Potpourri

God Bless America

2010-07-04T08:33:00.000-04:00

"While the storm clouds gather far across the sea,
Let us swear allegiance to a land that's free,
Let us all be grateful for a land so fair,
As we raise our voices in a solemn prayer. "

God Bless America,
Land that I love.
Stand beside her, and guide her
Thru the night with a light from above.
From the mountains, to the prairies,
To the oceans, white with foam

God bless America, My home sweet home.

Words and music by Irvin Berlin

OBAMA BOTCHES LADY LIBERTY SPEECH?

2010-07-03T02:48:00.001-04:00

foxnews.com
by Todd Starnes

President Obama’s first major speech on immigration contained several factual errors.

He concluded his remarks at American University with the moving story of Emma Lazarus, the woman who wrote the sonnet, “The New Colossus,” for the Statue of Liberty, in 1883.

President Obama said Lazarus was “inspired by what she saw and heard, she wrote down her thoughts and donated a piece of work to help pay for the construction of a new statue – the Statue of Liberty which actually was funded in part by small donations from people across America.”

There’s just one problem — the story is incorrect. According to the National Park Service, the Statue of Liberty was a gift from the people of France. The NPS told FOX News Radio French donors gave money to the Franco-American Union, a non-profit organization that gave the statue to the United States.

The statue’s pedestal, however, was paid for by contributions through an American branch of the Franco-American Union.

According to the Park Service, Lazarus’ poem was sold at auction by the pedestal committee for $1,500.

The sonnet was engraved on a bronze plaque and affixed to the inner walls of the pedestal in the early 1900’s.

The president also misquoted her sonnet. According to New York Magazine, he recited the line as “yearning to be free.” instead of “yearning to breathe free.”

Michelle was right when she said: "Barack knows that we are going to have to make sacrifices; we are going to have to change our conversation; we're going to have to change our traditions, our history; we're going to have to move into a different place as a nation."

Obama Gives Part of Arizona to Mexico

2010-06-25T13:40:00.002-04:00

Girly Man

2010-06-23T15:59:00.000-04:00

It's bad that we have a communist, marxist, socialist, progressive - take your pick - in the White House, but it might be worse to have an effeminate, prissy, girly "man" in the White House.

The Greatest Threat

2010-06-15T09:11:00.000-04:00

Killers in White Coats: Physicians and Nurses Kill the Unwary!

2010-06-13T04:00:00.000-04:00

Canada Free Press
by Dr. Don Boys

...Medical people kill the unaware, the unarmed, and the unwilling! News reports reveal, “A high proportion of deaths classed as euthanasia in Belgium involved patients who did not ask for their lives to be ended, a study found. More than 100 nurses admitted to researchers that they had taken part in ‘terminations without request or consent.’” Exactly what we predicted if euthanasia became legal!

Euthanasia means “good or easy death,” but call it what it is–the right to kill the helpless, the innocent and the “useless.” It is a ploy to get rid of all the “useless eaters,” people who take up space on the earth and consume the resources.
...It also shows our lack of courage, for you will notice that these brave, bold, and brash killers are going after those who can’t fight back! But then, cowards have always done that!
...Dr. Joseph Fletcher wrote, “If it is believed that the well-being of persons is the highest goal, then it follows that either suicide or mercy killing could be the right thing to do in some exigent and tragic circumstances.”
...Note his positive spin: Killing the helpless is the “right thing” to do. Well, the helpless sure would not agree with that. Neither does God. We are living in a day when men call good, evil and evil good. Right is wrong and wrong is right.
...Geriatrics magazine opined, “How long shall life be preserved when there is no redeeming social value?” Ah, yes, “redeeming social value.”
...If one is blind or deaf or dumb (like most liberals) then snuff them out. After all, they can’t enjoy life the way “normal” people do.
...Dr. Glanville Williams wrote that he wants “humanitarian infanticide” (killing babies after birth) and euthanasia for handicapped kids. Why? Because they don’t have the quality of life that “normal” people have. They are also so much trouble, aren’t they? And expensive!
...However, the trophy for muddled thinking (non-thinking) goes to Dr. Robert Williams who wrote in Northwest Medicine, “planning to prevent overpopulation of the earth must also include euthanasia….” We need to kill off the helpless because they are taking up too much space on earth without producing anything in return
...Those people who are fanatics about the earth’s population must not travel outside their ivory towers very often.
...In fact, every person on earth could live in Alaska with each family getting about 3,500 square feet of living space!
...These fools don’t understand that if they keep breathing, they will one day be old or ill with not much quality of life. Promoting euthanasia is not good long-term personal planning.
...Would you want to be in a hospital with a euthanasia-biased physician (who has a missionary zeal for donor organs) standing over you with scalpel in hand? “No way that could happen,” says the Innocent One. Oh, but it is happening right now. In the Netherlands, it happens every day! The U.S. News and World Report revealed, “Contrary to law, some three-fifths of all Dutch cases of euthanasia go unreported….1 in 5 of the unreported cases involved the most vexing kind of euthanasia, death without a patient’s consent.” Say WHAT? Many more people are being killed in the Netherlands than is being reported and 20% of them are killed without the patient’s permission or knowledge! Those physicians are killers in white coats. They smile when they kill you. They have “good” motives: they want to help someone else using your organs. They are also making room for someone else in the over-populated world.
...But that’s not always true. One 27-year-old ballet dancer was killed by her physician because she had arthritis in her toes and could not continue dancing. After all, her “quality of life” was not what she wanted. She couldn’t dance any more. Therefore, she was killed.
...You can rest assured that not many innocent, helpless, burdensome, and sickly people are clamoring for mercy killing.
...A society is measured by the way it treats its young, old, helpless, and ill, and God warns in Proverbs 21:13, “Whoso stoppeth his ears at the cry of the poor, he also shall cry himself, but shall not be heard.” While the state may close its eyes to the “mercy killings” going on in America and the world, God’s eyes are not shut, and I would not want to get caught in God’s wheels of judgment. They grind very fine.

We are here to minister not to murder, and make no mistake: Euthanasia, mistakenly called “mercy killing,” is murder.

A Shrink Asks: What's Wrong with Obama?

2010-06-12T09:48:00.000-04:00

American Thinker
by Robin of Berkeley

...So what is the matter with Obama? Conservatives have been asking this question for some time. I've written a number of articles trying to solve the mystery.

Even some liberals are starting to wonder. James Carville railed about Obama's blasé attitude after the catastrophic oil spill. The New York Times' Maureen Dowd revamped Obama's "Yes We Can" motto into "Will We Ever?"
The liberal women of the TV show "The View" have expressed sympathy for Michelle Obama's living with a man so out of touch. Peggy Noonan, hardly a vehement Obama foe, recently pronounced him disconnected.
...Many people attribute Obama's oddness to his narcissism. True, Obama has a gargantuan ego, and he is notoriously thin-skinned.

Yet a personality disorder like narcissism does not explain Obama's strangeness: his giggling while being asked about the economy; his continuing a shout-out rather than announcing the Ft. Hood shootings; or his vacations, golfing, partying and fundraising during the calamitous oil spill.
Take also Obama's declaring on the "Today Show" that he wants to know whose ass to kick. Consummate narcissists would never stoop to this vulgar display of adolescent machismo.
Obama is flat when passion is needed; he's aggressive when savvy is required. What's most worrisome is that Obama doesn't even realize that his behavior is inappropriate.
...If I saw a client as disconnected as him, the first thing I would wonder: Is something wrong with his brain? And I'd consider the following theoretical diagnostic possibilities.
...--Physical problems: There are a multitude of physiological conditions that can cause people to act strangely.
...Drugs and alcohol: Damage to the brain from drugs and alcohol can also cause significant cognitive impairments. Obama once said that there were 57 states -- and didn't correct himself. Memory problems can be caused by both illicit and prescription drug use.
...--Asperger's Syndrome: Also known as high-functioning autism, Asperger's causes deficits in social skills. A person with Asperger's can't read social cues. Consequently, he can be insensitive and hurtful without even knowing it.
...--Mental Illness: Obama's family tree is replete with the unbalanced. His maternal great-grandmother committed suicide. His grandfather, Stanley Dunham, was particularly unhinged: He was expelled from high school for punching his principal; named his daughter Stanley because he wanted a boy; and exposed young Barry to not just drunken trash talk, but unrestricted visits with alleged pedophile Frank Marshall Davis (who might or might not be Obama's biological father). Barack Sr. was an abusive, alcoholic bigamist.

Since mental illness runs in the family, does Obama have any signs? Yes and no.
...While Obama doesn't appear to hallucinate, he seems to have delusions. His believing he has a Messiah-like special gift smacks of grandiose delusions.
...Along with a delusional disorder, Obama may fit for a mild psychotic disorder called schizotypal disorder. It may explain some of Obama's oddness
...--Trauma: My gut tells me that Obama was seriously traumatized in childhood. His mother disregarded his basic needs, dragged him all over the place, and ultimately abandoned him.

But I think there may be something even more insidious in his family background. While I can't prove it, the degree of Obama's disconnect reminds me of my sexually abused clients.
...Apparently, young Barry was left in the care of Communist Frank Marshall Davis, who admitted to molesting a 13-year-old girl. As a teenager, Obama wrote a disturbing poem, "Pop," that evoked images of sexual abuse -- for instance, describing dual amber stains on both his and "Pop's" shorts.
...Along with the brain issues are personality disorders: narcissism, paranoia, passive-aggressiveness. There's even the possibility of the most destructive character defect of all, an antisocial personality. Untreated abuse can foster antisocial traits, especially among boys.
...If my assessment is accurate, what does this mean?

It means that liberals need to wake up and spit out the Kool-Aid...and that conservatives should put aside differences, band together, and elect as many Republicans as possible.
Because Obama will not change. He will not learn from his mistakes. He will not grow and mature from on-the-job experience. In fact, over time, Obama will likely become a more ferocious version of who he is today.
Why? Because this is a damaged person. Obama's fate was sealed years ago growing up in his strange and poisonous family. Later on, his empty vessel was filled with the hateful bile of men like Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers.
Obama will not evolve; he will not rise to the occasion; he will not become the man he was meant to be. This is for one reason and one reason alone:
He is not capable of it.

Rest of article at above link.

S.C. Sen. Nominee Was Kicked Out of Army, Has Felony Charge Pending

2010-06-09T23:25:00.002-04:00

abcnews.com

Alvin Greene , the surprise South Carolina Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate, was kicked out of the Army last year and is facing a pending felony charge, according to court records obtained by ABC News.

Greene, who has yet to enter a plea or be indicted, was arrested in November and charged with "disseminating, procuring or promoting obscenity" in Richland County, S.C., and faces up to five years in prison if convicted.

The U.S. Senate candidate was captured on video surveillance Nov. 4 trying to show "obscene photographs from a website" to a female victim on the University of South Carolina campus and go to her room without her consent, according to the affidavit.

Earlier today, the 32-year-old military veteran, who lives with his parents, declined to discuss the incident with ABC News during an interview at his home in Manning.

"I have no comment about that, I have no comment," he told ABC News.

Greene has been unemployed and living in his rural hometown 60 miles south of Columbia. He doesn't own a cell phone and there is no computer in his house.

He returned to Manning, SC, last August when he was involuntarily forced out of the Army after a 13 year career because "things just weren't working ... it was hard to say." He had served as an intelligence specialist in the Air Force and later as a unit supply specialist in the Army.

Article at above link.

2010-06-08T08:38:00.004-04:00

Herman Cain

Did you think that anti-reform in South Carolina has any limits?

2010-06-07T05:57:00.000-04:00

RedState
by Moe Lane

If you did, let me break it to you: no, it doesn’t.

The video (via Palmetto State Politics) is here: flip ahead to 5:53, where Lt. Governor candidate Larry Richter casually calls into question the combat service of Lt. Governor candidate Bill Connor. Repeatedly. With a smirking sneer and a greasy awareness that he won’t get decked for it. Some points to address there:

•Bill Connor is a combat veteran (Afghanistan).

•Larry Richter is a draft-dodger and a former judge who left the judicial circuit under circumstances that involved repeated uses of the phrase ‘allegations of cocaine use.’

•Bill Connor is a reform and Tea Party candidate for SC LT GOV.

•Larry Richter is a crony of state Senator Jake Knotts, who is of course a crony of Lt. Governor Andre Bauer, who is of course currently trying to accuse current SC-GOV front runner Nikki Haley of being a dirty adulteress without any of it spilling on his own hands. Not that he’s succeeding.

•Bill Connor’s voters are Nikki Haley’s voters, and vice versa. It’s thus in Bauer’s interests for Connor voters to be discouraged, and in Richter’s best interests for Haley voters to be discouraged.

See more at Ace of Spades and Blackfive.

Erick was scrupulous about separating out his approval of Bill Connor from the official approval of RedState, and I’ll do the same: it is merely my opinion that voters next Tuesday give both Nikki and Bill an outright majority in the primary. It will be an inadequate substitute for having Larry Richter, Jake Knotts, Andre Bauer, et al horsewhipped - but we live in an imperfect world.

Nikki Haley.

Bill Connor.

Tuesday.

Moe Lane

2010-06-05T02:08:00.000-04:00

Disasters and Double Standards

2010-06-04T09:24:00.001-04:00

Front Page Mag
by Andrew Cline

Remember the big stories in the national media when George W. Bush waited four days to tour New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina hit? Here’s a pop quiz: How long did it take President Obama to visit the Gulf coast after the Deepwater Horizon oil leak began?

The answer is 13 days. Here is how The Washington Post described that visit:

“He flew in and out of New Orleans on May 2, drove two hours to a Coast Guard station and got a briefing before taking a quick helicopter tour. He did not even see the oil slick.”

Mark Knoller of CBS News reported last week that in the first 39 days after each respective catastrophe, Obama visited the Gulf coast twice; Bush visited New Orleans seven times. But remember, this is not Obama’s Katrina!

Now imagine if President Bush, five weeks into one of the largest oil leaks in U.S. history, and without ever having seen the slick, jetted across the country to headline a $17,600 per-person fund-raiser at the home of an oil-fortune heir. How do you think the national press would have treated that? Bush didn’t do that, which is why you didn’t hear about it. President Obama did — which is why you didn’t hear about it.

The media covered Obama’s trip to San Francisco to raise money for Barbara Boxer. Some news outlets even reported that Obama spoke at a private reception at the home of Democratic Party donor Gordon Getty. But few reported that Getty is the heir to the Getty Oil fortune. For instance, the New York Times reports on Obama’s trip never identified Getty as an oil heir. Do you think that would have been omitted had Bush been Getty’s guest?

What if, hours after the head of the U.S. Minerals Management Service left her job over Washington’s mishandling of that giant oil spill, President Bush held a press conference (his first in months) and, when asked about that agency head, could not say whether she had resigned or been fired? What if, hours later, the White House stated that the President knew all along that she had been dismissed, but that story was contradicted by the Cabinet secretary — the one who supposedly did the dismissing — having said that morning during a congressional hearing that she’d resigned voluntarily?

That happened in the Obama administration last week. Where are the outraged cries of incompetence and dishonesty?

Can you imagine the charges of buffoonery that would pour forth from New York, Washington, and Los Angeles, if the George W. Bush administration asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a state law that had been signed into law by one of Bush’s own cabinet secretaries?

Well, last week the Obama administration did exactly that. The Department of Justice asked the court to overturn a 2007 Arizona immigration law that punishes employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano signed the bill into law when she was Arizona governor.

All of these events were reported in the mainstream media. But they were not reported in the same way they would have been had a Republican been president. The point of this criticism is not to say that Bush was great and Obama stinks. Bush was not a great president. The point is to illustrate the double standard most of the media have.

Media bias exhibits itself in the subtle favoring of liberal politicians and ideas. The same rules don’t apply to the left and the right. The left is presumed to have good intentions, the right bad. So when Bush took four days to get to New Orleans after Katrina hit, it was evidence of racism, elitism, a general lack of concern for the little people. But when it took Obama three times as long to visit the Gulf Coast, there was silence.

When a left-wing administration makes mistakes or contradicts itself, that is simply human nature. When a right-of-center administration does, it is incompetence or duplicity. Or both.

At least some on the left are calling out Obama for his inattentiveness to the Gulf oil spill. That’s no substitute for the press setting the national narrative by holding him to the same standards to which it held Bush. But it’s a start.

Memorial Day 2010

2010-05-31T01:22:00.001-04:00

All Gave Some...

And Some Gave All

Obama seems unable to cut the mustard as each incident makes it appear

2010-05-30T03:38:00.000-04:00

Canada Free Press
by Jerry McConnell

...We have had a few Presidents that had great problems at “cutting the mustard” while most of them have managed quite nicely.

...Obama’s latest attempt to cut the mustard with negative results has been his feeble attempts to look presidential in the face of the worst oil spill in this country’s history.

...NBC News on Channel Seven on late afternoon of May 28, 2010 showed a video film clip with Obama praising himself (as usual) stating “I am on top of things here in Louisiana.”
But Mr. Obama, I wanted to ask, instead of being “on top of things”, shouldn’t you better get started on “getting to the bottom of the problem?” And to think that just yesterday, he said he was going on vacation but apparently someone with more smarts (Joe Biden?) got to him and advised against it.

...FOXNews.com addressed the issue with this online headline and story, “Stressed Out or Tone Deaf? Obama Chicago Vacation Raises Eyebrows” on May 17, 2010: “But President Obama’s decision to skip the traditional Memorial Day ceremony in Arlington while on his second vacation since the BP oil spill began has some wondering what the schedule says about his priorities.”

...It appears that he would rather “cut and run” than “cut the mustard.” It would be fitting for someone who really and truly was too inept for the job. As his performance in office so far has produced just about a zero or minus zero capability score.

...For a narcissistic man such as Obama is, it is incredible to imagine that he would avoid meeting with the press as often as he apparently does; no meets with them in over 300 days represents more than EIGHTY PERCENT of his first year in office. To me that suggests ineptness or fear of being trapped by an errant answer from some aggressive reporter; OR BOTH.

...another matter that has jumped up to bite the current usurper on his bottom called the Joe Sestak, possible grounds for impeachment, problem. (If this keeps up Obama will refuse to talk with anyone named Joe, just look at the problem Joes; Joe the Plumber, Joe Sestak, Joe Wilson, and even Joe Biden. It’s his bad omen. And if he keeps messing with Arizona, Sheriff Joe Arpaio could be his downfall.)

...In the meeting with the press on Thursday, Christopher Ruddy reports that Obama said that an official response would be coming shortly. To me that means in Obama-speak, that as soon as they’ve arranged for even more bribes and have a pigeon fall guy arranged, a statement which exonerates Obama will be made.

Then guess what? They actually did notify the press not too many hours later and by now you may have heard who is the “fall guy” for this farce; if not, by gosh I’ll tell you: It’s Bubba! Yeah! Bill Clinton is going to say that he passed the word from Sestak.

...Now how much bailout money will old gullible Bubba grab from the White House for his part in this charade? We’ll probably never know. But it helps to add fuel to the fire of incompetence and ineptness in our current Administration.

God I’m tired already of writing about this absurd bunch of bungling, un-proficient, heavy-handed crooks. The liberals called Nixon a crook; oh, how I bet he is laughing now.

Rest of article at above link.

Obama Continues his Relentless Destruction of America

2010-04-19T05:00:00.001-04:00

Canada Free Press
by Sher Zieve

...If it is a statement that cannot—or will not—be backed up with facts and We-the-People demand to see the proof, Obama & Co denigrate, malign and call us “racists and terrorists.” Specifically, if we demand to see Obama’s birth certificate (the real one—not the Photo-shopped phony Birth certificate that appears from time to time on the Internet), we are called “racist birthers.” Still, Obama is allowed to skirt the law and present any apparent piece of forgery he wants, while (in order to shame others into remaining silent) using the excuse of his half-white/half-black lineage.

Isn’t that the true racism? And all the while, Obama & Co is working relentlessly to dissolve the United States of America—with, thus far, no one stopping him.

If we disagree with Obama on issues of substance, for example his obvious-to-those-with-working-eyes anti-job/anti-prosperity legislation, such as the thus far peaceful TEA Party movement we are called extremists and DHS and the FBI are now watching those who protest against the Marxist Totalitarian ObamaGov. In order to silence any and all dissent against the now firmly Despotic US government, even the old leftie and former Prez Bill Clinton spoke out recently on the TEA Party movement’s anti-ObamaGovernment stance—comparing it to the Oklahoma City Federal Building bombing. Now, that’s truly extreme! And, if we speak out against Obama’s pro-abortion commands—which include a baby’s murder even if the attempted abortion was botched and produced a viable living child—we are referred to as “Bible-toters” and the child is to be left to die. Obama & Co continues its demands that “unwanted fetuses” (mostly by the anti-human US Marxist-Party-controlled government) lives be terminated—and quickly! Ending the Right to Life is essential toward destroying the USA.

...Obama has already nationalized—that is, HE controls—the banking and auto industries. Now Obama, Marxist Party members of Congress—including RINO Marxist-Lite Sen. Lindsey Graham—are pushing for a new gas tax to resume and resuscitate the proven hoax that is/was “global warming.” Soon, Obama and his minions will—yet again—try to cram Cap & Tax down our throats. And if ObamaCare is any example, they will push through their Totalitarian Marxist agenda despite strong opposition from We-the-People.

...Obama & Co is, also, now pushing for his eventual control of any and all businesses that have virtually anything to do with consumers. That’s ALL businesses, folks.

...In order to fight the beast-government that has seized, currently inhabits and is daily demeaning OUR White House we must be equally relentless and tireless in our resolve to return our Republic and Constitution to their rightful places; as the form of government and its documented authority showing that We-the-People run said government—not the current tyrants in office. We must ensure that we rid ourselves of them forever and that any tricks by OUR current government “leaders” to stop any and all fair elections will be met with the strongest of opposition from We-the-People. Please remember what Jefferson said: “When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.” He also mentioned: “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” In these increasingly desperate times, those are truly words to understand thoroughly and to live by.

Oh and by the way, King George III labeled Jefferson and our founding fathers and mothers terrorists, too.

Rest of article at above link.

NPR archive describes Obama as 'Kenyan-born'

2010-04-09T13:06:00.003-04:00

worldnetdaily
by Bob Unruh

...Editor's Note: Shortly after this WND report was posted, NPR changed its web page to delete the reference to "Kenyan-born" Sen. Obama.

...Archives for the tax-supported organization reveal that a 2008 report described then-Sen. Barack Obama as "Kenyan-born" and a "son of Africa."

...NPR's promotion for the story included a brief description of West African correspondent Ofeibea Quist-Arcton, who "describes the stories that have been exciting, including the U.S. presidential race of Kenyan-born Sen. Barack Obama."

...At about 9:45 of the audio report, interviewer Michelle Martin said "a son of Africa. Barack Obama is poised to at least have the opportunity to become the next president of the United States." She asked, "How does this campaign look overseas?"

..."There's huge interest. Not just in Kenya. All over the continent. … The fact that a black man and one with African blood has managed to get this far … you know, I think has made young people sit up and listen and watch and follow the campaign and made the older generations who lived through the colonization and independence say, 'Well, well, well. So it can happen in American too."

...WND also reported this week when a video appeared in which Michelle Obama said her husband's "home country" was Kenya.

The video, posted April 3 on YouTube and forwarded by a score of Internet e-mails, shows Michelle Obama saying, "When we took our trip to Africa and visited his home country in Kenya, we took a public HIV test."

The reference drew attention because of the claim made in numerous lawsuits and other challenges to Obama's occupancy of the Oval Office that he is not eligible to be president under the requirement of Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution that the president be a "natural born citizen."

...At one point, there were reports that even Obama's grandmother claimed being in attendance at his birth in Africa.

...According to a compilation of images at a military forum, another reference was made in 2008 in the Nigerian Observer.

Under a byline from Solomon Asowata and a Washington dateline, the report says, "Americans will today go to the polls to elect their next president with Democratic Party candidate, Senator Barack Obama largely favoured to win. The Kenyan-born Senator will, however, face a stiff competition from his Republican counterpart…"

...It cited another report from African Travel Magazine that said, "As Kenyan born U.S. Senator Barack Obama jets into Kenya today as part of his African tour, concerns have once again been raised on the security preparations for other visitors and residents. ...."

...WND documented earlier several other statements linking Obama and Kenya.

These included the apparently archived article from the Sunday Standard in Kenya.

The report begins, "Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack (sic) Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race on Friday night amid a furor over lurid sex club allegations."

Sunday Standard

...Last year, an African news site and an MSNBC broadcaster referred to President Obama's birthplace as being outside of the United States.

Network correspondent Mara Schiavocampo was reporting on the celebratory atmosphere in Accra, Ghana, immediately prior to Obama's visit to the west African nation.

Interviewing a person who appeared to be a shop operator, she stated, "Barack Obama is Kenyan … but Ghanaians are still proud of him."

...Complicating the situation is Obama's decision to spend sums exceeding $1.7 million to avoid releasing an original long-form state birth certificate that would put to rest the questions.

...WND also has reported that among the documentation not yet available for Obama includes his kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records and his adoption records.

...WND also reported previously when Michelle Obama contradicted Obama's story that he lived with his mother and father for several years in Hawaii after he was born before his father left to pursue a graduate degree.

Michelle Obama said her husband's mother, Ann Dunham, was "very young and very single" when she gave birth to the future U.S. president.

Her comments undermine the official story as told by Barack Obama – that Dunham was married to his father, Barack Obama Sr., at the time of birth.

The remarks were made by Michelle Obama during a July 2008 round table at the University of Missouri. Obama was responding to criticism of her husband's presidential campaign speeches about fatherhood and faith-based initiatives.

Read entire article at above link.

