CITIZEN FOR FREEDOM

How we can take the bite out of Obama

2010-07-26T18:43:00.000-07:00

Will we pull Obama's teeth? Our founding fathers instructed us to chose men who were virtuous in private, How well do we know our candidates. They told us to chose men with high morals, how many have we elected in the past only to find they have more skeletons in their closet than most of us have forks in the silverware drawer. They told us not make these positions one of high pay, only of honor, or scoundrels would seek these positions. They told us elect modest thinking men, for those with large egos would bully and push their will unto the country and their opposition would demean them while wanting to have the same power themselves to pursuit their goals. Have we listened, is not the pay for these jobs way above average, is not the retirement program they have voted for themselves far better than most Americans enjoy? How many elected officials have legal problems, how many have and are facing ethics charges? How many actually have read and studied the constitution to know if they are are passing or proposing constitutional laws? De we really know the heart and mind of the candidates we have to chose from? I submit to you that the number of unqualified representatives, out numbers the the qualified. Why? There are several reasons, one we just don't pay attention, two, as Ben Franklin warned, when the people become corrupt, they only elect corrupt officials. You see, we are not living the standards needed to have a great working republic, therefore we can not or will not elect men and women with the standards to keep this great republic. Our Founding Fathers told us, plain and simple, only a religious, moralistic, virtuous people will be able to retain the principles that are needed for this Republic to survive. Are we going to pull his teeth, or just give him dentures?

The Founding Fathers also told us it was important to teach 3 things in our schools when they passed the Northwest Ordinance, 1,Religion, 2,Morality, and 3, Knowledge. Yes religion, a nondenominational religion that promoted 5 fundamentals. 1, There exists a Creator who made all things and mankind should recognize and worship Him. 2, The Creator has revealed a moral code of behavior for happy living which distinguishes right from wrong. 3, The Creator holds mankind responsible for the way they treat each other. 4, ALL mankind live beyond this life. 5, In the next life mankind are judged for their conduct in this one. This position was set forth in the Northwest Ordinance, which was voted on and passed by the same congress that approved the Constitution, the same year as they approved the Constitution. Washington re-emphasized this ordinance in his Farewell Address, both Franklin and Jefferson had a hand in its writing, and Samuel Adams stated that this group of basic beliefs which constitute "the religion of America is the religion of all mankind. So when Obama says we are not a Christian Nation, you know he does not know anything about the matter. This separation of Church and State only is to keep the state from telling us which Church we worship in.

Not American Tradition, Not America.

2010-05-27T19:12:00.000-07:00

I am not a fan of the American Civil Liberties Union, but in this case I believe they took the right side.

American Civil Liberties Union v. Ashcroft (filed April 9, 2004 in the United States) is a lawsuit filed on behalf of an unknown party by the American Civil Liberties Union against the U.S. federal government. The unknown party, an Internet service provider, was subject to National Security Letters (NSLs) from the Federal Bureau of Investigation requiring the release of private information and under a gag order forbidding any public discussion of the issues. In September 2004, Judge Victor Marrero of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York struck down the NSL provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act. This prompted Congress to amend the law to allow limited judicial review of NSLs, and prompted the government to appeal the case to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The appeal was dismissed by Doe I v. Gonzales, 449 F.3d 415 (2d Cir. 2006) because Congress amended Section 2709 in the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-177, sec. 116, 120 Stat. 192, 213 (2006).
On the recommendation of the Second Circuit, the district court considered the amended law in 2007, in Doe v. Gonzales. On September 6, 2007, Judge Marrero struck down the NSL provision of the revised Act, ruling that even with limited judicial review granted in the amended law, it was still a violation of separation of powers under the United States Constitution and the First Amendment. This is not yet enforced, pending a possible government appeal.

A heavily redacted page from the original lawsuit. LOOKS LIKE THIS IN THE CASE OF******************WE DO FIND****************ON THIS DAY OF 06/04/2004
***************************and therefore******************* swore to me Judge*********************
You get the idea, everything relevant is blacked out.

Because of the secrecy rules involved, the government would not let the ACLU disclose they had even filed a case for nearly a month, after which they were permitted to release a heavily redacted version of the complaint (like that would do them any good, nothing is readable) According to government secrecy rules (the National Security Letter provision, [Section 2709] of the 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act, [ECPA]) the ACLU still could not disclose which ISP was served with the request to produce documents.
This prompted the ACLU to challenge the secrecy law itself, and they sued to invalidate the NSL provision of the ECPA. Introduced by U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont and enacted in 1986, the bill permitted the FBI to obtain customer records from telephone and Internet companies in terrorism investigations.
The ACLU argued that the NSL violated the First and Fourth Amendments to the United States Constitution because
Section 2709 failed to spell out any legal process whereby a telephone or Internet company could try to oppose an NSL subpoena in court and
Section 2709 prohibited the recipient of an NSL subpoena from disclosing that he had received such a request from the FBI, and outweighs the FBI's need for secrecy in counter-terrorism investigations.
The government agreed in principle with the ACLU's claim that the recipient of the subpoena can challenge it in court, and because the matter of specified judicial process remained in question and directly affected other present and future cases, the Court found the NSL section to be in need of review.
[edit]Court finding

The Court subsequently found section 2709 of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act unconstitutional. It reasoned that it could not find in the provision an implied right for the person receiving the subpoena to challenge it in court as is constitutionally required.
The finding of unconstitutionality essentially dismisses any claimed presumptive legal need for absolute secrecy in regard to terrorism cases. The USA PATRIOT Act is affected only if the limits on NSLs in terrorism cases also apply to non-terrorism cases such as those authorized by the Act. The government was expected to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court, and until the district court ruling is reviewed, the secrecy procedures of the NSL remain in place.

This is part of the Patriot Act that was not explained to us just like the parts of the health care bill and the Finance Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Like so many things, yet our President sees no harm in revealing how many war heads we have and what kind they are, things that our enemies love to know. Like the governors from Minnesota and Texas and about 12 other governors who have recieved NSL's, I too fear where our government is taking us, I hope that those Governors do acknowlege that they have recived these letters and allow the people of their respective states know that the current administration not only will not protect US citizens, it will not allow us to protect ourselves. I take as example the U.N. Small Arms Treaty, this is nothing less than an attempt to take away our Second Amendment Right To Bare Arms. Look at what they did in England, they have taken away their hunting rifles, in the past they took their hand guns. One resident, Tony Martin had been robbed several times in a couple months, he lived rural enough that there were not police close or neighbors so finally he shot one of the robber when they were in his house. He got life in prison for premeditated murder. Just because he planned to protect himself and his property. Now the sentence has been reduced, but he is still in jail and being sued by the burgler. The burgler who was killed was 16 years old and had around 20 breakins on his police record. The other guy was in his early 30's and had 34 convictions on his record. I guess they don't have a three times and your in for life law in England. If you think removing guns from the public make us safer, look at England and Australias crime rates after guns are confidiscated from honest citizens. Violent crime up 30 plus percent. All crime up close to 40%. YoU DO THE MATH. From my cold dead fingers.

CIA Agent speaks out.

2010-05-06T08:42:00.000-07:00

Popcorn time, watch and listen three times at least

One Election Coming Right Up, How do you want it, Fair or Normal?

2010-04-27T06:39:00.000-07:00

Islamic Jihad coming our way soon.

2010-04-20T08:51:00.000-07:00

I have added bold lettering and enclosed some of (my) aside statements that I felt were of importance. When you hear people talk about how we have brought this on ourselves by invading Muslim countries or taking advantage of them for their oil, I ask you to point out they have been in jihad since 641 A.D. I don't think Exxon Oil started this back then and I don't believe the U.S.A. was sending diplomatic statesmen there with threats of any kind either. This is an ideology contrived by a murdering pedophile named Muhammad.

A short history of ISLAMIC JIHAD an Ideology not a Religion
and how it is affecting us, the U.S.A. and the WORLD

“Dhimmi” is the Arabic word for “subjugated, non-Muslim individuals or people that accept the restrictive and humiliating subordination to an ascendant Islamic power to avoid enslavement or death,” according to Giselle Littman whose pseudonym is Bat Ye’or, which means “daughter of the Nile” in Hebrew. (Giselle Littman was born in Cairo Egypt, her citizenship was revoked in 1955, became British by marriage and now lives in Switzerland, where she does research and publishes books and articles, mostly about Jews in Egypt and the subjugation of Christians and Jews by Islam.)

