film however; that job was the one of bringing this movie, and The Bible mini-series to completion with her husband Mark Burnett. This movie was largely the extended version of the life of Jesus as told by The Bible Series that came out last year, but it was not a rehash that I worried it would be.


There were some notable characters that deserve some credit for the drama and delivery of the film. Sebastian Knapp, who played John, was one of the more believable of the disciples who connected best with the audience. Greg Hicks, a marvelously complex actor, played the charismatic and ruthless Pontius Pilate. Darwin Shaw gets an honorable mention as Peter. Diogo Morgado plays a passably good Jesus with just a moment or two where the acting and script is weaker.


There is one last character I’d like to mention who made an impression, the individual who played Barabbas, Fraser Ayres. He has two moments in the top fourteen.


And here they are; the top fourteen moments in “Son of God”.


#14 Jesus and Barabbas: Ayres and Morgado have a moment where Barabbas and Jesus meet for the first time. There are moments in the film in which Jesus seems to stop time with his authority from God and this is one of those times. Jesus is marching into Jerusalem on a donkey when he is confronted by Barabbas; who is trying to whip up the crowd. Jesus silences Barabbas with a gesture and you can see the loud-mouthed Barabbas instantly moved to silence by the power of the Son of God. Well played on Ayers’ part.


#13 Barabbas again, I like this rather minor character. The religious leaders are trying to trap Jesus in the Temple after the Lord overturns the money tables. “What shall we do?” they ask Jesus. “Should we pay taxes to Caesar or not?” Barabbas is there trying to start a riot, yelling that the Jews should “not pay”. He’s almost gleeful as he is enticing the crowd to violence. Jesus gives his legendary answer that one should pay to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s. Barabbas leaves, visibly deflated by what Jesus has said.


#12 Jesus feeds five thousand: Jesus and the disciples disembark the boat and find a crowd waiting for them. They have no food for them, only a basket with some fish and some bread. Jesus prays and then distributes the food. The Apostle John, as surprised as the rest, has a basket in his hand that was all but empty a moment before. Suddenly it is filled and John cannot contain his happy enthusiasm. It’s a great little moment.


#11 Pilate is practicing his fencing: while not strictly in the Bible, this scene shows how charismatic and ruthless Pilate is. He is dueling a servant and deliberately wounds him in the swordplay. The audience gets a feeling that this is not a governor to be trifled with, a hands-on guy who is willing to inflict a little pain if it serves his purposes.


#10 Mary Magdalene played by Amber Rose Revah is on the boat with the disciples. Thomas the Apostle played by Matthew Gravelle is griping about something, saying in essence that Jesus’s recent actions don’t make sense to him. Mary gives him an earful on having faith. I like this moment because it shows that it just wasn’t men who had contact with Jesus, but women played a role in the early church. Revah is a firebrand who I liked very much.


#9 Mary again: Jesus has been crucified and buried. The disciples are in morning and hiding. Mary goes to the tomb alone and finds the stone that covered the tomb opening is not only rolled away, it is shattered in half. The tomb is empty except for the burial cloths. Mary is dumbfounded. Suddenly Jesus appears in the mouth of the tomb and Mary is inside the tomb looking at Jesus backlit from the sun. I like this scene because it shows Jesus in the light of life and Mary, who represents all of us, in the darkness of death inside a tomb. Well done by both actors.


#8 Thomas, played by Matthew Gravelle, is talking to Jesus at the last supper. Jesus has told the disciples that he is about to be betrayed, but he tells his followers not to fear. He is going away and his friends will follow him soon where he is going. Thomas asks, “How can we follow you to where you are going when we don’t know the way?” Jesus responds, “I am the way!” Me crying!


#7 Peter renounces Jesus: After the last supper, Jesus is talking to Peter. Peter is adamant; he says that even if all leave, Peter will follow Jesus even to the grave, he will lay down his life for him. “Will you?” says Jesus. “Before dawn you will deny me three times!” You can see the blood ebbing from Peter’s face as he turns to follow Jesus to the Garden of Gethsemane. Wow!


#6 Jesus is arrested: Jesus is about to be arrested and is kissed by his betrayer, Judas, played by Joe Wredden. A riot ensues and Peter rushes to defend Jesus, cutting off the ear of the captain of the guards. Jesus stops time again and everyone focuses on Jesus as he reprimands his disciple. “Those who take up the sword,” Jesus says, “will perish by the sword.” This is probably one of my best scenes in the movie. Well acted.


#5 John in exile: The Apostle John is one of the last disciples left alive after all of the others have died or have been murdered. He is living on an island all alone, exiled for his faith. Jesus appears to John and John is crying tears of joy. This is the moment he has waited for all his life, to see his Lord again. A visibly older and frailer John cannot believe his eyes as the Lord approaches him. Very moving.


#4 Jesus is marching his cross to the site where he is to be crucified. He stumbles and falls. His mother, played by Downey, stoops to help him and mother and son exchange glances and a few words. This is an incredibly moving moment. Not quite as strong as moments in “Passion” where Mary flashes back to Jesus’s boyhood, but still quite strong. This is one of the best moments of the film and best depicts Mary’s anguish at the event of her son’s death.


#3 Pilate and his wife: Jesus is being executed and you can see parts of his body marred by blood. The scene cuts to Pilate who is getting a massage with oil. His wife is there rebuking him for being involved in Jesus’s death. This scene is very well done. Now Jesus is suffering, but wait, it will be these two who will suffer later. Very well done.


#2 The Sea of Galilee as Jesus calms the storm: the disciples are in the boat and Jesus is not with them. This scene combines two separate scenes depicted in the Bible; one where Jesus is in the boat asleep during a terrible storm and calms the storm before everyone is killed. Another scene is where the disciples are in the boat and Jesus comes to them walking on the water. In this scene, the two stories are combined. We see the disciples in the boat about to be killed in a storm and then a ghostly Jesus, who was not in the boat, comes walking to them on the water. Peter goes out to him, walking on the surface for a while, but looking back, he loses his faith and his footing and plunges down. Jesus rescues him and rebukes him for his lack of faith. Foreshadowing? A good scene for everyone involved.


#1 The Great Commission: probably the most moving scene in the movie. Jesus is talking to the disciples atop a mountain. He commands them to preach the Gospel to the world and then vanishes in a brilliant light. Peter turns his back on the where Jesus once stood and strides away off the mountain. “Come,” he says, “We have work to do!” In this moment the disciples are transfigured from cowards into faithful and brave servants of Christ and Peter, who was a denier of Christ before, becomes their captain. Very cool.


And now for the not so great. There are moments in the Bible story of Jesus that resonate with every Christian. Sadly, in this movie, the acting or the script or something gets in the way and is not as strong as it could be. First on my list, the moment Jesus rescues an adulterous woman about to be stoned. It would be a great moment except; Jesus doesn’t follow the scrip as told by the original scripture. Instead, he makes it up and the line he delivers is not as strong as what the Bible originally reports. Very sad.


Number two: This is the most disappointing scene in the film and unfortunately, it is not Greg Hicks’s (Pilate) fault. Jesus is being interrogated by Pilate in prison. Pilate played by Hicks delivers his lines flawlessly and instead of getting torn down by the awe-impiring Son of God, we get a rather weak and mushy response from Morgado as Jesus. This is really upsetting because this is normally a great opportunity to show how Jesus interacted with people around him and Morgado doesn’t deliver. Bummer. Compare this scene with the scene involving the same characters in “Passion”. Jesus is played by Jim Caviezal, one of the all time best portrayals of Christ in film, and the very best portrayal in movie history of Pontius Pilate portrayed by Hristo Shopov!


While Shopov and Hicks are at their top of their game as the charismatic and complex Roman Governor, Caviezal and Morgado are not even in the same ball park. Clearly Caviezal is playing the World Series and Morgado is little league, but Morgado wasn’t at all helped by the script writer or the videographer at this point. Jesus as played by Morgado looked like a crazy person on acid with far too much hair. He didn’t know what he was doing, did not give the appearance of the second most powerful entity of the universe. Very disappointing.


Overall I think this show is worthwhile if you want to spend your time and money to see it. The characters with the exception of Roma’s Mary aren’t top billed actors, but they all deliver solid performances with very few exceptions. I would give it four and a half stars out of five, deducting half a star for some script and acting problems I previously mentioned. In comparison I give “Passion” four and a half stars as well, deducting half a star for Gibson’s obsession with dousing the audience in gratuitous blood and gore, and for scaring the B’Jesus out of us with a nightmarishly hermaphroditic Satan character. And that’s my view


Arizona Governor Should Veto Anti-Gay Law!

by Jeremy Griffith
American Millennium Online

 Hi gang, Jeremy here with The American Millennium. I’d like to talk to you about this so called anti-gay law that passed recently in the state legislature of Arizona. The governor has the option of passing or vetoing the law, she’s expected to act on it by Friday and she’s getting a lot of pressure to veto this very controversial law.