President Obama Needs to Prove His Constitutional Eligibility to Be Commander-in-Chief

2010-04-09T00:50:00.002-04:00

by Terrence Lakin,MD

"Last week, I entered Walter Reed Army Hospital to notify the Department of Defense that I would refuse to obey any orders from my commanding officers -- including President Obama -- until the president produces his original birth certificate. After nearly eighteen years of wearing the military uniform of the country I have proudly served, including overseas assignments in imminent danger/combat areas in Bosnia and Afghanistan, I felt compelled to take this step.

I made this decision from much deliberation, after lengthy consultations with many friends, family members, and colleagues, and I firmly believe that all servicemen and women, and the American public, have the right to know the truth about President Obama's constitutional eligibility to serve as Commander-in-Chief.

As military officers, we all take a solemn oath upon commissioning into the Uniformed Services. In this oath, we swear to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Upholding the law is an essential part of our role as citizens; in the military, we are the ultimate protectors of that law. The Constitution is our social compact, which safeguards all of us and ensures the "equal rights" that we are entitled to as American citizens.

Since Nuremberg, My Lai, and even Abu Ghraib more recently, the military has been taught the hard lessons of following illegal orders. Any reasonable person looking critically at the information and evidence currently in the public domain about Obama's birthplace would have questions about President Obama's claim to be a natural born citizen. I made the decision to disobey all military orders, including my deployment order to Afghanistan, in pursuit of the truth of whether President Obama can legally occupy the high post that he holds today and which entitles him to send servicemembers into harm's way.

The United States serves an example to the rest of the world of a stable, civilized, democratic government, where all men are equal under the law and the rule of law is cherished and obeyed. The U.S. military teaches and promotes the rule of law and civilian control of the military to many other nations and military forces around the world. Every soldier learns what constitutes a lawful order and is encouraged to stand up and object to unlawful orders. This is called the "duty to disobey."

My deployment orders for a second tour in Afghanistan included a requirement to bring copies of my birth certificate. I would be glad to obey this order and provide a certified copy of my original birth certificate with common, standard identifiers, including the name of an attending physician and a hospital. Every day in transactions across the country, American citizens are required to prove their identity; standards for identification have become stricter since the terrorist attacks of 9/11.

Since fall 2008, I have been troubled by reports that the president's original birth certificate remains concealed from public view along with other records which, if released, would quickly end questions surrounding his place of birth and "natural born" status. Many people mistook the online Certification of Live Birth for an original birth certificate. Until the summer of 2009, the Hawaiian Department of Homelands would not accept this Certification of Live Birth to determine native Hawaiian identity -- the Department insisted upon also reviewing an original birth certificate.

Many do not understand that the online document was from 2007, generated by computer, laser-printed, and merely a certification that there is something on file which may or may not be sufficient proof of a birth in Hawaii. An original birth certificate could be the underlying document that presumably includes a hospital and attending physician's or midwife's name. Such a document should lay to rest the "natural born" dispute. This controversy was further escalated by media reports that gave two different hospital names for Obama's birthplace -- even today, the public does not know what doctor delivered the then-future president or which hospital was the site of his birth. No eyewitnesses have stepped forward to affirm that he was born in Hawaii in 1961. Under immigration laws in force at the time, if born in Kenya to a father who was not a U.S. citizen, Barack Obama had no right to American citizenship of any kind, and he could never qualify as "natural born." This is why determining his actual birthplace is crucial.

In 2008, after pressure from news media, President Obama's rival, candidate McCain, produced an original birth certificate from the Panama Canal Zone; a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing examined and affirmed his "natural born" status and constitutional eligibility to serve as president. The U.S. Senate was strangely silent about President Obama's eligibility despite statements from Kenyan citizens that he was born there, evidently including his paternal grandmother and the Ambassador from Kenya to the U.S. during a November 2008 radio interview. Hawaiian state officials claim that they cannot release an original birth certificate without Obama's consent, declaring that the public has no "tangible interest" in seeing this vital birth record.

I attempted without success through my chain of command for over a year to get answers to the questions surrounding the president's eligibility. I was told that I have no standing to make this inquiry, and moreover, that no one in DoD could answer this question. I made inquiries, unsuccessfully, through my congressional delegation, which simply referred my questions back to DoD. No one I spoke to was able to offer any evidence that the president is "natural born." The burden of proof, it seems, must rest with the White House-- with president Obama himself, as these records are his, and he has chosen to conceal them at considerable legal expense. Remarkably, there is no enforcement mechanism for the Constitution's Article II, Section 1 requirement that the president be a "natural born" citizen -- voters have largely relied on an honor system and a free press to vet candidates for the highest political office in the nation.

While President Obama's records remain hidden, public consternation is growing. The American people have the right to know that their president is constitutionally eligible to serve as Commander-in-Chief and thereby may lawfully direct servicemembers into harm's way. I will be proud to deploy to Afghanistan to further serve my country and my fellow soldiers, but I should do so only with the knowledge that this important requirement of our Constitution is respected and obeyed. Those in uniform who continue to risk their lives and give the ultimate sacrifice to the service of our country deserve to know that they do so upholding their vows to the oath of office and to the Constitution.

Until an original birth certificate is brought forward that will validate the Commander-in-Chief's constitutional eligibility and put to rest the reasonable questions surrounding it, I cannot in good conscience obey any of my military orders. Unless it is established (sufficient proof that should be easily within the president's power to provide) that he is constitutionally eligible to serve as president and Commander-in-Chief, I and all other military officers are at risk of following illegal orders.

There is no legitimate privacy right to information necessary to prove that President Obama is legally eligible to serve as Commander-in-Chief.

I remain at risk of arrest and court-martial, but am mindful always that my oath of office is to the Constitution. It fills me with great sadness that on 31 March, I declined a direct order from my Medical Brigade Commander. This is a man I honor and wished to meet in order to thank him for his unquestionable valor and courage, and yet I could not obey his order. Now, he could order my arrest at any time.

I hope that President Obama will demonstrate his respect for the U.S. Constitution and release his original birth certificate. My bags are packed, and I look forward to joining my fellow soldiers in Afghanistan, but I will deploy only with the knowledge that I am following legal orders under a lawful Commander-in-Chief.

For those readers wanting to follow my ongoing story, the American Patriot Foundation has set up a legal defense fund to help me, and they tell me that they will be posting up-to-date information about my case. Their website is safeguardourconstitution.com."

Dr. Terrence Lakin is an active duty Lieutenant Colonel who serves as Chief of Primary Care at the Pentagon's TRICARE health clinic; he has been selected for promotion to Colonel.

Newt Gingrich Says Obama in a "Fantasy"; "Potentially the Most Dangerous" President

2010-04-07T12:22:00.001-04:00

Here is a video of Newt Gingrich last night where he said President Obama is in a "fantasy" when it comes to his approach to Nuclear Weapons and containing Iran and North Korea.

Gingrich said the Iranians are "literally laughing" at Obama's threat of sanctions. The former Speaker of the House also said Obama is "potentially the most dangerous" President we have ever had, because he believes "words are a substitute for reality."

Freedom's Lighthouse

Obama’s Dangerous Views Concerning Self Defense

2010-04-06T12:23:00.002-04:00

Once again, Barack Obama proves conclusively that, regardless of where he was born, he is not an American!
by John Lillpop
Canada Free Press

...During the presidential campaign, Barack Obama made it perfectly clear that the use of disproportionate force was sometimes necessary to defend one’s self.

Of course, he was referring to Republicans challenging his presidential aspirations and other delusions of grandeur.

...As reported, in part, at the New York Times:

“WASHINGTON — President Obama said Monday that he was revamping American nuclear strategy to substantially narrow the conditions under which the United States would use nuclear weapons.

“Discussing his approach to nuclear security the day before formally releasing his new strategy, Mr. Obama described his policy as part of a broader effort to edge the world toward making nuclear weapons obsolete, and to create incentives for countries to give up any nuclear ambitions. To set an example, the new strategy renounces the development of any new nuclear weapons, overruling the initial position of his own defense secretary.

“Mr. Obama’s strategy is a sharp shift from those of his predecessors and seeks to revamp the nation’s nuclear posture for a new age in which rogue states and terrorist organizations are greater threats than traditional powers like Russia and China.”

To moon bats on the left, Obama’s arguments make perfect sense: After all, fighting patriotic Republicans is far more vital than defending America against foreign evil-doers.

Once again, Barack Obama proves conclusively that, regardless of where he was born, he is not an American!

Rest of article at above link.

Unstamped certificate suggests Obama may not be "natural born" US citizen

2010-04-06T02:43:00.001-04:00

israelinsider.com

The "birth certificate" claimed by the Barack Obama campaign is not certified as authentic and appears to be a photoshopped fake.

The image, purporting to come from the Hawaii Department of Health, has been the subject of intense skepticism in the blogosphere in the past two weeks. But now the senior spokesman of that Department has confirmed to Israel Insider what are the required features of a certified birth document -- features that Obama's purported "birth certificate" clearly lack.

The image became increasingly suspect with Israel Insider's revelation that variations of the certificate image were posted on the Photobucket image aggregation website -- including one listing the location of Obama's birth as Antarctica, one with the certificate supposedly issued by the government of North Korea, and another including a purported photo of baby Barack -- one of which has a "photo taken" time-stamp just two minutes before the article and accompanying image was posted on the left-wing Daily Kos blog.

That strongly suggests that Daily Kos obtained the image from Photobucket, not the State of Hawaii, the Obama family, or the Obama campaign. Photobucket is not generally known as a credible supplier of official vital records for any of the fifty states, and the liberties that other Photoshoppers took with the certificates confirms this.

Some of these oddities surfaced in Israel Insider's previous article on the subject, but new comparative documentary evidence presented below, and official verification obtained by Israel Insider from a senior Hawaiian official, provides the strongest confirmation yet.

An authentic Hawaiian birth certificate for another Hawaiian individual has since surfaced which, using the same official form as the presumptive Obama certificate, includes an embossed official seal and an authoritative signature, coming through from the back. Obama's alleged certificate lacks those features, and the certificate number referencing the birth year has been blacked out, making it untraceable.

Janice Okubo, Director of Communications of the State of Hawaii Department of Health, told Israel Insider: "At this time there are no circumstances in which the State of Hawaii Department of Health would issue a birth certification or certification of live birth only electronically." And, she added, "In the State of Hawaii all certified copies of certificates of live birth have the embossed seal and registrar signature on the back of the document."

So if he were registered as being born in Hawaii, Barack Obama -- because only he or another member of his immediate family could by law request a "Certification of Live Birth" -- must have a certified paper copy, with embossed stamp and seal, or he could request one. But what his campaign has put forward as genuine, according to the senior spokesman in the relevant department of the State of Hawaii, is not in fact a certified copy. It is not valid.

Whereas the uncertified Obama document provides the date "filed by registrar", the certified DeCosta document provides the date "accepted by the registrar." The difference between filing an application for a Certification of Live Birth and having it accepted may be key here.

The Obama campaign, however, continues to flaunt the unstamped, unsealed, uncertified document -- notably in very low resolution -- on its "Fight the Smears" website, with campaign officials vowing that it's authentic, sending the image around as "proof" to reporters, and inviting supporters to refer to it as they battle against supposed distortions and calumnies against their candidate. However, the campaign refuses to produce an authentic original birth certificate from the year of Obama's birth, or even a paper version with seal and signature of the "Certification of Live Birth." Nor has it even published an electronic copy with the requisite embossed seal and signature.

The failure of the Obama campaign to do so, and its willingness instead to put up an invalid, uncertified image -- what now appears to be a crude forgery -- raises the dramatic question of why the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate might have to hide.

Until now, it has been thought that there might be some embarrassing information on the real certificate: was the candidate's name something other than Barack Hussein Obama II, as it is claimed? Was no father listed because of the uncertainty over Obama's paternity? Was his father's race listed as Arab, or Muslim, rather than African? These revelations might be embarrassing, and further undermine his credibility, but he could disavow and downplay their significance. Would revealing such embarrassment outweigh the far greater risks involved in perpetuating a palpable forgery, or passing off an uncertified official document as being certified?

There is one possibility, however, which alone might justify the risk that Obama and his campaign seems to be taking in putting forward the uncertified document image: Obama was not in fact born in Hawaii and may not be an American citizen at all, or at least not a "natural born citizen" as the Constitution defines the requirement for the nation's chief executive. Real original birth certificates, circa 1961, have all kinds of verifiable information that would confirm Obama's origins, or throw them into doubt should they be lacking.

Research has since uncovered the law, in force at the time of Obama's birth, that were he to have been born in another country, his young American mother's youth extended time abroad would not suffice to make him a "natural born citizen." Even if he were naturalized later -- and there is no evidence that he was -- he would not be eligible to run for the office of president and -- if forgery or misrepresentation were involved -- he and his staffers might find themselves facing stiff federal and state charges.

But if, at this late date, Obama has no proof of being a US citizen by law, natural born or otherwise, then he or his advisers may be tempted to try to "tough out" the allegations about his "birth certificate" or the lack thereof. He and his campaign have gotten through other embarrassments: maybe this one will go away, too.

Because the consequences were he to admit, or should it come out, that he was not born in Hawaii would be so grave as to make it tempting to take the gamble and hope that no one dares call his most audacious bluff by demanding proof. Talk about the audacity of hope.

But now the State of Hawaii has dashed those hopes by clarifying that a certified birth certificate must have an embossed seal and signature, features his claimed birth certificate image lack.

The longer Obama waits, the graver grow the consequences of waiting.

There is one simple way for the candidate to clear up the issue once and for all: produce for public inspection and objective analysis the paper copy of his original Hawaiian birth certificate -- if one exists. If he's lost the original, he can request a certified copy. Ordinary citizens are required to produce one to get a passport or a driver's license. Surely it's not too much to ask from a man who aspires to hold the highest office in the land.

The issue is not whether Obama is black or white, Christian or Muslim. It is whether he was born in the USA and thus a citizen eligible according to the Constitution to run for President.

If proof of citizenship does not exist, then surely it would be wiser to admit it now.

Because if Barack Hussein Obama II does not produce definitive proof of his "natural born" American citizenship with original, verifiable documents, he will be setting the stage for a very public battle over his personal credibility, the basic legitimacy of his candidacy, and its possible criminality.

UPDATE 6/26:
Janice Okubo, in response to an Israeli Insider question on Tuesday, would not confirm nor deny whether she had told a St. Petersburg Times reporter whether she had said the birth certificate was "real", citing the statutory stipulation that "Hawaii state law (HRS §338-18) prevents disclosure of information contained in vital statistics records except to those people who have a direct and tangible interest in the record as defined by statute." This would, however, seem to negate the propriety of any disclosure by her of confidential information.

Jim Geraghty of The National Review Online, following up on this Israel Insider report, said he had contacted Okubo:

"I spoke to Ms. Okubo late Wednesday afternoon, and she said she had seen the version of Obama's certificate of live birth posted on the sites. While her office cannot verify the information on a form without the permission of the certificate holder (Obama), she said "the form is exactly the same" and it has 'all the components of a birth certificate' record issued by the state. In other words, she sees no reason to think the version posted on Obama's web site and Daily Kos is not genuine."

"The 'embossed seal' in question is, she said, probably on the back of the document provided to Daily Kos, but not visible (as in another certificate posted on Israel Insider for contrast). She thinks the difference in visibility can be attributed to the pressure used when applying the seal."

Geraghty's interpretation of Okubo's comments is inexact and tendentious. First, her observation that "the form is the same" is not contested, here or elsewhere. No one is doubting that the form that appears on the various websites (including this one) is a replica of that used for valid certificates. Therefore Geraght's interpretation that follows "In other words" is clearly his own conclusion, not hers.

Indeed, Okubo confirms to Geraghty that the image is lacking the "embossed seal" (and the official signature) that are required for the certificate to be valid. While "she thinks" that the difference in visibility might be attributed to varying "pressure," she admits that she does not know and has not seen the original.

Contrasting the purported Obama image with the DeCosta sample, it is hard to imagine the embossed seal and signature being of such light pressure that they would become completely invisible. An inked date of June 6, 2007, in reverse, does come through. But in any event, Okubo's confirmation that the premsumptive birth certificate is lacking the required stamps makes it all the more imperative for Obama to release the original paper certification, the only valid kind, and not an easy-to-photoshop electronic facsimile thereof. It should not be hard to produce, since Hawaii provides for family members to request them.

Even though Geraghy notes that Obama "initially refused to provide his birth certificate," he has suggested that it is "rather unlikely" that Obama was born in Kenya, since it would require that the candidate and his family do a lot of lying. In fact, there were reports of Kenyati relatives claiming he was born there, and there is the mysterious disappearance of his grandmother, who may indeed know something about this subject.

After all, being born in Hawaii is part of the "family legend" and it would be unreasonable to expect this to vary from interview to interview, especially when a non-Hawaiian birth would invalidate Obama's run for the presidency.

It is indeed hard to believe that Obama could have gone through his life without having to prove that he was an American citizen. But the credulity with which the mainstream media has automatically accepted as valid the image that appears on the radical left Daily Kos blog and on the Obama campaign's polemical "Fight the Smears" website makes it clear that many have been unwilling, now and in the past, to demand proof of an authentic document. They prefer to accept on faith that the candidate or his campaign would not lie about such a thing, assuming he has nothing to hide and no motive to lie.

But until the certified paper birth document is produced -- either by media pressure or a legal challenge in any state -- the fact remains that Obama has not proven that he is a "natural born citizen" eligible to be President according to the Constitution.

Faux First Lady admits Obama born in Kenya

2010-04-05T05:04:00.003-04:00

The Post & Email
by Sharon Rondeau

...While giving a speech on AIDS and health care to a delegation of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender (GLBT) Democrats, Michelle Obama described Kenya as Obama’s “home country".

The story about his being born in Hawaii seems less and less likely with each passing day. His Muslim/African roots are very obvious with his obeisance to the Saudi king and his false statement made while celebrating Ramadan at the White House that “The contribution of Muslims to the United States are too long to catalog because Muslims are so interwoven into the fabric of our communities and our country.”

... It would seem that very little else would be needed to prove that Obama is a foreign-born usurper who does not qualify to be president and should be removed from office immediately

...The U.S. military needs a “natural born Citizen” for its Commander-in-Chief. The American people need someone without dual or foreign allegiances who has the best interest of the country in mind at all times. The foreigner who usurps the Presidency now is a fraud, an imposter, and a traitor to this country.

If Obama had been born in Hawaii, it would seem highly unlikely that his wife would refer to Kenya as “his home country.” Previously, the Kenyan Ambassador to the U.S., Peter Ogego, had also admitted that Obama’s birthplace in Kenya was “well-known.”

2010-04-04T04:40:00.001-04:00

2010-04-03T14:17:00.001-04:00

Dossier

2010-02-22T06:51:00.000-04:00

South Carolina mulls 2012: Romney? Palin? Huck?

2010-02-21T00:50:00.002-04:00

washingtonexaminer
by Byron York

...South Carolina is a lovely place, and its attractions bring thousands of tourists each year, but lately it's been getting a special class of visitor.

Rick Santorum, the former Republican senator who harbors presidential ambitions, has been here in recent weeks. So has Sen. John Thune, the South Dakota Republican, whose name is sometimes whispered by the Great Mentioner. Mike Huckabee, former GOP presidential candidate and current talk show host, will be here soon. And so will Haley Barbour, the Mississippi governor who many would like to make a run for the White House.

They're not coming to play golf.

...they're going to test the question of whether South Carolina's Republicans will welcome a new breed of candidate.

...In the past, the state's voters have favored candidates they know, mostly from previous campaigns.

...That's good news for Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee, who ran here in '08. Romney hasn't been around much -- by this time in 2006, he was getting pretty familiar -- but local politicos expect to see him after his new book, "No Apology: The Case for American Greatness," comes out in early March.

Another boost for Romney could be Sen. Jim DeMint, who endorsed the former Massachusetts governor in 2008. DeMint's increasingly prominent role in opposing the policies of the Obama administration has made him "incredibly popular" here in South Carolina, in the words of one conservative activist. That popularity could make DeMint a power broker, or even a contender for the national ticket. If DeMint goes with Romney again, it could be a very big deal -- especially since Romney has never really excited the state's voters.

The wild card here, as it is almost everywhere, is Sarah Palin. There's no doubt that McCain's selection of Palin energized Republicans who were unhappy with his candidacy.

...Of course, there's always the possibility South Carolinians will break their pattern and go with someone new. If Romney, Huckabee and Palin all fail to turn on the voters, that could open the way for Tim Pawlenty (who hasn't been here recently), or Thune, or some complete stranger. Whatever happens, the road to the nomination in this key GOP state is wide-open -- and very likely bumpy.

Read article at above link.

The Mount Vernon Statement

2010-02-20T02:24:00.002-04:00

Constitutional Conservatism: A Statement for the 21st Century
themountvernonstatement.com

In light of the challenges facing the country and the need for clarity in the age of Obama, The Mount Vernon Statement, modeled on the Sharon Statement issued on Sept. 11, 1960, is a defining statement of conservative beliefs, values and principles penned by a broad coalition of conservative leaders representing a wide spectrum of the movement including fiscal, social, cultural and national security conservatives.

Excerpts:

"We recommit ourselves to the ideas of the American Founding. Through the Constitution, the Founders created an enduring framework of limited government based on the rule of law. They sought to secure national independence, provide for economic opportunity, establish true religious liberty and maintain a flourishing society of republican self-government."

"The change we urgently need, a change consistent with the American ideal, is not movement away from but toward our founding principles. At this important time, we need a restatement of Constitutional conservatism grounded in the priceless principle of ordered liberty articulated in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

The conservatism of the Declaration asserts self-evident truths based on the laws of nature and nature’s God. It defends life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It traces authority to the consent of the governed. It recognizes man’s self-interest but also his capacity for virtue."

"If we are to succeed in the critical political and policy battles ahead, we must be certain of our purpose.

We must begin by retaking and resolutely defending the high ground of America’s founding principles."

Signed: February 17, 2010

Edwin Meese, former U.S. Attorney General under President Reagan

Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America

Edwin Feulner, Jr., president of the Heritage Foundation

Lee Edwards, Distinguished Fellow in Conservative Thought at the Heritage Foundation, was present at the Sharon Statement signing.

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council

Becky Norton Dunlop, president of the Council for National Policy

Brent Bozell, president of the Media Research Center

Alfred Regnery, publisher of the American Spectator

David Keene, president of the American Conservative Union

David McIntosh, co-founder of the Federalist Society

T. Kenneth Cribb, former domestic policy adviser to President Reagan

Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform

William Wilson, President, Americans for Limited Government

Elaine Donnelly, Center for Military Readiness

Richard Viguerie, Chairman, ConservativeHQ.com

Kenneth Blackwell, Coalition for a Conservative Majority

Colin Hanna, President, Let Freedom Ring

Kathryn J. Lopez, National Review

Sign the petition at above link.

Executive Power Grab

2010-02-18T02:25:00.003-04:00

WorldNetDaily
by Joseph Farah

Now that Barack Obama sees the likelihood of losing Democratic dominance of the U.S. Congress later this year, he's making plans to misuse presidential executive authority, violate the Constitution yet again and "legislate" from the White House.

Word of his intentions came in the form of a New York Times article, which, remarkably, did not even hint that such a strategy was improper, illegal or even controversial.

"With much of this legislative agenda stalled in Congress, President Obama and his team are preparing an array of actions using his executive power to advance energy, environmental, fiscal and other domestic policy priorities," the story began.

Rahm Emanuel, the charming White House chief of staff, was quoted as saying: "We are reviewing a list of presidential executive orders and directives to get the job done across a front of issues."

Among the legislative initiatives the executive branch plans to enact are:

softening the ban on open homosexuals in the military;
instituting new regulations on so-called "heat-trapping gases" responsible for all this warm weather we've been having

If all this sounds familiar, it is.

Way back on July 4, 1998, the New York Times reported that Bill Clinton was going to go the same route four years after the Democrats lost control of the House of Representatives for the first time in a generation.

Then-White House aide Paul Begala was a little less subtle than Emanuel. He explained the approach like this: "Stroke of the pen. Law of the land. Kinda cool."

Of course, it should surprise no one at this point in Obama's administration that he has nothing but contempt for the Constitution, which states in Article 1, Section 1: "All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."

Nowhere in the Constitution will you find any authority given to the president or the executive branch of government to change laws, make laws, institute new regulations or otherwise "legislate." Those powers belong to another branch of government known as the "legislative branch."

Yet, the New York Times, previously known as "the newspaper of record," sees nothing alarming about this plan whatsoever.

"The use of executive authority during times of legislative inertia is hardly new," explained the story. "Former presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush turned to such powers at various moments in their presidencies, and Emanuel was in the thick of carrying out the strategy during his days as a top official in the Clinton White House."

And so the precedent has been established, explains the Times. The Constitution be damned.

The Times even goes on to suggest "presidents have logged significant accomplishments through the stroke of a pen."

Example?

"In 1996, on his own authority, Mr. Clinton turned a 2,600-square-mile section of southern Utah into the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, in what was called at the time his boldest environmental move."

What the Times didn't mention about this bold "environmental move" was that it had nothing to do with the environment at all. It was payback for at least $1 million in illegal foreign campaign contributions Clinton had received in his 1992 election effort from billionaire James Riady, who was later convicted on those charges.

Four years later, Clinton, with a stroke of the pen, locked up the Utah land, one of the world's largest-known reserves of "clean coal" – the kind that can be burned in power plants without undue harm to the environment.

The largest reserves in the world are in Indonesia, and they are owned by Riady.

The founders of this once-great nation really knew what they were doing when the strictly limited the power of the federal government and separated authority between three branches of government.

The president simply has no constitutional power to legislate – never did, never will.

Unless, of course, the Constitution is null and void, which, apparently, is exactly what Barack Obama and Rahm Emanuel think it is.