Dhimmitude, according to Littman, is the dysfunctional state in which the entire Muslim world known today exists. Furthermore, this dhimmitude is a result of a 1,300 year-old jihad dynamic that has reduced once thriving non-Muslim majority civilizations to a state of dysfunctional dhimmitude. Many civilizations,” she goes on, “have been completely Islamized and have disappeared. Others remain as fossilized relics of the past, unable to evolve.” It is an English derivative of dhimmi.
Littman further explains the meaning of dhimmitude: “I have called ‘dhimmitude’ this condition of ‘subjection with protection’ of non-Muslims in their own countries, obtained by the cession of their land to the Muslim ruler. Subjection, because the infidels submit to the Islamic law which expropriates them, and protection because this same law protects them from jihad and guarantees limited rights under a system of discrimination's that they must accept, or face forced conversion, slavery or death.”
Her understanding of jihad is that it “represents a unique ideology of continuous and universal religious war. People unfamiliar with its history might believe that it remained an abstraction. Quite the contrary; in the course of one century, beginning
in 641 after jihad armies had already conquered Arabia and advanced into the surrounding areas, Islamic conquests expanded over Christian lands from Armenia to Portugal. By the second decade of the eight century, Muhammad bin Qasim’s jihad campaigns had extended the Muslim empire to Sind, on the Indian subcontinent. Other conquests in Byzantine and European lands followed in the next centuries. The newly conquered countries around the Mediterranean had been populated by Christians, with large Jewish minorities. Waves of colonists form Arabia followed the Muslim armies of occupation. These settlers gradually became majorities through the occupants’ policy of colonization, land dispossession, fiscal oppression and, at times, slavery and deportation.” ( As in the example of the three workers at the publishing house who were killed because they printed Christian material in Turkey last week, they also use violence.)
While dhimmis may view jihadic subjugation as oppressive, Muslims think otherwise. They believe in mandatory jihad and because dhimmitude rules are justified by Islam’s sacred texts, Muslims cannot criticize it. “The oppression and persecution of the infidels, including Jews and Christians, are the rightful punishment deserved by the infidels for refusing Islam’s truth.” Muslim conquerors over the centuries have been aided and abetted by Christian leaders who have colluded with them because of inter-Christian dynastic and religious rivalries and personal ambitions.” This pattern, Littman contends, persists today, with France as the leader among European nations that together collude with Arab powers (e.g., encouraging immigration and multiculturalism on the European continent) to obtain need petrol resources. This collusion, which started in 1973 during the devastating Arab oil embargo (which Littman calls “the snare”), is transforming Europe into a dhimmitude continent.
During the process of Islamization of “powerful Christain civilization spread over the Middle East, North Africa, the Iberian Peninsula, Anatolia, and Southeastern Europe,” three important factors emerge as fixed components of jihad policy, says Littman, as follows:

1. “The gradual erosion of resistance within the societies targeted but not yet conquered by jihad, concurring with their growing economic weakness due to the tribute required for the Muslim overlords’ renewal of the truce. During and after their subjugation , their demographic decline followed as a result of warfare, massacres, slavery, abduction of women and children, and deportation, until the situation stabilized. (Forced Political Correctness.)

2. The insecurity caused by the constant mass immigration of foreign populations and the subsequent process of alteration and substitution of one civilization by another, hostile to the indigenous inhabitants. ( Millions of illegals who ignore and break our laws at a much higher rate than our citizens. Illegal students who carve up computers given them in the class room to use, to learn, they just don't care, it is free and their parents don't care they do not pay taxes to replace the damaged equipment.) (The removal of borders, and national pride.)

3. The emergence of powerful collaborationist parties economically and politically linked with Muslim rulers.” (President who attended Muslim school?)
Reply
Reply to all
Forward

They created the problem, let them bail themselves out!

2010-04-10T14:09:00.000-07:00

I received a letter the other day, one of those 'Important Time Dated Information' ones we seem to get so often. This was my reply, I think you know why.

Citizen For Freedom
4435 N.State Highway 37
Winnsboro, TX. 75494
Joseph L. Larson

April 10, 2010

To; College Republican National Committee

I received your survey (request for money) and once again I am astounded by your inability to grasp facts. I can no longer support the Republican Party, I neither have the money to do so, nor the inclination. The Republican Party as well as the Democratic Party have fallen so far from the Constitution of this once great nation that they should be ashamed of themselves. You have taken every opportunity to spend other peoples money in ways that are both wasteful, but also totally with out the right to do so. There is no place in the Constitution where you are given the right to spend my money, or anyone else's. You can spend your money how ever it pleases you, but what is mine is mine. Under the republican party taxation has grown. To say, but not as fast as under the democrats is a joke, waste and government growth is government growth and waste. I have joined www.goooh.com and if I should be able to support anyone, they will get my money. It is our intention of replacing every representative in congress with someone we can trust. As for the health care bill we intend to see it reversed and make it law that government can never have say in our health care. We will educate the American people to the insidious practice of the two parties working hand in hand to steal our freedoms, our money and our country. You have to be blind not to see the tide turning, how can you expect anyone to believe you are the party of reform, first your senators won't even agree to a 1 year moratorium on pork spending. Yes, pork spending, that nefarious historical waste of tax payers money for things like Murthas' airport, and you want us to vote for people who openly admit they want to practice this? Grow up and get a brain. We don't trust either side and for good reason. Now you bring Newt back with another Contract with America, when you never honored the first one. Do you think college kids can't figure this one out? There are few representative we are going to keep, very few. The only way for you to be a viable party was to listen to the voice of God and make law according to the Constitution. You do neither, so you get no support. None of us are blindly giving money to support a party, when the party does not support America. Look at S.S., Washington had to spend the money in the fund, just because they can't stand to see money not being spent, why did we not hear about the bad choices being made in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack until it was too late, do we need to hire watchers to watch the watchers? How do you explain $300 hammers and $500 toilet seats. We are going to explain it to you at the polls. The finale straw has been the attempted destruction of our Christian beliefs, the restriction on our moments of prayer in public places, we are not turning the other cheek any longer. IN GOD WE TRUST, NO OTHER.

JOSEPH L. LARSON
Citizen For Freedom

Davey Crocket understood what a congressman needs to know.

2010-04-09T09:07:00.000-07:00

From "The life of Colonel David Crockett
By Edward S. Ellis
Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1884

DAVEY CROCKETT was then the lion of Washington. I was a great admirer of his character, and, having several friends who were intimate with him, I found no difficulty in making his acquaintance. I was fascinated with him, and he seemed to take a fancy to me.
I was one day in the lobby of the House of Representatives when a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support—rather, as I thought, because it afforded the speakers a fine opportunity for display than from the necessity of convincing anybody, for it seemed to me that everybody favored it. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose. Everybody expected, of course, that he was going to make one of his characteristic speeches in support of the bill. He commenced:
"Mr. Speaker—I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it.
We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him. This government can owe no debts but for services rendered, and at a stipulated price. If it is a debt, how much is it? Has it been audited, and the amount due ascertained? If it is a debt, this is not the place to present it for payment, or to have its merits examined. If it is a debt, we owe more than we can ever hope to pay, for we owe the widow of every soldier who fought in the War of 1812 precisely the same amount.
There is a woman in my neighborhood, the widow of as gallant a man as ever shouldered a musket. He fell in battle. She is as good in every respect as this lady, and is as poor. She is earning her daily bread by her daily labor; but if I were to introduce a bill to appropriate five or ten thousand dollars for her benefit, I should be laughed at, and my bill would not get five votes in this House. There are thousands of widows in the country just such as the one I have spoken of, but we never hear of any of these large debts to them. Sir, this is no debt.
The government did not owe it to the deceased when he was alive; it could not contract it after he died. I do not wish to be rude, but I must be plain. Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity.
Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much of our own money as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week’s pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks."
He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and, of course, was lost.
Like many other young men, and old ones, too, for that matter, who had not thought upon the subject, I desired the passage of the bill, and felt outraged at its defeat. I determined that I would persuade my friend Crockett to move a reconsideration the next day.
Previous engagements preventing me from seeing Crockett that night, I went early to his room the next morning and found him engaged in addressing and franking letters, a large pile of which lay upon his table.
I broke in upon him rather abruptly, by asking him what devil had possessed him to make that speech and defeat that bill yesterday. Without turning his head or looking up from his work, he replied:
"You see that I am very busy now; take a seat and cool yourself. I will be through in a few minutes, and then I will tell you all about it."
He continued his employment for about ten minutes, and when he had finished he turned to me and said:
"Now, sir, I will answer your question. But thereby hangs a tale, and one of considerable length, to which you will have to listen."
I listened, and this is the tale which I heard:
SEVERAL YEARS AGO I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast as we could. When we got there, I went to work, and I never worked as hard in my life as I did there for several hours. But, in spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made homeless, and, besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them, and everybody else seemed to feel the same way.
The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done. I said everybody felt as I did. That was not quite so; for, though they perhaps sympathized as deeply with the sufferers as I did, there were a few of the members who did not think we had the right to indulge our sympathy or excite our charity at the expense of anybody but ourselves. They opposed the bill, and upon its passage demanded the yeas and nays. There were not enough of them to sustain the call, but many of us wanted our names to appear in favor of what we considered a praiseworthy measure, and we voted with them to sustain it. So the yeas and nays were recorded, and my name appeared on the journals in favor of the bill.
The next summer, when it began to be time to think about the election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up, and I thought it was best to let the boys know that I had not forgot them, and that going to Congress had not made me too proud to go to see them.
So I put a couple of shirts and a few twists of tobacco into my saddlebags, and put out. I had been out about a week and had found things going very smoothly, when, riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came to the fence. As he came up I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but, as I thought, rather coldly, and was about turning his horse for another furrow when I said to him: "Don’t be in such a hurry, my friend; I want to have a little talk with you, and get better acquainted."
He replied:
"I am very busy, and have but little time to talk, but if it does not take too long, I will listen to what you have to say."
I began:
"Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and…"
"’Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.’
This was a sockdolager… I begged him to tell me what was the matter.
"Well, Colonel, it is hardly worthwhile to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it in that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the Constitution to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you. I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for my rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest. But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the more honest he is."
"I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, for I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any constitutional question."
"No, Colonel, there’s no mistake. Though I live here in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true?"
"Certainly it is, and I thought that was the last vote which anybody in the world would have found fault with."
"Well, Colonel, where do you find in the Constitution any authority to give away the public money in charity?"
Here was another sockdolager; for, when I began to think about it, I could not remember a thing in the Constitution that authorized it. I found I must take another tack, so I said:
"Well, my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did."
"It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government.
So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other.
No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week’s pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life. The Congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give.
The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution."
I have given you an imperfect account of what he said. Long before he was through, I was convinced that I had done wrong. He wound up by saying:
"So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you."
I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go talking, he would set others to talking, and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, and the fact is, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him:
"Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it full. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said there at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot."
He laughingly replied: "Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote, and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and, perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way."
"If I don’t," said I, "I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say, I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbecue, and I will pay for it."
"No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbecue. This is Thursday; I will see to getting it up on Saturday a week. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you."
"Well, I will be here. But one thing more before I say good-bye… I must know your name."
"My name is Bunce."
"Not Horatio Bunce?"
"Yes."
"Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before, though you say you have seen me; but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend. You must let me shake your hand before I go."
We shook hands and parted.
It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence and incorruptible integrity, and for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.
At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before. Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept him up until midnight, talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before.
I have told you Mr. Bunce converted me politically. He came nearer converting me religiously than I had ever been before. He did not make a very good Christian of me, as you know; but he has wrought upon my mind a conviction of the truth of Christianity, and upon my feelings a reverence for its purifying and elevating power such as I had never felt before. I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him—no, that is not the word—I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if everyone who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.
But to return to my story: The next morning we went to the barbecue, and, to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted—at least, they all knew me. In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying: "Fellow citizens—I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only."
I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation as I have told it to you, and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying: "And now, fellow citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error.
"It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit of it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so."
He came upon the stand and said: "Fellow citizens—It affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today." He went down, and there went up from the crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before.
I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the honors I have received and all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress.
"NOW, SIR," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday. I have had several thousand copies of it printed and was directing them to my constituents when you came in.
"There is one thing now to which I will call your attention. You remember that I proposed to give a week’s pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men—men who think nothing of spending a week’s pay, or a dozen of them for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased—a debt which could not be paid by money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $10,000, when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it."
This story reflects the reason the constitution was written, why as guideline for our government and our congress it is the best guideline we have, and when the lines are streached and even as we have seen lately, broken, we can no longer vote for those who favor mis-treatment of this paper, of this document written in the blood of our forefathers and our men and women in uniform today.
Joseph L. Larson