So the state legislature has passed a law to allow business owners to deny service to homosexuals or people in the LGBT community for religious reasons. That is to say, photographers don’t have to shoot their weddings and bakers don’t have to bake them cakes. Before we get into what I think of this law, let’s listen to what Judge Andrew Napolitano has to say about it. He was talking to Tom Sullivan on Fox News Radio. Here is the judge.

So there you have it. I have to say I was waffling on this law a bit but after having heard the judge speak on the issue I have to agree with him at least partially. I think this a bad law and should be vetoed and I think that even if it isn’t it is probably unconstitutional and will probably face challenges at the supreme court level where it will likely be overturned. I can understand a business owners hesitancy to offer services to people who are outside their religious views like gay weddings and such, on the other hand I don’t want to see a class of people go without housing, food or essential services because they live a certain lifestyle different than my own.

So that begs the question, does a Jewish bakery have to provide non-cosure food to a customer who has a swastika tattooed on his forehead, or does a gay interior decorator have to provide services to a business that opposes same sex marriage; Does a Christian caterer have to provide food to a party thrown on the anniversary of Rowe v. Wade at the local office of Planned Parenthood? You can see how we can go to extremes here. Do we have the freedom to associate with whom we please or don’t we. I think it’ll be a mess either way.

More importantly I think we as Christians miss an opportunity to engage with people of another worldview if we just throw them out of or businesses. Jesus gave us what we call the great commission in that we are to share our faith with the world. We in essence are lifeguards of the world and we are ordered to educate, share and rebuke those around us as we share the Gospel. It doesn’t mean we all have to be Billy Graham or we have to yell at gay couples and tell them they’re going to hell. No! But when we see the drowning swimmer, do we judge is or her lack of planning, rebuke them for not learning to swim or for not wearing a life vest? No, that is not the time to judge, that is the time to throw the lifeline and as Christians, we are called to do that.

What it does mean I think that most of us have to be prepared to be like Andrew the Apostle who often lead people to Jesus and made introductions. I think when the opportunity is offered to engage with these people, we should, not with hate like the Westborough Baptists do but as Jesus did. Remember he often hung out with the riff raff, the tax collectors, prostitutes and sinners. That’s because he came to save us as many as possible from inevitable judgment. We need to be compassionate with these people and show by demonstration in our personal lives how Jesus influenced and changed us and thereby show them what awaits them if they commit their lives to him as well.

I think you should be subtle, business owners in your dealings with the LGBT community. Instead of throwing them out, offer a better deal and better quality service than what they would expect to get at a shop that endorses their lifestyle. A better cake for that wedding and better photos for the reception. Greet them with a smile and a handshake and show them how you are different you are than the world around them. Entice their curiosity. Put a Bible verse in your shop or on your business card, or a provocative saying that will spark a conversation: something like “My boss is a Jewish carpenter. Ask me how he changed my life!” Then be prepared to give a satisfactory answer. Remember Jesus wasn’t judgmental. I can totally see him at a gay wedding. When invited by Matthew the tax collector, he didn’t brow beat old Matt, he told stories and won people over with his words. That’s how we should act, toward everyone who crosses our path and that is how the Christian makes an impact on the world, one person at a time.

No one will darken the door to your churches before if they see the members acting like asses. And that’s my view.

If you have a different point of view or would like to comment about the new Arizona law, you can add your opinion to the comment section below.

Listen to Tom Sullivan’s full interview with Judge Napolitano on Fox News Radio here.



Hold back on the feathers and tar: FCC abandons plan to embed monitors in American Newsrooms

by Jeremy Griffith
The American Millennium


Peter Firth from the movie, The Red October. FCC abandoned it's plan this week to embed government monitors in American news agencies.

Peter Firth from the movie, The Red October. FCC abandoned it’s plan this week to embed government monitors in American news agencies.

Just yesterday I recommended on this blog that newsroom editors, TV and radio producers, tar and feather (verbally) FCC monitors embedded into their newsrooms. It looks like that will no longer be necessary, as the FCC has backed off on this enormous government assault on the First Amendment.

This is a great victory for journalism and the First Amendment. (Damn, I was really looking forward to the tarring and the feathering!) Nonetheless, we must be continually vigilant against these kinds of assaults on our constitutional freedoms by big government. Someone in the FCC thought it was a good idea to place embedded spies inside American newsrooms to kind of steer their editorial decisions towards the types of stories they wanted covered, what they called the public’s Critical Information Needs. No one thought for a second that anyone would pay any attention or that there would be any blowback. They thought you were watching the Olympics. There was blowback however, and that’s a good thing.

National Review’s Tim Cavanaugh pats himself on the back in his recent article on this issue, as he was the one to first cover it back in October of 2013. We concede the point; Tim is a great American! Good job. Read his most recent article in the NRO here.

But the real hero of the day is Mr. Ajit Pai, the FCC commissioner who opposed his peers and rocked the boat by writing in opposition to the idea in an op-ed piece published in the Wall Street Journal last week. Mr. Pai is to be complimented on his efforts. It is a rare government official who will stand up for what is right rather than go with the flow. Thank you, Mr. Pai.

But lest we get too comfortable, let us read on into what Cavanaugh writes in his NRO piece. You see, the FCC is not done; they’re just regrouping. They’re still sending surveys to TV and radio journalism outlets, these based on race and ethnicity, with the controversial questions taken out and no threat of government intrusion in the form of spies in the newsroom. Says Cavanaugh:

“… a revised version of the survey could raise new concerns: that it will trade its now-kiboshed news questions for a demographic survey that might justify new race-based media ownership rulemaking.”

Quoting the FCC press release, Cavanaugh writes, “[I]n the course of FCC review and public comment, concerns were raised that some of the questions may not have been appropriate. Chairman [Tom] Wheeler agreed that survey questions in the study directed toward media outlet managers, news directors, and reporters overstepped the bounds of what is required. Last week, Chairman Wheeler informed lawmakers that that Commission has no intention of regulating political or other speech of journalists or broadcasters and would be modifying the draft study. Yesterday, the Chairman directed that those questions be removed entirely.”

Yay! That’s awesome. But what is this business about demographics and race-based media ownership rule making? It’s Political Correctness crap run amok! In order to get a new license for a TV or radio station, you’ll have to have female body parts or some sort of a tan. Ask anyone who drives truck in this country and they’ll tell you how PC rules have hampered the way they do business.

Now I’m all for diversity. But I don’t think that that is something we can produce with federal rule making. The best thing the federal government can do for diversity and entrepreneurship is to get the Hell out of the way and stop with the onerous regulations. These big government bureaucratic types will never stop trying to infringe on our rights and assert their control over every aspect of our lives. That is why we must do as Patrick Stewart suggests when the actor played Captain Jean-Luc Picard on Star Trek: The Next Generation. “Vigilence is the price we must continually pay!” he said, in order to preserve the freedom of the Republic. Actually he was talking about the United Federation of Planets, but the ideal is the same. Ok, I’m a total geek for making this reference, but you get my point.

Vigilance and pushback is what got the Ukrainians where they are today. Their daily protests in Kiev have resulted in a truce after over a hundred brave protesters lost their lives at the hands of government forces. The Parliament is calling for the removal of the pro-Russian president and is reverting to an earlier constitution limiting presidential power, just as the protestors asked for. The US government and big government types like Barack H. Obama have to be quaking in their boots watching this story unfold. Read about it on the Fox News website here.

So keep up the pressure patriots and take my advice: invest in pine tar and feathers now, just in case they become as rare as .22 caliber bullets. We can’t win if we don’t fight.





Tar and Feathers: The Solution to FCC Overreach in American Media?

(Scene from HBO mini-series, “John Adams”.Warning, explicit!)

By Jeremy Griffith
The American Millennium

An example of tarring and feathering practice in Boston in 1773.

An example of tarring and feathering practice in Boston in 1773.

In pre-revolutionary Boston, I’m told, a public servant of the British Monarchy ran amok of local ship owners and shipping workers when he demanded that a load of British Tea be off loaded from a ship in the harbor. The incident led to the offending official being “Tarred and Feathered”. Perhaps they should bring back the practice for the FCC?

The Bostonians cried, foul! They said they didn’t want the tea as it represented the unfair taxation of the British crown on Bostonians. At the time it was the only tea allowed to be imported in the colonies and it carried a tax meant to help pay for British wars in the colonies which the Parliament thought it should be the colonists’ partial responsibility to pay. The Bostonians would have none of that and brought to a boiling point, decided to “tar and feather” the fellow, a barbarous and painful act in which boiling hot pine tar was applied to the bare skin followed by a load of feathers. The goal was to torment and humiliate the fellow as it was very painful to be doused in hot tar and it made one look quite ridiculous walking around with the feathers of a bird stuck to the skin. The victim was then “ridden on the rail”, where the victim was forced to sit on a rail and then carried around by other men in a parade of humiliation.