Joseph Farah is founder, editor and CEO of WND and a nationally syndicated columnist with Creators Syndicate. His book "Taking America Back: A Radical Plan to Revive Freedom, Morality and Justice" has gained newfound popularity in the wake of November's election. Farah also edits the online intelligence newsletter Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, in which he utilizes his sources developed over 30 years in the news business.

No Compromise on Enemy Combatants

2010-02-15T04:27:00.002-04:00

We’re winning because we should be winning.

National Review online
by Andrew McCarthy

...Imagine the Yanks are beating the Mets 12–0 in the eighth inning (I know — not hard to imagine). Now, imagine if the Mets approach the Yanks and say, “How ’bout we give you a new Gatorade barrel, and we call this thing a draw?” Joe Girardi would laugh them out of the dugout and say, “Hey, you want to forfeit, go ahead and forfeit. Otherwise, get back out on the field and finish getting your brains beat in.”

This is how we ought to think about rumors swirling around that the Obama administration is looking for a deal on enemy combatants and that some GOP types are listening. The compromise would be: KSM gets a military commission, but Republicans agree to close Gitmo and bring the combatants to stateside federal prisons.

This would be a terrible sell-out of our national security. It would also be unnecessary. The American people strongly support military commissions for enemy combatants — not for all terrorism cases, but for all unlawful alien enemy operatives who have no right to be tried in our civilian courts and for whom Congress has authorized military commissions.

...The American people also support holding enemy combatants at Guantanamo Bay, a secure, off-shore military facility.

...The Left’s counter to this is the claim that Gitmo fuels terrorist recruitment. That is absurd, and, as I’ve said before, confuses a pretext with a cause. People in the Islamic world could not care less whether we are detaining Muslim terrorists based on civilian protocols or under the laws of war: They don’t know the difference. The Blind Sheikh’s disciples mass-murdered people in an attempt to extort his release despite the fact that he is in a nice civilian jail after having had his nice civilian trial. What offends many in the umma is that we are holding Muslim terrorists, period. They don’t care where.

...The only people actually offended by Gitmo are leftists who regard it as a symbol of Bush-style counterterrorism. Those people are projecting their own obsessions onto our enemies. As is too often the case, Republican moderates are itching to placate these ideologues in order to show how they rise above the fray, reach across the aisle, and transcend all this partisan bickering. That is nuts.

...Lives are at stake if we get this wrong. Any compromise here benefits al-Qaeda and harms Americans. Moreover, it would only convince the Left, which does not really take national security to heart, that it should cling to its positions, however unpopular, because there will always be some GOP appeasers who convince themselves that being bipartisan is a virtue that outweighs doing the right thing by the country.

... We are winning on these issues not because we are more politically savvy , but because our policies on these matters are the right ones.

There is no reason to compromise on this issue. We should tell the president we are delighted he has had the good sense to keep Gitmo open and to refer at least some of the combatants to military commissions. Now it is time for him to announce that the decision to close Gitmo was a mistake, and that it will remain open for the foreseeable future. Now is the time for him to announce that all of the enemy combatants who are tried will be tried by military commissions, as authorized by Congress. If he won’t agree, then fine: Congress should deny the funds to transfer prisoners out of Gitmo, divest the district courts of jurisdiction to try enemy combatants, and dare the president to empty Gitmo by releasing trained jihadists to other countries where they can plot against the United States. He won’t dare.

...There is plenty we can do to make this easier for the president. We can emphasize that he ordered his administration to undertake a thorough study of Gitmo to ensure that it is a top-flight detention camp. We can point out that a good-faith assumption Obama made about closing Gitmo — namely, that he would get a lot of cooperation from our allies — turned out not to be true.

...In sum, I’m not suggesting that we humiliate the administration. Obama is going to be president for another three years, and we have to make it as easy as we can for him to do the right things — which will often go against his instincts.

But we don’t have to compromise on the things that actually must be done. No civilian trials for war criminals. No closing Gitmo, and no permitting alien jihadists to enter our country so the courts can order them released. Consider these not negotiable. If the administration won’t accept those terms, then tell the president to keep his Gatorade barrel, get back out on the field, and prepare for his side to get its clock cleaned.

Rest of article at above link.

No More Rock Stars!

2010-02-14T16:20:00.002-04:00

American Thinker
by Lauri B Regan

Why is it that Americans are so hung up on rock stars, Hollywood celebrities, and anorexic models? Our culture is caught up (and brought up) in the influences of "America's Next Top Model" and "American Idol" hysteria. The obsession with these entertainment programs likely had some influence on the outcome in the 2008 presidential election, which resulted in the choice of a man who was not competent to serve in the government, let alone run the country.

On the heels of the Obama phenomenon that swept the country, one would think that at least a majority of Americans have learned their lesson. The electorate gave up the principled legitimacy of George W. Bush and John McCain for Obama's hope and change rhetoric, pectoral muscles flaunted on all of the magazine covers, swaggering across a Styrofoam stage with an air of confidence that only rock stars radiate.

But now, waking up from The Obama Show is like being on "Let's Make a Deal" and trading in your winning prize hidden under box number 1 for the "zonk" behind curtain number 2. Americans are stuck with the booby prize for the next three years. And buyer's remorse is setting in as the wrapping comes off the package and all that is left is an empty shell of ideology so far left from the mainstream that it reeks of practical joke.

The latest phenomenon on the iconic stage appears to be Scott Brown. Within hours of his win in the Massachusetts senatorial special election, headlines appeared broaching the possibility of a 2012 run for president. According to a recent report, Brown's election "has many Republicans hoping he'll make a White House bid."

It is surprising that with everything working in its favor for midterm elections in 2010 and a national election in 2012, some Republicans are falling for the latest rock star candidate to sweep the stage. This is disheartening when considering that Republicans have multiple viable candidates in Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, Eric Cantor, and others. There are even signs that Newt Gingrich may throw himself into the mix.

And yet the media and pundits cannot help but attempt to create a candidate who embodies the rock star persona. In the mainstream, there has been more discussion about Scott Brown's 1980s pinup than his policies -- clearly the mainstream does not want to come clean with the real reasons why Massachusetts voters booted out the Democrats, so they focus on Brown as a cultural icon rather than serious politician.

The problem is that politicians like Obama, Palin, Edwards, and Brown often jet to the forefront of the American political scene faster than the public has time to digest anything beyond their good looks. Yet in Obama's case, there was plenty of time to digest his record, or lack thereof, and the majority of Americans still chose to go with his good looks and charm rather than the substance offered by the McCain/Palin ticket. Clearly the far left knowingly voted for the socialist agenda being offered by Obama, but the independent voters who helped him win fell for the faux persona and the rhetoric, which was music to their ears.

What happened to the days when experience and wisdom mattered? Appearance was not always paramount. What was important was the ability to govern, respect for the Constitution, understanding of foreign affairs, knowledgeable and respectable advisers, and high moral standards.

Obama was elected without any indication that he is capable of running the country, and after a year in office, he has proven that assumption correct. Furthermore, one would expect a Harvard Law graduate and constitutional law instructor to be familiar with, and hold in high regard the provisions of, the Constitution. Instead, Obama continues to show his disdain for the Constitution's limitations, and he most recently illustrated his ignorance of constitutional jurisprudence when he scolded the Supreme Court justices for their decision in Citizens United v. FEC.

Obama certainly was lacking in the area of foreign affairs. His selection of running mate Joe "we've lost the war/let's partition Iraq into three regions" Biden, his belief that Austrian is a language, and his misstatement that Japanese Emperor Hirohito signed the surrender to MacArthur are just a few of the indicators that should have set off alarms.

On the issue of surrounding oneself with respectable advisers and maintaining high moral standards, where does one begin? Obama has surrounded himself with tax cheats, America-bashers, and individuals who favor teaching homosexuality to elementary school students -- and this is just the tip of the iceberg. Obama's character can easily be called into question after one year of watching him consistently lie to the public, renege on all of his campaign promises, and ignore the will of the American people.

None of this is to say that Scott Brown or Sarah Palin may not make a fine president some day. The point is that they should be given time to grow as politicians, leaders, and representatives of the American people. They should be given time to accomplish more than the production of a successful autobiography, a few impressive interviews, and some great headshots. Americans do not need to elect an individual who is better left to the footnotes in the annals of history -- an individual who is enjoying fifteen minutes of fame while more serious leaders with less commercial appeal are being ignored.

John Edwards is thankfully all but gone from the public stage. Scott Brown is seated in the Senate, where he will take the time to grow as a politician on the national level and gain the electorate's respect while serving in office. Sarah Palin may or may not find her way to a future presidential ticket, but she will be given time to acquire the tools necessary in order to succeed.

Obama will not go down in the history books as a simple footnote, a political mistake based on a confused and misguided electorate caught up in his rock star persona, and this is unfortunate. When the show is over and the curtain comes down on the Obama presidency, he will likely be remembered as the worst president this country has ever seen. And all of the pictures of him topless on the cover of Vanity Fair and glowing with the aura of a messiah on the cover of Time Magazine will be overshadowed by his inexperience, his horrific decisions, and his devastating policies.

Read article at above link.

President Obama, Democrats, the Media - A Mix of Willful Misunderstanding and Economic Illiteracy

2010-02-13T23:48:00.002-04:00

Resource for Attorneys

...President Obama, has totally adopted the loathsome practice, so deeply embedded in the Democrat Party and the Nanny-State Media, of preaching the hate of Class Warfare/Class Envy.

President John F. Kennedy never did.

Unfortunately many uninformed Americans are taken in by LEFTIST deceit, so skillful at acting out Willful Misunderstanding, along with a serious helping of economic illiteracy.

...Since LBJ's War on Poverty, which turned out to be more of a war on fathers living at home and more of a war on persistence and self-sufficiency, millions of the irresponsible, have gone on the dole, and stayed there for decades, now, stretching into generations.

Yet the drumbeat of victim hood, by Democrats and a Media interested only in Nanny-State-Activism, each under the guise of compassion, only reinforces this irresponsible behavior, encouraging its continuance.

This creates a double negative on America. We first must pay a hefty amount of our daily labor supporting these individuals, while simultaneously, the nation is robbed of their productivity and contribution to society, not the least of which is government revenues.

...What do Democrats fight endlessly for today?

The constant creation of victim groups, who receive other people's money, by filling out government forms (means-testing) rather than working for their money and becoming proud, self sufficient citizens.

Today's elected Democrats, constantly rely on phrases like "those without a voice" "those who can't help themselves" and "the working poor." This suggests that anyone who wants a voice, can't have one or anyone who wants to help himself, can't do so in America. Preposterous!

As to the working poor, does anyone know, even 1 American who has made responsible decisions in his/her life who is actually poor and stays so. Many responsible people have rough periods in their lives, but poor???

Even those classified by our federal government, as living below the poverty level, enjoy many everyday comforts, for example clean, spacious 3 bedroom homes, including air-conditioning, garages, porches or patios, 2 color TV's, at least 1 car and practically every other amenity including DVD'S or VCR'S. Our so-called poor, have more living space than "average" Europeans living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens and practically every other European city.

This data all comes from the United States Census Bureau.

...One of the most widely read and respected economics books, over the last 30 years is Henry Hazlitt's ECONOMICS IN ONE LESSON, in which Mr. Hazlitt declares the entire matter of sound economics can be reduced to the following:

"The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups."

The examples of redistribution of the earnings of those who actually pay net taxes, to Democrat special interests, has become egregious, to an almost unimaginable degree.

Public employees unions, low income workers, high school dropouts, out of wedlock mothers--have made a complete mockery of the above principal and American principals in general.

...Public employees salaries and benefits represent a whopping $200 billion dollar plus drain, on the federal treasury. These employees openly declare they are underpaid and fight like fierce warriors to increase not only their salary and benefits but their power in the Democrat Party and they succeed.

February 2010 data shows that in this deep recession the Obama Administration has added, more than 143,000 NEW federal civilian workers, now averaging above $110, 000 a year in salary and benefits and of course 143,000 new Democrat voters.

...Low levels of parental work and high levels of out-of-wedlock childbearing with accompanying single parenthood, resulted in redistributing $714 billion in welfare (means-tested programs) in 2008.

The average so-called poor family with children, typically works an average, of just 16 hours per week. What is the equation here? 16 hour work week=little earnings=much welfare.

Nearly two-thirds of poor children live in single-parent homes. promoting soaring, out-of-wedlock childbearing in low-income communities. When LBJ's War on Poverty began, 7% of American children were born out of wedlock; today it's 39%.

...President Obama's special interest, reckless spending has outraged the American population, including overwhelming numbers of unaffiliated voters, to the extent that even the solidly Democrat state of Massachusetts, rebelled when it elected a Republican to the seat formerly held by Ted Kennedy.

...President Obama fervently believes in taking from those who earn, to redistribute to those who don't. His speeches and statements can be found everywhere, proving it.

In July 2008, Pres. Obama promised to triple the Earned Income Tax Credit, which would take the maximum benefit from $5663 to $16, 989. The EITC is a total welfare program. This would simply take $16, 989 from someone who earned it at work and give it to someone who did nothing to actually earn it--absolutely nothing.

When Liberal news anchor, Charlie Gibson asked in 2008 why Mr. Obama wanted to raise capital gains tax rates, stating that historically, when rates rise, revenues to government decline, and that always, when rates dropped, revenues to government increased:

The president told Gibson, what he would later tell Joe The Plumber--it was a matter of fairness.

...In a 2001 radio interview, in Chicago, President Obama, talked about the Civil Rights movement not focusing enough on community organizing as the means to bring about "redistributive change"

This all proves unequivocally that he believes it's alright for the larger population to have less and be forced to give to his perceived victims.

The so called-Stimulus Package has given us new Orwellian 1984 NEWSPEAK (Saved Jobs). No new wealth is being created under this huge addition to the deficit and total debt. It will more likely drain wealth, causing a shrinking pie for an expanding population.

Unfortunately the national microphone is heavily dominated by the LEFT; the MEDIA, the PUBLIC SCHOOLS, UNIVERSITIES, presently Congress and the White House, Book Publishers and Hollywood.

There must be a way, America can work on helping these groups end their economic illiteracy, along with the practice of willful misunderstanding. Maybe we can persuade them to read ECONOMICS IN ONE LESSON.

Rest of article at above link.

Unsustainable

2010-02-06T23:57:00.002-04:00

NationalReview.com
by Mark Steyn

....At the National Prayer Breakfast, Barack Obama singled out for praise Navy Corpsman Christian Bouchard. Or as the president called him, “Corpseman Bouchard.” Twice.

Hey, not a big deal. Throughout his life, the commander-in-chief has had little contact with the military, and less interest. And, when you give as many speeches as this guy does, there’s no time to rehearse or read through: You just gotta fire up the prompter and wing it. But it’s revealing that nobody around him in the so-called smartest administration of all time thought to spell it out phonetically for him when the speech got typed up and loaded into the machine. Which suggests that either his minders don’t know that he doesn’t know that kinda stuff, or they don’t know it either. To put it in Rumsfeldian terms, they don’t know what they don’t know.

Which is embarrassingly true. Hence, the awful flop speeches, from the Copenhagen Olympics to the Berlin Wall anniversary video to the Martha Coakley rally. The palpable whiff given off by the White House inner circle is that they’re the last people on the planet still besotted by Barack Obama, and that they’re having such a cool time starring in their own reality-show remake of The West Wing they can only conceive of the public — and, indeed, the world — as crowd-scene extras in The Barack Obama Show: They expect you to cheer and wave flags when the floor-manager tells you to, but the notion that in return he should be able to persuade you of the merits of his policies seems entirely to have eluded them.

...Obama’s spending proposes to take the average Bush deficit for the years 2001–2008, and double it, all the way to 2020. To get out of the Bush hole, we need to dig a hole twice as deep for one-and-a-half times as long. And that’s according to the official projections of his Economics Czar, Ms. Rose Colored-Glasses.

...But, if they’re “unsustainable,” what happens when they can no longer be sustained? A failure of bond auctions? A downgraded government debt rating? Reduced GDP growth? Total societal collapse? Mad Max on the New Jersey Turnpike?

...Testifying to the House Budget Committee, Director Elmendorf attempted to pull back from the wilder shores of “unsustainable”: “I think most observers expect that the government will act, that the unsustainability will be resolved through action, not through witnessing some collapse down the road,” he said. “If literally nothing is done, then eventually something very, very bad happens. But I think the widespread view is that you and your colleagues will take action.”

Dream on, you kinky fantasist. The one thing that can be guaranteed is that a political class led by Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, a handful of reach-across-the-aisle Republican accomodationists and an economically illiterate narcissist in the Oval Office is never going to rein in unsustainable spending in any meaningful sense. That leaves Director Elmendorf’s alternative scenario. What was it again? Oh, yeah: “Some collapse down the road.”

...Did you get your pay raise this year? What’s that, you don’t work for the government? Yes, you do, one way or another. Good luck relying on Obama, Pelosi, Frank, and the other Emirs of Kleptocristan “taking action” to “resolve” that

... President Barack Obama sent Congress a $3.83 trillion budget on Monday that would pour more money into the fight against high unemployment, boost taxes on the wealthy and freeze spending for a wide swath of government programs.”

What language is that written in? How can a $3.83 trillion budget “freeze spending”? And where’s the president getting all this money to “pour” into his “fight” against high unemployment? Would it perchance be from the same small businesses that might be hiring new workers if the president didn’t need so much money to “pour” away?

...It’s not the “debt” or the “deficit,” it’s the spending. And the only way to reduce that is with fewer government agencies, fewer government programs, fewer government employees, lower government salaries.

Instead, all four are rocketing up: We are incentivizing unsustainability, and, when it comes to “some collapse down the road,” you’ll be surprised how short that road is.

Rest of article at above link.

The Electorate vs. Obama's Agenda

2010-02-05T05:05:00.002-04:00

RealClearPolitics.com
by Charles Krauthammer

"I am not an ideologue," protested President Obama at a gathering with Republican House members last week. Perhaps, but he does have a tenacious commitment to a set of political convictions.

Compare his 2010 State of the Union to his first address to Congress a year earlier. The consistency is remarkable. In 2009, after passing a $787 billion (now $862 billion) stimulus package, the largest spending bill in galactic history, he unveiled a manifesto for fundamentally restructuring the commanding heights of American society -- health care, education and energy.

A year later, after stunning Democratic setbacks in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts, Obama gave a stay-the-course State of the Union address (a) pledging not to walk away from health care reform, (b) seeking to turn college education increasingly into a federal entitlement, and (c) asking again for cap-and-trade energy legislation. Plus, of course, another stimulus package, this time renamed a "jobs bill."

This being a democracy, don't the Democrats see that clinging to this agenda will march them over a cliff? Don't they understand Massachusetts?

Well, they understand it through a prism of two cherished axioms: (1) The people are stupid and (2) Republicans are bad. Result? The dim, led by the malicious, vote incorrectly.

Liberal expressions of disdain for the intelligence and emotional maturity of the electorate have been, post-Massachusetts, remarkably unguarded. New York Times columnist Charles Blow chided Obama for not understanding the necessity of speaking "in the plain words of plain folks," because the people are "suspicious of complexity." Counseled Blow: "The next time he gives a speech, someone should tap him on the ankle and say, 'Mr. President, we're down here.'"

A Time magazine blogger was even more blunt about the ankle-dwelling mob, explaining that we are "a nation of dodos" that is "too dumb to thrive."

Obama joined the parade in the State of the Union address when, with supercilious modesty, he chided himself "for not explaining it (health care) more clearly to the American people." The subject, he noted, was "complex." The subject, it might also be noted, was one to which the master of complexity had devoted 29 speeches. Perhaps he did not speak slowly enough.

Then there are the emotional deficiencies of the masses. Nearly every Democratic apologist lamented the people's anger and anxiety, a free-floating agitation that prevented them from appreciating the beneficence of the social agenda the Democrats are so determined to foist upon them.

That brings us to Part 2 of the liberal conceit: Liberals act in the public interest, while conservatives think only of power, elections, self-aggrandizement and self-interest.

It is an old liberal theme that conservative ideas, being red in tooth and claw, cannot possibly emerge from any notion of the public good. A 2002 New York Times obituary for philosopher Robert Nozick explained that the strongly libertarian implications of Nozick's masterwork, "Anarchy, State, and Utopia," "proved comforting to the right, which was grateful for what it embraced as philosophical justification." The right, you see, is grateful when a bright intellectual can graft some philosophical rationalization onto its thoroughly base and self-regarding politics.

This belief in the moral hollowness of conservatism animates the current liberal mantra that Republican opposition to Obama's social democratic agenda -- which couldn't get through even a Democratic Congress and powered major Democratic losses in New Jersey, Virginia and Massachusetts -- is nothing but blind and cynical obstructionism.

By contrast, Democratic opposition to George W. Bush -- from Iraq to Social Security reform -- constituted dissent. And dissent, we were told at the time, including by candidate Obama, is "one of the truest expressions of patriotism."

No more. Today, dissent from the governing orthodoxy is nihilistic malice. "They made a decision," explained David Axelrod, "they were going to sit it out and hope that we failed, that the country failed" -- a perfect expression of liberals' conviction that their aspirations are necessarily the country's, that their idea of the public good is the public's, that their failure is therefore the nation's.

Then comes Massachusetts, an election Obama himself helped nationalize, to shatter this most self-congratulatory of illusions.

For liberals, the observation that "the peasants are revolting" is a pun. For conservatives, it is cause for uncharacteristic optimism. No matter how far the ideological pendulum swings in the short term, in the end the bedrock common sense of the American people will prevail.

The ankle-dwelling populace pushes back. It re-centers. It renormalizes. Even in Massachusetts.

Read article at above link.

Ego, Obama’s Achilles’ Heel

2010-02-03T11:54:00.001-04:00

Lloyd Marcus

The Bible says, “I have seen the wicked in great power, and spreading himself like a green bay tree” (Psalms 37:35). A classic scenario is evil appearing to be all powerful only to be defeated. Wow, what an accurate description of the collapsing Obama administration.

The Obama regime had all the power, the White House, a majority in the House and the Senate. Team Obama owns the liberal media. Because the media selected him, they have a vested interest in protecting his presidency. Obama also had the American people in his corner; youths considered him a rock star, blacks saw Obama as their Great Black Hope and naïve whites thought casting their vote for a black guy would finally put an end to them being called racist.

Our master of deception president accuses republicans of standing in the way of his government run health care plan. While in reality, the republicans do not have enough votes to stop any item on Obama’s unprecedented far left radical agenda. Obama believed he could silence all descent from “we the people” by playing the race card. Yes, Obama, the all powerful, seemed unstoppable. Who could have ever predicted that the weight of Obama’s own arrogance would trigger his demise? Ego is Obama’s Achilles’ heel.

Almost from day one, Obama began usurping unconstitutional power; nationalizing banks and the auto industry. While deceitfully preaching unity, Obama was like the guy in cowboy movies who stands on the steps of the jail house. He masterfully works the crowd into a frenzy and demands that they drag out the accused prisoner and hang him. This is what Obama did to corporate executives, CEOs and anyone who opposed his agenda. It is not unfair to suggest that the SEIU (Service Employees International Union) thugs who beat up a black conservative at a town hall meeting were inspired by Obama’s orders for his supporters to attack his opposition by “hitting back harder”. Obama’s posse.

In President Obama, I see a bully. During his State of the Union Address, Obama used his, pardon the pun, “bully pulpit” to bully the free market, banks, insurance companies, republicans and even the supreme court. Obama governs the Chicago way; no compromise, simply destroy your opponent. “Mr Thug Goes to Washington” would be the perfect title of a movie about his reign.

Leadership emanates from the top down. Mary Kay of MK Cosmetics said, “The speed of the leader is the speed of the gang”. Obama’s number one and two enforcers, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi equal, if not surpass, his unbelievable arrogance. At town hall meetings across America, “we the people” passionately said “no” to government run health care. As an exclamation point to our national, “no”, 1.7 million protesters showed up in Washington DC. Unbelievably, the Reid/Pelosi tag team are still conniving and scheming to force Obama Care down our throats. Remarkably arrogant.

While the Obama regime appeared powerful, unstoppable and spreading “like a green bay tree”, a change was happening across America. Americans were awakening from their Night of the Living Dead Obama zombie trance. His speeches were no longer heard as the voice of a messiah.

Republican Scott Brown’s shocking win in Massachusetts confirmed that Obama’s spell had been broken. Even after Obama’s emergency visit, the Senate seat owned by democrats for almost half a century was lost; a devastating affirmation of Obama’s declining power.

But who is responsible for the fall of the “chosen one”? Not the republicans. While the Tea Party movement has played an extremely vital role, Obama’s biggest problem has been his arrogance and his ego. Contemptuously, Obama believes he can use America’s ignorance of history and the facts, his presumed superior intellect and amazing oratorical skills to ignore the Constitution and the will of the American people. Obama arrogantly remains relentless in his quest to implement his rejected overreaching agenda.

I have received gloom and doom emails saying, “Lloyd, you tea party folks are just wasting your time. Our government is corrupt and nothing will change it”. My response, “So, your solution is we sit on our hands and do nothing. Thanks for sharing”.

Despite our big bad president’s continued huffing and puffing and threats to blow America’s house down, his power is rapidly declining. This is why when confronting evil, one should never give up. Keep moving forward, fighting the good fight and doing what makes sense and feels right to do. You never know what tomorrow may bring. In politics, as in life, things can change on a dime.

A month ago, freedom and liberty were on life support. Obama’s government run health care, cap and trade and the rest of his socialistic agenda appeared to be unstoppable “done deals”.

Today, Obama’s promise to “fundamentally transform America” appears to be down for the count. This makes me feel like singing, “The sun will come out tomorrow, bet your bottom dollar that tomorrow there’ll be sun…”

Lloyd Marcus (black) Unhyphenated American, Singer/Songwriter, Entertainer, Author, Artist & Tea Party Patriot

Read article at above link.