Joe Wilson had it right, LIAR!!!!

2010-03-25T08:56:00.000-07:00

Here IS what we have to look forward to. This is from HR 3200 the bill passed was 3590 but most everything here is found in 3590 and more, Government paid abortions, yes, Obama lied again, his executive order does not exclude abortion from the government health care bill.

Page 22 of the HC Bill: Mandates that the Govt will audit books of all employers that self-insure!!

Page 30 Sec 123 of HC bill: THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get.

Page 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill: YOUR HEALTH CARE IS RATIONED!!!

Page 42 of HC Bill: The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC benefits for you. You have no choice!

Page 50 Section 152 in HC bill: HC will be provided to ALL non-US citizens, illegal or otherwise.

Page 58 HC Bill: Govt will have real-time access to individuals' finances & a 'National ID Health card' will be issued! (Papers please!)

Page 59 HC Bill lines 21-24: Govt will have direct access to your bank accounts for elective funds transfer. (Time for more cash and carry)

Page 65 Sec 164: Is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in unions & community organizations: (ACORN).

Page 84 Sec 203 HC bill: Govt mandates ALL benefit packages for private HC plans in the 'Exchange.'

Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill: Specifications of Benefit Levels for Plans -- The Govt will ration your health care!

Page 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill: Govt mandates linguistic appropriate services. (Translation: illegal aliens.)

Page 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18: The Govt will use groups (i.e. ACORN & Americorps to sign up individuals for Govt HC plan.

Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill: Specifications of Benefit Levels for Plans. (AARP members - your health care WILL be rationed!)
Page 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill: Medicaid eligible individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid. (No choice.)

Page 12 4 lines 24-25 HC: No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Govt monopoly.

Page 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill: Doctors/ American Medical Association - The Govt will tell YOU what salary you can make.

Page 145 Line 15-17: An Employer MUST auto-enroll employees into public option plan. (NO choice!)

Page 126 Lines 22-25: Employers MUST pay for HC for part-time employees ANDtheir families. (Employees shouldn't get excited about this as employers will be forced to reduce its work force, benefits, and wages/salaries to cover such a huge expense.)

Page 149 Lines 16-24: ANY Employer with payroll 401k & above who does not provide public option will pay 8% tax on all payroll! (See the last comment in parenthesis.)

UNHOLY SUNDAY IN WASHINGTON DC. Obama Style

2010-03-25T08:48:00.000-07:00

The budget for the federal government has never, I repeat never been balanced under a democratic congress. The years when Clinton was president he had a republican house and congress. The truth which any economist worthy of the name will tell you, it normally takes 6to8 years for the economic policy of an administration to affect the economy. So Clinton road the ground swell of Reagan and Bush Senior, the economy was starting to fall late 1999 and early 2000, then with the war, GW did not have a chance to make the needed changes. Then he fell into Barney Franks "Freddy Mack Fannie Mae" screw up. Then his big mistake was the TARP bailout. Bailouts only work if the plan has a plan to retire the the money inserted in the economy. There was no such plan and Obamadinejad keeps spending what does come back to the treasury. Hyper inflation is around the corner. Why employers are not expanding and hiring is simple, they see the no track brain of this administration and know where it will end up. If they have to bite the bullet, they are making sure it is a small caliber bullet. I for one do not intend to trust congress with my bank account as you will have to do if the health care bill passes. That is part of the deal, read the bill, I am not making this up. Now with the report from the N.E.J. of M. showing 43.6% of doctors saying they will be forced to leave medical practice if this bill passes, we are looking at 30 million potential new patients and just about half as many doctors. Your next appointment will be in 6 or 7 months. Hopefully. Kind of sounds like Canada to me. I bet you really like the idea of doctors getting paid bonuses if they can get a little old lady to sign up for assisted suicide. Hey gramps, your sitting in my sunlight, go die somewhere. Not in front of me though, yuck, you might fill your pants. Look at the lady with cancer Obamadinejad brought out on stage, what a hoax, she has care, good care, and they are not going to put a lien on her house. In fact the hospital director stated he was confident her bills would be taken care on, through state medicaid or as a charity case. Lets not forget anything that requires the feds to impose a tax on you is unconstitutional anyway. The 16th amendment was passed illegally, in a secret meeting with less than a quorum present. Excise tax is the only tax the feds are allowed to charge per the constitution. Our founding fathers knew that taxation led to the downfall of every great nation and empire in history. Don't listen to the drive by media, they are all owned by members of the Tri-lateral commission and they do not have the best interests of America in mind. I have been studying this since 1974, I saw this day coming, I was at Gresham, Tigerton, I was around at Wounded Knee, Ruby Ridge, Waco. the time has come to put a stop to the ruining of our nation. If you don't agree, then move.
FOOT NOTE: As you can tell this was written before the vote on Sunday, but the results of this atrocity will be the same, voted on or not.

The battle can be won

2010-03-22T17:58:00.000-07:00

Since September 10 2008 to March 10 2010, 18 months, in order to keep up with the spending of this administration. Bernanke has broadened the monetary base of U.S. currency from 850 billion dollars to 2.1 trillion dollars. That is 2.5 times as much cash floating around out there. That means that every dollar you had in the bank in September of 2008 is now worth $0.40. The health care bill passed Sunday, if the benefits started right away it would require enough capital that the presses would have to fire up again to print the 90 Billion dollar price tag. That means in ten years time the cash floating around out there by double what was there is 2008. Thats not counting the 2.5 times already out the door. We are talking at least 3 trillion dollars instead of the 850 billion when it started in 08. Now your $1.00 will be worth about $0.25 give or take a penny. This was what they were doing in Germany in the 30s when Hitler started all his social programs. They had a 500,000 Mark note that in 1921 would buy a new house, by 1937 it would not even buy a loaf of bread. Bernanke made the statement, we will never run out of money, we can just print more. Everytime the presses roll, you dollar becomes less valuable. Is this the democrats fault, yes to some degree, is it the republicans fault, yes to some degree. But the main fault lies with us, the citizens, we have failed to pay attention and failed to hold our congress and president accountable. Here and there a good man or two would come along, (good women too) but we let the bad ones keep running because they brought pork barrel packages home. Guess what? The money in those pork barrel deals was yours to start with. The government does not own anything, they can not give you anything with out taking it from you first. When the government pays for it, you pay for it, but you don't even get to select what color it will be. Now I know before I write this, there are going to be many naysayers out there in blog land. That is ok, here is the deal. I hear GWB blamed for getting us into a war we did not need to be in, there is some truth to that. If Bush 1 had not listened to the U.N and finished what he started, we would not have had to go back. However, this drive-by media hype that there were no WMDs in Iraq is Bull$$#*. I have a family member who was there before we went back the second time, he found chemical WMDs that nearly killed him. They were never disclosed as the administration was trying to discover who had manufactured them, what country sold them to Iraq. I admit Rumsfeld was a bad choice to lead this war, but it is a difficult thing to wage war without collateral damage. (killing innocent civilians) Especially hard when the enemy embeds itself among them and does not wear uniforms. That is why when they went in so fast they by-passed many units the units went to civilian clothing and came in from the rear causing casualties that could have been avoided. Point being they had WMDs, they could be easily delivered to our population centers. They, the Islam leaders including Iraq's president were intent on killing us. As they still are. Jihad has been planned for several hundred years, this is not something that just came up in recent years because we supposedly have been mistreating these people as some would have you believe. King Richard of England, (during the time frame we read of Robin Hood) was off at the Crusades. Where the crusades were and who they were against was Muslims in the Middle East. Remember also no administration with a democrat controlled congress has ever balanced the budget. Clinton had a republican congress. Does that make republicans better? No, that means when the executive branch and the legislative branch are of different parties all they do is argue and nothing gets done in Washington. And that my friends is when the American people win.