Fast forward to today! We are informed by FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai (a very American name, I must say!) that his colleagues in the Federal Communications Commission want to put “researchers”, read: government monitors, into television and radio news rooms around the country where they will in Pai’s words, “With its “Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs,” or CIN, the agency plans to send researchers to grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run.”

Fun! When is this going to start? Mr. Pai informs us that the pilot program will begin in Columbia South Carolina this spring. Kudos to Pai for bringing this information to us. He correctly observes that the federal government has no business inserting itself in a constitutionally protected private organization like a television or radio news room. Says Pai, “Should all stations follow MSNBC’s example and cut away from a discussion with a former congresswoman about the National Security Agency’s collection of phone records to offer live coverage of Justin Bieber’s bond hearing? As a consumer of news, I have an opinion. But my opinion shouldn’t matter more than anyone else’s merely because I happen to work at the FCC.”

Well said, Mr. Pai! You can read the rest of Pai’s’ Op-Ed in the Wall Street Journal here. It a good, but disturbing read.

Robert Laurie of the Canada Free Press explains in greater detail what the FCC researchers will be doing. Apparently they’ve concocted eight Critical Information Needs of the populace at large, which they will use as guidelines they will be using in questioning news editorial boards about how they plan to satisfy those CINs. Says Laurie, “Their study would demand that news departments answer a series of questions designed to “ascertain the process by which stories are selected, station priorities (for content production quality, and populations served), perceived station bias, perceived percent of news dedicated to each of the eight CIN’s and perceived responsiveness to underserved populations.”

Laurie continues, “They also want to “understand the critical information needs of the American public. One of the issues addressed in the study is how these CINs are framed, and whether said framing does enough do give viewers the full context of the story.”
Laurie asked a very correct and relevant question regarding this intrusion by the Federal Government into Free Speech and Press. He asked, in a nutshell, what happens if the other party was to do this during their administration? Do you still think it’s a good idea?
You can read the content of Laurie’s article in the Canada Free Press here, where the publication’s stated motto is, “Without America, there would be no Free World”!

We are told that the FCC would send monitors to newspapers as well as a part of this study, even though they have no regulatory authority on newspapers as such. Participation is “voluntary” but the FCC issues TV and radio stations their licenses, which begs the question, what happens if these organizations are less than cooperative with this new government intrusion into their business? Will their license be yanked?

I have a suggestion to those who manage the respective news agencies: tar and feather the bastards!

Now I don’t mean to literally tar and feather them as was done in colonial days, but you might want to perform a little object lesson to get the FCC goon thinking about the ramifications of what he is doing. Take a vat of pine tar and heat it to boiling over a hot plate. Have Mr. or Ms. FCC Dude or Dudette sit by the hot plate and gently apply the tar to their hand or cheek with a cotton swab. Then apply downy feathers to the affected area. Ask the FCC rep this question: Do you like how that feels? Then by all means, come back tomorrow and will do the whole thing!

In that first meeting I recommend that you have your attorney present to “grille” the offending government rep on their understanding of the First Amendment with special attention paid to the concept of prior restraint. Remind them their boss in the big white house in Washington D.C. taught constitutional law for a decade before occupying his current office. Then ask what they believe their boss’s concept of the First Amendment and prior restraint is. Document their response on camera and post it on your website. Then conduct your editorial meeting and discuss you’re weekly stories. One story idea I humbly suggest for you editors and publishers: the new intrusion of the FCC into your editorial practices.

I have another suggestion, this one for patriots living in Washington D.C. Find the FCC offices and get together with some of your friends outside. Bring along some boiling pine tar and bags of feathers and wait outside. Have one of your members politely knock on the door of their office and inform whoever is there that you will be waiting for them outside. Document their reactions on video and post it to your blog. Let the cops who come to speak to you know that you are just gathering in protest and you have no real intention of torturing government officials, that your only real intent is polite observation of constitutional history and ramifications.

I think everyone should be disturbed by the return of government intrusion into the press. Already many Americans are frustrated at the pro-government bias in newsrooms today. Our only recourse, and it’s an effective one, is the free market. When the news doesn’t fit the needs of the consumer, we shut them off. It’s up to the news agency to figure out our needs, not the government and in a free market capitalist system, the market decides.

We don’t want to become a Russian satellite state, where the state owns and operates the media. The Constitution is a sacred declaration of our rights. It doesn’t grant our rights; it simply declares what should be a foregone conclusion, self-evident. This government has been assaulting our rights for years, as has the previous administration. It is up to the citizens of this country to wake up and take a stand, saying enough is enough.

Who is next on the FCCs’ list, bloggers? If they’re going after newspapers, where they have no authority, then the Internet and independent blogs are surely next. Welcome back net neutrality.

Here at The American Millennium, I am not suggesting we actually physically abuse unelected government officials in the manner depicted in the video above. I talk about this practice purely tongue in cheek to illustrate a point. I agree with John Adams as played by the actor Paul Giamatti, it is a brutal and illegal act. However, I do recommend that editors and producers publicly shame and humiliate the FCC regulatory monitors for their illegal intrusion into their newsrooms.

If Americans reacted so violently to a tax worth only a few pennies per cup of tea, then what will they do now with their constitutional rights being violated almost daily by an overreaching big government? Will we turn into the Ukraine, which is on fire as we speak?

These monitors should be educated on the strength of the constitution and the purpose of the amendments as put forth by The Framers. This is an incredible teaching point that those newsrooms should not pass on. If they do take a pass, then what happens to the freedom of press and of speech that we all once enjoyed?! Watch the fascinating example of the practice of tarring and feathering below from the HBO mini-series “John Adams”. I’ve also included an interesting discussion of the practice and history of tarring and feathering from Reddit here.

American Millennium creator Jeremy Griffith on the steps inside the Minnesota capitol in St. Paul. Griffith is a veteran of the Iraq war and part-time blogger. All opinions presented here are his own.

American Millennium creator Jeremy Griffith on the steps inside the Minnesota capitol in St. Paul. Griffith is a veteran of the Iraq war and part-time blogger. All opinions presented here are his own.

Hagedorn Takes the Fight to Walz over Health Care

Jim Hagedorn, 1st District Republican Congressional Candidate, held a press conference in front of Rep. Tim Walz’s Rochester office to talk about the detrimental effects of Obamacare,(Affordable Health Care Act), on consumers, the City of Rochester, and the Mayo Clinic.

Below is the press release and video of the comments he made to the press Wednesday, Feb. 19, 2014.

Hagedorn is one of several candidates competing in a crowded Republican field who are vying for the opportunity to challenge Rep. Tim Walz-D for his 1st District Congressional Seat. The winner of a state Republican convention will move on to run against Walz later this year. The CD1 convention takes place on April 5, while the state convention takes place on May 30-31. For more information on upcoming dates, check out the Olmsted County GOP calander here, or check out their website at http://olmstedgop.org. 

Hagedorn – Rochester Obamacare PR

The American Millennium does not endorse any candidate or candidate’s campaign. The creators of the American Millennium stand for conservative free market principles and limited government. Candidates who want to discuss their views prior to the county and state conventions can contact us at the AmericanMillenniumOnline.com.

Nye/Ham Creation-Evolution Debate Largely a Draw

By Jeremy Griffith
American Millennium Online

The Downy Woodpecker outside my window is a great example of Intelligent Design- photo by AP

The Downy Woodpecker outside my window is a great example of Intelligent Design- photo by AP

Outside my window, right beside the back porch patio doors, a woodpecker drums its beak into the wood of an insect-infected tree like a jackhammer into concrete. Evidence of his work is all over the side of the tree, demonstrating to the casual observer that the little guy has been very busy. The specialized anatomy of the woodpecker is a great example of engineering and intelligent design that defies evolution, the kind of evidence that would have been great in a debate of Evolution and Creation. Sadly examples like this did not come up in last night’s debate between Evolutionist Bill Nye The Science Guy and Creationist Ken Ham.

Don’t get me wrong, I enjoyed the debate immensely and I encourage anyone to go and see it on the web. The video podcast is still available for several days on debatelive.org. In the debate, which lasted nearly 3 hours, the two contestants battled it out over the question of whether or not the Creation model is a viable model for scientific discussion, a question as stated I thought automatically put the Creationist presenter on the defensive. I got the impression, when all was said and done, of amateur middle-weight boxers dancing around each other for a while and never landing any significant blows.

To those of you who haven’t heard, Ken Ham, author and curator of the Creation Museum in Petersburg KY invited the Emmy winning science broadcaster Bill Nye to debate their worldviews Tuesday night. I thought is was a friendly debate and CNN moderator Tom Foreman was great, injecting a bit of wit and maintaining a fair and balanced debate that was very fair to the participants. You can see more information on the debate at CNN’s Belief Blog here.

Time Magazine has already published a piece on the web including a blow-by-blow account of the debate on their blog Swampland. In the blog, it’s very evident that the author didn’t think much of the Creationist presenter Ham, and I’m disappointed that Time would disenfranchise their more religious readers by allowing a junior writer to be so snarky and disrespectful. Disappointing, but not unexpected coming from the mainstream media. You can read that blog here.