The Evolution of Marxism in America

2010-02-02T06:25:00.002-04:00

Canada Free Press
by JR Dieckmann

Where does the Constitution grant Congress the power to pass laws that regulate the lives of the people?

A people can remain free and self governing only for as long as they are educated and informed, and are willing to accept personal responsibility for their own lives. Once they relinquish that responsibility to the government - they are no longer free - but become subjects of those in power.

The “American experiment” was devised by our Founders with the idea that a country could grow and prosper through freedom, ingenuity, and self rule, where the people themselves run their own government and make the laws.

Think about that - we the people run this country, not a king, not a dictator, not a ruling class. We do it all ourselves. That is a huge responsibility, and if we mess it up, our country fails. As a democratic republic, it is our responsibility to elect officials who will be responsible to us, the voters. We do not elect them to rule us. This concept seems to have been lost on those in power today.

The only way that America can succeed is by every American citizen taking personal responsibility for their own lives and electing representatives who will truly represent us, not themselves, and not their own special interests or lobbyists. That requires them to be honest and maintain a high enough level of integrity and discipline to resist the temptations of power that are so prevalent in Washington today.

They must be willing to respect and obey the Constitution and do only those things that are authorized for government to do in that document. Everything else is left up to the individual states and to the people, according to the 10th Amendment. The federal government is empowered by the states, not the other way around.

If you are a citizen who depends too much on the government for your daily needs, what are you going to do when this bloated government collapses under its own weight - the inevitable result of what is happening now in Washington?

The more we get into the habit of depending on government to take care of us, the less equipped we will be to take care of ourselves
That is to say, when the U.S. government can no longer borrow money from other countries to pay for the obligations it has made to the people who are dependent upon it, how will they survive?

It is at that point that everyone will be forced to accept responsibility for their own lives. For those of us who have made a habit of it for most of our lives, it won’t be that difficult. But for those who think government will always be there to rescue them and give them what they need, it’s going to be impossible for them to survive. They simply won’t know how.

The more we get into the habit of depending on government to take care of us, the less equipped we will be to take care of ourselves when our government defaults on its loans to foreign nations. This point has nearly been reached, and when it is, we will no longer be able to borrow money at an affordable interest rate. How can we possibly expect to pay back loans while we continue to spend more than we make? It doesn’t make any sense.

Today, we are barely able to pay the interest alone on those loans which amounts to a half trillion dollars every year. That is more than the entire annual federal budget under any previous administration. Not only is this policy unsustainable, it is national suicide.

Now, Obama wants Congress to pass another near trillion dollar stimulus bill to be marketed to the American people as a “jobs bill” - while the last stimulus bill did nothing to grow jobs in the private sector - and more than half of it still remains in his slush fund to promote and finance the elections of more of the same.

Just how stupid does he think we are? You only have to look at his State of the Union speech to answer that one. In trying to sound conservative, Obama’s speech was full of rhetoric in direct opposition to his own policies. What this man says is to be ignored. What he does must be watched very closely. They are two distinctly different and opposite things.

When Obama and Pelosi promised transparency in government, what they really meant was that it will be so transparent that you won’t be able to see it. We learned that from the invisible healthcare policy meetings held behind closed doors.

"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” - Patrick Henry

Where does the Constitution grant Congress the power to pass laws that regulate the lives of the people?
Where does the Constitution grant Congress the power to pass laws that regulate the lives of the people? In fact, the Constitution was crafted to do just the opposite by guaranteeing the rights of the people to be free from government oppression while imposing limitations on that government. Those limitations restrict the federal government to doing only those things which must be done, but cannot be done by the individual states acting on their own.

Those wise men who crafted our constitutional foundation were very clear about its limits on government. Our Constitution’s principle author, James Madison, wrote, “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined [and] will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce.”

Concerning the legislature’s authority, Thomas Jefferson asserted: “Giving [Congress] a distinct and independent power to do any act they please which may be good for the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. It would reduce the whole [Constitution] to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and as sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please. Certainly, no such universal power was meant to be given them. [The Constitution] was intended to lace them up straightly within the enumerated powers and those without which, as means, these powers could not be carried into effect.”

Madison added, “If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions.”

These men knew what would evolve in a government left unrestrained by the national charter. They, perhaps mistakenly, assumed that elected officials would honor and obey these basic laws and limitations. After 230 years, we can now see that they assumed incorrectly.

The Tea Parties are just one example of constitutionally informed people revolting against the people responsible for violations against, and the corruption of, the founding principals laid out in the Constitution, and their failures to live up to their oath of office.

The early 20th century progressives decided that they didn’t like the constitutional limits on government so they decided to change it. One thing they did was to change the way the Supreme Court works.

Previously, when the SCOTUS would consider constitutional challenges, they would look not only to the actual wording of the Constitution, but also the background writings of the Founders to understand their intent. The court decision would then be based on what they learned from that research.

The socialist progressives realized that their agenda could never be realized as long as the SCOTUS depended on the wisdom of the Founders for their decision - that had to be changed.

They began characterizing the Founders as a group of senile old men whose creation represented only their time and grievances against the King of England. They coined the expression “a living document” with the intent of changing the Constitution to suit their wishes. The foundation of our country would be destroyed.

The new SCOTUS, instead of depending on constitutional writings, would now depend on “precedent” for their decisions. The folly in this is that it allowed a judge to interpret the Constitution in a way that he thought it should be, rather than the way it is. A decision based on this perverse thinking then becomes a precedent for the next decision which again distorts the intent of the Founders.

At the same time, they made the same changes in the universities and law schools. Rather than teach the Constitution and the thought processes behind it, they began teaching prior legal decisions which had little basis in the Constitution. All of those law books you see behind lawyers on TV are just full of such ill-begotten decisions.

By the mid-20th century, court decisions had become so corrupted from being based on prior distorted decisions that we now get court rulings that are in direct opposition to the Constitution. It then became accepted that any court ruling on a single case would become law across the country for all to respect and obey, regardless of the fact that lawmaking is the job of Congress, not the courts.

Court rulings must be made to apply only to the specific case at hand and the use of precedence must be abolished. Each case must be judged on its own merits and how they apply to the Constitution, not to previous cases. This is the problem we see in the courts today.

The Marxist progressives, over time, have succeeded in reducing the Constitution to little more than a fairy tale of dreamers long gone. Had the concepts inscribed in the Constitution been respected and obeyed by those in Congress, the White House, and the courts, we wouldn’t have 535 people today making a full time job of doing nothing but dreaming up new laws to limit our freedom and liberty.

The 16th Amendment, along with the 1000 page tax code needs to be repealed and federal taxes should be paid on a voluntary basis. This would almost be better than voting in that those who support what government is doing could pay for it.

When few people support the actions in Congress - like their current 2000 page plus bills to take over control of our lives - there would be no financial support for them to continue down their anti-American path of destruction. On the other hand, when the people are happy with what the government is doing, there would be plenty of financial support from the taxpayers.

The only other way we as a people can preserve our democratic republic and insure our freedom and liberty is to restore our Constitution to its rightful place as the supreme law of the land. And that can only be done by electing representatives who respect the Constitution and the will of the people by an educated and informed electorate.

If we cannot do that, then our nation is surely doomed, and will become just another banana republic under the supreme rule of an oppressive elite class who will make laws to ensure their own survival in politics on the backs of the American taxpayers.

Houston - We Have a Problem

2010-02-01T06:21:00.002-04:00

redstate.com

For the life of me I really don’t understand what in Heaven’s name is going on here. When I first encountered it at Ace of Spades I thought they were pulling my chain. But the AP cut line makes clear what is going on:

U.S. President Barack Obama bows to Tampa Mayor Pam Iorio at MacDill Air Force Base on Thursday, Jan. 28, 2010 in Tampa, Fla.

The mayor of Tampa isn’t a Third World potentate, totalitarian dictator, or terrorist leader so I can’t understand why Obama would be in full-bow mode. Is bowing now the standard way the President greets people these days? Is he misoriented, for some reason, and thinks Tampa is a terrorist stronghold or an enemy of the United States? Does the US owe Tampa a boatload of money and the bow just good business practice?

Mark Steyn: In Obama's America you'll all work for the government

2010-01-31T06:59:00.002-04:00

OrangeCountyRegister
by Mark Steyn

The world turns. In Indonesia, the principal of a Muslim boarding school in Tangerang who is accused of impregnating a 15-year-old student says the DNA test will prove that a malevolent genie is the real father.

In New Zealand, a German tourist, Herr Hans Kurt Kubus, has been jailed for attempting to board a plane at Christchurch with 44 live lizards in his underpants.

In Britain, a research team at King's College, London, has declared that the female "G-spot" does not, in fact, exist.

In France a group of top gynecologists led by Monsieur Sylvain Mimoun has dismissed the findings, and said what do you expect if you ask a group of Englishmen to try to find a woman's erogenous zone.

But, in America, Barack Obama is talking.

Talking, talking, talking. He talked for 90 minutes at the State of the Union. No matter how many geckos you shoveled down your briefs, you still lost all feeling in your legs. And still he talked. If you had an erogenous zone before he started, by the end it was undetectable even to Frenchmen. But on he talked. As respected poverty advocate Sen. John Edwards commented, "After the first hour, even my malevolent genie was back in the bottle."

Like any gifted orator, the president knows how to vary the talk with a little light and shade. Sometimes he hectors, sometimes he whines, sometimes he demands. He hectored the Supreme Court. He whined about all the problems he inherited. He demanded Congress put a jobs bill on his desk. Or was it a desk job on his bill? No matter. He does Nixon impressions, too: "We do not quit," he said.

Boy, you can say that again!

So he did: "We don't quit. I don't quit," he said. Throughout the chamber, Democrats were quitting. "I quit," says Rep. Marion Berry of Arkansas, declining to run this November. "I quit," says Sen. Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, doing likewise. "I quit," says Bo Biden of Delaware, son of Vice President Joe Biden, choosing not to succeed to his father's seat in America's House of Lords.

But not Barack Obama: "I don't quit." So on he went. As my colleague Rich Lowry put it after the Massachusetts vote, the public thinks Obama doesn't get it, and Obama thinks the public doesn't get it. And as he's got the microphone he's gonna keep talking at you until you do get it.

The ever tinnier, more perfunctory sophomoric uplift at the start and finish can't conceal the hope-killing, jobs-slaying, soul-sapping message in between, which is perfectly consistent, and has been for two years. As President Obama sees it, whatever the problem – from health care to education, banking to the environment – the solution is more Washington.

Simply as a matter of internal logic, this is somewhat perplexing. After all, when he isn't blaming George W. Bush, Obama blames "Washington" – a Washington mired in "partisanship" and "pettiness" and "the same tired battles" and "Washington gimmicks" that do nothing but ensure that our "problems have grown worse." Washington, Obama tells us, is "unable or unwilling to solve any of our problems."

So let's have more Washington! In our schools, in our hospitals, in our cars, in everything!

Which raises the question: Does even Obama listen to Obama's speeches?

The public does – at least to this extent: They understand that, when he's attacking the tired old Washington games, he's just playing the tired old Washington games. But, when he's proposing the tired old Washington solutions, he means it; that's the real Obama, the only Obama on offer. And everything the president proposes means more debt, which at the level this guy's spending means, at some point down the road, either higher taxes or total societal collapse.

Functioning societies depend on agreed rules. If you want to open a business, you do it in Singapore or Ireland, because the rules are known to all parties. You don't go to Sudan or Zimbabwe, where the rules are whatever the state's whims happen to be that morning.

That's why Obama is such a job-killer. Why would a small business take on a new employee? The president's proposing a soak-the-banks tax that could impact your access to credit. The House has passed a cap-and-trade bill that could impose potentially unlimited regulatory costs. The Senate is in favor of "health" "care" "reform" that will allow the IRS to seize your assets if you and your employees' health arrangements do not meet the approval of the federal government. Some of these things will pass into law, some of them won't. But all of them send a consistent, cumulative message: that there are no rules, that they're being made up as they go along – and that some of them might even be retroactive, as happened this week with Oregon's new corporate tax.

In such an environment, would you hire anyone? Or would you hunker down and sit things out? Obama can bury it in half a ton of leaden telepromptered sludge but the world has got the message: More Washington, more microregulation of every aspect of your life, more multi-trillion-dollar spending, and no agreed rules in a game ever more rigged against you.

Obama and the Democrats have decided, in the current cliché, to "double down." That hardly does justice to what the president's doing. In effect, he's told embattled congressmen and senators to strap on the old suicide-bomber belt and self-detonate for the team this November.

That's a lot of virgins to pass out, but, with this administration, budget restraints aren't exactly a problem: Untold pleasures will await every sacrificial incumbent in paradise, or at any rate the coming liberal utopia.

What's the end game here? President Obama gave it away in his student-loan "reform" proposals: If you choose to go into "public service," any college-loan debts will be forgiven after 10 years.

Because "public service" is more noble than the selfish, money-grubbing private sector. C'mon, everybody knows that. So we need to encourage more people to go into "public service."

Why?

In the past 60 years, the size of America's state and local workforce has increased five times faster than the general population. But the president says it's still not enough: We have to incentivize even further the diversion of our human capital into the government machine.

Like most lifelong politicians, Barack Obama has never created, manufactured or marketed any product other than himself. So, quite reasonably, he sees government dependency as the natural order of things.

And in his college-loan plan he's explicitly telling you: If you start a business, invent something, provide a service, you're a schmuck and a loser. In the America he's building, you'll be working 24/7 till you drop dead to fund an ever-swollen bureaucracy that takes six weeks off a year and retires at 53 on a pension you could never dream of. Obama's proposals are bold only insofar as few men would offer such a transparent guarantee of disaster: It's the audacity of hopelessness.

In Massachusetts, enough voters got the message. And the more speeches this one-note politician inflicts on the nation the louder they'll hear it.

©MARK STEYN

First Lady requires more than twenty attendants

2010-01-30T04:12:00.001-04:00

Canada Free Press
by Dr Paul L Williams

“In my own life, in my own small way, I have tried to give back to this country that has given me so much,” she said. “See, that’s why I left a job at a big law firm for a career in public service, “ Michelle Obama

No, Michele Obama does not get paid to serve as the First Lady and she doesn’t perform any official duties. But this hasn’t deterred her from hiring an unprecedented number of staffers to cater to her every whim and to satisfy her every request in the midst of the Great Recession. Just think Mary Lincoln was taken to task for purchasing china for the White House during the Civil War. And Mamie Eisenhower had to shell out the salary for her personal secretary.

How things have changed! If you’re one of the tens of millions of Americans facing certain destitution, earning less than subsistence wages stocking the shelves at Wal-Mart or serving up McDonald cheeseburgers, prepare to scream and then come to realize that the benefit package for these servants of Miz Michele are the same as members of the national security and defense departments and the bill for these assorted lackeys is paid by John Q. Public:

$172,2000 - Sher, Susan (CHIEF OF STAFF)
$140,000 - Frye, Jocelyn C. (DEPUTY ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR OF POLICY AND PROJECTS FOR THE FIRST LADY)
$113,000 - Rogers, Desiree G. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND WHITE HOUSE SOCIAL SECRETARY)
$102,000 - Johnston, Camille Y. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE FIRST LADY)
Winter, Melissa E. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE FIRST LADY)
$90,000 - Medina, David S. (DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE FIRST LADY)
$84,000 - Lelyveld, Catherine M. (DIRECTOR AND PRESS SECRETARY TO THE FIRST LADY)
$75,000 - Starkey, Frances M. (DIRECTOR OF SCHEDULING AND ADVANCE FOR THE FIRST LADY)
$70,000 - Sanders, Trooper (DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF POLICY AND PROJECTS FOR THE FIRST LADY)
$65,000 - Burnough, Erinn J. (DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY SOCIAL SECRETARY)
Reinstein, Joseph B. (DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY SOCIAL SECRETARY)
$62,000 - Goodman, Jennifer R. (DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF SCHEDULING AND EVENTS COORDINATOR FOR THE FIRST LADY)
$60,000 - Fitts, Alan O. (DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF ADVANCE AND TRIP DIRECTOR FOR THE FIRST LADY)
Lewis, Dana M. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT AND PERSONAL AIDE TO THE FIRST LADY)
$52,500 - Mustaphi, Semonti M. (ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY PRESS SECRETARY TO THE FIRST LADY)
$50,000 - Jarvis, Kristen E. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR SCHEDULING AND TRAVELING AIDE TO THE FIRST LADY)
$45,000 - Lechtenberg, Tyler A. (ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF CORRESPONDENCE FOR THE FIRST LADY)
Tubman, Samantha (DEPUTY ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR,SOCIAL OFFICE)
$40,000 - Boswell, Joseph J. (EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO THE CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE FIRST LADY)
$36,000 - Armbruster, Sally M. (STAFF ASSISTANT TO THE SOCIAL SECRETARY)
Bookey, Natalie (STAFF ASSISTANT)
Jackson, Deilia A. (DEPUTY ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF CORRESPONDENCE FOR THE FIRST LADY)

Lowry: Obama's reality problem

2010-01-30T03:43:00.002-04:00

The Salt Lake Tribune
by Rich Lowry

...Justice Samuel Alito let a pained expression pass his face and muttered, "Not true." His reaction to President Barack Obama's demagogic attack on the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision aptly summed up the entire State of the Union address.

Obama warned that the decision striking down restrictions on corporate spending opened "the floodgates for special interests -- including foreign corporations -- to spend without limit in our elections." But the court explicitly left untouched a statute that bans election spending by foreign corporations, even "indirectly." There isn't even a "loophole" for U.S. subsidiaries of foreign firms, as the White House claimed in damage-control mode.

...He spoke for more than an hour, but the quick gloss might have been, "It's not my fault, and please ignore your lying eyes." Obama did everything in the speech -- reach out to the middle class, feel people's pain, try to recapture the stirring magic of past oratory -- except acknowledge what people dislike about his agenda and recalibrate accordingly.

...So alarmed is Obama by the spiraling debt that he committed to the bold step of naming a bipartisan commission. Of course, nothing's stopping Obama from proposing a budget that puts us on a more sustainable path. He is, after all, president of the United States. (You can tell by his stately and impressive teleprompters.)

...But Obama has another priority -- namely, passing a new health-care entitlement. He attributed its difficulties to his failure to explain it "more clearly." The real problem is that he can't explain it more honestly.

He said in his address that the bill would "preserve the right of Americans who have insurance to keep their doctor and their plan" -- even though the Congressional Budget Office says millions will lose their current employer-provided coverage. He said it would reduce premiums for millions -- when it will increase premiums for millions of others. He maintained that the CBO estimates it will reduce the deficit by "as much as $1 trillion over the next two decades" -- but even the CBO considers the assumptions behind that estimate flimsy.

It isn't that people haven't heard all this before from Obama; it's that they don't believe it. This is what Obama refers to as "a deficit of trust."

...The president has a reality problem. He's crafted a fantasy universe where he and his friends can live unperturbed by our center-right country, comforted by just-so stories. The rest of us can only, like Justice Alito, crinkle our noses and mutter, "Not true."

Rest of article at above link.

Obama's Dawn Johnsen Appointment

2010-01-26T03:22:00.002-04:00

Townhall.com
by Ken Blackwell

...Dawn Johnsen is President Obama’s nominee to head the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel (OLC). It’s arguably the most important office at DoJ. OLC sets policy for the entire federal government.

When not serving in government, Dawn Johnsen has spent her career promoting abortion-on-demand. She denies there is even such a thing as Partial-Birth Abortion. Even the term, she maintains, is “intentionally provocative.” She does not think that “progressives”—that’s PC-speak for liberal—should suggest that abortion is ever a tragedy.

...Dawn Johnsen doesn’t think abortion is wrong at all. She is all for it. She drafted the five lethal Executive Orders that Bill Clinton signed within hours of taking the oath as President to promote easier access to abortion. Clinton struck down Ronald Reagan’s Mexico City Doctrine, allowing U.S. funds to go to Planned Parenthood and the UN Fund for Population. This order sluiced money to abortionists worldwide and even, as in China, to those who force women to have abortions.

...She worked for years to strip the Catholic Church of its tax-exempt status. Why? Because the Catholic Church has never wavered in its outspoken defense of unborn children. Dawn Johnsen was part of the Abortion Rights Mobilization (ARM ) that fought a legal battle for eight years in the courts.

ARM’s assault on religious liberty and free speech was the brainchild of Lawrence Lader, the co-founder of NARAL, for whom Johnsen also worked. Lader said “abortion is central to everything in life and how we want to live it.” Johnsen’s record puts her very much in that camp. She has even likened pregnancy to slavery.

... But we can see that if churches object to funding for killing the unborn, they could be targeted by Dawn Johnsen at the Office of Legal Counsel.

Chief Justice John Marshall famously said in McCullough v. Maryland that “the power to tax is the power to destroy.” That’s what Dawn Johnsen tried to do for eight years to the Catholic Church in America. That’s what she could do to your church if she is confirmed by the Senate.

...Because of Dawn Johnsen’s pro-abortion extremism, because she has sought to impose a “chilling effect” on religious free speech, because she has tried to destroy churches, this ACLU lawyer should be rejected by the U.S. Senate.

Rest of article at above link.

Obama Emboldens Terrorists

2009-12-27T01:31:00.003-04:00

Obama has squandered home land security in order to pacify leftists who continue to operate under the illusion that Islam is a Religion of Peace
Canada Free Press
By John Lillpop

"When former President George W. Bush spoke to terrorists his message was simple and clear: We will hunt you down and kill you!

Period, end of story.

W’s “clenched fist” kept America safe for nearly eight years following the 9.11 attack.

Regrettably, since Barack Obama was sworn in as the 44th U.S. President, the message to terrorists is:

•Unclench your fists and let us talk
•Terrorists will be treated with the same dignity and politically correct manners afforded any American citizen
•Terrorists will be read their Miranda rights, provided with taxpayer-paid legal representation, and will be allowed to broadcast their anti-American, Jihad messages from the great media center that is New York City
•Terrorists are guilty of crimes which will be adjudicated in civilian courts rather than military tribunals, even for thugs like KSM who master-minded the 9.11 attack
•America is NOT a Christian nation—so fret not about your background in Islamofascism
•All things considered, 9.11 was justifiable and understandable. Let’s talk.

Obama’s unilateral unclenching of America’s mighty fist does not seem to have resonated. In just eleven months, a Muslim at Fort Hood has killed thirteen fellow soldiers. And an Al-Qaeda devotee tried to blow up an airplane headed to Detroit. In addition, nothing has been done to address Iran and its drive toward nuclear weapons. President Bush kept us safe for almost eight years; Obama has squandered home land security in order to pacify leftists who continue to operate under the illusion that Islam is a Religion of Peace. Moonbats who voted for Obama need to answer a fundamental question: Is America safer today than it was before noon on January 20, 2009 Period, end of story."

Read article at above link.

Senate Passes Healthcare - Victory with no Honor

2009-12-26T05:47:00.002-04:00

Canada Free Press
By Rev. Michael Bresciani

...Santa came early on Christmas Eve 2009 for the embattled Democrats of the Senate who passed the Obama Healthcare bill as expected.

Being forced to buy healthcare by the U.S. government will hardly be seen as a gift from Santa by the citizens of this country and even now, some republicans are planning to test the constitutionality of the bill.

Special sweetheart deals for Florida and Connecticut are overshadowed by what may be the most expensive and openly public bribe in U.S. history for the state of Nebraska. The Corn Husker’s are mostly insulted by Sen. Nelson's last minute deal to circumvent paying some 100 million dollars a year to help foot the costs of the bill but even the Governor of that state, Dave Heineman, says Nebraskans don’t want this kind of exclusion.

...Sen. Jeff Sessions, R- Ala., has indicated that the Constitution may have been violated because the understanding of the Constitution is that the government must play a limited role in the commerce and free trade of the nation. Forcing people to buy health care is anything but limited and may clearly be seen to most Americans as a step toward a complete takeover of their rights and free enterprise as it has been for over two centuries.

The Senate Democrats have ignored the will of the people with their wrangling and wresting of this bill to a vote that could not fail because of the majority of seats and sweetheart last minute deals. It is a bill with other costs attached. Taxpayers will be asked to pick up the tab eventually but the happy days of the Democrats will most certainly come to an abrupt halt in the 2010 elections. Here is where the Democrats will have to pick up the rest of the costs in dozens of defeats in the polls. Many political careers will come to an abrupt halt in 2010 and Christmas next year will produce a lot of coal in the stockings of the Dem’s.

Should the Supremes enter the fray? There are those who would carry it all the way to that, but in today’s climate of spineless adherence to the newly worshipped deity of ‘change’ there is a great deal of doubt about whether the most honorable have enough collective backbone to give it an honest look see. Who could have seen a day when what is most popular instead of what is honorable would be the guiding force of the nation?

...So will the Supreme Court take up the question of the healthcare bills constitutionality? We might want to refer that question to the birthers who after enduring almost two years of public ridicule are still looking for one honest judge to give them and the American public the right to glance at the real Obama birth certificate. The BC is only one of about twenty or so other documents about Obama’s past that remain mysteriously albeit conspicuously missing from anything that might be construed as an open and public record on Mr. Transparency.

...This is a victory of the Democratic House and Senate that will indeed make history but it will be filed in our national annuls as a victory without honor.

It is well known that Abraham Lincoln was at times referred to as the prophet President, but perhaps we should include patriot John Adams in the list of founders with powers of divination. Could Adams have been looking into the future all the way up to the Christmas of 2009 when he said “In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress.”

The skullduggery, the back room deals and all of the elements that were engaged to ram this bill down the throats of an unwilling citizenry have drawn remarks from statesmen and ordinary citizens across the nation. Words like bribery, tyranny, foul and worse have popped up repeatedly in those reactions.

...“When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn.” (Pr 29:1, 2)

Rest of article at above link.