Health care thats good for America

2010-03-04T11:43:00.000-08:00

MEDICAL ALERT! MEDICAL ALERT!, 90 % of congress men and women have been infected with the deadly virus known as Swine Barrel Flu, commonly known as pork barrel waste. There does not seem to be immunity for either party. Eventually everyone sent there catches it, and there is only one cure. Remove them from their duties and allow them to come home. This illness has grown to pandemic porportion and has infected the whole country. We must act immediately, we are at fault and only we can provide our government with a health care plan that will save us trillions of dollars. We must start recycling elected officials at the soonest opportunity. We must become more compassionate, no longer can we fail to do the right thing, give congress the health care plan they deserve, save them, as they can not do it themselves. Restore health to Washington in November, VOTE FOR THE NEW GUY. The above announcment has not been approved by either party.
Symptoms usually manifest as a serious hearing disorder, often failure to hear the voices of constituents, even when more than 50% of them are calling out the same words, "NO TO HEALTHCARE" Also there becomes a perverse tendency to tell lies, even to their co-representatives. More serious is the inability to know themselves, when they are lying. There is often an uncontrollable desire to spend other peoples money, as well as a tendency to blame someone else for their own short sightedness. Some of them have been known to commit criminal acts as they become delirious with the fever of unlimited power. These are the easily treatable cases. However some become very adept at hiding their illness. This is why in order to be sure we stamp out this virus, we will have to do the humane thing and remove them from the day to day exposer by bringing them home from Washington and send others not yet exposed to the pig headed infection that is so rampant in our nations capitol. Some of them will have to be quarantined at state facility often referred to as 'THE CROW BAR HOTEL' for as long as it takes to be 'CURED'. Normally that period of time is equal to the time frame they were exposed to the virus. There does seem to be, certain members of congress and the senate who have a natural resistance to the virus, study shows that it appears to come from an exercise they perform nightly and quite often during the day. They do deep knee bends and while they are down there, they pray for guidance, this seems to work very effectively

OBAMAS OBSTRUCTION BEGAN FIRST DAY IN OFFICE

2010-02-21T16:53:00.000-08:00

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
January 21, 2009
EXECUTIVE ORDER 13489
- - - - - - -

PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to establish policies and procedures governing the assertion of executive privilege by incumbent and former Presidents in connection with the release of Presidential records by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) pursuant to the Presidential Records Act of 1978, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Definitions. For purposes of this order:

(a) "Archivist" refers to the Archivist of the United States or his designee.
(b) "NARA" refers to the National Archives and Records Administration.

(c) "Presidential Records Act" refers to the Presidential Records Act, 44 U.S.C. 2201-2207.

(d) "NARA regulations" refers to the NARA regulations implementing the Presidential Records Act, 36 C.F.R. Part 1270.

(e) "Presidential records" refers to those documentary materials maintained by NARA pursuant to the Presidential Records Act, including Vice Presidential records.

(f) "Former President" refers to the former President during whose term or terms of office particular Presidential records were created.

(g) A "substantial question of executive privilege" exists if NARA's disclosure of Presidential records might impair national security (including the conduct of foreign relations), law enforcement, or the deliberative processes of the executive branch.

(h) A "final court order" is a court order from which no appeal may be taken.

Sec. 2. Notice of Intent to Disclose Presidential Records. (a) When the Archivist provides notice to the incumbent and former Presidents of his intent to disclose Presidential records pursuant to section 1270.46 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist, using any guidelines provided by the incumbent and former Presidents, shall identify any specific materials, the disclosure of which he believes may raise a substantial question of executive privilege. However, nothing in this order is intended to affect the right of the incumbent or former Presidents to invoke executive privilege with respect to materials not identified by the Archivist. Copies of the notice for the incumbent President shall be delivered to the President (through the Counsel to the President) and the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel). The copy of the notice for the former President shall be delivered to the former President or his designated representative.
(b) Upon the passage of 30 days after receipt by the incumbent and former Presidents of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the Archivist may disclose the records covered by the notice, unless during that time period the Archivist has received a claim of executive privilege by the incumbent or former President or the Archivist has been instructed by the incumbent President or his designee to extend the time period for a time certain and with reason for the extension of time provided in the notice. If a shorter period of time is required under the circumstances set forth in section 1270.44 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist shall so indicate in the notice.

Sec. 3. Claim of Executive Privilege by Incumbent President. (a) Upon receipt of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the Attorney General (directly or through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel) and the Counsel to the President shall review as they deem appropriate the records covered by the notice and consult with each other, the Archivist, and such other executive agencies as they deem appropriate concerning whether invocation of executive privilege is justified.

(b) The Attorney General and the Counsel to the President, in the exercise of their discretion and after appropriate review and consultation under subsection (a) of this section, may jointly determine that invocation of executive privilege is not justified. The Archivist shall be notified promptly of any such determination.

(c) If either the Attorney General or the Counsel to the President believes that the circumstances justify invocation of executive privilege, the issue shall be presented to the President by the Counsel to the President and the Attorney General.

(d) If the President decides to invoke executive privilege, the Counsel to the President shall notify the former President, the Archivist, and the Attorney General in writing of the claim of privilege and the specific Presidential records to which it relates. After receiving such notice, the Archivist shall not disclose the privileged records unless directed to do so by an incumbent President or by a final court order.

Sec. 4. Claim of Executive Privilege by Former President. (a) Upon receipt of a claim of executive privilege by a living former President, the Archivist shall consult with the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel), the Counsel to the President, and such other executive agencies as the Archivist deems appropriate concerning the Archivist's determination as to whether to honor the former President's claim of privilege or instead to disclose the Presidential records notwithstanding the claim of privilege. Any determination under section 3 of this order that executive privilege shall not be invoked by the incumbent President shall not prejudice the Archivist's determination with respect to the former President's claim of privilege.

(b) In making the determination referred to in subsection (a) of this section, the Archivist shall abide by any instructions given him by the incumbent President or his designee unless otherwise directed by a final court order. The Archivist shall notify the incumbent and former Presidents of his determination at least 30 days prior to disclosure of the Presidential records, unless a shorter time period is required in the circumstances set forth in section 1270.44 of the NARA regulations. Copies of the notice for the incumbent President shall be delivered to the President (through the Counsel to the President) and the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel). The copy of the notice for the former President shall be delivered to the former President or his designated representative.

Sec. 5. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) authority granted by law to a department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budget, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

Sec. 6. Revocation. Executive Order 13233 of November 1, 2001, is revoked.

BARACK OBAMA
THE WHITE HOUSE,
January 21, 2009.

The EXECUTIVE ORDER HE REVOKED 13233 of November 1, 2001 ( see Sec. 6 above)

Sec. 3. Claim of Executive Privilege by Incumbent President.

(a) Upon receipt of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the Attorney General (directly or through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel) and the Counsel to the President shall review as they deem appropriate the records covered by the notice and consult with each other, the Archivist, and such other executive agencies as they deem appropriate concerning whether invocation of executive privilege is justified.

(b) The Attorney General and the Counsel to the President, in the exercise of their discretion and after appropriate review and consultation under subsection (a) of this section, may jointly determine that invocation of executive privilege is not justified. The Archivist shall be notified promptly of any such determination.

(c) If either the Attorney General or the Counsel to the President believes that the circumstances justify invocation of executive privilege, the issue shall be presented to the President by the Counsel to the President and the Attorney General.

(d) If the President decides to invoke executive privilege, the Counsel to the President shall notify the former President, the Archivist, and the Attorney General in writing of the claim of privilege and the specific Presidential records to which it relates. After receiving such notice, the Archivist shall not disclose the privileged records unless directed to do so by an incumbent President or by a final court order.

As you can see the ability to over ride a President invoking executive privilige is neatly removed from the books. This gives Obama freedom to pick and chose what information can be released to the public, including his legal status as an AMERICAN CITIZEN. It will be much harder to examine the records of future President. Is this Transparant policy in action?