I thought Ham had a very strong opening using power point slides showing that Creationists are not a bunch of religious fanatics who want to discard science altogether and live in the backwoods of Kentucky worshiping in churches that handle snakes. To bolster his point, Ham’s presentation had testimonials from Ph. D scientists from several disciplines of science who are willing to speak out on their creationist leanings. Nye’s opening wasn’t quite as strong as he didn’t present much evidence to show that Creationists are a bunch of science hating cooks and actually wasted much time on a very unamusing story about how his father learned to tie a bow-tie. He did have a prop however. He showed off a rock he had extracted there in Kentucky with a fossil in it, declaring essentially, “here is an example of evolution, right here in your own back yard,” without ever examining why a dead critter stuck in a rock is dead-to-rights evidence that evolution ever took place. We’ll just have to take his word for it, or not.

While the two competitors danced around the subject, I found myself longing for more grit, more evidence, to back up what the presenters were attesting. I didn’t find it. Nye went on and on discussing how he thought it was inconceivable that an ancient book that almost no one has read, translated from Aramaic and Greek into English could be used to justify a set of viable scientific principles. He harped on his view that an embrace of Creation mysticism would hamper scientific education in America and would handicap American youth in higher educational disciplines and eventually result in the decline of the country. Ham meanwhile asserted his understanding of the Bible as an explanation of our origins and asserted that all scientific study should utilize that book as the basis for all search for truth, scientific or otherwise.

There was some discussion of details, though they were sparse on both sides. Nye blasted the story of the Noah Ark and flood as largely mythical. He had satellite photographs of large zoos filled with animals and the land necessary to support the animals with food and grazing areas. He discounted the possibility of those animals, the many species of them miraculously coming onto the ark and living for the better part of a year while the earth and all its greenery was deluged in water.

Ham rebutted that there really weren’t all that many animals on the ark, that they were only invited to be rescued by kinds, not species, and only the warm-blooded ones at that so that the numbers aboard would be greatly reduced, adding to the credence that the animals could be saved as the Bible suggests.

Nye countered with his disbelief that such a boat, made all of wood as the ark was, could sustain a long voyage on a torrential sea without twisting and bowing and ultimately breaking apart. “Noah and company weren’t the master shipbuilders of today, how could they have designed and built a boat capable of withstanding such a flood?” Nye suggests.

Ham counters “how do you know what kind of a shipmaster Noah was, did you meet him?” In fact, Ham observes, ancient civilizations have had advanced technology and architecture that we in modern times don’t have full comprehension of, a rare blow made by Ham on Nye’s evolutionary argument.

And thus it went back and forth for a while. There was some discussion about the geological column of the earth as demonstrated by the Grand Canyon and I had hope that Ham would land some blows on Nye with that discussion. Sadly that opportunity was largely missed. Nye questioned an idea of how any catastrophic happening like the flood should create such land features like the Grand Canyon and argued that the canyon was obviously the work of slow steady processes over billions of years as the Uniformitarian naturalist argument often states. Ham acknowledges that the Grand Canyon is interesting and states that it is not a result of long slow evolutionary processes, but doesn’t go into evidence to support his case, another opportunity lost.

Nye showed a graphic in his presentation showing the geological column along with examples of early primitive fossils likely found in such strata of rock, proudly declaring it as evidence undisputed of evolution. The problem is that the geological column as pictured appears nowhere in nature and the fossils found there often are also present in other layers of rock billions of years ahead or behind where they are supposed to be.

“Show me an example of where a fossil like this is found in any other strata and maybe I’ll believe in something other than evolution!” Nye asserts with passion. “They are no where to be found!”

You got it Mr. Nye! Here you go. In the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) article by Steve A. Austin, Ph.D, entitled “Ten Misconceptions about the Geological Column” Austin blows away this point with Misconception No. 6. It’s quite lengthy but I include it all so that the reader may understand the whole context as Dr. Austin states the facts much more eloquently than I could.

Austin writes, “Misconception No. 6. Fossils, especially the species distinctive of specific systems, provide the most reliable method of assigning strata to their level in the geologic column.

“Bed-to-bed correlation of strata to their “type system” area is the most reliable method of assigning strata to a system. The data from oil well drilling, seismic surveys, and surface geologic mapping is of such character that subsurface correlation of lithostratigraphic units of the thickness of systems is possible on a continental scale. Although some fossils appear to be distinctive of certain systems (most fossil taxa range through a few to several systems), care must be exercised in correlation by fossils. First, the stratigraphic range of a fossil type is always open to extension as new fossils are discovered. Second, when an extension of a fossil’s range may be required, geologists may call upon erosion (reworking fossils into younger strata or leaking fossils into older strata) and structural events (overturning or faulting strata and fossils). An example of the first problem is the monoplacophoran mollusk Pilina, which might otherwise be considered diagnostic of the Silurian System, except for the startling discovery that Neopilina lives today, and, therefore, would be expected in any system overlying the Silurian. For these reasons correlation by fossils must always remain tentative awaiting further confirmatory evidence from lithostratigraphy. We should look very skeptically at strata correlations which rely solely on fossils.”

So there you have it. A fossil exists not only in strata where it’s not supposed to be, but the creature that made it, largely believed to be extinct is still alive and swimming. What do I win, Mr. Nye?!

Austin’s article about the misconceptions surrounding the geological column is fascinating and I recommend everyone read it, here. Did you know for example that the column was created by geologists who considered themselves to be Creationists and who if living today would have thoroughly rejected its use to determine time as the evolutionists have? I did not know that. Did you also know that the geological column is often missing layers that are totally stripped away, missing, flipped on top of another in nonsequencial order and often intertwined? I had heard that bit before. All these and more could have been ammunition for Ham against his evolutionary opponent that unfortunately was not picked up. It was like the Ship of Ham had come along for a perfect broadside against Ship Nye and Ham, with that perfect position, declined to fire.

I was glad to see that Ham largely debunked Nye’s assertion that radiometric dating was indisputable evidence of the age of the earth. Ham showed a graphic in his presentation showing all the different ways an age of a rock or of the earth can be determined and many if not all can be subjective depending on your assumptions of starting points, i.e. how much radio-active material was in a rock before it started to degrade. Was the glass half full when we started, or was it at three-quarters?

Talk of radiometric dating, the geological column, or Noah’s Ark aside, there was very little evidence leading any participant to an overall win in this debate. That is all I suppose we can expect from two duelists possessing degrees no higher than a bachelors? (I did not know that Nye was educated with a bachelor of science in Mechanical Engineering, did you? Ham likewise also has nothing higher to boast that a bachelor’s. Both have honorary degrees, but still! Maybe at the next debate we can get some experts in the fields with Ph. Ds? Hhmmm!?)

I’m no scientist, but I do have a degree higher than a bachelor’s. (Masters in New Media Journalism, if you must know!) And, in less than five minutes I found several articles and videos from credible sources demonstrating evidence for a creation scientific model. There was the Austin article on the geological column for example, a fascinating article about the wonderfully evolution frustrating anatomy of the common woodpecker, and a video from You Tube featuring Dr. Danny Faulkner, featured in Ham’s presentation, where Faulkner discusses Biblically compatible theories of astronomy and cosmology. I’m sure the evolutionists could find similar defenses of their worldview in a matter of minutes. (By the way, I recommend the reader see Dr. Faulkner’s comments in the movie, The Young Sun from Iachod Visuals where he talks about the problems of evolutionary star formation.)

The argument is not that there is evidence that can be made readily available for each worldview. The problem lies in the almost total banning of one worldview being taught in public schools. Often schools will have evolutionary teaching in science class rooms, but any talk of a creation model is outlawed and any academic scholar who even breathes a reference to it is fired and banned from Academia. See Ben Stein’s movie “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed”, where Stein talks to prominent scientists dismissed for their beliefs and Stein’s fascinating interview of famous atheist Richard Dawkins.

I also didn’t like Nye’s assertion that discussions of such topics in high school classrooms could degrade the level of scientific education in America. Did you see the snarky backhanded insult he gave to Kentuckian Education. (He basically blasted the state because a precious scientific degree program was not offered in the state. I wonder how many other states similarly do not offer that particular program. Nye doesn’t elaborate.) Nye riddle’s Ham for what he perceives as his backward devotion to that ancient book the Bible and his near fanatic embrace of the youthful timeline of man, 4,000-6,000 years, as if Ham is the only one in Christendom who offers this view.

Actually, the number of people who advocate this view is increasing, though many Christians also think some form of evolution is still compatible with the Biblical account.