2009-12-25T05:04:00.001-04:00

Merry Christmas

The White House "Holiday" Tree

2009-12-24T05:31:00.003-04:00

Examiner

If the Obama administration hasn't convinced you that it is both incompetent and out of touch , maybe this will help realize that the President's critics may actually be on to something. Fox news reports that the official White House Christmas tree features ornaments featuring Mao Zedong, a former Chinese dictator, and drag queen Hedda Lettuce. The kicker is an ornament that depicts President Obama's ever thinning face on Mount Rushmore.

This offers an insight into the mentality of the people that surround the President, and shows the strange ideology of the current first family. One factor remains consistent - they admire dictators and people with loose morals. They also feel that the greatness of Obama has already placed him in the unique company of our greatest leaders. This couldn't be further from reality. In fact, it is completely delusional. At least the tree is environmentally friendly and uses an organic tree skirt. Whatever that means?

Obama Chooses Christmas Eve as Night of Darkness For Free World

2009-12-24T05:18:00.002-04:00

Canada Free Press
by Judi McLeod

...There may be an ornament with the face of China’s evil Mao Zedong on the White House holiday tree, but for many of the rest of us there’s an elephant right in our living room.

The elephant in our living room is what moseyed in when the mainstream media took a holiday and the mask of President Barack Obama began to crack. How long have we known in our hearts that Obama is not an American? How long have we known that even though he professes to be one, Obama is not a Christian, nor even a Christian sympathizer and that his actions over the last year prove he is not a benevolent president.

Obama wants a healthcare bill that is signed, sealed and delivered on Christmas Eve. Obama wants to ruin America and the Free Enterprise system that made America what it is.

Personal records are required to establish the legal identity of every human being on Planet Earth, but Obama’s ID was sealed off from public view before he was sworn in as the 44th President of the USA. In the reality that follows such a move, Obama could be anything. He’s the antithesis of what tens of millions of main-street Americans expect in a president. Obama is proving to be the worst enemy imaginable. Since September 11, 2001 for America and its freedom loving supporters worldwide, worst enemy could be defined as radical Muslim.

Back in March 2006 Canada Free Press (CFP) asked in a cover story, “How does a senator who came from out of the fog land himself front and center on the pages of USA Today, where he’s touted as “the new face of change and reform for the democratic party?”

CFP’s cover story went on to say, “Move over, Hillary, Barack Obama is here.

...Barack Hussein Obama’s name only rhymes with Saddam Hussein and Osama, but he did try to parallel the life of President Abraham Lincoln with that of his own—and did it in the mainstream media.

“As Gateway Pundit aptly points out, “Lincoln was a humble man. He did not compare himself after six months in office to great men from history.”

Three years later Obama went on to win the Nobel Peace Prize after only 11 days in the office of president.

But back in March 2006, CFP pondered, “Without the media, could Barack Obama have discovered the fast track to fame?

...Obama must have attended school in Indonesia. Is it possible that as a young Muslim boy he went to a Saudi Madras?

“Yes, that’s a possibility.

...“The Democrats attract the majority of Jewish voters and funding, and this guy is being groomed as their golden boy?

“Essentially Obama is a Christian convert—but also then a Muslim apostate"

...“What if Obama is engaged in pious fraud? This is a Muslim practice of pretending not to be Muslim to further the cause of Islam or to “defend the faith”. He becomes President and then says, “Gee…I think I want to be Muslim again” after he finds the “football” in his hands that carries the launch codes for the USA nuke forces.

...“Currently, Obama is an apostate as far as Islam is concerned. This is a fact and not a conspiracy theory. They say all babies are born Muslim but then parents of infidel religions brainwash the baby Muslims into other lesser faiths. That is a fact.

“What must be done with an apostate of the Muslim faith? Give him a chance to convert back to Islam.

...The elephant in our living room has been sitting there all that time. But at 9 o’clock on Christmas Eve, Obama, the Christian, will pull a dark curtain down on the Free World.

On Christmas Eve, the elephant’s trumpet will sound very much like the camel’s bellow.

Rest of article at above link.

Give Me Liberty, or Give Me Obamacare

2009-12-23T13:37:00.002-04:00

nationalreview.com
Jeffrey H Anderson

...Remember back in June, in President Obama’s major address to the AMA, when he said the following? “No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise. . . . If you like your health-care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what.” In the six months since, there seems to have been a change.

Obamacare would require Americans to buy government-approved health insurance. It would make it illegal to offer choices in insurance plans beyond the handful of very similar ones that the government would allow. It would become illegal to offer new and innovative plans. Under any of the government-approved plans, it would become illegal to pay your doctor directly for more than a certain percentage of your care. Higher deductible, consumer-driven plans would be severely altered or eliminated. By law, a greater percentage of money would have to be paid in insurance premiums, rather than directly for care. Competition and choice would diminish tremendously. One-size-fits-all conformity would rule the day.

At its core, what Obamacare really means is a loss of freedom.

...In exchange for our significantly reduced freedom to contract with others in the manner of our own choosing, and our significantly reduced freedom to control the fruits of our own labor, one would hope that we would at least enjoy a corresponding drop in health-care costs. Instead, the Office of the Chief Actuary at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) says that health-care costs under Obamacare would rise in relation to current law, becoming 21 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP) by the end of 2019 in comparison to 17 percent today.

...According to the CBO, the Democrats would siphon over $1 trillion out of Medicare and related federal programs in the real first decade of their health-care overhaul. Simply put, they would siphon $1 trillion out of Medicare and spend it on Obamacare.

...When a "health-care reform" bill would deplete Medicare funds, drive up health costs, and dramatically reduce choice, competition, and personal freedom in health care — while funneling $1 trillion from American taxpayers to insurers (who would now be almost entirely under government control) — one starts to suspect that the motivation is something other than health-care reform. It is. The motivation is to replace millions of private choices with a command-and-control model in which health-care decisions and health-care resources are centrally administered and allocated by the federal government — under the ultimate command, at least initially, of Barack Obama. The motivation is simple and can be reduced to one word: power. And it doubtless has the American Founders, who dedicated their lives to securing liberty, spinning in their graves.

Rest of article at above link.

Passing health reform could be a nightmare for Obama

2009-12-21T06:50:00.002-04:00

Washington Post
by Robert Samuelson

...Barack Obama's quest for historic health-care legislation has turned into a parody of leadership. We usually associate presidential leadership with the pursuit of goals that, though initially unpopular, serve America's long-term interests. Obama has reversed this. He's championing increasingly unpopular legislation that threatens the country's long-term interests. "This isn't about me," he likes to say, "I have great health insurance." But of course, it is about him: about the legacy he covets as the president who achieved "universal" health insurance. He'll be disappointed.

Even if Congress passes legislation -- a good bet -- the finished product will fall far short of Obama's extravagant promises. It will not cover everyone. It will not control costs. It will worsen the budget outlook. It will lead to higher taxes. It will disrupt how, or whether, companies provide insurance for their workers. As the real-life (as opposed to rhetorical) consequences unfold, they will rebut Obama's claim that he has "solved" the health-care problem. His reputation will suffer.

It already has. Despite Obama's eloquence and command of the airwaves, public suspicions are rising. In April, 57 percent of Americans approved of his "handling of health care" and 29 percent disapproved, reports the Post-ABC News poll; in the latest survey, 44 percent approved and 53 percent disapproved. About half worried that their care would deteriorate and that health costs would rise.

These fears are well-grounded. The various health-care proposals represent atrocious legislation.

...Meanwhile, the health-care proposals would impose substantial costs

...Obama's plan might add almost an additional $1 trillion in spending over a decade -- and more later. Even if this is fully covered, as Obama contends, by higher taxes and cuts in Medicare reimbursements, this revenue could have been used to cut the existing deficits. But the odds are that the new spending isn't fully covered, because Congress might reverse some Medicare reductions before they take effect.

...So Obama's plan amounts to this: partial coverage of the uninsured; modest improvements (possibly) in their health; sizable budgetary costs worsening a bleak outlook; significant, unpredictable changes in insurance markets; weak spending control. This is a bad bargain. Health benefits are overstated, long-term economic costs understated. The country would be the worse for this legislation's passage. What it's become is an exercise in political symbolism: Obama's self-indulgent crusade to seize the liberal holy grail of "universal coverage." What it's not is leadership.

Rest of article at above link.

"Victory or Death!"

2009-12-20T06:41:00.002-04:00

Kitman TV

Five part video of Newt Gingrich's speech at David Horowitz's Restoration Weekend.

Wednesday Hero

2009-12-16T14:28:00.000-04:00

This Weeks Post Was Suggested & Written By Greta

This week's Wednesday Hero is both an individual, and a group. The group we honor are the milblogs: the military blogs, spouse blogs, and support blogs who bring you the news and information you can get nowhere else. The information and news that matter to you. The individual we honor today is C. J. Grisham.

Army Master Sgt. C. J. Grisham has always led from the front, from combat that earned him the Bronze Star with V device, to doing right by the men he led. His honesty won him readership and respect, from the White House on down. Yet, when he stood up for his children in school, his command did not stand by him. You can read more at Military Times to get the full story.

Please donate via PayPal; or you can log into PayPal on your own, go to the send money page, and put in his email: dj_chcknhawk AT yahoo DOT com; or, you can send donations directly to:

Grisham Legal Fund
c/o Redstone Federal Credit Union
220 Wynn Drive
Huntsville, AL 35893
Please write "Grisham Legal Fund" in the memo line if you use this option.

Milblogs have been a vital link in getting accurate news and information about the military, and military operations, to you. Today, many milblogs are gone and others are under attack from within and without. Today, you have the chance to imagine a world without milblogs, and to do something about it. Make your voice heard by writing your congressional representatives and others, and by making donations as you see fit.

The battle for freedom of speech and the marketplace of ideas is fought on many fronts and in many ways. Without your help, the battle may well be lost.

These brave men and women sacrifice so much in their lives so that others may enjoy the freedoms we get to enjoy everyday. For that, I am proud to call them Hero.
We Should Not Only Mourn These Men And Women Who Died, We Should Also Thank God That Such People Lived

This post is part of the Wednesday Hero Blogroll. For more information about Wednesday Hero, or if you would like to post it on your site, you can go here.

Lieberman Rules Out Voting for Health Bill

2009-12-14T06:12:00.002-04:00

NYTimes
by ROBERT PEAR and DAVID M. HERSZENHORN

...In a surprise setback for Democratic leaders, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut, said on Sunday that he would vote against the health care legislation in its current form.

...But on Sunday, Mr. Lieberman told the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, to scrap the idea of expanding Medicare and abandon any new government insurance plan or lose his vote.

...On a separate issue, Mr. Reid tried over the weekend to concoct a compromise on abortion that would induce Senator Ben Nelson, Democrat of Nebraska, to vote for the bill. Mr. Nelson opposes abortion. Any provision that satisfies him risks alienating supporters of abortion rights.

In interviews on the CBS News program “Face the Nation,” Mr. Lieberman and Mr. Nelson said the bill did not have the 60 votes it would need in the Senate.

...Marshall H. Wittmann, a spokesman for Mr. Lieberman, said the Connecticut senator “notified Senator Reid on Friday that he had severe misgivings about the Medicare buy-in proposal, so his comments on ‘Face the Nation’ should not have come as a surprise to the leadership.”

The Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said that passage of the bill was looking less and less inevitable. The Democrats “are in serious trouble on this,” he said, “and the core problem is the American people do not want us to pass it.”

...Mr. Lieberman said he would have “a hard time” voting for a bill with the Medicare buy-in.

“It has some of the same infirmities that the public option did,” he said. “It will add taxpayer costs. It will add to the deficit. It’s unnecessary. The basic bill, which has a lot of good things in it, provides a generous new system of subsidies for people between ages 55 and 65, and choice and competition.”

...Even if Senate Democratic leaders were prepared to meet Mr. Lieberman’s demands, they would still need to resolve intraparty disputes over insurance coverage for abortion.

Aides to Mr. Reid met Saturday with advocates of abortion rights to explore ideas for a compromise.

...Details were sketchy. Under one idea, some health plans receiving federal subsidies could offer optional coverage for abortion, but they could not use federal money to pay for the procedure. They would have to use money taken from premiums paid by subscribers and would have to keep it separate from federal money.

Critics of abortion say such requirements for the segregation of funds are an accounting gimmick.

Rest of article at above link.

$71,206: Not Bad For Gov't Work

2009-12-13T03:44:00.002-04:00

investors.com

...Hypocrisy: Sen. Max Baucus' office defends his girlfriend's big pay raise by pointing to the raises others living off the taxpayer spigot got. What sympathy for the 10% of Americans suffering unemployment.

If you didn't think the Democrats in power in Washington are doing enough to spark a people's rebellion, just look at their latest shenanigans.

Congress is raising the federal debt ceiling by as much as $1.8 trillion in hopes that next October, when Republicans will be pounding them on this, voters won't remember what they were up to way back in December of 2009.

But that astronomical amount is twice what was baked into their budget resolution earlier this year. When asked about so much red ink, House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey, D-Wis., just shrugged and told the Politico: "The credit card has already been used. When you get the bill in the mail you need to pay it."

Except that it isn't Obey or House Speaker Nancy Pelosi or Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid or President Barack Obama paying for the trillions they have racked up on their American Excess card. It's you, the long-suffering American taxpayer.

...How about a little belt-tightening for the federal government at a time of double-digit joblessness, you ask? None of the 7-million-plus who have lost private-sector jobs should bet their unemployment check on it.

...Delving into the details is even more galling. At the outset of the recession, for example, the Transportation Department had one employee salaried at $170,000 or more. Now, only 18 months later, it has 1,690. With fewer Americans driving or taking mass transit to work, what are those thousands of supertalented transportation bureaucrats doing that warrant so much extra cash? Counting the empty seats on the commuter trains?

...Somehow the Obama administration's national "pay czar," lawyer Kenneth Feinberg, who goes around dictating the compensation decisions of private-sector firms for their mid-level executives, hasn't noticed the wads of questionable extra cash Uncle Sam is handing out during these tough times.

...So with all these leeches of the state whooping it up, why wouldn't a powerful Senate committee chairman not give a hefty raise to his best gal? Baucus, the Montana Democrat who chairs the tax-writing Senate Finance panel, authorized a pay raise of close to $14,000 to staffer Melodee Hanes last year, as he was becoming sexually involved with her. Baucus was separated from his now ex-wife at the time.

...As the Politico reports, a few months later Baucus took Hanes "on a taxpayer-funded trip to Vietnam and the Middle East, though foreign policy was not her specialty." In Washington, they call that on-the-job training — except that Baucus then nominated her for U.S. attorney in Montana, where Asian and Arab expertise is rarely useful in court.

A Baucus spokesman's excuse: "Ms. Hanes' salary increased by the exact same amount as our legislative director and less than our chief of staff." Does the senator really think that makes the 7 million ordinary Joes without work feel better?

Rest of article at above link.

President George W. Bush: A Class Act (Where's Barack?)

2009-12-11T14:35:00.002-04:00

politicalpolicy.net

...President Bush will always be remembered as one of the military's favorite Presidents. After the Ft. Hood massacre he and the former first lady secretly visited the victims of the shooting to pay their respects. As reported in "A Soldier's Perspective" on November 7, "

Former President George W. Bush secretly visited Ft. Hood last night to meet with the victims of the troops affected by the recent massacre at the hands of a Muslim extremist within our ranks. This is typical for President Bush who worked hard during his presidency not to use the military for political gain, especially when it came to wounded troops and their families. He made many unannounced and unpublicized visited to military bases in and out of the country. He invited military bloggers, myself included, to meet with him one on one without fanfare or media. That's the way he was and I'm glad to see that he has continued this respect and admiration for our military".

When President Bush gave his farewell address to his troops he received heartfelt respect from his troops. Direct from the U.S. Dept. of Defense's website are the following testimonies from our servicemen at former President Bush's farewell address to the troops at Andrews Air Force base on Jan. 20,2009:

Air Force Col. Steven Shepro, commander of the 316th Wing said, “It’s like saying goodbye to an old friend.”

“We’re all here to honor our former honor in chief as he departs,” said Army Sgt. Tyler Murray, one of six members of the 3rd Infantry Regiment “The Old Guard” to serve in the joint service honor guard. “President Bush has looked out for his troops, and we’re here to honor him.”

...President Bush's parting comments to the troops was, "I've had a lot of great experiences as President. But none has been better than leading military members who have volunteered to serve the country in a time of danger." President Bush said he'll miss being commander in chief and being able to stand in front of the troops to tell them "how much we respect you and how much we admire you."

...Two questions remain as to President Obama's relationship with the military, (1) where was President Obama when the hospitalized Ft. Hood military victims could have benefited from some solace from their current commander-in-chief? and (2) at the end of his Presidential term will he be viewed by the military with the same respect and regard as President George W. Bush?

The answer to number (1) is clear. President Obama doesn't seem to want to jeopardize his "politically correct" alliances with the Muslim world to be seen comforting one of their follower's victims. Maybe the answer to number (2) can be summed up in the following video, showing a cadet's reaction to President Obama's Afghanistan strategy speech at West Point, i.e., indifference.

Harry Reid is Wrong on History and Wrong on Health Reform

2009-12-09T07:12:00.004-04:00

US News & World Report
by Michelle D. Bernard
Michelle D. Bernard is president and CEO of the Independent Women's Forum and an MSNBC political analyst.

...I am black. I am a woman. And, with all due respect, I think Harry Reid has lost his mind.

Yesterday, on the Senate floor, Majority Leader Reid compared those who oppose his healthcare reform package to those who opposed ending slavery, fought against women's suffrage, and thwarted civil rights. What's next, Holocaust comparisons

Many assume that given my race and gender, I would support the Senate health reform bill as a savior of the masses. I do not. And thousands, if not millions, of blacks, Hispanics, women, low-income, and at-risk communities feel the same.

There are many reasons why I don't support the proposed healthcare legislation. I worry about how Congress's regulations will drive up insurance premiums, a "public" option might strangle private health insurance, employer mandates might exacerbate the job crisis, and that ultimately this program will add to our already exploding debt.

...I firmly believe that decisions about my care should be left between me and doctor. I worry that for millions of American women, these kinds of personal choices will increasingly become influenced by government bureaucrats.

We recently got a glimpse into the role that the government could play in making healthcare decisions. A federal task force recommended against annual mammogram exams and regular breast self-exams for women under age 50. They calculated that the costs of all of the false-positives that are created by screening women (like me) in their forties aren't worth the number of lives saved.

...Many doctors were alarmed by the recommendations. An impassioned Dr. Daniel Kopans at Harvard Medical School said: "Tens of thousands of lives are being saved by mammography screening, and these idiots want to do away with it. It's crazy—unethical, really." And beyond the effects of the change in policy, doctors worry about the confusing messages that recommendations like these send.

...This is particularly true for minority communities. African-American women are nearly 40 percent more likely than white women to die of the disease. The mortality rate for black women under 50 is 77 percent higher than for white women.

...There was a public outcry about the mammogram recommendations, and the Senate has amended its legislation specifically to protect and encourage the use of women's preventative services. Yet this should be little comfort to those concerned about the potential consequences of more government involvement in healthcare.

...Americans want a better healthcare system—but they don't want government bureaucrats dictating care options and restricting the availability of certain treatments.

...If comparisons to slavery are now fair game, Majority Leader Reid should consider this one. In 1839, slaves being transported on the ship La Amistad revolted and killed many of those holding them captive; when the matter was eventually taken up by the Supreme Court, the would-be slaves were found not guilty of wrongdoing and were freed. Today, Reid and members of Congress are steering America toward a land of government-run healthcare, in spite of the fact that polls consistently show that most Americans don't want to go in that direction. Just 27 percent of Americans polled have a favorable view of Congress, and just about 40 percent of Reid's constituents plan to vote for him again.

It's not a perfect analogy, but I hope it gets a point across: If Reid and his fellow congressman continue on their present course, they may be facing a mutiny of their own.

Rest of article at above link.

51% of SC Republicans Say Party Should Be More Like DeMint Than Graham

2009-12-08T12:16:00.001-04:00

Rasmussen Reports

Two of the most influential Republicans in the U.S. Senate these days come from South Carolina, Jim DeMint and Lindsey Graham. But Graham’s efforts to work with majority Democrats on some issues has angered many GOP voters in the state, even prompting efforts to censure him.

Fifty-one percent (51%) of Republican voters in South Carolina say the GOP should be more like DeMint, who’s a staunch conservative, than like Graham, according to a new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the state.

Thirty-two percent (32%) of the state’s Republican voters think the party should model itself more after Graham, and 18% are not sure which one is the best role model.

Among all voters in the state, 38% say Republicans should be more like DeMint, while 32% say they should be like Graham. Thirty percent (30%) aren’t sure.

Sixty-five percent (65%) of South Carolina Republicans have a favorable view of Graham, but 85% feel that way about DeMint. Republicans are nearly twice as likely to have a very favorable view of DeMint compared to his fellow GOP senator – 57% to 30%.

Perhaps more tellingly, 18% of GOP voters have a very unfavorable view of Graham, while just three percent (3%) say the same of DeMint.

...Graham leads DeMint by 22 points among voters who strongly favor the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. But he trails his fellow senator by 27 points among those who strongly oppose the plan.

The bad news for Graham is that in South Carolina, as in most of the country, those who strongly oppose the plan (48%) far outnumber those who strongly support it (27%).

Rest of article at above link.

Pearl Harbor Day - A Day That will Live in Infamy

2009-12-07T08:21:00.001-04:00

Just How Brillant is Barack Obama?

2009-12-07T07:45:00.002-04:00

Canada Free Press
by John Lillpop
The big question: Just how did this fellow get elected?

"For nearly two full years now, the American people have been force-fed a steady diet of propaganda as to the formidable genius and superior intellect of one Barack Hussein Obama.

According to the mainstream media and other liberal sources, Obama’s superior intelligence was more important than the fact that, at age 46, this savant from Chicago had no practical problem solving experience and no accomplishments to his credit when he decided to seek the presidency.

His IQ is so extraordinary, they said, that he was entitled to step into the most powerful position in the world with only the Audacity of Hope on his resume, and the word CHANGE on his lips and loaded into his teleprompter.

Barack Obama was the messiah, the One, the Healer, all things good and glorious rolled into one clean and articulate ball of genius that would save the world, America, and all of mankind from eight years of W. and the Republicans.

Unfortunately, the American people bought into this bull excrement and elected an enthusiastic agent of CHANGE who was, and is, exactly clueless about the real world.

For the nightmare now residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, we can thank mainstream media and the Democrat party, and the 69 million people who voted with their hearts rather than their brains.

After less than a full year in the presidency, Barack Obama has distinguished himself as the most overrated and unqualified president in American history.

His gaffes and demonstrations of incompetence are truly astounding for a man of alleged “superior intelligence.”

For example, this president declared that America is not a Christian nation while speaking in Turkey, a Muslim nation.

What exactly was the point of irritating 250 million Americans just to get in a sound bite for the evening news? He could have said what he wanted without resorting to this explosive insult.

Another example is the hoopla and fan fare surrounding his announcement concerning the closing of GITMO.

What man blessed with superior intelligence would, as one of his first acts as president, move to shut down a facility housing the most brutal terrorists in the world without having any idea where to send said murders?

What man blessed with superior intelligence would put the prestige and influence of the presidency at risk by making a personal address to the International Olympic Committee on behalf of his home town without knowing beforehand how his efforts would be received?

What man blessed with superior intelligence would box himself into a foolish corner by accepting an undeserved Nobel Peace prize at a time when his job as Commander-in-Chief required him to consider a surge of American troops in Afghanistan?

There is more.

What man blessed with superior intelligence would commit to creating or saving 3-4 million jobs with a deficit-crashing stimulus bill that he approved, but did not read or understand?

What man blessed with superior intelligence would accuse a police officer of “acting stupidly” for simply doing his job?

What man blessed with superior intelligence would repeatedly apologize for the policies and leaders of America while standing on foreign soil?

What man blessed with superior intelligence would deliberately move the trials of murdering Islamofascists to New York City in order to impress the Muslim world with the fairness of America’s judicial system, and then declare that the accused were guilty, would be found so by the jury, and punished?

What man blessed with superior intelligence would send 30,000 young Americans into harms way with a speech that advised the enemy of our timeline for retreating, rather than fierce commitment to win?

What man blessed with superior intelligence would lie about the number of jobs created and saved in order to make his approval of the stimulus disaster appear prudent?

What man blessed with superior intelligence would ring up the federal deficit with the abandon of a drunken sailor and then lecture Congress and the American people about the dangers of deficit spending?

What man blessed with superior intelligence would nominate tax cheats to his cabinet?

What man blessed with superior intelligence would allow his Attorney General to drop voter intimidation charges against the New Black Panther party and to advise Congress that funding criminals at ACORN was appropriate?

Bottom line: It appears as though Barack Obama is an educated fool, an individual who has a high IQ, but almost no practical intelligence.

Most such people excel in the ability to give away other people’s treasure—they make terrific community organizers, but not leaders!

Compounding his problem, Barack Obama is an arrogant narcissist who actually believes that truth and wisdom is his exclusive domain.

The big question: Just how did this fellow get elected? "

Random Thoughts

2009-12-01T05:24:00.002-04:00

Thomas Sowell
Townhall.com

...Random thoughts on the passing scene:

Sometimes we seem like people on a pleasure boat drifting down the Niagara river, unaware that there are waterfalls up ahead. I don't know what people think is going to happen when a nation that already sponsors international terrorism has nuclear bombs to give to terrorists around the world.

Since this is an era when many people are concerned about "fairness" and "social justice," what is your "fair share" of what someone else has worked for?

Here is a math problem for you: Assume that the legislation establishing government control of medical care is passed and that it "brings down the cost of medical care." You pay $500 a year less for your medical care, but the new costs put on employers is passed on to consumers, so that you pay $300 a year more for groceries and $200 a year more for gasoline, while the new mandates put on insurance companies raise your premiums by $300 a year, how much money have you saved?