Why Big GOVERNMENT Won't Work

2010-02-18T11:48:00.000-08:00

The premis of BIG GOVERNMENT is to do more, provide more, be the end all to every problem. History has shown us that under free enterprise this nation has out-grown every other nation in the world. Under free enterprise our standard of living out paced every other country in the world, more people were employed, more people had health care, more people could afford "extras" boats, second cars, snow mobiles, personal watercraft, vacations, wide screen TVs. Why? Because industry when it has access to "CAPITOL" (money, loans) expands, When industry expands it hires more employees, it offers extended hours of work each week, it rewards employees with pay increases and other benefits. When industry can not find capitalization, it grows stagment, when equipment wears out it does not replace it, reseach is cut back, then hours are reduced, next jobs are lost.
Big Government, means large payrolls, Large Payrolls mean higher taxes, higher taxes means less money for the extras, less money for the extras means less need for expansion of business. Less expansion means fewer New Job, therefore less taxable income. When government starts to compete for the available money, (borrowing money, selling treasury notes, etc.) it reduces the capitol needed for buisness to expand, it reduces the incentive to create more just to pay more tax. Money is only a good as what is behind it. (used to be the gold standard)if there is no product to represent our money, (Hard Goods, cars, finished lumber, houses, things that are produced from the ground) Then the money has no value, it is only paper. Government, even big government does not produce any hard good, therefore it should not be in compitition for the available money. Government need to get out of out lives, it need to learn to live in a restrictive budget. It needs to reduce wast, it needs to start seeing itself has the problem, and we need to quit turning to our government to bail us out. Be responsible for yourself and your family. And remind our government it can not out-grow the other sectors of out industry.

One less, but not forgotten.

2010-02-08T13:47:00.000-08:00

Today 02/08/2010 John Murtha died. He had been an elected official of the United States congress for manY years. My first reaction, I am sad to say, was, this should be a big help to those who are trying to save this country from bankruptcy. I have to admit I am not and never have been a JOHN MURTHA FAN. In fact I dispise his dishonesty, his corruption of his trust as a representative of our rights and future. He stole by "legal" means taxpayer monies and built his own personal multibillion dollar airport. On a rare week besides his own plane which he takes to D.C. there may be 3 or 4o other flights that actually land at this airport. He has double talked about military support, in armament, in benefits to returning vets, and he has held up improvement of support for families who lost their bread winner while fighting on behalf of the rest of our country. John Murtha will not be remembered for what he truely was, like so many of our politions he will be made into something he never was, or at least in the last years of his life. He will be honored as an American hero, when in fact he should be remembered as a thief in disguise, wearing a congressional headband instead of the noose he deserved. I do hope that somewhere along the way he has made peace with GOD, BECAUSE IN THE END, IT IS GOD WHO WILL MAKE THE JUDGEMENT THAT COUNTS.

2nd. breath In the Second month of HIS 2nd. year.

2010-02-02T11:35:00.000-08:00

The great liar has stepped up his attack on the American citizen. He went to the enemy,(Republican Retreat) and denied their assertions of his mishandling of the economy, health and his eagletarian manners. The part that made me sad was the fact that very few of the congressional members used what he said as talking points or even admitted they thought he was wrong. The republican party is not the party of conservatives, they have become centrists and are as guilty of betraying the public interests as the liberal left. Floyd Brown has mounted an impeachment action and I am thinking this is our real and only hope. Even Jeb Hensarling who has argued the fiscal waste in our federal government made me feel angry and defeated when he said he liked and respected president obama (capitalization left out on purpose). There is no room at the Inn for obama and company. This county was founded with Christian Principals as the basis of its existance. But a belief in God is reflected in what you support and I am not seeing action showing stated beliefs. It is time for those who are for Christian morals and FREEDOM from government monopoly to rise up and say no more! NO MORE! NO MORE!IT IS TIME FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO TELL THE WORLD, WE ARE NOT GOING TO KNEEL TO YOUR WISHES ANY LONGER. WE HAVE GROWN FROM OUR HARD WORK AND WHAT WE HAVE WE HAVE EARNED, IT IS OURS. IF YOU WANT TO GROW, WE WILL HELP, IF YOU WANT A HANDOUT. SORRY OUR HANDS ARE BUSY CREATING AND WORKING FOR OUR FUTURE.

John Wayne, Ronald Reagan, Gene Autry and Roy Rogers, all would have told Barry to shut up and resign by now. If indeed they would have allowed him to run at all.

Obama has taken a tried and failed trail to spend our way to finacial growth, to create jobs, just as was tried during the "GREAT DEPRESSION" as Secretary of the treasury, Henry Morganthau said then, addressing congress,
never has so much money been spent, so much debt created in the history of the world and nothing gained. After nine years of C.C.C. and W.P.A.and other make work programs THERE WAS NO GAIN IN THE RECOVERY FROM DEPRESSION.

Then, as now, there was no plan to retire the money pumped into the banks and all that does in the end is create inflation. The cycle just repeats its self. This time the amount of fiat(printed with no backing) money is so huge it will creat SUPER INFLATION and send the U.S. INTO A TAILSPIN. There is only one answer, vote out evey one you can, replace them with new people, new people you select, not the puppets given to us by the political machine. Change the names and the faces.

Also, IMPEACH OBAMA NOW. I don't know about you, but I am tired of being told I am too stupid to take care of myself

The Voters Spoke In Mass. Ring The Bell, Round Two

2010-01-20T12:17:00.000-08:00

For those who don't know, no government program ended the recession of 29, and no government program will end this one. What ended the "29" was a war. A war that pulled Americans together, not driving wedges in to class division, not creating "race" issues that were slowly disappearing until "government" brought all the old players out and propped them up as examples that did not really portray where we were. Not, for sure, spending our Grandchildren's future away. There will always be rich and poor, there will always be different looking people with different racial and geographic history. There will always be people who are driven and those who are laid-back. There will always be those who strive and those who float along. But there will never be total agreement what is best for all. But we do have choices, you can support what the founding fathers created, or you can leave, go where your utopia exists. But you can not blame others for what happens if you did nothing for or against it. Obama wants a socialist country, he can move, I'll help him pack. He wants to spend lots of money, he can get a loan at his bank. I won't co-sign. This is not about health insurance, it is not about taxes, it is not about race, nor is it one party over another. IT IS ABOUT REMAINING FREE! It is time to replace our congress, if you wear your underwear too long, it starts to stink, after awhile, "YOU" DON'T NOTICE, BUT PEOPLE AROUND YOU DO! Change congress, vote out the stinkers and never leave the new guys in long enough to start smelling. Two term, 'term limits' no special retirement programs, what they get we get, or what we get they get. It is not because Obama is a democrat that I disagree with him, it is because he just does not relate to the real world, he is still in ALINSKY LAND.

WITH OBAMA SIGNING EXECUTIVE ORDER 12425 THIS COULD HAPPEN TO ANY OF US.

2010-01-16T11:31:00.000-08:00

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Geert Wilders
Dutch Parliament member Geert Wilders, whose film "Fitna" warns that Islam is threatening Western civilization, will be tried for a "hate crime" in the Netherlands.

Wilders previously was banned from Britain – a move later overturned in court – because of the subject of "Fitna," which features Quranic verses shown alongside images of the 9/11 terror attacks, the 2004 attack in Madrid and the 2005 attack in London.

The film calls on Muslims to remove "hate-preaching" verses from the text of their holy book.

Wilders, the leader of the Dutch Freedom Party, has been living under 24-hour protection from police since 2004. Al-Qaida has called for his murder.

According to a report from the Christian Institute, a ministry promoting Christianity in the United Kingdom, a court ruling this week removed the last obstacle to Wilders' trial, dismissing his objections to the prosecution.

The report said Wilders' lawyer argued his client should not be prosecuted for discriminatory statements since the Dutch superme court last year found that insulting a religion did not automatically "imply an insult to its believers."

A lower court, however, concluded the provision did not mean Wilders could not be put on trial based on charges that originated from complaints filed by Dutch lawyer Gerard Spong on behalf of several clients.

The report said Wilders' remarks included suggesting Muhammad should be tarred and feathered and expelled from the Netherlands and declaring no Muslim should be allowed to enter the nation.

Prosecutors originally chose not to file any action against Wilders, the report said, citing their conclusion the comments were "in the context of societal debate." But the case was resurrected after a campaign urged people to complain to the courts.

Wilders has called the prosecution an "attack on freedom of speech."

"In this country, you are apparently allowed to criticize only if you are politically correct in how you express yourself," he has said.

Blogger Diana West wrote on Wilders' website, "It is not just the repression … of Islam that Wilders is outspoken about… He is equally if almost singularly outspoken about the political remedies necessary to halt the extension of Islam's law. Such remedies include stopping Islamic immigration and deporting agents of jihad. These are simple measures any democratic state that wished to repeal Islamization would take. … It is a political trial, then, in the worst sense, that we are about to witness. And it is about more than the future of freedom of speech. The trial of Geert Wilders is about the future of freedom."

Wilders' 17-minute documentary, "Fitna," meaning "strife," likened the Quran to Adolf Hitler's manifesto, "Mein Kampf."

Early critics had expressed fears the Wilders film would show a copy of the Quran being destroyed, but the ending offered a slight surprise.

As someone leafs through the Quran, a sound of tearing is heard.

"The sound you heard was from a page [being torn out] of the phone book. It is not up to me, but up to the Muslims themselves to tear the spiteful verses from the Quran," text on the screen reads. "Stop Islamization. Defend our freedom," the film concluded.

Wilders has received numerous death threats. His police protection has been in place because of the 2004 murder of Theo Van Gogh, the director of a film that exposed violence against women in Islamic societies.

Since the Van Gogh murder, the government of a nation proud of its liberal social attitudes has cut back on generous welfare programs to immigrants and made Dutch-language classes mandatory for newcomers.