American Vision founder and CEO Gary DeMar has offered his opinion on Creation Vs. Evolution and has hosted debates between Ph. D level participants regarding this issue. In a recent article he argues that he would not have accepted a debate with Nye due to the slanted nature of the question posed as the premise of the debate. DeMar writes,

How I would I go about debating Bill Nye the UnScience Guy? First, I never would have agreed to the question being debated. I would have chosen “Is Abiogenesis a Viable Model of Origins in any World?” This is what it’s really all about: Life from non-life. The debate would be over before it started. To win, Bill Nye will have to demonstrate scientifically (demonstrate is the key word) that life as we know it came from non-life from no outside intelligent agency!”

Nye skirted this issue in the debate without really knowing it in a response to a question from Ham, mentioning Louis Pasteur who did important research on vaccines.

Says Nye, “You say life cannot come from nonlife! Are you absolutely sure?!”

The answer from Ham that we anticipated but never got was, “Yes, Louis Pasteur proved it in his laboratory. End of story. Life does not come from nonlife.” Before Pasteur, we believed rats came from piles of rags and flies came into being out of thin air. Sorry Bill.

DeMar continues: Until evolutionists demonstrate (1) the origin of matter out of nothing (a topic they rarely want to talk about), (2) how inorganic matter evolved into organic matter (spontaneous generation), (3) the origin of information and its meaningful organization (DNA programming), and (4) a genetic explanation for why it is mandatory that anyone be moral (ethics), evolution is a modern form of alchemy.

“No evolutionist has ever shown a single example of spontaneous generation. That’s why evolutionists want to talk about this found skull and that found femur and this percentage of chimpanzee DNA in relation to human DNA. It’s a long way from nothing to you and me and everything in between. I want to know how nothing became something and how that something became the UnScience Guy and the rest of the life we see on planet earth in terms of what can be demonstrated scientifically.”

 ”I want to know how nothing became something and how that something became the UnScience Guy and the rest of the life we see on planet earth in terms of what can be demonstrated scientifically.” -Gary DeMar, American Vision


Indeed, Nye showed a graphic of different skulls including apes and humans combined, almost prophetically proving DeMar’s point unknowingly. Said Nye, “You look at these skulls with all their differences and similarities and tell me where modern man falls.”

You can read the rest of DeMar’s comments on his blog here in the article entitled, “How I would Debate Bill Nye the UnScience Guy”.

After the debate is over and the participants shake hands I’m left with the feeling that no forward progress was made, neither side redeeming themselves to the supporters of the other, rather they continued the status quo of their own following. I hope more debates like this will happen in the public sphere, but have little hope that any scientist with an evolutionary worldview will willingly expose themselves again to the criticism of a credentialed creationist scientist armed with facts.






Magnificent: “The Square” captures the three-fold revolution of Egypt’s Tahrir Square.

By Jeremy Griffith
The American Millennium

Why Mina?! Didn’t I tell you not to go to the protests?”

‘I won’t go. I’ll do as you say, Mom!’”

But you tricked me and went and took your life away from me!”

‘If I died a martyr, Mom, would you be sad for me Mom?!’”

I’m not sad for the martyr in you, my love! But losing you hurts!

 “I’m not sad for the martyr in you, my love!”- A grieving mother following the death of her son, from an interview in the documentary, “The Square”

Khalid Abdallah, from the documentary film, "The Square"

Khalid Abdalla, from the documentary film, “The Square”

It seems in the absence of real news, I’ve taken up movie reviews. Here’s another film you should see, friends, but it is not likely to be in a theater near you. Instead go to Netflix to watch, “The Square” and bring a box of tissues.

Like Marcus Luttrell’s “Lone Survivor”, The Square is a tear-jerker worthy of your review. It is a documentary covering the lives of three individuals who partook in the revolution that started and ended in Tahrir Square, Cairo Egypt in 2011. Ahmed Hassan is from the working class neighborhood of Shobra in Cairo. He is featured prominently throughout the film as a spokesperson for the Revolution. Khalid Abdalla is a British-Egyptian actor who helps organize the protestors and uses social media to tell their story to the outside world. You may recognize Khalid from movies like The Kite Runner, United 93, and The Green Zone. Magdy Ashour is a father of four, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood who befriends Ahmed. Despite their differences, Ahmed and Magdy are close, and work together during the revolution. Magdy was tortured during the Mubarak regime’s crackdown on the Brotherhood.

Magdy Ashour from the documentary, "The Square".

Magdy Ashour from the documentary, “The Square”.

Now I was in Egypt in 2008 following my deployment to Iraq. I was there as a tourist and I walked around Cairo, where even then you could cut the tension with a knife. Not far from Tahrir Square where the events of the documentary took place, in the shadow of a large Mosque, I sipped Chi Tea and listened to the call to prayer. Three young girls chatted at the table next to me, smoking a hooka together. The fragrance of the tobacco was thick and sweet. I was struck by how few people went up to the mosque when the singing started. I started filming, but my film was ruined, at least in my mind, when a street vendor accosted me to sell his worthless trinkets. Another such vendor had tricked me and picked my pocket earlier in the day, next to the Giza Pyramid, and it was only because of the police that I was able to get my money back. So when this new guy attempted to hawk his business, I would have nothing to do with him. I didn’t realize it then, but I had been first hand witness of the heavy handedness of the police and military in a brutish totalitarian regime. That event shaped the way I think of Egypt to this day. The police found the man who had taken my money, lined him up against a wall and went through his pockets, returning the cash to me. I think about that man from time to time, wondering if he is alive or dead. I wonder if our encounter gives him a sour view of my country or tourists like me. I hope not, but I wouldn’t doubt it. I have no animosity for him. He was most likely trying to support himself and his family, albeit in the wrong way. But, when you’re starving, you’ll do anything, I suppose.

Demonstrators mob a tank in Tahrir Square, Cairo Egypt

Demonstrators mob a tank in Tahrir Square, Cairo Egypt

It was because of the memories of those days that I was intrigued to find a documentary on the revolution on Netflix. I had to check it out and I’m glad I did. In 2011 things boiled over as the people of Egypt had had enough of their totalitarian government under the direction of Hosni Mubarak. Young people gathered in the square for many days and sat there, demanding the resignation of the president and the writing of a new constitution guaranteeing civil rights for all. They succeeded in toppling the government, only to bring the Muslim Brotherhood to power, and a new fascist government of Muhammad Morsi. Morsi, emboldened by his new power, seized upon his opportunity like a newly crowned Egyptian Pharaoh. His police and soldiers removed the protestors and seized power illegally, claiming the Quran as their constitution. No real constitution was written and the people went on the offensive again, retaking the square.

The documentary is an excellent one using a combination of professional film photography and cell phone video to cobble together a moving narrative of the events of those days, much of it not reported by CNN or the rest of the mainstream American media. It demonstrates masterfully how social media was used to circumvent the power of government and ultimately lead to the demise of not one or two, but three regimes in Egypt in the course of a few years. It showed the suffering of the people who lived through it and the pain of loss of families who lost loved ones in the conflagration.

It reminds me of Occupy Wall Street times ten. Violent scenes captured on cell phone cameras depict people shot down in the street by soldiers and mowed down by armored vehicles. Follow up video shows the tragic aftermath and will leave the viewer in tears.

The film is balanced from the heady joy of the participants following a victory and the shameful brutality of the government and hired thugs. The photography is beautifully done and the editing shows a keen sense for dramatic story telling. A graffiti artist tells the story magnificently through mural art and the music makes you want to march in the street.

Americans have this troubling philosophy that if it didn’t happen here, it’s not any of my concern. This horribly misplaced egocentricity blinds us and prevents us from participating on the world stage. The fact is, the United States supported Mubarak’s regime and sold him tanks and war planes, knowing he was a brutal awful dictator. The Obama administration supported the Egyptian Spring, but did nothing to foster real democracy, allowing the Muslim Brotherhood to take control through political subterfuge. Instead, the Egyptian people alone had to solve their problems, without any real help from the outside world, and continues struggle to this day. That is a shame!

Ahmed has a wonderful comment that I think illustrates the role of the Muslim Brotherhood’s takeover of the government in Egypt and solidifies their intent around the world. He says, “The Brotherhood is here to celebrate- and we’re here to continue the revolution. The Brotherhood buys people with oil and sugar. They mobilize people using religion!”

 “The Brotherhood is here to celebrate- and we’re here to continue the revolution. The Brotherhood buys people with oil and sugar. They mobilize people using religion!” -Ahmed Hassan

In the midst of the strife during the military crack down, someone comments, “The Army is killing us! How can they be Egyptian? They’ve forgotten Egypt!”

 “The Army is killing us! How can they be Egyptian? They’ve forgotten Egypt!” -an Egyptian citizen in Cairo

In the end of the film, Ahmed narrates, describing his role in the Egyptian Spring. He remarks, “We’re not looking for a leader. What will they bring, solutions from the heavens? Everyone who marched in Tahrir Square is a leader. What we want is a conscience.”