...No one likes to admit having been played for a fool. So it will probably take a mushroom cloud over some American city before some Obama supporters wake up. Even so, the true believers among the survivors will probably say that this was all George Bush's fault.

...There has probably never before been as drastic a decline in the quality of vice presidents as there has been when Dick Cheney was replaced by Joe Biden. Yet the New York Times is lionizing Biden as a wise counselor to President Obama. When you support the liberal agenda, that makes you brilliant ex-officio in the media, whether or not you are vice president-- and whether or not you have even common sense.

...Government pressures on mortgage lenders to accept less than the full amount they are owed may win votes for politicians, since there are far more borrowers than lenders. But how much future lending can be expected when the lenders know that politicians are ready to intervene at any time to prevent them from getting their money back?

...People who are urging us to do things to win the approval of other countries seem to put an excessive value on other country's approval, as distinguished from their respect that we can lose by such bowing to "world opinion." Do the world champion New York Yankees try to curry favor with teams that are also-rans?

Rest of article at above link.

Are These The Actions Of A President Who Loves His Country?

2009-11-30T15:36:00.002-04:00

by Doug Patton
GOPUSA

...I have grown weary of pretending that Barack Obama has anything but disdain for the United States of America. So let us ask the question on all of our minds: Are the actions of this president those of a man committed to what is best for his country?

With small business, the engine of our economy, on the ropes, Obama and his myrmidons in Congress are trying to ram through a health care reform bill that will, in the words of Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn, bring about our "fiscal ruin." Is this the action of a president committed to doing what is best for his country?

...Obama continues to push his "Cap and Trade" legislation, with all the taxes, fees, energy price increases and restrictions on freedom that inevitably accompany it, on the strength of junk science that is being discredited every day. ... Is this the action of a president committed to doing what is best for his country?

...So preoccupied with his domestic agenda is this president, that an urgent request for more troops from Gen. Stanley McChrystal, his hand-picked commander in Afghanistan, has been collecting dust on his desk in the Oval Office since August. ... Is this the action of a president committed to doing what is best for his country?

...when an Islamist fanatic in our own armed forces murdered 13 innocent people at Fort Hood, Texas, in an obvious act of terror, we were told by our president not to jump to conclusions. Is this the action of a president committed to doing what is best for his country?

...And finally, there is the tale of Matthew McCabe, Jonathan Keefe and Julio Hertas, three Navy SEALs who should be receiving commendations from their commander in chief, but who, sadly, will instead receive court-martials. The charge? They gave the most wanted terrorist in all of Iraq a boo-boo on his lip! That's right. The man responsible for murdering four American contractors in March of 2004, mutilating and burning their bodies, dragging them through the streets of Fallujah and hanging what was left of them from a bridge over the Euphrates River for the world press to dutifully photograph, was finally captured by these three brave Navy SEALs. But in the course of subduing him, apparently he got slugged in the mouth. Do you care? I know I don't. But apparently our politically correct military does, from the commander in chief on down. Obama pardoned a turkey last week, but heroes he court-martials.

...For the last time, I ask you, is this the action of a president committed to doing what is best for his country?

Rest of article at above link.

Mr. Obama, we have now asked you nicely but firmly

2009-09-14T07:07:00.002-04:00

Renew America
by Sher Zieve

Mr. Obama: As you flew quickly toward your counter-demonstration (avoiding the increasing crowds of the American people) stacked with only your supporters, in order to further push your anti-American and anti-human ObamaCare agenda, we were gathering in the streets of our now commandeered-by-you White House.

As we 1.2-2 Millions strong Americans lined the streets of Washington D.C. and many hundreds of thousands more of us in state capitols on Saturday, you spoke to a hand-picked crowd of between 10-15,000 in Minnesota. Where you continue to tell us that your planned and now attempted implementation of the death and destruction of our country and We-the-People is good for us, we have finally said nicely but, firmly "stop and listen to us!"

You have told us you will have your appointed Czars instead of elected representatives who will run our nation. And your power — as well as that of your unelected Czars — is growing exponentially. We say NO!

You told us that our US Constitution is not enough for you, when you said that it only says what the government can't do to We-the-People, not what it CAN do to them. You want to change it by adding your own 'bill of government rights.' We say leave our Constitution alone!

You have told us that violent Islamist thugs, who are actively working to destroy America, have Miranda rights but, have told We-the-People who oppose you that we are "extremists and terrorists" and your Obama-controlled DHS has advised our state and local police forces to be on the lookout for us. Then, you used our taxpayer dollars to create a US government website where you 'encouraged' our neighbors and liberal/leftist activists to "rat" on us and our anti-ObamaCare views. We say leave us alone!

You have told us that the majority opinion in OUR country no longer matters to you if we do not agree with your draconian policies. You have told us, despite the growing opposition from Democrats, Republicans and Independents to your gutting our economy with your ObamaCare, Cap and Trade and "stimulus" packages (which only stimulate you, your masters and your adherents), that you will ram them down our throats. You have appointed people to your growing list of ObamaCzars who tell us human life is no more important than the life of any other living thing (Obama Regulatory Czar Cass Sunstein) and may actually be less important, a baby is not a human until it reaches 'around 2 years of age' and abortions should be able to be performed until then (via your Science Czar John Holdren), a Green Czar who is an avowed Marxist, black nationalist and believes (and even signed a document espousing that belief) that President Bush was complicit in the 9/11 slaughter and have appointed as your "FCC Diversity Czar" (to shut down conservative talk radio) Mark Lloyd who speaks almost glowingly of the genocide of the Tutsis by the Hutus via the Hutus using state-run media to spread lies about them. On Lloyd's video, it sounds strongly and decidedly as if genocide may not be out of the question for those in the USA who oppose you. We say enough is enough!

Again sir, we are saying firmly but, nicely "stop your dismantling of our country." And despite your state-run media's attempts to lessen us, our numbers and our cause, you know how many of us there truly are. We are peaceful now. But, if history proves to be a factor in predicting the future, all tyrants are eventually overthrown — most of them in a very unambiguously "unpeaceful" way.

Please think carefully about your next counter move. In the end, good will defeat evil. But, We-the-People of the United States plan to bring it about — in our area — sooner. We-the-People will not be controlled by a despot and persecutor. Had you been born in the USA, perhaps you might better understand.

Read article at above link.

What does Pelosi know about Obama's eligibility?

2009-09-13T01:07:00.003-04:00

Online images for certification of nomination raise questions
by Bob Unruh
worldnetdaily

A commentator at Canada Free Press says he has obtained copies of two documents apparently prepared by Democrats to certify Barack Obama as their nominee for president in 2008 that suggest House Speaker Nancy Pelosi knew there was an unresolved issue with his eligibility under the U.S. Constitution.

Writer JB Williams describes himself as a "no nonsense commentator on American politics, American history, and American philosophy." And he say's he's gotten possession of copies of the documents in question.

The first includes a verification that Obama and Joe Biden, then-candidate for vice president, "are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution."

One image of the certification for Barack Obama's nomination, including includes the affirmation Obama and Joe Biden "are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution"

The second form obtained by Williams appears identical, down to a typographical error in "through." But in this one, the verification of eligibility under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution is gone.

Another image of a certification, on which the certification of eligibility has been removed

"Now this is the stuff real conspiracies are made of!" Williams, who also maintains his own website, wrote. "Please allow me to connect the dots here…"

"The DNC drafted, signed and notarized TWO slightly different versions of their Official Certification of Nomination documents, not one," he wrote. "One of those documents had complete legal language, and one of them was missing the text concerning the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama.

"The version which is absent any certification of constitutional standing for the office of president is the version that was filed with every state in the country, and the one used by the DNC to elect Barack Obama president," he wrote.

WND contacted the Democratic National Committee multiple times over three days to request an explanation of the two images, including whether one might be a forgery. A spokeswoman in the press office confirmed, "We are aware of it," but declined to elaborate.

Likewise, WND contacted the office of Pelosi, but got no response over several days. And the White House declined to respond to multiple e-mails asking for a comment.

The fact that TWO DNC Certifications exist, both signed, dated and notarized by the same individuals on the same day, means that a very real conspiracy to commit election fraud was under way, and since it took until six months after the election to uncover it, the conspiracy was indeed successful," Williams wrote.

"Are you still wondering why Barack Obama has spent nearly $1.5 million in taxpayer's funds to race Department of Justice lawyers around the country to stop all cases questioning Obama's eligibility before discovery can force Obama to open up his top secret life?"

He described the discoveries as "actually very serious business."

"We are talking about the top-down leadership of the ruling political party knowingly and wantonly defrauding voters by way of playing monkey business with fraudulent election documents."

The documents show the "Official Certification of Nomination" of Obama, of "5046 South Greenwood Avenue" in Chicago and Joe Biden, of "1209 Barley Mill Road" in Wilmington, Del., as the party's candidates.

They were signed by Pelosi as chair of the Democratic National Convention as well as Alice Travis Germond, the secretary of the Democratic National Convention at its nominating meetings in Denver a year ago.

They were notarized by Shalifa A. Williamson of Denver.

...WND reported this week on a decision by a California judge to schedule a trial early next year on the arguments over Obama's eligibility.

U.S. District Judge David Carter tentatively scheduled a trial for Jan. 26, 2010, for the case. If the case actually goes to arguments, it will be the first time the merits of the dispute have been argued in open court, according to one of the attorneys working on the issue.

...Williams explained political parties in the U.S. are responsible for vetting their own candidates.

The nomination form, however, including the certificate of eligibility under the Constitution, wasn't actually used.

"Instead, a very similar document was delivered to 50 state DNC offices, which those offices certified to each of 50 state Election Commissions, who then date-stamped the document and stuck it in a file cabinet, and proceeded to place these 'certified' candidates on the ballot,'" Williams wrote.

"And yes, I have a copy of this version of the DNC Official Certification of Nomination letter too!" he wrote.

"There is no honest debate on the matter anymore. Obama is NOT a constitutional president, which is to say, we do NOT have a constitutional federal administration at present and every anti-American policy of the last six months is also, BINGO! – Unconstitutional!" he wrote.

Rest of article at above link.

JB Williams article: http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/14583

Big Brother Health Care Provisions Slipped Into Economic Stimulus Bill

2009-09-08T09:18:00.002-04:00

Free Republic
by Mike Adams

...The new $800 billion economic stimulus bill contains some striking new "Big Brother" health care language that should give pause to all freedom-loving Americans. For starters, the bill requires the electronic tracking of the medical records of all Americans. All your private medical data will be stored in a government database, including your history of disease, pharmaceutical treatments, surgeries and even emergency room visits.

How would you like the government knowing all the details about your drug rehab? Or alcoholism treatments? Abortion? Sexually-transmitted disease diagnosis? Pregnancy status? Blood test results?

But it gets even more interesting than that: Under the new provisions found in the bill, all U.S. doctors will now be stripped of autonomy and forced to follow the medical treatment guidelines dictated by the government.

...Effectively, this bill transforms the entire U.S. medical profession into nothing more than pill-pushing puppets. It wipes out the intelligence of a local doctor and replaces it with the stupidity of Big Government.

If the government says all expectant mothers must be screened for depression and put on antidepressant drugs, then all the doctors have to play along and do that if they don't want to be fined or have their medical licenses taken away. If the government says nutritional supplements are dangerous and cannot be recommended to patients, then all doctors must remain silent and avoid telling patients the truth about helpful nutritional supplements. Whatever the government dictates must now be mirrored by all practicing doctors.

...Communism is alive and well in America's health care system Americans asked for health care, but what they got was Health Communism. There is absolutely no reason to believe that a centrally-controlled government body has any ability to make good health care decisions for individual patients across America. There is also no reason to believe the U.S. government will safeguard patient medical data or even respect the privacy of patients. This is the same government, after all, that has been caught routinely spying on its own citizens by tapping phone lines, emails, faxes and internet traffic.

Rest of article at above link.

Guess how many 'stimulus' predictions flopped?

2009-09-02T04:33:00.002-04:00

Report blasts White House for selling $787 billion 'failed experiment'
WorldNetDaily
by Drew Zahn

...The Republican National Committee has released a massive, 200-point "I told you so" on President Obama's 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, otherwise known as the "stimulus package."

The RNC calls the report "200 Days, 200 Claims," and moves point-by-point through Democrats' pledges and promises in promoting the stimulus package. Quoting Obama, Vice President Biden and Democrats from each region of the country separately, the report cites what advocates of the stimulus package said would happen upon its passage, then lists stats and quotes the GOP claims present the "reality" of what actually happened.

"It is appropriate on the 200th day of the stimulus to look back at exactly what the stimulus has accomplished," writes RNC Chairman Michael Steele in a letter introducing the report. "The answer is very little. What it has done, however, is give the American people a $787 billion bill."

...The resulting report, – '200 Days, 200 Claims' – holds Democrats accountable for their claims that the stimulus was an absolute necessity to jolt the economy.

"[Democrats] used this and other claims to quickly force through one of the largest spending bills in American history," the report charges. "Now Americans will see how valid those claims are 200 days later."

..."What makes this recovery plan so important," the president said, "is [that] it will create or save 3.5 million jobs over the next two years."

To counter the claim, the GOP report cites statistics from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and states, "Reality: Since the stimulus bill was signed in February, America has lost more than 2.2 million jobs."

..."At a time when the budget deficit was already large, we could not afford to create jobs by digging ditches and filling them in," Christina D. Romer, chair of the Council of Economic Advisors, said in a statement before The Economic Club of Washington, D.C. "Government spending had to satisfy genuine needs and leave us with useful public investments."

The report, however, quotes an article from Fox News' Joseph Abrams called "Stimulus Bill Funds Go To Art Houses Showing 'Pervert' Revues, Underground Pornography."

Abrams writes, "The National Endowment for the Arts may be spending some of the money it received from the Recovery and Reinvestment Act to fund nude simulated-sex dances, Saturday night 'pervert' revues and the airing of pornographic horror films at art houses in San Francisco."

...The RNC, however, drew its own conclusions about the "200 Days, 200 Claims" report:

"Not surprisingly, the American people are not buying these and other Democrat claims. No wonder a recent USA Today/Gallup poll found that nearly 6 in 10 Americans believe the stimulus is having no impact on the economy and won't help in the years to come," the report concludes. "As the reality behind these 200 claims demonstrate, Americans are too smart to be misled."

Rest of article at above link.

Promoting a Racial-Spoils System

2009-07-27T06:27:00.003-04:00

New York Post
by Linda Chavez

...PRESIDENT Obama used his considerable powers of persuasion to try to sell his health-care package in a nationally televised press conference this week. But Americans are growing skeptical -- and for good reason. The gargantuan new bureaucracy ObamaCare envisions would not only be inefficient and expensive but could give birth to a new racial-spoils system.

...In 2002, the Institute of Medicine released a study entitled "Unequal Treatment: Confronting Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care" that sparked a flurry of accusations that minority patients, especially African-Americans, receive bad health care because their doctors were biased.

...There is no question that African-Americans, on average, die younger and have poorer health than whites. What is less clear is why that is the case. Socio-economic class and behavior both play an important role. Homicide is the leading cause of death for young black males between the ages of 15-24, for example. Obesity, drug and alcohol use, and other behavioral factors play an important role in determining overall health. But will insisting on preferences for African-American students applying to medical-school admission improve health care for blacks? Not likely.

...A 2006 study by my Center for Equal Opportunity on preferential admission practices at the University of Michigan School of Medicine showed that admitting black students with lower grades and test scores is a bad idea -- especially for the patients who might be treated by these doctors (italics added)

...Black students admitted by UMMS had substantially lower test scores and undergraduate science grade-point averages than all other groups admitted.

Indeed, in the four years of data CEO analyzed, 11,647 white, Asian and Hispanic applicants were rejected by UMMS even though they had better grades and test scores than the average black student admitted.

UMMS isn't alone in using race to determine who gets in. CEO has studied preferences in medical-school admissions at more than a half-dozen schools, including the University of Maryland, the University of Washington and the State University of New York Brooklyn, all with the same overall results.

...ObamaCare will push more institutions to adopt racial preferences by giving preference to those that have, in the words of the Democratic House legislation, a "demonstrated record" of "training individuals who are from underrepresented minority groups or disadvantaged backgrounds." And notice the term "underrepresented minorities." They may as well have put up a sign "Asians need not apply."

...We've seen these efforts before in the context of employment and education. Their end result is always a form of bean-counting that leads to racial quotas -- which is bad medicine and won't improve health care for anyone.

Rest of article at above link.

Obamacare for old folks: Just 'cut your life short'

2009-07-26T01:54:00.002-04:00

Health plan provision demands 'end-of-life' counseling
worldnetdaily
by Bob Unruh

...The version of President Obama's universal health care plan pending in the U.S. House would require "end-of-life" counseling for senior citizens, and the former lieutenant governor for the state of New York is warning people to "protect their parents" from the measure.

At issue is section 1233 of the legislative proposal that deals with a government requirement for an "Advance Care Planning Consultation."

Betsy McCaughey, the former New York state officer, told former president candidate Fred Thompson during an interview on his radio program the "consultation" is no more or less than an attempt to convince seniors to die.

...The proposal specifically calls for the consultation to recommend "palliative care and hospice" for seniors in their mandatory counseling sessions. Palliative care and hospice generally focus only on pain relief until death.

...Under "QUALITY REPORTING INITIATIVE," the bill says, "For purposes of reporting data on quality measures for covered professional services furnished during 2011 and any subsequent year, to the extent that measures are available, the Secretary shall include quality measures on end of life care and advanced care planning that have been adopted or endorsed by a consensus-based organization, if appropriate. Such measures shall measure both the creation of and adherence to orders for life-sustaining treatment."

...McCaughey said she was stunned.

...She cited the federal provision that such counseling sessions must be administered every five years. If there's a significant change in the person's health or status during that time, such as an ordinary move to a nursing home because of declining physical abilities, the counseling must be administered again.

The message, she said, is "to do what's in society's best interests, and cut your life short."

...McCaughey is a health policy expert who founded HospitalInfection.org to stop hospital-acquired infections as well as DefendYourHealthCare.us concerning the proposed nationalization of health care.

...McCaughey also said the Obama administration is suggesting that medical care be withheld from seniors based on the expected years they have left to live. Such a program already is in effect in the United Kingdom, where patients losing their eyesight to age-related macular degeneration cannot be given an eyesight-saving medication until they lose sight in one eye.

Rest of article at above link.

Obama Caught Lying to Congress and Nation about Health Care Reform

2009-07-25T17:12:00.002-04:00

Barack Obama makes Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton look honest

israpundit
by Bill Levinson

...We previously cited a Wall Street Journal opinion piece that openly, albeit politely, contends with evidence that Barack Obama is lying about his health care reform proposal. We have since then seen three additional opinion pieces, all in the prestigious Wall Street Journal, that use language like “obfuscate” and “simply not credible” to describe the President’s statements. We meanwhile reported in 2008 that Barack Obama lied to his own church, the United Church of Christ, when he promised that he would not misuse the church’s tax exempt resources to promote his campaign.

We have heard various talk radio show hosts attack Obama’s health care plan with cries of “Socialism,” but talk radio is a lot like professional wrestling; you have to know what parts are real (the acrobatics and stunt fighting) and what parts are not (the proposition that the wrestling is actually a contest in which the winner is not known ahead of time). Talk radio is similarly a combination of actual news and bombastic entertainment. The Wall Street Journal is not talk radio, and its readers do not pay $250 or more a year to read the kind of hyperbole and exaggeration they can get from talk radio or the headlines of various tabloids. When the WSJ’s distinguished writers and contributors use language like “obfuscate” and “simply not credible,” they are openly calling the President of the United States a liar; a position with which we agree.

...“He didn’t seem to be telling the truth.” “Who would believe that?” “His ability to obfuscate.” “This is simply not credible.” “What he’s not telling the American people…” All these statements go far beyond a mere difference opinion over Obama’s health care plan and its likely effectiveness. They state in no uncertain terms that Barack Obama is lying to the United States, the Congress of the United States, and even the Democratic Party to push his agenda. We must therefore wonder what else he has lied about both before and after his election to the Presidency (e.g. the Clean Energy and Security Act). The bottom line is that the country simply cannot trust this individual and, until we fix our collective mistake in November 2012, must find ways to work around him to improve health care, the economy, and the security of the United States.

Rest of article at above link.

FOX: Do We Want Obama to Be Our Doctor-In-Chief?

2009-07-23T12:39:00.002-04:00

NewsReal
by Joseph Klein

...I listened to President Obama last night, hoping that he would answer some hard questions during his press conference about his universal health care plan. He did not. The mainstream liberal press gave him a free pass.

...What we do know is downright scary. The President wants to be our doctor-in-chief. Our medical records will be in a Washington D.C. database to enable the government to “help” us make the “correct” choices about our care. The government will have the power to decide what deserves to be paid for and what does not, intruding directly into the privacy of the doctor-patient relationship.

...If the reasoning in Griswold v. Connecticut and Roe v. Wade regarding “privacy” as a fundamental constitutional right is to mean anything, Obamacare’s intrusion into the privacy of our most important medical decisions about our own bodies would be a clear violation of the Constitution.

Besides the constitutional problem, Obamacare will bankrupt us despite the president’s insistence that the plan will be deficit-neutral. Taxes on small businesses will go up, killing off millions of more jobs.

...I share with many Americans the opinion that Obama should not become our doctor-in-chief, and that we cannot afford another one of his economy-wrecking Big Government programs.

Rest of article at above link.

Health-Care Reform: Why Not Try Ownership?

2009-07-20T12:33:00.002-04:00

Ownership, choice, and patient freedom are the best ways to defeat Obamacare.
National Review Online
By Deroy Murdock

...America does not face a health-care crisis. America faces a manageable challenge: how to help a relatively small share of the population purchase health insurance. Obamacare is too big a solution chasing too small a problem — like hunting quail with a howitzer.

Rather than endorse such big-government overkill, pro-freedom members of Congress should promote a simple concept: Let every American own and control an individual health-insurance policy that can be transported among jobs, self-employment, graduate school, and life’s other twists and turns.

Obamacare is propelled by the oft-repeated Census Bureau statistic that 45.7 million Americans lack health insurance. Even if that number were accurate, why would Washington turn the health-care industry upside down for all 300 million Americans in order to help 45.7 million? In fact, as Pacific Research Institute president Sally Pipes demonstrates, public policy should concentrate on a far smaller group of hard cases.

...From those 45.7 million uninsured, subtract 17.5 million who earn more than $50,000 annually. Though they can afford coverage, they evidently have other priorities. Of the remaining 28.2 million uninsured, some 14 million are eligible for, yet have not enrolled in, the Medicaid and S-CHIP programs. Meanwhile, as many as 10 million uninsured may be illegal aliens. All told, Pipes estimates that only about 8 million Americans are uninsured due to chronic illness or working-poor status. The latter have incomes too high for assistance and too low for insurance.

Why not help these 8 million rather than overturn medicine for all 300 million of us?

...Health-care reform should give Americans the option of using money tax-free to purchase whatever kinds of health insurance make them happy.

...Selling the core conservative messages of ownership, choice, and patient freedom is the best way to defeat Obamacare and lay the foundation for real reforms that will make American medicine healthier, not sicker.

Rest of article at above link.

Michael Savage: Pack your bags for England!

2009-07-19T02:37:00.003-04:00

Britain's incoming home secretary says ban on radio talker's travel to be lifted
worldnetdaily

...Radio talker Michael Savage told WND he was "stunned" by the quick decision by incoming United Kingdom Home Secretary Alan Johnson to scrap his predecessor's list of people banned from Britain – a list that included Savage along with Islamic hate preachers and terrorists.

Savage had sued outgoing Home Secretary Jacqui Smith for libel for listing him, along with 15 others, as "least wanted" visitors in the country. Meanwhile, Smith's successor, Alan Johnson, called the move a terrible blunder and told the London Daily Mail he would scrap the policy of maintaining such enemies lists.

...Johnson said Smith had no right to put Savage, the third highest rated radio talker in America, on the same list as a former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard, a skinhead gang leader and a Hezbollah militant.

...Savage took the offensive against her by appearing on a BBC radio program and filing his lawsuit.

...Savage also has sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, asking that she call on the British government to withdraw the ban.

...Savage hosts the nation's third most popular radio talk show in the U.S., with an estimated 8 million listeners a week on about 400 stations, according to his syndicator, the Talk Radio Network.

...The U.K. list also includes Hamas leader Yunis Al-Astal, former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard Stephen Donald Black, neo-Nazi Erich Gliebe and radical American pastor Fred Phelps, known for his virulent anti-gay protests at funerals. Phelps' daughter Shirley Phelps-Roper also is on the list.

On his website, Savage appealed to his listeners to contribute his legal fund, which he has used for various efforts, including a lawsuit last year against the Council on American-Islamic Relations for waging a boycott using excerpts of his copyrighted remarks. In the case of Savage's U.K. ban, however, CAIR has sided with Savage, arguing "freedom of speech is a two-way street."

Rest of article at above link.

Jewish settlers launch 'Obama Hilltop project'

2009-07-18T01:44:00.002-04:00

Earth Times
by DPA

... Tel Aviv - Radical Jewish settlers overnight vowed to respond to US President Barack Obama's stance against Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian areas, by rebuilding one in the northern West Bank, evacuated in 2005. Homesh was one of four West Bank settlements uprooted by former Israeli premier Ariel Sharon as part of his unilateral pullout from the Gaza Strip and a small area in the northern West Bank.

Settler leaders published a message to Obama, slamming him for his pressure against Israel on the issue of settlement construction.

"Mr. President, your policy that aims to destroy the Jewish communities of Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem will no longer go unchallenged," said the message, using the Jewish Biblical names for the southern and northern West Bank.

It called Obama's objection to Israeli construction in these areas "an affront" to history and the Jewish religion.