Van Gogh's film, "Submission," was written by Wilders' former political ally, Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

Societies dominated by Islam, in the meantime, have been working at the international level to ban any criticism of Islam globally.

A plan is being pushed by the 57 members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference to "protect" Islam from what they perceive as criticism.

The resolution, pending in one form or another since 1999, originally was called "Defamation of Islam." The name later was changed to "Defamation of Religions," but Islam remains the only faith protected by name in the proposal.

The proposal is based on the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam. The declaration states "that all rights are subject to Shariah law and makes Shariah law the only source of reference for human rights."

However, the latest vote on the nonbinding proposal came just weeks ago at the U.N. and showed falling support, with 80 votes in favor of the proposal, 61 against and 42 abstentions. A year ago there were 86 yes votes, and two years ago the support came from 108 votes.

AND OUR PRESIDENT IS ONE OF THEM

2010-01-10T17:13:00.000-08:00

Geert Wilders is a Dutch Member of Parliament.

America as the last man standing

'In a generation or two, the US will ask itself: who lost Europe ?'

Here is the speech of Geert Wilders, Chairman, Party for Freedom, the Netherlands , at the Four Seasons, New York , introducing an Alliance of Patriots and announcing the Facing Jihad Conference in Jerusalem .

Dear friends,

Thank you very much for inviting me.

I come to America with a mission. All is not well in the old world. There is a tremendous danger looming, and it is very difficult to be optimistic. We might be in the final stages of the Islamization of Europe. This not only is a clear and present danger to the future of Europe itself, it is a threat to America and the sheer survival of the West. The United States as the last bastion of Western civilization, facing an Islamic Europe.

First I will describe the situation on the ground in Europe . Then, I will say a few things about Islam. To close I will tell you about a meeting in Jerusalem .

The Europe you know is changing.

You have probably seen the landmarks. But in all of these cities, sometimes a few blocks away from your tourist destination, there is another world. It is the world of the parallel society created by Muslim mass-migration.

All throughout Europe a new reality is rising: entire Muslim neighborhoods where very few indigenous people reside or are even seen. And if they are, they might regret it. This goes for the police as well. It's the world of head scarves, where women walk around in figureless tents, with baby strollers and a group of children. Their husbands, or slaveholders if you prefer, walk three steps ahead. With mosques on many street corners. The shops have signs you and I cannot read. You will be hard-pressed to find any economic activity. These are Muslim ghettos controlled by religious fanatics. These are Muslim neighborhoods, and they are mushrooming in every city across Europe . These are the building-blocks for territorial control of increasingly larger portions of Europe , street by street, neighborhood by neighborhood, city by city.

There are now thousands of mosques throughout Europe . With larger congregations than there are in churches. And in every European city there are plans to build super-mosques that will dwarf every church in the region. Clearly, the signal is: we rule.

Many European cities are already one-quarter Muslim: just take Amsterdam , Marseille and Malmo in Sweden . In many cities the majority of the under-18 population is Muslim. Paris is now surrounded by a ring of Muslim neighborhoods. Mohammed is the most popular name among boys in many cities.

In some elementary schools in Amsterdam the farm can no longer be mentioned, because that would also mean mentioning the pig, and that would be an insult to Muslims. (Hard to believe)

Many state schools in Belgium and Denmark only serve halal food to all pupils. In once-tolerant Amsterdam gays are beaten up almost exclusively by Muslims. Non-Muslim women routinely hear 'whore, whore'. Satellite dishes are not pointed to local TV stations, but to stations in the country of origin.

In France school teachers are advised to avoid authors deemed offensive to Muslims, including Voltaire and Diderot; the same is increasingly true of Darwin . The history of the Holocaust can no longer be taught because of Muslim sensitivity.
(Discrimination on the level of absurdity) (Seen in Saudia Arabia in 1974)

In England sharia courts are now officially part of the British legal system. Many neighborhoods in France are no-go areas for women without head scarves. Last week a man almost died after being beaten up by Muslims in Brussels , because he was drinking during the Ramadan.

Jews are fleeing France in record numbers, on the run for the worst wave of anti-Semitism since World War II. French is now commonly spoken on the streets of Tel Aviv and Netanya , Israel . I could go on forever with stories like this. Stories about Islamization.

A total of fifty-four million Muslims now live in Europe . San Diego University recently calculated that a staggering 25 percent of the population in Europe will be Muslim just 12 years from now. Bernhard Lewis has predicted a Muslim majority by the end of this century.

Now these are just numbers. And the numbers would not be threatening if the Muslim-immigrants had a strong desire to assimilate. But there are few signs of that. The Pew Research Center reported that half of French Muslims see their loyalty to Islam as greater than their loyalty to France . One-third of French Muslims do not object to suicide attacks. The British Centre for Social Cohesion reported that one-third of British Muslim students are in favor of a worldwide caliphate. Muslims demand what they call 'respect'. And this is how we give them respect. We have Muslim official state holidays.

The Christian-Democratic attorney general is willing to accept sharia in the Netherlands if there is a Muslim majority. We have cabinet members with passports from Morocco and Turkey .

Muslim demands are supported by unlawful behavior, ranging from petty crimes and random violence, for example against ambulance workers and bus drivers, to small-scale riots. Paris has seen its uprising in the low-income suburbs, the banlieus. I call the perpetrators 'settlers'. Because that is what they are. They do not come to integrate into our societies; they come to integrate our society into their Dar-al-Islam. Therefore, they are settlers.

Much of this street violence I mentioned is directed exclusively against non-Muslims, forcing many native people to leave their neighborhoods, their cities, their countries. Moreover, Muslims are now a swing vote not to be ignored.

The second thing you need to know is the importance of Mohammed the prophet. His behavior is an example to all Muslims and cannot be criticized. Now, if Mohammed had been a man of peace, let us say like Ghandi and Mother Theresa wrapped in one, there would be no problem. But Mohammed was a warlord, a mass murderer, a pedophile, and had several marriages - at the same time. Islamic tradition tells us how he fought in battles, how he had his enemies murdered and even had prisoners of war executed. Mohammed himself slaughtered the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza. If it is good for Islam, it is good. If it is bad for Islam, it is bad.

Let no one fool you about Islam being a religion. Sure, it has a god, and a here-after, and 72 virgins. But in its essence Islam is a political ideology. It is a system that lays down detailed rules for society and the life of every person. Islam wants to dictate every aspect of life. Islam means 'submission'. Islam is not compatible with freedom and democracy, because what it strives for is sharia. If you want to compare Islam to anything, compare it to communism or national-socialism, these are all totalitarian ideologies.

Now you know why Winston Churchill called Islam 'the most retrograde force in the world', and why he compared Mein Kampf to the Quran. The public has wholeheartedly accepted the Palestinian narrative, and sees Israel as the aggressor. I have lived in this country and visited it dozens of times. I support Israel . First, because it is the Jewish homeland after two thousand years of exile up to and including Auschwitz, second because it is a democracy, and third because Israel is our first line of defense.

This tiny country is situated on the fault line of jihad, frustrating Islam's territorial advance. Israel is facing the front lines of jihad, like Kashmir, Kosovo, the Philippines , Southern Thailand, Darfur in Sudan , Lebanon , and Aceh in Indonesia . Israel is simply in the way. The same way West-Berlin was during the Cold War..

The war against Israel is not a war against Israel . It is a war against the West. It is jihad. Israel is simply receiving the blows that are meant for all of us. If there would have been no Israel , Islamic imperialism would have found other venues to release its energy and its desire for conquest. Thanks to Israeli parents who send their children to the army and lay awake at night, parents in Europe and America can sleep well and dream, unaware of the dangers looming.

Many in Europe argue in favor of abandoning Israel in order to address the grievances of our Muslim minorities. But if Israel were, God forbid, to go down, it would not bring any solace to the West It would not mean our Muslim minorities would all of a sudden change their behavior, and accept our values. On the contrary, the end of Israel would give enormous encouragement to the forces of Islam. They would, and rightly so, see the demise of Israel as proof that the West is weak, and doomed. The end of Israel would not mean the end of our problems with Islam, but only the beginning. It would mean the start of the final battle for world domination. If they can get Israel , they can get everything. So-called journalists volunteer to label any and all critics of Islamization as a 'right-wing extremists' or 'racists'. In my country, the Netherlands , 60 percent of the population now sees the mass immigration of Muslims as the number one policy mistake since World War II. And another 60 percent sees Islam as the biggest threat. Yet there is a danger greater danger than terrorist attacks, the scenario of America as the last man standing. The lights may go out in Europe faster than you can imagine. An Islamic Europe means a Europe without freedom and democracy, an economic wasteland, an intellectual nightmare, and a loss of military might for America - as its allies will turn into enemies, enemies with atomic bombs. With an Islamic Europe, it would be up to America alone to preserve the heritage of Rome , Athens and Jerusalem .

Dear friends, liberty is the most precious of gifts. My generation never had to fight for this freedom, it was offered to us on a silver platter, by people who fought for it with their lives. All throughout Europe , American cemeteries remind us of the young boys who never made it home, and whose memory we cherish. My generation does not own this freedom; we are merely its custodians. We can only hand over this hard won liberty to Europe 's children in the same state in which it was offered to us. We cannot strike a deal with mullahs and imams. Future generations would never forgive us. We cannot squander our liberties. We simply do not have the right to do so.