Ahmed Hassan, The Square

Ahmed Hassan, The Square

“We’re not looking for a leader. What will they bring, solutions from the heavens? Everyone who marched in Tahrir Square is a leader. What we want is a conscience.” -Ahmed Hassan

Every American should see this movie, and hopefully ditch the notion that what happens overseas doesn’t affect us here at home. The documentary is raw, and relevant and powerful. And the events that happened there can certainly happen anywhere, even here.

For more information on the documentary film, The Square, visit the web page at http://thesquarefilm.com/.

Watch the trailer of the movie below.

Jeremy and friends in Cairo

Jeremy, the author,  and friends in Cairo, 2008

Awe-inspiring, Painful, Tragic, Heroic: Marcus Luttrel’s Navy Seal Movie “Lone Survivor” is an Epic testament to the courage of the US Navy Sailor!

by Jeremy Griffith
The American Millennium

I really enjoyed Marcus Luttrel’s new movie about his time in Afghanistan, based on his book about his experiences, “Lone Survivor”. Well, maybe enjoy isn’t the right word. Awe-struck is more like it!

The movie that opened this weekend is Luttrel’s work of passion to bring his epic true to life story about what happened to him and his Navy Seal companions in Afghanistan to the big screen. It was everything it was booked to be and I’m sorry I didn’t read the story before hand. I will now. It was painful to watch as our Heroes slowly die on a mountainside, surrounded by enemies, fighting to the last man. Painful, but it also had a life lesson; a lesson about the corps creed of the Navy Seal, never quit. We all could learn something from this motif. Nothing is too hard for the Seal. They never give up and they never quit.

This is something that CNN’s Jake Tapper apparently missed when he saw the movie. He interviewed Mr. Luttrell on his show recently. For Tapper, the whole situation was hopeless, tragic. Well, maybe for someone like him, or you or me, we would have found the whole situation hopeless. Perhaps we would have given up a long time ago. But then, we are not Navy Seals. We are not inculcated in that creed, but maybe we should be! You have to decide to win, and so we must! That is the message I got from the film. Harder to do than it is to say.

You see, these young Sailors are trained to fight for freedom, and are the very best of us. You have to be strong and smart to be a Seal. I don’t think I can be as strong. Maybe you neither, but we can all attempt to emulate these heroes. That means getting out of our comfort zone and doing the right thing, even when nobody else is looking and no credit will be given to do so.

I recommend this movie to anyone who is a military history buff, or just a patriot. It reminded me of another film where all the Heroes die, “We Were Soldiers” staring Mel Gibson, based on the book “We were Soldiers Once and Young!” by Harold Moore and Joseph Galloway. When I was a young Infantry lieutenant, SGT Ernie Savage of the lost platoon gave a speech at my Infantry Officers Basic Course class at Fort Benning, GA. That day in the Ia Drang Valley when his platoon was cut off and surrounded by 500 battle-hardened North Vietnamese Regulars, surrender was not in Savage’s vocabulary. With his platoon leader and platoon sergeant dead, it was up to him to save his remaining platoon mates. For over 24-hours he called artillery fire on the NVA and kept them at bay until his company was able to relieve him the following day. Listening to Savage, a young Infantry hero in the making, all hard and macho, I cried like a child listening to him recount the events of that day. I cried again in the theater last night as I watched actors playing the parts of heroes falling off a mountain.

Maybe civilians don’t get it. Maybe loved ones of military members won’t get it fully, but I think I have a piece of it. And so I recommend the movie to all my friends, and I’m running out this morning to get the book, because it’s that important a story. The tree of freedom is occasionally watered with the blood of tyrants and heroes and the blood shed by those heroes is priceless in purchasing our freedom. It can never be for nothing.

On 9/11 some murderous thugs dressed in the trappings of an ancient religion murdered our citizens. In order to stop future attacks and to crush the murderers who did this to us, Heroes like Marcus Luttrel and his friends were called upon to deal with some very awful people. In the meantime, peace loving people of Afghanistan, abandoned by the US, were dealing with the evil of the Taliban for many years and waiting for someone to help them. So when Luttrel’s team was deployed, the players found each other, the Seals, the Taliban, the pashtunwali villagers, and that set the stage for the events that followed. Marcus Luttrel was the lone survivor who alone could tell the tale.

I feel a hole in my heart after watching this movie. I’m grateful that there are people like Luttrel who were willing to do violence for my stead. Thank you sir, for your service and for this book and movie. We all needed to hear this story again.

The battle against terrorism isn’t over, though many of us wish it were. Al-Qaeda has retaken Fallujah in Iraq, and there are giving our Marines in Afghanistan a run for their money. Lone wolf terrorists attack us all the time, as they did in Boston. We are all tired and “war weary” as we sit at our kitchen tables or in front of the boob tube, hoping eventually someone will get all our troops the Hell out of there, where ever there is! And while the bad guys are plotting their next vicious attack on hapless Americans like you and me, who haven’t got the first clue, a young Hero is squatting in a swamp somewhere, on a training exercise. He might be a Sailor, a Soldier, Airman or Marine, but he waits in silence for his turn to “punch the time card” putting in a bullet into the enemy’s brain pan for the sake of us all.

For their sakes, we should always give our freedom fighters the tools and support they need, because when we help them, we help ourselves.

See the interview of Marcus Luttrel and actor Mark Wahlberg with Jake Tapper of CNN below.

Minnesota DFL Fined $100,000 for Illegal Campaign Coordination, One of the Largest Fines in Minnesota History

by Jeremy Griffith
The American Millennium

Too late to affect the outcome of local state campaigns, the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board has fined the Minnesota DFL $100,000 for illegal campaign coordination, one of the largest civil penalty levied in state history.

On Tuesday the Board levied the fine against the DFL after it was discovered that 13 DFL candidates coordinated their campaigns illegally, since properly reclassifying the expenditures means that the candidates illegally exceeded their campaign contribution and/or spending limits.  A total of over $300,000 in illegal contributions were not reported by the campaigns.. The board also plans to fine each individual campaign directly, according to a press release from the Minnesota Republican  Party.

State Republican Party Chairman Keith Downey demonstrated his frustration at the DFL’s actions in the last campaign, as well as satisfaction with the boards’ ruling.

“Senate Democrats were so intent on winning at any cost and throwing huge money into the 2012 campaign that they played fast and loose in a big way,” said Downey. “Even though it is over a year too late for the voters in these thirteen districts, and the ruling says nothing about the truthfulness of their ads, today’s ruling does at least provide a much needed check on their campaign financing tactics.”

“Many of the Democratic Senators on this list won their elections by narrow margins. We will never know how this illegal coordination would have impacted the results in these races and ultimately control of the legislature.  They cheated, they won, but at least they are being held accountable now.” Downey continued.

“They cheated, they won, but at least they are being held accountable now.” -Republican State Chairman Keith Downey.

“We look forward to the Campaign Finance Board’s continued investigation and expect them to thoroughly examine each of the thirteen campaigns to determine the full extent of this wrongdoing,” Downey concluded.

DFL lawmakers disagreed with the board’s ruling said that they are glad to put the matter to rest.

“Ultimately, it is best to set this distraction aside and allow our members to focus on governing,” DFL Party Chairman Ken Martin said.

The Minneapolis Star Tribune reports that the board has levied only two fines of equal or greater size in the past 11 years: former gubernatorial candidate Tim Pawlenty was fined $100,000 for coordinating a 2002 television ad with the Republican Party, and the board also fined the national 21st Century Democrats a whopping $190K for failing to disclose the its spending to influence Minnesota’s 2004 election.

Read the full report from the Star Tribune here.

Join Our Army of Light at The American Millennium

The Economy Sucks, jobs are scarce, the government is increasing taxes and cutting military retirements. This sucks. I am therefore going to create my own job, and I invite you to join me.

If you are a writer/activist with a conservative/libertarian viewpoint, I invite you to join me on a journey. My goal is to make The American Millennium my business. I intend to write daily columns with news and editorial content that people in Minnesota and middle America need, that the mainstream media won’t cover. If you would like to write for us, send me an email with a story idea, or better yet, a complete story with photos, audio, video. If it’s up to snuff, we’ll give you a byline and include your work here at The American Millennium.

If you are an experienced advertiser, businessperson, or a recent journalism or public relations graduate, we’d like to have you partner with us in creating this new publication, with the ultimate goal of creating a monthly activist magazine. If you are creative and willing to work hard, we’d like to have you on our team.

Send your tips, stories and media to JeremyG71@yahoo.com.

Jeremy Griffith
Publisher, The American Millennium

Lake City Officer Remembered on Two Year Anniversary

by Jeremy Griffith
Publisher of The American Millennium Online

Strangers and friends gather to pray for Lake City Officer Shawn Schneider. -photo by Star Tribune

Strangers and friends gather to pray for Lake City Officer Shawn Schneider. -photo by Star Tribune

 This December marks the second sad anniversary of a fallen Lake City Police Officer’s death. Shawn Schneider gave his life for someone he had not before met as he stepped between a deranged gunman and his underage former girl friend. Schneider was shot in the head, taking the bullet that was meant for the girl.