The message even compared Obama to the Biblical Pharaoh of the book of Exodus who kept the Jewish people in bondage.

...The initiative is supported by such pro-settler groups the Land of Israel Committee of North America, the Shomron Liaison Office, and Homesh First.

They have launched a website, obamahill.tk, on which visitors are asked to make a donation of 10 US dollars to help rebuild Homesh.

Rest of article at above link.

Bombshell: Orders revoked for soldier challenging prez

2009-07-15T09:15:00.002-04:00

worldnetdaily
by Chelsea Schilling and Joe Kovacs

...A U.S. Army Reserve major from Florida scheduled to report for deployment to Afghanistan within days has had his military orders revoked after arguing he should not be required to serve under a president who has not proven his eligibility for office.

His attorney, Orly Taitz, confirmed to WND the military has rescinded his impending deployment orders.

"We won! We won before we even arrived," she said with excitement. "It means that the military has nothing to show for Obama. It means that the military has directly responded by saying Obama is illegitimate – and they cannot fight it. Therefore, they are revoking the order!"

...A hearing on the questions raised by Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook, an engineer who told WND he wants to serve his country in Afghanistan, was scheduled for July 16 at 9:30 a.m.

..."..any order coming out of the presidency or his chain of command is illegal. Should I deploy, I would essentially be following an illegal [order]. If I happened to be captured by the enemy in a foreign land, I would not be privy to the Geneva Convention protections," he said.

...He said the vast array of information about Obama that is not available to the public confirms to him "something is amiss."

"That and the fact the individual who is occupying the White House has not been entirely truthful with anybody," he said. "Every time anyone has made an inquiry, it has been either cast aside, it has been maligned, it has been laughed at or just dismissed summarily without further investigation.

...According to the claim, "Plaintiff submits that it is implicit though not expressly stated that an officer is and should be subject to court-martial, because he will be derelict in the performance of his duties, if he does not inquire as to the lawfulness, the legality, the legitimacy of the orders which he has received, whether those orders are specific or general."

..."Barack Hussein Obama, in order to prove his constitutional eligibility to serve as president, basically needs only produce a single unique historical document for the Plaintiff’s inspection and authentication: namely, the 'long-form' birth certificate which will confirm whether Barack Hussein Obama was in fact born to parents who were both citizens of the United States in Honolulu, Hawaii, in or about 1961," explains the complaint.

...Taitz said she will attend the hearing to amend the temporary restraining order to an injunction because more members of the military have joined the cause.

"We are going to be asking for release of Obama's records because now this completely undermines the military.

..."We're going to be asking the judge to issue an order for Obama to provide his vital records to show he is legitimately president," she said. "We're going to say, we have orders every day, and we'll have revocations every day. This issue has to be decided."

She said there cannot be any harm to the president if he is legitimately holding office.

"If he is legitimate, then his vital records will prove it," Taitz said. "If he is illegitimate, then he should not have been there in the first place."

...WND also reported that just within the last week, at least two reports have cited Obama's birth in Kenya. Wikipedia also was found to have been reporting on Obama's birth in Kenya, before a series of scrubs placed his birth in Honolulu.

...WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

...WND has reported that among the documentation not yet available for Obama includes his kindergarten records, his Punahou school records, his Occidental College records, his Columbia University records, his Columbia thesis, his Harvard Law School records, his Harvard Law Review articles, his scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, his passport, his medical records, his files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.

Rest of article at above link.

Observation on the President's Early Days

2009-07-13T10:13:00.002-04:00

1. Offended the Queen of England.

2. Bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia.

3. Praised the Marxist Daniel Ortega.

4. Kissed Hugo Chavez on the cheek.

5. Endorsed the Socialist Evo Morales of Bolivia.

6. Announced we would meet with Iranians with no pre-conditions.

7. Gave away billions to AIG also without pre-conditions.

8. Expanded the bailouts.

9. Insulted everyone who has ever loved a Special Olympian.

10. Doubled our national debt.

11. Announced a termination of the space defense system the day after the North Koreans launched an ICBM.

12. Despite the urgings of his own CIA director and the prior 4 CIA directors, released information on intelligence gathering.

13. Accepted without public comment the fact that five of his cabinet members cheated on their taxes and two others withdrew after they couldn't take the heat.

14. Appointed a Homeland Security Chief who quickly identified as "dangers to the nation", groups including veterans of the military, and opponents to abortion on demand....and who ordered that the word "terrorism" no longer be used but instead referred to such acts as "man made disasters".

15. Circled the globe so he could openly apologize for America 's greatness.

16. Told the Mexican President that the violence in their country was because of us.

17. Politicized the census by moving it into the White House from its Department of Commerce origins.

18. Appointed as Attorney General the man who orchestrated the forced removal and expulsion (from America to Cuba ) of a nine-year-old whose mother died trying to bring him to a life of freedom in the United States .

19. Salutes as heroes three Navy SEALS who took down three terrorists who threatened one American life... and the next day announces members of the Bush administration will likely stand trial for "torturing" a terrorist who had played a part in killing 3000 Americans by pouring water up their nose.

20. Flew Air Force One over New York City.

21. Sent his National Defense Advisor to Europe to assure Europe that the US will no longer treat Israel in a special manner and they might be on their own with the Muslims.

22. Began the process of nationalizing the Auto Industry and the Insurance industry.

23. Announced that for intents and purposes the Health Insurance Industry will be nationalized.

24. Campaigned on "the most transparent Government in history". Said American citizens would have time to read all bills on the Internet before he signed the bill into law. Our Representatives weren't even given time to read the Stimulus Bill, much less the People.

25. Cap and Trade, if passed, may well be the biggest tax increase in American history. The Democrats amended the Bill at 3:09 AM the day of The House vote. Once again our Representatives didn't have time to read the 300+ page amendment to the Bill that has major changes and absolutely UNKNOWN consequences to the original 1200+ page Bill. Transparency or Cloak and Dagger?

26. Promised the Russians to cut 1/3 of our nuclear weapons and he will cancel the anti-missile defense program to appease the Russians!

27. He's like God; doesn't have a long form birth certificate.

And he thinks he’ll be re-elected???? And you know what…he probably will because “our liberal press loves him" 1360 more days to go...God help us all!

Thanks Alex.

No Moving On

2009-07-13T10:04:00.002-04:00

The American Spectator

RED MEAT
Despite reports to the contrary over the weekend, Attorney General Eric Holder's review of a possible criminal investigation into use of enhanced interrogation techniques is taking place with the approval, and even the encouragement, of the White House.

On Sunday, several news outlets, speaking to unnamed sources in the Administration, said that Holder was considering the criminal prosecution despite concerns or "against the wishes" of President Barack Obama, who wanted to leave the issue in the past.

But Capitol Hill Democratic aides and several White House aides who deal with outside political organizations say that's not the case. While the public stance of Obama and his senior aides may be reticence on the enhanced interrogation investigation, "they know the issue is one reason [Obama] has the support from groups like MoveOn, and this is the kind of thing that politically will keep them engaged on other issues," says one White House staffer. "We can't afford to flip on every campaign promise or issue, and there is already a sense out there, what with our decision on terrorist detention, that we're hedging a bit more than these supporters like."

Another concurred, saying that while Obama and Holder would doubtless take political heat from many Republicans and other segments of the public, there was hesitancy to further agitate Obama's friends on the left at a time when they needed that political coalition on a range of issues, including healthcare reform and climate change legislation.

"Better to keep our team happy and willing to fight and have the other side distracted," says a House Democrat aide. "If Holder moves ahead, it doesn't particularly hurt us, but it may indirectly help us: while the other guys get all riled about it, we can just push ahead with other things and leave them in the dust."

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS
It would seem David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel have greater faith in Barack Obama's varied teleprompters than in their man in an unstructured setting.

Several weeks ago, it was announced that tomorrow the president would attend a town hall in Warren, Michigan, a Macomb County suburb of Detroit. Yesterday, however, the White House announced that Obama would not take questions from a community angry over his stimulus plans and auto bailout and where unemployment is higher than the national average of about 10 percent. Instead Obama will make a prepared speech, expected to focus, White House sources said, on education and job retraining programs.

The decision was made, according to Democrat sources in Michigan, after party officials determined that Republicans, as well as auto workers, were planning on seeking admission to the event, to ask questions of the President on the economy, taxes, auto and bank bailouts, and the scandal-ridden Democrat House member, John Conyers.

"There were also rumors that Republicans were going to hold their own town hall nearby to answer the questions Obama did not," says a state Democrat party consultant. "It may be a circus no matter what, but this gives the White House a little more control than they might have had."

The White House, according to sources, is mulling to have selected attendees to the speech ask questions specific to the President's remarks, but as it now stands, they would rather control the message than give the citizens of Michigan the answers they feel he owes them.

Obama science czar Holdren called for forced abortions

2009-07-12T00:49:00.002-04:00

worldnetdaily
by Drew Zahn

...The man President Obama has chosen to be his science czar once advocated a shocking approach to the "population crisis" feared by scientists at the time: namely, compulsory abortions in the U.S. and a "Planetary Regime" with the power to enforce human reproduction restrictions.

"There exists ample authority under which population growth could be regulated," wrote Obama appointee John Holdren, as reported by FrontPage Magazine. "It has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society."

Holdren's comments, made in 1977, mirror the astonishing admission this week of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who said she was under the impression that legalizing abortion with the 1973 Roe. v. Wade case would eliminate undesirable members of the populace, or as she put it "populations that we don't want to have too many of."

In 1977, when many scientists were alarmed by predictions of harmful environmental effects of human population growth, Holdren teamed with Paul R. Ehrlich, author of "The Population Bomb," and his wife, Anne, to pen "Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment."

Holdren's book proposed multiple strategies to curb population growth, and, according to the quotes excerpted by FrontPage Magazine, advocated an international police force to ensure the strategies were carried out.

Rest of article at above link.

He says ... Obama’s distractions lead to Constitution’s destruction

2009-06-29T05:52:00.002-04:00

Bluffton Today
by Bill Roe
June 25, 2009

He says ...
The morning sunshine broke over Washington, D.C., this past weekend. Many Americans watched the sad news in Iran as it came on TV while they listened to the television news shows lamenting the failure of the stimulus packages. A news flash broke in showing the riots in Iran taking place because of a corrupt election where the ballot boxes were stuffed.

Sadly, young Iranian protesters were being killed in the streets. Our president told his staff that his children wanted ice cream, so Mrs. Obama put on her $530 sneakers and a 10-car motorcade headed out to Georgetown for ice cream. I would rather the priority at that moment to have been for the president to speak out for the rights of those Iranians, mostly youths; the protesters also included females. Silence is golden, some say, but liberty and freedom are precious.

This is where the president and I disagree. There are those who say my columns belabor the presidency of Obama. Yet I deal with his actions because they are current while the left still is fixated on former President Bush. A new poll by Rasmussen shows Obama’s holiday on the economy is over. Thirty-nine percent of respondents say Obama’s big-spending policies are heading to failure. At the same time, the polls show his strong readings slipping to a new low.

President Obama taught constitutional law in Chicago but his actions are in direct contradiction of constitutional powers, which is definitely a cause for concern. With the presidency, House and Senate controlled by Democrats we are seeing the Constitution rolled like never before.

Obama, by improperly firing Inspector General Walpin, showed his arrogance, mind I didn’t say ignorance, of the law.

He fired Walpin and two others so he could put political friends in those positions, just like he did with our new attorney general, Eric Holder. The qualifier for these jobs is to be a friend of the president, not whether they are the best qualified for the job operating under the established law that justice is blind.

The question has been raised to the Obama administration as to who fired Walpin and why. The answer was mumbo jumbo, but apparently the Obamas were willing to use their political influence to get involved in a sensitive investigation of their friend Kevin Johnston, who apparently misused thousands of dollars of Americorp funds.

The administration accused Walpin of having problems with concentration and making statements that were incorrect. This past week I have seen six excellent interviews with Walpin, who has had an outstanding career until the smear job he received by the administration.

He is articulate and energetic, plus if he sees that something is wrong he will not participate in a cover-up. When compared with Vice President Joe Biden, well, there just is no comparison. Maybe Obama in his arrogance of the law should fire Biden; however, then we would get Pelosi, whose positive numbers are rockbottom after she tried a cover-up by turning on the CIA and calling them liars.

Walpin is eager to see a congressional investigation of his firing, as this is the way it is done in a free America. Our president seems to be consumed with his personal agenda and liberal party ideologies which truly threaten our Constitution. I say bring it on Mr. Walpin, you are a patriot.

Read article at above link.

Farah's $10,000 birth certificate challenge

2009-06-23T13:06:00.002-04:00

worldnetdaily.com

WND Editor and Chief Executive Officer Joseph Farah is offering a $10,000 reward to anyone who can prove he or she was present at the birth of Barack Obama – and he's asking Americans to donate to the cause in hopes of raising the bounty to an irresistible amount.

"Barack Obama claims to have been born in Honolulu Aug. 4, 1961," explains Farah. "His entire constitutional claim to the presidency rests on this premise. Yet, he refuses to release a copy of his long-form birth certificate – the only document that could possibly corroborate his claim. Therefore, in the interest of truth, justice and the Constitution, I am making the extraordinary offer to entice someone to come forward with the facts of his birth – whether it took place in Hawaii or elsewhere."

Obama has steadfastly refused to release evidence of that Hawaiian birth – a valid, long-form birth certificate that would show details of the birth, such as the hospital and the attending physician. Because the short-form "certification of live birth" he released to select news organization was at least sometimes issued for foreign births on the basis of an affidavit by one parent, it proves nothing as far as constitutional eligibility – and, in fact, raises suspicions about a foreign birth.

To date, no hospital in Hawaii has come forward to claim this historic birth.

No doctor or nurse has come forward to say they were present for that historic birth.

No witness of any kind has come forward to say they have first-hand knowledge or involvement in that historic birth – at least in Hawaii.

Obama's paternal grandmother, Sarah Obama, claims to have been present for the birth in Mombassa, Kenya.

"It is clear now that Obama will never willingly release his birth certificate," said Farah. "It's time for Americans who still value the Constitution to step up and force the issue. It's time for us to learn the truth of where Obama was born. We may find he was born in Hawaii. We may find he was born elsewhere. I have no pre-conceived ideas. But this issue has haunted the American people long enough. It's time for some truth and transparency."

To collect the reward, the subject must:

1. Agree to an interview with WND journalists;

2. Provide persuasive evidence, such as pictures, documents or verifiable details;

3. Agree to a polygraph test.

"I think it's disgraceful that Americans should be forced to go to such lengths by the intransigence of public officials toward accountability," said Farah. "But that is what it has come to in 2009 with our current president. He prefers to dodge and weave, while his apologists in government and media viciously attack citizens for attempting to see that the Constitution is observed."

Farah launched a petition drive earlier this year that has accumulated nearly 400,000signatures demanding that all controlling legal authorities pursue proof of Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." That petition campaign is still on-going.

More recently, he launched a billboard campaign raising the simple question, "Where's the birth certificate?" That campaign has raised $85,000 so far. Farah says there are plenty of billboards available, despite a ban on the campaign by several major outdoor advertising companies. But donations have dried up because of an apparent misperception among readers that billboards are not available due to the bans imposed by a few companies.

In addition, Farah points out those interested in backing his latest campaign can also raise visibility for the issue by purchasing magnetic bumper stickers, tea party rally signs and yard signs that raise the same simple question, "Where's the birth certificate?"

Rest of article at above link.

Walpin-gate opens wider

2009-06-22T01:52:00.002-04:00

The Washington Times
Editorial

President Obama's excuses for firing AmeriCorps Inspector General Gerald Walpin look weaker every day. The FBI has opened an investigation into a Sacramento program formerly run by a close ally of President Obama's, giving credence to the IG's work.

The president fired Mr. Walpin June 11 after Mr. Walpin filed two reports critical of Obama friends. The highest-profile of the two reports focused on misuse of funds at Sacramento's St. Hope Academy, then run by former NBA star Kevin Johnson before Mr. Johnson was elected Sacramento's mayor in November. Mr. Johnson was a frequent stump speaker for Mr. Obama during last year's campaign and has claimed in TV interviews to be particularly good friends with first lady Michelle Obama.

The inspector general detailed numerous irregularities in St. Hope's use of AmeriCorps funds, including AmeriCorps grantees being used to wash Mr. Johnson's car. Mr. Walpin complained vociferously, though, that acting U.S. Attorney Lawrence G. Brown had negotiated far too lenient a settlement of the charges against Mayor Johnson and St. Hope.

In turn, the U.S. attorney filed a complaint against Mr. Walpin, charging him with unethical behavior throughout the investigation. The White House fired Mr. Walpin long before the relevant committee would have finished its assessment of the U.S. attorney's complaint.

As The Washington Times reported in a previous editorial, U.S. Attorney Brown's complaint included at least two major, easily discernible errors of fact. Many other complaints against Mr. Walpin, both by Mr. Brown and by other AmeriCorps officials, were strangely petty in nature.

Now here is where the story gets really interesting. On the very same day that the president fired Mr. Walpin, St. Hope's executive director, Rick Maya, left his job at St. Hope. He did not go quietly. His resignation letter charged Mr. Johnson and several St. Hope board members with numerous ethical violations. Most explosively, he charged that a board member improperly deleted e-mails of Mr. Johnson's that already were under a federal subpoena.

Suddenly, the problems at St. Hope begin to look as severe as Mr. Walpin had charged rather than being minor infractions.

On Wednesday, the Sacramento Bee reported that Mr. Maya's allegations have been deemed serious enough that the FBI is investigating potential obstruction of justice at St. Hope. In that light, the firing of Mr. Walpin, who properly blew the whistle on mismanagement and possible corruption, looks ill-considered.

Early last week, Sen. Charles E. Grassley, Iowa Republican, and Sen. Claire McCaskill, Missouri Democrat, publicly questioned the White House handling of the firing, as did Rep. Darrell Issa, California Republican. On Thursday, Sen. Orrin G. Hatch, Utah Republican, and Sen. Michael B. Enzi, Wyoming Republican, sent a strongly worded letter to the White House indicating serious reservations about whether the administration had abided by the laws governing inspectors general.

It also was learned last week that the White House is involved in major disputes with two other inspectors general who were poking around the administration's business, including Neil M. Barofsky, whose job is to serve as watchdog for spending the $787 billion in controversial economic bailout funds.

All of this suggests that the purported White House mistreatment of independent inspectors general is a scandal that might have real legs. As well it should.

Article at above link.

Independence Day tea party tally explodes

2009-06-21T01:58:00.008-04:00

worldnetdaily
by Chelsea Schilling

...The tea party movement is showing fresh signs of momentum as the national tally is once again exploding.

Amy Kremer, national organizer for the Tea Party Patriots, told WND her organization is expecting more rallies on Independence Day weekend than were held on April 15 this year.

"They are going on all across the country," Kremer said. "Last time it was on one day; this time it is all July 4 weekend. We will have more tea parties this time around than we did last time, for sure."

..."The administration is ratcheting up its rhetoric on pushing through its 'health care reform,'" Kremer said. "We can have tea parties until the end of time, but we need to be effective. We're using our tea parties as a platform and an opportunity to educate people about what is going on with this and why we are opposed to government-run health care. If the government gets involved and imposes any kind of governmental health care, it is intrusive into our lives, and it will absolutely affect the free market."

...But the party won't end there. Kremer said Tea Party Patriots has organized another national protest to be held July 17. Her group is encouraging motivated citizens to meet simultaneously at every representative's and senator's office in the country at 12 p.m. EST to show their commitment to stopping Washington's health care agenda.

"It's important because all of these people are concerned about this slippery slope to socialism," she said. Every day there is something the Obama administration or Congress is trying to push through to take more control over our lives."

Kremer referenced Obama's recent firing of the CEO of GM and is sale of Chrysler to Fiat.

...Tea Party Patriots lists events by state on its website. Most of the following protests are organized by Kremer and her Tea Party Patriots team:

South Carolina

Beaufort – Saturday, July 4, 12 p.m., federal courthouse, Bay Street and Bladen Street

Boiling Springs – Saturday, July 4, 11 a.m. to 2 p.m., Boiling Springs Community Park, Double Bridge Road

Charleston – Saturday, July 4, 10:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m., Cannon Park, 261 Calhoun St.

Columbia - Saturday, June 27, 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Emabssy Suites Columbia, Greystone Blvd.

Erie – Saturday, July 4, time and place to be announced

Florence - Saturday, July 4, Florence City/County Complex, 6:30 p.m.

Greenwood – Saturday, July 4, 5 p.m. to 6:30 p.m., Greenwood SC fairgrounds, HIghway 221 South

Myrtle Beach - Saturday, July 11, 5:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m., Grand Park@Market Common

Rest of article at above link.

Somewhere in Kenya

2009-06-18T08:44:00.002-04:00

patriot depot

Yes folks, we have a President who thinks he can stimulate the economy by printing more "money," raising your taxes, and spending our grand children's inheritance—all to win the votes of illegal immigrants, dead people, and Democrats.

Furthermore, he can't prove he was born in America. According to Obama's Kenyan (paternal) grandmother, as well as his half-brother and half-sister, Barack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya, not in Hawaii as he claims. Before his inauguration, his grandmother bragged that her grandson was about to be President of the United States and is so proud because she was present during his birth in Kenya, in the delivery room. This, according to several news sites and Pennsylvania attorney Philip J. Berg who is a life long democrat himself. Berg is the former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania.

This new bumper sticker that has conservatives laughing and liberals hopping mad! Of course, we didn't think of it first. The liberals did the same thing to President Bush. Notice this anti-bush protest sign.

All kidding aside, the really scary part is that President Obama is NOT an idiot. Every decision he makes is calculated to take one more liberty away and moves us one step closer to full-blown communism.

Obama to Jews: I'm Just Not That Into You

2009-06-15T05:32:00.003-04:00

by Stuart Schwartz
American Thinker

...American Jews and Israel would do well to take a page from the book of Saul Alinsky, who provides the radical underpinning for much of how the Obama left sees the world: "As an organizer I start from where the world is, as it is, not as I would like it to be."

It is time for American Jews to leave the Democratic Party, to see reality as it is and not how they wish it to be. To be a Jew in this world is dangerous ...and our president and his party are deliberately making it more so (even serial Obama apologist Susan Estrich is "not completely certain...where this president will stand in a crisis" involving Jews). A leading reform rabbi (for whose community Obama "represents the golden harvest," as a senior executive of the Union for Reform Judaism put it) has just issued a clarion call to Jews to wake up and see a world in which a United States president "is most certainly creating a climate of hate against us (Jews)."

...American Jews can no longer afford the luxury of wishful thinking. "No trap is so deadly as the one you set for yourself" was the lesson William Manchester, the award-winning biographer of Winston Churchill, took from a similar time. His characterization of the politicians and journalists who painted rosy portraits of the Nazis in the early thirties as deliberately blind and intellectually dishonest (including Jews, such as Walter Lipmann of the New York Herald Tribune, who hailed Hitler as a "genuinely statesmanlike" leader "of good faith") eerily mirrors the mindset and actions of American Jewish supporters of Obama today. Most continue to cheer a president whose treatment of Israel has been described by one American Thinker blogger as "a sign of moral depravity."

Cartoon originally published in jewcy on February 4, 2008.

..."Stupid is as stupid does," Forest Gump observed in the movie of the same name. Perhaps American Jews will stop "doing stupid" and recognize another movie truth about Obama and his regard for Jews, both domestic and foreign: He's Just Not That Into You.

...An exaggeration? President Obama's speech to the "Muslim world" broke new ground as an American president supported terrorists, "an abandonment" of Israel, Jews, and human rights victims in the Arab world, noted U.N. critic and human rights activist Anne Bayefsky. This after a Jewish electorate gave him 83% of its vote.

...American Jews overwhelmingly continue to praise a leader shaped by anti-Israel political ideologies and anti-Semitic associations (e.g., twenty years a member of a church in which anti-Semitic preaching and activities are the fifth gospel, political alliances with some of the most notorious anti-Semites in American life). And they continue to open their wallets for the first president to officially embrace the despots who delight in playing Whack-A-Jew at the United Nations, the world's Chuck E. Cheese for anti-Semites.

...It is time to see the world as it is. Rush Limbaugh noted recently that Obama has officially "de-tethered" Israel from the United States, describing a process that is doing the same for American Jews. The stark reality, as Richard Baehr, the chief political correspondent of the American Thinker, points out, is that" Israel is no longer an ally" of this nation; it is, instead, an "obstacle" to an Obama-led government that openly seeks alliances with murderous anti-Semites.

...The world as it is: Obama enjoys the support of American Jews who are "blindly liberal" and "in rapture to the almighty Obama." Therefore, he can afford to throw away Israel (literally), one of the most democratic and humanitarian societies in the world, to enhance his power and prestige among the social and international political players he wishes to cultivate as America's first "Muslim" president

...Democratic leaders can play to their anti-Semitic core because, in part, they need not worry about Jewish support.

Rest of article at above link.

Obama's Bow to Saudis Escalates to Sellout

2009-06-13T23:40:00.002-04:00

newsmax.com
by Scott Wheeler

...President Obama bowed to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia at the G-20 nations summit in April, and then he denied it.

Despite the evidence of a video and still photos of the event confirming the bow, the mainstream media told us: “Are you going to believe Obama or your lying eyes?”

But Obama obviously bowed, with such great reverence that some described it as “Obama bowing to the keeper of his holy places.” And this was weeks before Obama went to the Middle East and reclaimed his Muslim heritage. His speech in Cairo was like a Muslim debutante's coming-out announcement.

...This trip to the Middle East had an awkward stop in Saudi Arabia, perhaps so Obama could have the king greet him in broad daylight to show Americans back home that he didn’t bow. And he apparently didn’t this time — or at least not literally. But just days before his trip, he genuflected to the Saudi royals and subordinated American victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks as though they were subjects as well.