We have to take the necessary action now to stop this Islamic stupidity from destroying the free world that we know.

Please take the time to read and understand what is written here, Please send it to every free person that you know, it is so very important.

MORONIC IMBICILIC IDIOTS

2010-01-09T18:47:00.000-08:00

To President Obama and all 535 voting members of the Legislature,

It is now official you are ALL corrupt morons:

The U.S. Post Service was established in 1775.
You have had 234 years to get it right and it is broken and broke.
FAILURE TO KEEP UP WITH TECHNOLOGY

Social Security was established in 1935.
You have had 74 years to get it right and it is broken and broke.
FUNDS WERE STOLEN FOR PORK PROJECTS

Fannie Mae was established in 1938.
You have had 71 years to get it right and it is broken and broke.
RAPED WOULD BE A BETTER DESCRIPTION

War on Poverty started in 1964.
You have had 45 years to get it right;
$1 trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred
to "the poor" and they only want more.
GIVE THEM AN INCH AND THEY WANT A MILE. GREED BEGATS MORE GREED.

Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965.
You have had 44 years to get it right and they are broken and broke.
INTITLEMENT PROGRAMS BEING USED BY PEOPLE WHO NEVER PAID IN (illegal aliens)

Freddie Mac was established in 1970.
You have had 39 years to get it right and it is broken and broke.
EMASCULATED WOULD DESCRIBE FREDDIE MAC

The Department of Energy was created in 1977 to lessen our dependence
on foreign oil. It has ballooned to 16,000 employees with a budget of
$24 billion a year and we import more oil than ever before.
You had 32 years to get it right and it is an abysmal failure.
DIESEL FUEL IS WHATS LEFT AFTER MAKING GASOLINE, NEW CAFE STANDARDS WILL REDUCE GASOLINE PRODUCTION THAT WILL REDUCE DIESEL SUPPLY AND DRIVE TRANSPORTATION COSTS UP, COMPANIES WILL FAIL, MORE UNEMPLOYMENT, HIGHER COST OF GOODS AS A RESULT. GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIES WILL BE OFFERED AS A SOLUTION, INCREASING THE PROBLEMS WE ALREADY HAVE.

You have FAILED in every "government service" you have shoved down
our throats while overspending our tax dollars!!!
Thats "OUR TAX DOLLARS".

Now you are borrowing the future of our grandchildren with rampent spending that has to be paid, either in TAXES or by giving those lenders CONTROL of OUR COUNTRY. Moron does not begin to convey the contemp we have for you.
SEE OUR RATH AT THE POLLS NEXT NOVEMBER.

AND YOU WANT AMERICANS TO BELIEVE YOU CAN BE TRUSTED
WITH A GOVERNMENT RUN HEALTH CARE SYSTEM??

BARBARA GETS HER EARS BOXED

2010-01-07T17:47:00.000-08:00

Read the letter sent to Sen. Barbara Boxer from an Alaskan
Airlines pilot below.

Many of us witnessed the arrogance of Barbara Boxer on June 18,
2009 as she admonished Brigadier General Michael Walsh because he
addressed her as "ma'am" and not "Senator" before a Senate hearing.

This letter is from a National Guard aviator and Captain for
Alaska Airlines named Jim Hill. I wonder what he would have said if he
were really angry. Long fly Alaska !!!!!

Babs: (Babs- I love it.)
You were so right on when you scolded the general on TV for
using the term, "ma'am," instead of "Senator". After all, in the
military, "ma'am" is a term of respect when addressing a female of
superior rank or position. The general was totally wrong. You are not a
person of superior rank or position. You are a member of one of the
world's most corrupt organizations, the U.S. Senate, equaled only by the
U.S. House of Representatives.

Congress is a cesspool of liars, thieves, inside traders,
traitors, drunks (one who killed a staffer, yet is still revered),
criminals, and other low level swine who, as individuals (not all, but
many), will do anything to enhance their lives, fortunes and power, all
at the expense of the People of the United States and its Constitution,
in order to be continually re-elected. Many democrats even want
American troops killed by releasing photographs. How many of you could
honestly say, "We pledge our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor"?
None? One? Two?

Your reaction to the general shows several things. First is your
abysmal ignorance of all things military. Your treatment of the general
shows you to be an elitist of the worst kind. When the general entered
the military (as most of us who served) he wrote the government a blank
check, offering his life to protect your derriere, now safely and
comfortably ensconced in a 20 thousand dollar leather chair, paid for by
the general's taxes. You repaid him for this by humiliating him in front
of millions.

Second is your puerile character, lack of sophistication, and
arrogance which borders on the hubristic. This display of brattish
behavior shows you to be a virago, termagant, harridan, nag, scold or
shrew, unfit for your position, regardless of the support of the
unwashed, uneducated masses who have made California into the laughing
stock of the nation.

What I am writing, are the same thoughts countless millions of
Americans have toward Congress, but who lack the energy, ability or time
to convey them. Regardless of their thoughts, most realize that
politicians are pretty much the same, and will vote for the one who will
bring home the most bacon, even if they do consider how corrupt that
person is. Lord Acton (1834 - 1902) so aptly charged, "Power tends to
corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Unbeknownst to you and
your colleagues, "Mr. Power" has had his way with all of you, and we are
all the worse for it.

Finally Senator, I, too, have a title. It is "Right Wing
Extremist Potential Terrorist Threat." It is not of my choosing, but was
given to me by your Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano.
And you were offended by "ma'am"?

OVER WHOS' DEAD BODY?

2010-01-07T16:10:00.000-08:00

Legislation Still Under the Radar Would Devastate U.S. Gun Ownership Rights

September 30, 2009 by Bob Livingston

And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.–President Barack Obama in San Francisco at a 2008 fundraiser.
While high profile issues like passage of a healthcare reform bill and cap and trade energy tax are getting front page headlines and top billing by television talking heads, be very wary of stealth legislation slowly working its way through Congress to restrict gun ownership.
Passage of either of two bills, HR 45 (also known as Blair-Holt Firearm Licensing and Record Sale Act of 2009) and S 1317, would be a devastating blow to Second Amendment rights.
HR 45, introduced by Rep. Bobby Rush, would make it illegal to own a gun unless you are fingerprinted and can provide a driver’s license and Social Security number.
Additionally under HR 45, a person buying a gun would have to undergo both a physical and mental evaluation before making a firearm purchase. It also would require guns be secured from access by children under age 18, and would empower law enforcement officers to come into your home to check compliance.
S 1317, introduced by Sen. Frank Lautenburg, would give the attorney general the right to block gun sales to people on terror watch lists. A third bill, HR 2647, contains a companion clause to S 1317 that gives the attorney general the authority to determine who belongs on terrorist watch lists.
And who are the terrorists? In Obamaworld it’s not the Islamo-fascists flying airliners into buildings, planting improvised explosive devices (IEDs) or strapping bombs to their waists and setting them off in crowded areas.
No, because in Obamaworld, the word terrorism no longer applies to those who were once called terrorists. And those who used to be considered terrorists no longer commit acts of terrorism. No they commit man-caused disasters. The word terrorist, at least in its past usage, has been dropped from the lexicon.
Today’s terrorists, according to those now in power in the United States, are people in flyover country who believe the Constitution is sacrosanct, and that the Second Amendment actually means that people are free to own guns without restriction.
Our own country’s Department of Homeland Security issued an assessment earlier this year warning law enforcement of a possible rise in home-grown terrorism from “right wing extremists.” And who are those rightwing extremists? The assessment tell us: “Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”
As we’ve reported before in related stories here and here the current administration is no friend to gun owners.
And what does Eric Holder—attorney general for the United States and the person who would under S 1317 be granted the authority to determine who belongs on terrorist watch groups—think about guns?
Following are few of his quotes that have appeared in various newspapers over the last few years:
“As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons.”
“The second amendment does not protect firearms possession or use that is unrelated to participation in a well-regulated militia.”
“To further strengthen the ability of law enforcement officials to track those suspected of terrorism or other criminal acts in this country, Congress should also pass legislation that would give the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms a record of every firearm sale.”
Holder’s boss, the president, is equally unfriendly to gun owners. Writing for Gun Digest last October, gun lobbyist Richard A. Pearson called Obama an enemy of the law abiding firearm owner. You can read his article here.
Some of Obama’s own quotes, as they have appeared in various publications, will back this up:
“I am consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry.”
“I am not in favor of concealed weapons. I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations.”
“The package (legislation passed in the Illinois Senate) closes the Firearm Owners Identification (FOID) card loopholes which resulted in the shooting out in Melrose Park. We’re eliminating 17 specific assault weapons. There is no reason why anybody should need an assault weapon to protect themselves or their family. We’re limiting handgun sales to one a month. We’re calling for handgun registration. It’s very hard right now to track whether or not a felon has turned in his weapons or if he has a FOID card because we don’t know how many weapons he has purchased.”
Without a doubt, the current administration is the most anti-gun administration in our nation’s history. Don’t let the hullabaloo over healthcare and cap and trade cause you to let your guard down.
And be sure you cling to your guns and religion. They may soon be all you have.