Schneider didn’t die right away. He lingered for days as his family said goodbye. Total strangers, family and friends gathered in a courtyard at St. Mary’s Hospital in Rochester where Schneider was admitted. They sang Christmas carols and said prayers. Blue lights and only blue were hung on a tree to commemorate our men and women in police and sheriff’s departments across our state.

When Shawn died, he left a gaping hole in our lives. I did not know him, but I know his partner, who was with him that day. They were doing their jobs, defending the innocent, and one of them paid the ultimate price. The other lost a little of himself that day and will always remember.

Shawn left behind a wife and kids. This Christmas I ask everyone who reads this column to remember Shawn and all those in uniform in our local law enforcement agencies. They are here to protect us, and they do a great job. Lay wreaths at their local offices, hang blue lights on trees and windows. Thank a police officer who you meet on the street.

And remember, Jesus Christ is the reason for this and every season.

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God. Matthew 5:9 NIV

 Read the article from the Star Tribune here.


Looks like we could have used the guy who likes to fire people!

by Jeremy Griffith
Creator of The American Millennium Online

As the title says, it looks like now we could have used the man who likes to fire people, who has experience breaking up dysfunctional companies and putting together businesses that can actually make a profit, over the guy who looks clean and neat but who’s staff can’t balance their checkbook or build a simple website.

Mitt Romney, the wacky Mormon businessman would have done far better as president than the organizer-in-chief Barack H. Obama. That’s not opinion anymore that is fact. Look at the records of both men. Romney has put together successful teams that work well together and profit in business, he was also a successful governor. Obama can make a good speech, but everything he says has an expiration date. Just look at all the clips of Obama lying straight faced into the camera; only to have it revealed later that he was “mistaken” or that he “misspoke”!

Remember this one? “If you like your doctor/plan, you can keep them!” How many times did he say that in his speeches?

Meanwhile, the controversy and scandal surrounding the man only seem to increase. No longer ankle deep, the president seems to be wading waste deep in hypocrisy and scandal. Any one scandal is enough blood in the water for a Republican to be in deep as the ravenous shark like media begin to circle. Look at Republicans past: For Ronald Reagan it was the Iran-Contra Affair, for Nixon it was that minor burglary at the Watergate. When it comes to Democrats, multiple scandals no matter how distressing never seem to cause any damage to the man in the office. Minor players perhaps, but not the president. Barack has learned well from Bill Clinton’s example. If you put off the press long enough, eventually the whole thing will blow over.

Only with Clinton it was only about consensual sex with an Intern in the Oval Office. With Obama, you can take your pick: Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the Health Care website rollout, the Iranian Nuke scandal, etc., etc!

There is a reason none of this scandal sticks to a liberal progressive. The people who supported them don’t hold them to account, so half or over half of the people living in the United States give the president a pass, while the rest of us fume in fury.

Liberals are like little spoiled children. They don’t care that their parents may go bankrupt buying them the things they want, right now, regardless of the cost or the fact that they’ll no longer be interested in the item tomorrow. They want it and it’s their parents’ job to get it. When they grow up it’s no different, only it’s not a parent they’re pleading with, it is their children, and they are willing to mire their children in Trillions in debt to get the niceties, entitlements they want.

Put it another way, Liberals are like identity thieves. They don’t care to work a single day in their lives, they only want what they think they deserve, and they have no problem taking it from you.

Note the explosion of identity theft in America. Thousands of people have had their identities stolen in American, their property seized, their credit card accounts and savings emptied, all by unscrupulous thieves. It is such with liberals, they’ve stolen the national identity at the ballot box and now all of us are paying as they run up the debt, enslaving us all.

They way they do this is very clever, but easy to see through, for those of us who are awake. They promise the people they’ll be taken care of, that they won’t have to work hard, that their needs and medical health concerns will be taken care of. This works especially well in minority communities because minorities are so eager to hear that someone is looking out for them. But as evidenced by the facts, the minorities, especially the black community, are hardest hit by these lies. Look at major metropolitan cites run for decades by Democrats. Detroit, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles. All on the verge of bankruptcy and full of corruption and graft. And yet the black and other minorities, though through decades of suffering, continue to hope that one day the right person with the right promises will make it all right.

But sadly, the same old policies end up in failure, no matter who the personality is at the top running things. Sadly, until we stop allowing the votes to be stolen come election time and stop the liberal progressive movement from sending their loyal sons and daughters to office, we will never rid ourselves of these low-lifes. So for now, the people who work for a living, will be forever enslaved by those who only vote for a living.

Personally, I would have liked a guy who can fire some people for their incompetence, rather than reward people for their continued failure.

Watch this entertaining video from PJTV’s Trifecta last January on Mitt Romney’s predictions, here.

Technology and the Free Market has the power to connect us, or tear us apart!

by Jeremy Griffith
American Millennium Online

This Thanksgiving I learned a lesson on how technology and the private sector Free Markets can have the power to connect us, or pull us apart, depending on how we use it. Let me explain how.

I didn’t know my grandfather well, I was very young when he passed on, but I knew of the connection my mother had with her father, and through her I grew to know and love the man. He was an outdoorsman, he loved to hunt and fish. My father is an outdoorsman of another sort, he would rather busy himself with raising his Angus cattle and hard outdoor chores. Gordon was never like that. He would rather go to the stream or the woods and be at peace while he pulled a trout out of a stream with his fly rod or took down a deer with his bow.

I was not privy to the mentorship of Grandpa Gordon, being so far separated by time, but I felt that this year I bonded with him a little and found out what it was like to stalk a deer in the quiet woods. I bought a bow online from Precision Shooting Equipment online and I’ve been practicing for two years. Armed with arrows I bought at Fleet Farm I hid in a ground blind tent I purchased as well. I didn’t get anything, but I spent some quality time in the woods, with the spirit of my grandpa.

Now I didn’t pick up any hunting tips from Gordon, but I did do some research, and I picked up a thing or two. You can learn a lot on the Internet, from how to stalk a deer, to the selection of equipment, to how to gut it and skin it in the end. Pretty cool. Thanks to the Internet and private sector business, I was able to bond with my late grandfather this Thanksgiving, way cool.

There is another way technology can connect us. My twin brother lives in Colorado, far from here. He and his family were unable to join us for dinner because of distance and his work obligations. But with the help of my Macbook Pro and Skype, we were able to see and talk to him as we ate dinner. He called just before noon and gave us a tour of his buddy’s house where they were having dinner and we got to chat a bit. I connected the laptop to the big screen TV at my parent’s house via USB cable so that everyone could see him from far off without leaving the table. Everyone thought it was a good idea and commented that it was almost like having him here in person. Score two for business and technology. Thank you Steve Jobs. Thank you Skype creators.

Ah, but there’s a dark side of technology and entrepreneurship too. While I was able to bond with brother and grandfather this holiday season, others used technology to disconnect. You see some of my younger relatives, children of my brother and cousins, took advantage of the technology to get onto Facebook and other social media to play games and connect to friends rather than socialize with family. Me, I could live my whole life without candy crush, but some prefer it to the dry banter of older relatives on the holidays.

You see, while I was connecting to my family, my brother and my late grandfather, and using technology to connect others as well, others were disconnecting and that’s the point. The technology is great, but sometimes you have to set the tablet or iPhone down and talk to people.

I’m grateful for this lesson and grateful to the entrepreneurs who brought us these great gadgets, the Internet and social media, my bow, my Macbook Pro, and Skype. I will always try to use them to enlighten as well as entertain, and keep connected with my family, who are the real blessing of the season.

Sandy Hook Massacre Game is Edgy, but not fun!

by Jeremy Griffith

Undated screen grab of Sandy Hook Massacre video game.

Undated screen grab of Sandy Hook Massacre video game.

So there is a guy out there who developed a very simple first person shooter based on the Sandy Hook Elementary Massacre. It basically allows the player to relive the moments of the massacre in real time, about ten minutes. While the game is edgy, it certainly isn’t fun.

Now let me be clear about something. The Sandy Hook shooting was a tragedy, for everyone. I’m not trying to justify anything. This column’s purpose is not aimed at causing any more pain for the victims. I’m just analyzing the game and it’s implications.

I’m a First Amendment advocate. That means I have to defend this game developer’s right to produce this game, even though I don’t agree with his motivations. I mean, this game is really in poor taste. It does start conversations about the Sandy Hook shootings and maybe we should talk about it more, why it happened and how to prevent it in the future.

So I played the game and it’s pretty pedantic. I’ve played a lot of first person shooters and I enjoy them. The difference in this game is, nobody shoots back. It opens with this very basic character and has very simple controls that take a few moments to figure out. The character is a blob, kind of a shadow of a person. In fact, all the characters are shadows. As the cretin walks, his feet look like all broken apart like he’s a wraith, or he’s wading in darkness or blood or something. I’m not sure what the author was trying to convey with this effect. It’s kind of creepy.