...Democrats have been curiously silent on the issue of Obama’s affection for the Saudis, especially considering the fact that, when Bush was president, his relationship with the Saudis was a constant source of conspiracy mongering among the left.

Sen. John Kerry sought to exploit Bush’s need for Saudi cooperation in the war on terror in the 2004 election. And who could forget the Democrats' favorite film of that year: Michael Moore’s "Fahrenheit 9-11," which masqueraded as evidence of the Bush administration’s complicity with the Saudis in the attacks.

Obama has declared whose side he is on; now the question is whether the Democrats prove to be as duplicitous on this issue as they do on most everything else.

Rest of article at above link.

Obama's 100 Days by Jeff Kuhner on the Michael Savage Show

2009-06-11T10:54:00.001-04:00

Wednesday Hero

2009-06-10T10:50:00.001-04:00

Aviation Ordnanceman 2nd Class (SEAL) Marc A. Lee
28 years old from Hood River, Oregon
Navy SEAL
August 2, 2006

"Marc was amazing. He was my best friend, my love," his widow, Maya, said.

Petty Officer Marc A. Lee joined the Navy in 2001 and became an AO after completing Naval Air Technical Training. Later that year he attempted to complete the grueling BUD/S program but caught pneumonia and had to drop out. He tried again in 2004 and completed the course.

On August 2, 2006, Marc A. Lee became the first SEAL to be killed in combat in Iraq when he was fatally wounded in a firefight in Ramadi, Iraq. The following is from the award citation:

"During the operation, one element member was wounded by enemy fire. The element completed the casualty evacuation, regrouped and returned onto the battlefield to continue the fight. Petty Officer Lee and his SEAL element maneuvered to assault an unidentified enemy position. He, his teammates, Bradley Fighting Vehicles and Abrams tanks engaged enemy positions with suppressive fire from an adjacent building to the north.

"To protect the lives of his teammates, he fearlessly exposed himself to direct enemy fire by engaging the enemy with his machine gun and was mortally wounded in the engagement. His brave actions in the line of fire saved the lives of many of his teammates"

"It was so like Marc to give up his life to save his friends," his mother, Debbie Lee, told the Hood River News. "I am so proud of him. He is my hero."

Petty Officer Lee was posthumously awarded a Bronze Star with combat "V" for his actions in Iraq during his team’s combat tour and the Purple Heart medal.

All Information Was Found On And Copied From MilitaryCity.com

These brave men and women sacrifice so much in their lives so that others may enjoy the freedoms we get to enjoy everyday. For that, I am proud to call them Hero.
We Should Not Only Mourn These Men And Women Who Died, We Should Also Thank God That Such People Lived

This post is part of the Wednesday Hero Blogroll. For more information about Wednesday Hero, or if you would like to post it on your site, you can go here.

Evan Thomas: Obama Is a 'Brave,' 'Great Teacher' Who 'Stands Above' Us All

2009-06-10T08:29:00.002-04:00

newsbusters
by Scott Whitlock

...Newsweek editor-at-large Evan Thomas appeared on this weekend's edition of Inside Washington and lauded President Obama as a "brave," "great teacher" who "stands above everybody." These comments were only slightly less hyperbolic than a gushing assertion on Friday's Hardball. On that program, the journalist cooed, "I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."

...Moderator Gordon Peterson prompted Thomas to expound on Obama after asking him and other panelists for their critiques of Obama's speech last week in Cairo, Egypt. Thomas extolled, "We're understanding what Obama is. He is the great teacher. He is this guy that stands above everybody." He did allow that "there's some condescension" in this attitude. However, the Newsweek editor continued, "But, he stands above everybody and says, 'Now, listen. You people have to stop blaming each other unreasonably. You have to get along here and I am going to show you the way.'"

...Conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer, who also appeared on the show, dissented. Speaking of Obama's remarks on Iran, he derided, "What he said about Iran, it was the weakest statement on Iran's nuclear program ever given by a president, weaker than anything heard in the last seven or eight years." He added that the President "did more in three minutes to delegitimize the existence of Israel than any president in American history."

Rest of article at above link.

Obama Tears Down US Economy; Mikhail Gorbachev Endorses Plan

2009-06-09T10:42:00.003-04:00

rushlimbaugh.com
by Rush Limbaugh

...Ladies and gentlemen, there can be no other way to say this now. The gloves have to come off. It's time for people to sober up. The president of the United States, Barack Obama, is destroying the United States economy.

... Even the Associated Press, government-run Associated Press with a headline: "Big Government Spending Programs Have Opposite Effect on Economy." They are concluding that you cannot spend yourself out of a recession. So what is President Obama planning to do? Spend even more, even sooner.

... I know the Democrat Party is oriented toward socialism. I know the Democrat Party is oriented toward big government and massive power. I'm speaking specifically of the Democrat Party now. I'm still not convinced the Democrat Party wants to destroy the US economy.

...Obama's nationalized health care will require businesses and individuals to insure everybody who is uninsured whether they want to be or not, that's 50 million new health insurance customers that will happen by government fiat if this health care bill gets passed and is signed into law. And with this as a backdrop: "President Obama met with his cabinet Monday to deliver more than 600,000 jobs through his stimulus plan this summer,"

...Obama ramping up his stimulus program this week, even as his wife stays in Paris to shop with the kids while Obama continues to warn CEOs not to get on their jets and fly to Las Vegas. For a man who said he didn't have time to see any troops or to meet with Sarkozy or to have some quality time with Angela Merkel, the man had to get back and he got back yesterday and went and played golf at Andrews Air Force Base 90 minutes after arriving back from France, or wherever he was. And Michelle and the daughters are still over there on a sightseeing tour.

...To add insult to injury -- dadelut dadelut dadelut dadelut dadelut dadelut dadelut -- Mikhail Gorbachev has now entered the world economic question with his own point of view, my friends.

...The truth be known, Gorbachev was the world's first messiah. Obama is number two.

...Mikhail Gorbachev presided over the collapse of his country like Barack Obama is presiding over the collapse of his. And so a man who knows how to collapse his own economy is now advising us on how to collapse ours. He said that "it was now clear to him 'that the new Western model was an illusion that benefited chiefly the very rich.'" He's not talking about Obama's current policies, folks. He's talking about officially ditching capitalism.

...There is no other way to say this. Given the economic numbers that we have -- given the 25-year record unemployment, given that there is no positive economic news anywhere -- wouldn't somebody with common sense and a brain think that after... Let's count 'em up here. This is just five months, and then we add October, November... After eight months of an amount of spending that equals $11 trillion and an over $2 trillion budget deficit this year -- after eight months of stimulating the economy in ways that have never been done, under the theory that this was the only way to revive our US economy -- isn't it time to stop and say, "Wait a minute! The political solutions not only aren't working, they are making it worse"?

...Barack Obama inherited greatness in a nation. He inherited the birthplace of the individual. He inherited the defender of liberty at home and abroad, the United States of America. He inherited the opportunity to lead a nation of sheer exceptionalism, a nation of equal opportunity, a nation which featured its citizens the right to fail and to try and try and try again. He inherited the financial center and capital of the world. Barack Obama inherited the country that has successfully championed capitalism and widespread prosperity. He inherited a nation which liberated billions of people who lived in oppression. He also inherited great responsibility. He inherited the responsibility to lead this great nation, the world's lone superpower, a nation oriented toward the good of humanity. He inherited the responsibility to preserve and strengthen the free markets and economies that made this the greatest nation in the history of human civilization. He inherited the responsibility to continue the philosophy and the tradition of a country founded on Judeo-Christian morals, ethics, and principles.

He inherited the Constitution of the United States. He did not claim the right to remake it, to rewrite it, to change it. He swore to uphold it. And he's in the process of wreaking as much damage to the Constitution as he can get away with, with nominations like Sonia Sotomayor, as he is wreaking damage to the US economy. Barack Obama did not inherit a mess. He leads a mess. He inherited the United States of America, where anything is possible. And greatness has been delivered to the world time after time in the form of private sector inventions, innovations, advancements in products that improve people's lives for over 200 years. He inherited a country of individuals energized by their liberty and strengthened by their character. Barack Obama inherited the leadership of the greatest collection of human beings in the history of human existence.

...And what has he done with this inheritance? He has run around the world and apologized at every stop he makes for what he considers the sins, the immorality, and the unjust unfairness of the way he perceives the United States of America.

...There is a lot to be proud of this country, but you don't hear much about that from the Oval Office or wherever Obama's teleprompter happens to be planted. We don't hear people in his administration talk about how proud they are of this country and how proud they are of the people who make this country work.

...Evan Thomas said he was above America, above the world, he's a god. Barack Obama is a human being. He is not a god. I was simply trying to, shall we say, emphasize that proclamation by describing his humanity. He is not a god.

Carla & Michelle

2009-06-08T11:21:00.002-04:00

U.S first lady Michelle Obama and France's First Lady Carla Bruni-Sarkozy attend a ceremony to mark the 65th anniversary of the D-Day landings in Normandy at Colleville-sur-Mer cemetery, June 6
Yahoo News

Is questioning Obama 'offensive'?

2009-06-08T06:33:00.003-04:00

by Joseph Farah
worldnetdaily

No doubt you've heard about CBS' decision to ban billboards questioning Barack Obama's eligibility for office as "offensive, misleading or incompatible with community standards."

As I have explained before, I don't care if CBS prohibits the use of its billboards for my campaign to bring public attention to this issue. In fact, I support CBS' absolute right to reject any kind of advertising it deems inappropriate.

However, I think it is the public's right to know what CBS' standards are – if, indeed, the company has any.

According to CBS, this billboard in Phoenix, purchased by a group of Arizona atheists," is not offensive or incompatible with community standards.

This one is.

Again, that's fine. If those are CBS' standards, so be it. But the public should know.

Questioning God is OK. Questioning Barack Obama, even when he is not named, is not.

But I'd like you to see what the billboard industry states in its code about billboard suitability: "We advocate the use of outdoor advertising for political, editorial, public service, and other noncommercial messages."

Is this not a "political" and "editorial" message?

It would seem that CBS has a bias here against certain kinds of political and editorial messages.

There is indeed some self-censorship at work here.

And I can certainly understand it given the way the Obama administration has shown no hesitation in hiring and firing the chief executive officers of some of the biggest public corporations in America, indeed, taking over those companies, regulating freedom of speech and strictly controlling debate.

CBS obviously doesn't fear God. It does, however, fear Obama.

...They stopped being watchdogs and became lapdogs.

...The Constitution establishes only two criteria for serving as president of the United States – that the officeholder be at least 35 years of age and be a "natural born citizen." This campaign seeks to find the proof that Obama is indeed a "natural born citizen."

Rest of article at above link.

Sanford wins bet with Palin on hockey series

2009-06-07T04:17:00.004-04:00

wistv.com

There will be no shrimp and grits for Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. She owes South Carolina's Mark Sanford some king salmon from her home state.

The two Republican governors - rumored to have aspirations for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination - bet on the ECHL's Kelly Cup finals between the Alaska Aces and South Carolina Stingrays.

The Stingrays won their third Kelly Cup on Friday, defeating the Aces 4-2 in the decisive game in Anchorage - so Sanford wins some Alaska king salmon.

Had the Aces won, Palin would have received shrimp and grits and she-crab soup from Tristan Restaurant in Charleston.

Article at above link.

Wednesday Hero

2009-06-03T13:09:00.000-04:00

Sgt. Pablo A. Calderon
26 years old from Brooklyn, New York
1st Battalion, 5th Cavalry Regiment, 1st Cavalry Division
November 30, 2004

"He wanted to fight for his country," said his heartbroken younger sister, Lilliana Calderone. "He always wanted to be there."

Pablo Calderon joined the Army in 1997, right out of High School. "He went straight to the army from high school," said his sister. "He wanted to improve himself. He was proud. He loved his country."

Sgt. Calderon was killed when an IED was detonated near his vehicle in Fallujah, Iraq. Also killed in the attack was Sgt. Jose Guereca of Missouri City, Texas.

All Information Was Found On And Copied From MilitaryCity.com & NYDailyNews.com

These brave men and women sacrifice so much in their lives so that others may enjoy the freedoms we get to enjoy everyday. For that, I am proud to call them Hero.
We Should Not Only Mourn These Men And Women Who Died, We Should Also Thank God That Such People Lived

This post is part of the Wednesday Hero Blogroll. For more information about Wednesday Hero, or if you would like to post it on your site, you can go here.

Sonia Sotomayor 'La Raza member'

2009-05-28T11:36:00.002-04:00

American Bar Association lists Obama choice as part of group
by Joe Kovacs
worldnetdaily

...As President Obama's Supreme Court nominee comes under heavy fire for allegedly being a "racist," Judge Sonia Sotomayor is listed as a member of the National Council of La Raza, a group that's promoted driver's licenses for illegal aliens, amnesty programs, and no immigration law enforcement by local and state police.

...Over the past two days, Sotomayor has been heavily criticized for her racially charged statement: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

..."Imagine a judicial nominee said 'my experience as a white man makes me better than a latina woman,'" blogged former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga. "Wouldn't they have to withdraw? New racism is no better than old racism. A white man racist nominee would be forced to withdraw. Latina woman racist should also withdraw."

Radio's Rush Limbaugh noted, "And the libs of course say that minorities cannot be racists because they don't have the power to implement their racism. Well, those days are gone because reverse racists certainly do have the power to implement their power. Obama is the greatest living example of a reverse racist, and now he's appointed one. ..."

...As WND previously reported, La Raza was condemned in 2007 by former U.S. Rep. Charles Norwood, R-Ga., as a radical "pro-illegal immigration lobbying organization that supports racist groups calling for the secession of the western United States as a Hispanic-only homeland."

Norwood urged La Raza to renounce its support of the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan – which sees "the Race" as part of an ethnic group that one day will reclaim Aztlan, the mythical birthplace of the Aztecs. In Chicano folklore, Aztlan includes California, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico and parts of Colorado and Texas.

Rest of article at above link.

Wednesday Hero

2009-05-27T09:45:00.001-04:00

USS George H.W. Bush

Sailors assigned to the Air Department of the aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush (CVN 77) are silhouetted against the setting sun at the conclusion of flight operations. George H.W. is underway in the Atlantic Ocean conducting flight deck certifications.

These brave men and women sacrifice so much in their lives so that others may enjoy the freedoms we get to enjoy everyday. For that, I am proud to call them Hero.
We Should Not Only Mourn These Men And Women Who Died, We Should Also Thank God That Such People Lived

This post is part of the Wednesday Hero Blogroll. For more information about Wednesday Hero, or if you would like to post it on your site, you can go here.

2009-05-25T08:16:00.000-04:00

Pepsi vs Obama

2009-05-22T14:41:00.001-04:00

Radio fire ignited to burn Savage ban

2009-05-21T12:57:00.003-04:00

Talkers urged to boycott U.K., rally around blacklisted host
worldnetdaily
by Chelsea Schilling

...A well-known right-leaning radio firebrand whose face has become a staple on cable TV news shows has vowed to speak out against the U.K.'s blacklisting of Michael Savage – and he's demanding that the nation's talkers join him.

Bill Cunningham, Cincinnati host of 700 WLW who replaced Matt Drudge on the Sunday night Premiere Radio Network talk show, is best known for being scolded by John
McCain after he referred to President Obama as "Barack Hussein Obama" during the presidential campaigns. He pledged Sunday to talk about Britain's ban every week on his live show, aired in more than 200 markets, until the U.K. removes Savage's name from its blacklist.

"If the kings and queens of talk radio do not arise and stand with Michael Savage, they're going to start picking us off one at a time," Cunningham told WND. "If we don't stand with Michael, there'll be no one left to stand with each of us when the FCC or the British government or the American government comes after us. I see it as personal because if Michael Savage falls, who are they going to pick on next?"

Cunningham pledged, "Every Sunday between now and the end of time, I will talk about Michael Savage, support Michael Savage and encourage boycotts of everything British until they free Savage from this fatwa that was issued by the British government."

...The U.K. list also includes Hamas leader Yunis Al-Astal, former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard Stephen Donald Black, neo-Nazi Erich Gliebe and radical American pastor Fred Phelps, known for his virulent anti-gay protests at funerals. Phelps' daughter Shirley Phelps-Roper also is on the list. But Cunningham said he believes it is outrageous to link Savage with members of the Ku Klux Klan and radical Islamists.

...Asked why he thinks the nation's talk radio hosts haven't already voiced their support for Savage, he replied, "I think there are two reasons: One is competition. Maybe they think that if Michael Savage leaves the airwaves it'll give them more time clearances on more stations. I think that is short-sighted. Secondly, Michael Savage is a bit radioactive, and they don't want to engender commercial boycotts of their own shows."

..."I guarantee that if the British government had issued a fatwa against left-leaning politicians, if it had banned Ed Schultz who sits in the front row of Obama's news conferences, I bet the Obama administration would get the ban lifted," he said.

"But because it's Michael Savage, who's on the opposite side of the political spectrum as Obama, they keep their damn mouths shut."

...On his website, Savage is appealing to his listeners to contribute to his legal fund as he considers action against the home secretary. Cunningham said listeners should also boycott Britain. He and his wife had planned to go to London in September, but they canceled the trip after the blacklist was released.

...I don't agree with some things Michael Savage says, but I will fight to the death for his right to say it," he said. "That's the essence of the First Amendment. He may say some things that I wouldn't say, but damn it, he's got the right to say it."

Rest of article at above link.

Wednesday Hero

2009-05-20T01:57:00.001-04:00

Sgt. Christian E. Bueno-Galdos
25 years old from Paterson, New Jersey
3rd Battalion, 66th Armor Regiment, 172nd Infantry Brigade
May 11, 2009

On Mother’s Day, Eugenia Gardos made a tabletop shrine to her recently deceased mother — surrounding her photograph with silk roses, a small white rosary cross, two votive candles and a prayer card of Senor de los Milagros, the patron saint of Peru.

The next day, May 11, she added her son's picture to the shrine for the dead.

Sgt. Gardos was killed along with five fellow servicemen; Army Spc. Jacob D. Barton, Army Maj. Matthew P. Houseal, Navy Cmdr. Charles K. Springle and Army Pfc. Michael E. Yates Jr. in the attack on Camp Liberty.

"The first time he left for Iraq, when they would read the lists of the dead on the news, we used to hold our breath, praying he wasn't on it," his mother said. "I don't understand how he could have died this way. I just don't understand it."

Sgt. Galdos had emigrated with his family from Mollendo, Peru, as a child and had been a U.S. citizen since high school. His mother, two older brothers and older sister recalled how he used to hand out candy to children in Iraq the same way he always did in Paterson — never making a trip to the corner bodega without a group of neighborhood children tailing behind, knowing he would buy them candy or a soda.

"We were all here at home," Carlos Bueno, Sgt. Galdos's father, said. "I was getting ready to go to bed when I heard screaming downstairs. I ran downstairs and everyone had thrown themselves to the floor, thrashing around, screaming."

Bueno said he does not feel bitterness toward the man accused in the shootings, whom he described as "mentally ill."

"We want people to know we're proud of our son's Army, but if my son had died in war we would be able to handle that," he said. "But not to die in this manner."

All Information Was Found On And Copied From MilitaryCity.com

These brave men and women sacrifice so much in their lives so that others may enjoy the freedoms we get to enjoy everyday. For that, I am proud to call them Hero.
We Should Not Only Mourn These Men And Women Who Died, We Should Also Thank God That Such People Lived

This post is part of the Wednesday Hero Blogroll. For more information about Wednesday Hero, or if you would like to post it on your site, you can go here.

Obama Used ‘Tough Love,’ Bibi Stood Firm

2009-05-19T05:05:00.002-04:00

Arutz Sheva
by Gil Ronen

...Global media report that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu "stood firm" against pressure from the Obama administration Monday on the issue of a "two-state solution" with the Palestinian Authority.

“The Israeli prime minister stood firm,” reported France24 after the talk between President Barack Obama and Israel Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. “He said he is ready to negotiate with the Palestinians but only if they recognized Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state.”

...“Israel stood firm against demands from Barack Obama on Monday to cease the construction of Jewish settlements and embrace the ‘two-state solution’ to achieving peace in the Middle East,” the newspaper said. It added that Netanyahu “made it clear that while he welcomed Mr. Obama's commitment to the region, he was more concerned about dealing with the threat of Iran than peace talks.”

...French press agency AFP reported that the “intense first talks” between the leaders “laid bare differing approaches on Iran and the U.S. goal of a Palestinian state.” The agency characterized Netanyahu’s remarks after the meeting as “blunt” and describing “an impassioned Netanyahu voicing his fears before reporters that a nuclear-armed Tehran would pose a mortal threat to Israel.”

...CNN reported that, based on interviews with U.S., Israeli and Arab diplomats, a drastic change in the relationship between Israel and the U.S. is not likely. “The Obama administration won't waiver from the traditional unshakable commitment to Israel's security,” the news outlet estimated.

Rest of article at above link.

The definitive retrospective on the Notre Dame/Obama scandal [SEAN HANNITY INTERVIEWS ALAN KEYES]

2009-05-18T12:28:00.000-04:00

Wednesday Hero

2009-05-13T11:25:00.000-04:00

Spc. Robert Hamilton

Spc. Robert Hamilton, from Corpus Christi, Texas, Company C, 2nd Battalion, 5th Cavalry Regiment, prepares to bandage the thumb of an Iraqi boy in Ula Market in Sadr City, April 19. The boy cut his thumb while preparing meat at a local butcher shop.

These brave men and women sacrifice so much in their lives so that others may enjoy the freedoms we get to enjoy everyday. For that, I am proud to call them Hero.
We Should Not Only Mourn These Men And Women Who Died, We Should Also Thank God That Such People Lived

This post is part of the Wednesday Hero Blogroll. For more information about Wednesday Hero, or if you would like to post it on your site, you can go here.

Mothers Day

2009-05-10T04:32:00.002-04:00

Next step? No guns allowed for right-wing 'extremists'

2009-05-09T04:56:00.002-04:00

Bill empowers attorney general to forbid firearms for those 'suspected dangerous'

worldnetdaily

by Drew Zahn

...A new gun law being considered in Congress, if aligned with Department of Homeland Security memos labeling everyday Americans as potential "threats," could potentially deny firearms to pro-lifers, gun-rights advocates, tax protesters, animal rights activists, and a host of others – any already on the expansive DHS watch list for potential "extremism."

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., has sponsored H.R. 2159, the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009, which permits the attorney general to deny transfer of a firearm to any "known or suspected dangerous terrorist." The bill requires only that the potential firearm transferee is "appropriately suspected" of preparing for a terrorist act and that the attorney general "has a reasonable belief" that the gun might be used in connection with terrorism.

Gun rights advocates, however, object to the bill's language, arguing that it enables the federal government to suspend a person's Second Amendment rights without any trial or legal proof and only upon suspicion of being "dangerous."

..."[Rep. King] would deny citizens their civil liberties based on no due process," objected Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America. "A 'known terrorist?' Look, if the guy has committed an act of terrorism, we shouldn't have to worry about him being able to buy a gun; he should be in jail!"

...Pratt's biggest concern, however, is the sidestepping of the Constitution and due process that the nebulous language of this bill could permit.

"Unbeknownst to us, some bureaucrat in the bowels of democracy can put your name on a list, and your Second Amendment rights are toast," Pratt told WND. "This is such an anti-American bill, this is something King George III would have done."

...the relative of a Louisiana driver claims her brother-in-law has already been unfairly targeted by police simply for having a supposedly subversive, "Don't Tread on Me" bumper sticker on his car.

According to the relative, it happened this way: Her brother-in-law was driving home from work through Ball, La., which has a local reputation for enhancing its budget by ticketing speeders. He was pulled over by police officers who told him "he had a subversive survivalist bumper sticker on his car."

"They proceeded to keep him there on the side of the road while they ran whatever they do to see if you have a record, keeping him standing by the side of the road for 30 minutes," she told WND.

Finding no record and no reason to keep him, they warned him and eventually let him go, she said.

...WND contacted Rep. King's office for comment on the bill, but received no response.

House bypasses governor’s veto to claim Oklahoma’s sovereignty

2009-05-06T11:30:00.001-04:00

NewsOK
by Michael McNutt

Although Gov. Brad Henry vetoed similar legislation 10 days earlier, House members Monday again approved a resolution claiming Oklahoma’s sovereignty.

Unlike House Joint Resolution 1003, House Concurrent Resolution 1028 does not need the governor’s approval.

The House passed the measure 73-22. It now goes to the Senate.

"We’re going to get it done one way or the other,” said the resolutions’ author, Rep. Charles Key, R-Oklahoma City.

"I think our governor is out of step.”

House Democrats objected, saying the issue already had been taken up and had been vetoed, but House Speaker Pro Tempore Kris Steele, R-Shawnee, ruled the veto is not final action.

Key said he expects HCR 1028 will pass in the Senate. HJR 1003 earlier passed the House 83-18 and won approval in the Senate 29-18.

Henry vetoed HJR 1003 because he said it suggested, among other things, that Oklahoma should return federal tax dollars.

Key said HCR 1028, which, if passed, would be sent to Democratic President Barack Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress, would not jeopardize federal funds but would tell Congress to "get back into their proper constitutional role.” The resolution states the federal government should "cease and desist” mandates that are beyond the scope of its powers.

Key said many federal laws violate the 10th Amendment, which says powers not delegated to the U.S. government "are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” The Constitution lists about 20 duties required of the U.S. government, he said.

Congress should not be providing bailouts to financial institutions and automakers, he said.

"We give all this money to all these different entities, including automakers, and now they’re talking about, ‘Well maybe it’s better to let them go bankrupt,’” Key said. "Well, maybe we should have let them go bankrupt before we gave them the money..”

2009-05-04T03:56:00.001-04:00