The game opens and the words on the screen say “Take the Glock”. You walk over and you hit action and you get the gun. Then you go into your mother’s bedroom and the words tell you, “Shoot your mom.” So you do and if you do, you get rewarded with the AR-15 rifle and the car keys. (After you’ve shot your mom numerous time to make sure she’s dead.)

So then the scene fades and you appear at the school, breaking in through the window. With the rifle raised, you go from room to room shooting teachers and students. Nobody fights back. The game is pretty slow as the character’s walking and his reaction time really sucks. That’s why, when you walk into a room, some of the kids get away because they run too fast for you to take aim at them. There are plenty of opportunities for you to kill because many of the victims just cower in place and that allows you to walk up and shoot them. There is a little blood and it’s over and you move on to the next one.

Once you get to the end of the game, you hit x and the game is over, the police arrive. The game pretty much froze for me after that, but you get the gist. It’s pretty sick and not in the good millennial way. Other articles mention that there is a place at the end where you can sign a pro-gun control petition. But because the game froze for me I never got to this point. Whatever.

There are several problems I have with this game, other than it’s sick, broken and wrong and the author should get psychiatric care immediately. While the moron who perpetrated this horrendous crime did have the AR-15 rifle in the car, for whatever reason, he didn’t carry it into the building. He had two Glock pistols. More than enough to do his awful deed. Obviously, historical accuracy was not the developer’s goal. It’s not cool for the developer or the anti-gun crowd to have a pair of Glocks in the wraith-like killer’s hands. It’s the AR’s fault and that is why it has to appear in the game. Ban long guns that look black and scary.

Number two: where is the security guard? Oh right, there was none. If there had been a guard with a gun, in real life and in this work of virtual fiction, the ‘game’ would be over almost before it began. Shooter walks in with a gun, guard sees him, guard shoots killer, game over.

So the developer of this game has achieved his goal by starting conversations like this one. He’s grabbed a headline or two. Likely we won’t hear the last of him. The actual killer has grabbed headlines too and we should really have conversations about mental health, access to guns and ammo and whether or not it is now time to have armed guards at our public and private schools.

There was a Facebook meme I saw recently that spelled it out for me really well. It said basically, we protect the President, Congress, Banks, important celebrities etc. with guns. We protect our schools where our precious children reside most of the day with a sign that says ‘no guns allowed’. How stupid is that?!

The lasting impression I get from this is that guns, once again are not solely to blame for this and other massacres, people with serious mental issues are. It strikes me more than ever that the Founding Fathers were right on so many levels by enumerating our God given right to self defense by granting us the right to bear arms, as written in the Second Amendment. In the right hands, a gun will save a life. In the wrong hands, a gun can cause tragedy. Criminals never follow the laws, there is always a way for them to cause harm. Why would anyone want to deprive the people of their right of self-defense?

The Revolutionary Founders were worried about Indian attacks, criminals and the British Army. They had muskets to defend themselves. Today criminals have access to much more harmful weapons. It demonstrates why the average person needs a gun to defend themselves in this day and age.

Now you’ve got kids playing the knockout game in large urban cities. You can’t walk down the street anymore without some kid attempting to be cool attempting to punch your lights out just for the fun of it and to impress his friends. I would rather have a gun to protect myself than have nothing at all.

Barack Obama famously said that his grandmother was the typical white person who would cross the street to avoid being confronted by black kids. Well, I think grandma was pretty smart. It’s not safe to walk down the street any more, so it is more important than ever to be suspicious and take precautions. I would take it a step further. Show the kids your gun and make them cross the street.

It’s not that the black kids are the problem. There is enough blame to go around, most school shooters are white. The problem is that we don’t teach values to our kids any more in the public school. Take the Ten Commandments out of schools, take prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance out of schools, and this is what you get. Tell the kids they are evolved from dung beetles with no hope for eternity, no different from other animals and the kids will act like animals. Teach them that they are accountable to their Maker and you will get a much different outcome. Perhaps the biggest problem in schools won’t be teenage pregnancy, violence and dropping out, it’ll be little Johnny chewing bubble gum in class.

And then we won’t hear about these awful school shootings and these moronic game developers ever again.

God bless the victims of Sandy Hook and bring them relief from their pain.

Check out out this You Tube video posted by Secular Talk. The author comes to different conclusions than I do, but still makes some valid points.

Obama’s firing of General Officers Demonstrates Third World Mentality

by Jeremy Griffith
American Millennium Online

The Proxy In Chief, Barack H. Obama won’t fire his loyal minions like Kathleen Sebilius or Eric Holder, because in the Liberal Progressive Worldview, you reward your friends and punish your enemies. That he is now firing top military brass demonstrates that the president is afraid of them and is displaying a Banana Republic Third World View.


As you may know, nine General Officers of the Army, Navy and Air Forces have been fired, some for cause some not. Some believe this a purge; Obama is merely getting rid of people he feels may be disloyal. There is speculation that there is a litmus test for the president. The Generals are a threat to him like the Generals of the Army in Egypt were a threat to Egypt’s former president, who was replaced by a military leader rather recently.


You may remember that the president invested a lot of hope in the Arab Spring with deposed the former president of Egypt and replaced him with a minion of the Muslim Brotherhood. Now that president has been replaced by the Army and that same Army is cracking down on the Brotherhood, to the very glad support of the Egyptian citizenry.


Obama must recognize this sea change, and like all Third World leaders, he is rightfully afraid. It’s too bad because the US has never acted like the Third World, until we elected Barack Obama. You see, the Generals possess something the president fundamentally lacks, leadership! You don’t get to be a General or an Admiral, especially one with four stars on your collar lest you’ve been vetted by other leaders. These are the best and brightest and each has held commands at many levels. It is only natural for someone like Barack, who’s never led anyone or even held a real job, to be intimidated by these types. That is why they are being given their walking papers.


There’s an analogy that I think will illustrate this. Back in the 80s there was this classic sci fi film, Star Trek II, The Wrath of Khan staring Bill Shatner, Leondard Nimoy and Ricardo Monltelban. Captain James T. Kirk, Captain of the intrepid Enterprise and his loyal first officer, Spock are locked in an epic contest of wills against genetically enhanced super-genius Khan Noonian Singh! Khan has a score to settle against Kirk and steals a vessel, the Reliant, in order to exact his vengeance. Both ships are damaged in Khan’s surprise attack and in order to even the odds, Kirk orders the Enterprise into an ionized nebula. The interference of the Nebula causes force screens to lower, wrecks havoc with tactical displays and diminishes sensors. Sauce for the Goose, says Spock. The odds would be even. Each vessel blindly searches for the advantage over the other in the ghostly mist of the nebula.


The science officer, Mr. Spock notices something, a potential weakness. Khan is flying his ship like it was a surface vessel, displaying 2D thinking. The combatants are traveling in space, a 3D medium. Kirk uses Khan’s inexperienced mistake to get the advantage. Dropping down under the enemy ship, he gets a position behind Khan’s Reliant and lets him have it. An epic moment in sci fi history.


By all intents and purposes, Barack Obama is a genius, just like Khan. He’s learned his lessons well, a constitutional scholar and all that. But he really doesn’t understand or really like the constitution. He’s been trained at the feet of committed socialists and communists. He doesn’t understand or appreciate a constitutional Republic at all. That is why Obama is trapped in 2D, Third World mentality. He doesn’t know us at all.


If Obama is planning for a coup, firing of the Generals would do no good. They are still out there and they can still affect their influence in retirement. The Generals and Colonels behind them, after all what is a colonel but a general who hasn’t got his star yet? Were brought up through the ranks by the generals above them. All have sworn allegiance to the country and sworn to protect the Constitution, something progressives like Obama view as an obstacle of negative liberties that limits his power.


He’s right, the Constitution does limit his power. The president can’t do anything about the Tea Party or Congressional conservatives, so he has to attack the Generals. It’s a fruitless effort, but it does demonstrate his Third World Progressive mentality.


Here’s something to think about. Each of the 50 states and Porto Rico have militias. It’s called the National Guard. Each of those states and territories have a Two-Star Adjutant General at the head of them, each operating under the authority of their respect Governors. Over half of the Governors are conservative Republicans. Firing Generals at the Pentagon does Barack no good if he is worried about a coup. He should be worrying about the Governors and their respective militias. One conservative Governor, like Perry of Texas or Brewer of Arizona, could rally the states against the President and give him a very hard time, and that is what he should fear.


But that’s not going to happen, at least not soon. Because, we are not the Third or Developing World. We’re America and any fight we launch against the president will be a political one. The Tea Party and conservatives around the country are continuing to fight the good fight to legally pry this loser and his minions from office. With all the failures of this administration: Benghazi, Fast and Furious, the Failure of the Obamacare website and the termination of millions of insurance policies around the country, this president is damaging his party’s brand. As he serves what’s left of his lame duck term, it will be increasingly difficult for president to accomplish anything, and anyone running for the blue will have a hard time making headway when the next election comes around.