Bob Livingstonis an ultra-conservative American who has been writing a newsletter for 39 years. Bob has devoted much of his life to research and the quest for truth on a variety of subjects. Bob specializes in health issues such as nutritional supplements and alternatives to drugs, as well as issues of privacy (both personal and financial), asset protection and the preservation of freedom.
Email this author | All posts by Bob Livingston

I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT BOB LIVINGSTON IS NOT AN ULTRA CONSERVATIVE, THERE IS NO SUCH THING, YOU ARE EITHER A CONSERVATIVE OR YOU ARE A LIBEREAL. THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND. JOSEPH LARSON

ARE YOU WATCHING THE SHAME OF OUR CHANGE?

2010-01-02T17:56:00.000-08:00

About The Author
Jan LaRue is Senior Legal Analyst with the American Civil Rights Union

If saner minds rule the day, the “Flying Dutchman” will replace Janet Napolitano as Secretary of Homeland Security.

Jasper Schuring, a vigilant passenger on Northwest Flight 253, is the only part of our airline security “system” that “worked,” contrary to Napolitano.

Schuringa saw the glow of fire in row 19, and assumed someone was trying to blow up the plane. “I just jumped over all of the seats” and “jumped to the suspect,” he told CNN. According to The Washington Post:

Jasper Schuringa, an Amsterdam resident, lunged toward the fire in Row 19, jumping from one side of the plane to the other and over several other passengers. He burned his fingers as he grabbed a piece of melting plastic held by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian man accused Saturday of trying to bring down the passenger jet with a homemade explosive device.

It’s highly doubtful that Napolitano or the President would have jumped as quickly to Schuringa’s conclusion about Abdulmutallab since he’s not a returning war vet, a cop, or employed by Fox News.

Napolitano wrongly profiled our returning military veterans as potential right-wing “terrorists,” but she and Obama are opposed to profiling actual terrorists. She was wrong again when she told us “the system worked.” But as before, she claims she was “taken out of context.” The President expressed his confidence in her after admitting that the system failed.

Obama is right—“human and systemic failures” allowed the massacre of our military at Ft. Hood and the latest terror attack inside the United States.

It was the election of 2008.

A naïve electorate fell for Obama’s fraudulent promises of “hope and change” facilitated by his media sycophants: Obama was the most brilliant politician of the century.

The fundamental question ignored was: In what way was this “brilliant politician” committed to “fundamentally transforming the United States of America”?

How can brilliance be reconciled with so many senseless “mistakes”? To name a few:

A schizophrenic policy that prosecutes “an act of war” as a common crime
Pursuing a military court martial of Navy Seals for allegedly roughing up a captured terrorist but dismissing a victorious case of voter intimidation against the “New Black Panthers.”
Extending an open hand to our sworn enemies while backhanding our closest allies, Great Britain and Israel.
Appointing numerous tax cheats who’ve had to withdraw.
Appointing a self-professed communist, Van Jones, the “Green Czar.”
Appointing White House Communications Director Anita Dunn, who resigned after disclosing that one of her two favorite philosophers is Mao Tse-Tung.
Appointing a “Science Czar,” John Holdren, who thinks the Constitution permits forced abortion.
Appointing a “Regulation Czar, Cass Sunstein, who wants to apply the “Fairness Doctrine” to the Internet, ban hunting, and give animals standing to sue.
Appointing a “Safe-Schools” Czar, homosexual activist Kevin Jennings, who
promoted sexually explicit and inappropriate books to 7th graders, and is a fan of a notorious pedophile.
Obama’s relationships with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers and with his own America-damning preacher, Jeremiah Wright.
Closing Guantanamo Bay detention center, sending suspected terrorists back to the battlefield or into the United States civil justice system.
Nominating a director of the Transportation Safety Administration, Erroll Southers, who looks forward to “joining” the TSA with a major union.
Is it incompetence, or are these the calculated decisions of a “brilliant” politician who wants to fundamentally transform the United States into his socialist image with the help of “brilliant” political appointees who share his beliefs? Is merely well-intentioned bumbling behind the increasing government control of our lives, destruction of our economy, emasculation of our national security, and redistribution of our wealth?

Each time Obama or one of his political appointees commits a colossal blunder, Obama’s political spinomatics drag out their George W. Bush punching bags, while puzzled critics dismiss the formerly “brilliant” blunderers as being in over their heads. Are they inept or conniving? Either is intolerable.

After allowing another Muslim terrorist to breach airline security, the administration is imposing new “security” regulations that treat innocent travelers like terrorists instead of treating terrorists as unlawful enemy combatants.

Obama should have instructed the FBI to take Abdulmutallab to Guantanamo Bay for questioning and confinement instead of a federal lock-up in Detroit where he’s enjoying his “right to remain silent.”

Presidents from Washington to Roosevelt knew the difference between common criminals and war criminals. Presidents dealt with them accordingly, either by lock-up in a military brigade until the war ended, or execution upon conviction by a military tribunal.

If Napolitano and Obama are serious about finding and fixing “the vulnerabilities in our systems that allowed this breach to happen,” they should repent of their policies that are fundamentally changing the United States to our detriment. Better yet, lead the way by resigning.

It’s the best way to correct fraud in the inducement of a presidential election.

WE CANNOT FAIL AGAIN

2010-01-01T18:03:00.000-08:00

If we as a nation fail, we fail the whole world to suffering and enslavement.

It is going to take more than just voting. Where we can, we need to run for office, when we cannot do that, we need to convince others to do so. We need to choose who we want to run and then choose between two or more candidates, we need to insist on term limits. We cannot continue to blindly support who ever the parties throw up there or the incumbents. Over time anyone can lose site of their ideals. Regular change clears the air. We need to provide sunset laws for entitlement programs that are not fair to healthy men and women, because they do not encourage people to do better. We need to give control of certain law enforcement back to the county level. We need to rescind the IRS and the confusion of tax laws. We need to make the Federal reserve bank open its books every year. Congress should be required to say the pledge of allegiance every day at open and close of their meetings. The President or the Vice President should lead them unless called away on a national emergency. Schools should be required to say the pledge everyday and students should have the responsibility to raise and lower The Flag each day. And Gods name should be used anywhere anytime for every need.

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety”-Ben Franklin

What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?" Abraham Lincoln February 27, 1860 - Cooper Union Address

These were men of vision, these are the ideals our country was founded on. Yes there has always been problems, but never have so few lied to and tied to control this country, with more hatred and dishonesty then the administration in power at this time. This includes both houses of congress and the White House. It must end, and only we the people can end it. It starts by word of mouth, it grows to the polls. Vote for new leadership, personal responsibility, and a future for our children that does not enslave them to taxation with out representation.

MAYBE OUR LAST CHANCE FOR REAL CHANGE

2010-01-01T08:24:00.000-08:00

As you may or may not know, in 1974 I ran for state assembly in the 68th. district in Wisconsin. I was extremely uninformed when I started. Fortunately my father had become active politically prior to my entry into politics and was able to guide me to some books and information sources that high school classes never covered. College courses will not go near the truth either. It was then that my financial positions and political knowledge was developed. I learned for the first time that there was nothing Federal about the Federal Reserve Bank. It was and is a private owned company, it has never been audited, and it decides prime interest rates for the whole nation, it prints our money and distributes it to "Federal Banks" around the country. It also charges us, The United States of America for the printing, distribution and for the use of these "moneys". It was at that time I first learned of organizations like CFR, (Council of Foreign Relations) ONO, (One World Order) WCB, (World Council of Bankers). The WCB is owned and run by the Rothschild empire, it is the principle owner of the Federal Reserve Bank. Rothschild was, a "pawnshop" owner, for lack of a better word during the Napolianic war. He held vast sums of Hapsburg Dynasty money in his vault when they ran off to escape the war. He used that money without their permission to finance the war, first one side then the other. He was of course re-paid and able to give the money back to its rightful owner after the war had ended. But he made a fortune, which ever since has been used the same way, he has financed wars between countries, playing one side against the other, charging both side exorbitant interest. Now of course it is his heirs that do this....Rockefellers, Morganthals, Rosenthals, Morgans, Kissinger, Geithner, Summers, Volker, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Albright, Christopher and Rubin.

There are some other ties to this group of men and women, They all are members of the CFR, AND THEY ALL HAVE OR DO ATTEND MEETINGS OF THE GROUP KNOWN AS 'BILDERBERG' the Bilderbergers are a group of elitists who would control the world. JFK spoke of them and was killed for doing so, Barry Goldwater spoke of them in his book "WITH NO APOLOGIES", Wylie C. Sampson wrote about them in his book, 'PATRIOTS PRIMER" They are still out there and they still have the same goal, enslave everyone else and force us to do their bidding.

In 1915 JP Morgan purchased the editorial polices of 25 of the nations top newspapers, that way they could control the general policy of the whole media. The Rockefellers eventually took over the Morgan empire, they gained control of the ASSOCIATED PRESS. They also own the magazines, Time, Life, Fortune and Newsweek. The elite also own and control ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, ETC....If memory serves me right, that was just before the thirteenth amendment was passed that JP MORGAN bought up the news media, then, after most of congress had went home for Christmas break, the thirteenth amendment was passed by less then a quorum. It is the amendment that led to income tax. Convenient to own the papers that might have reported that little error of parlamentury procedure.

This is why we must remove all national political leaders, we do not know who is in the pocket of these groups, this why we need to be involved and choose people to run for office, and not choose between two or three people who choose to run for office. We do not know their motives. We must insist on term limits, no matter how we feel about the job they have been doing. Everyone can be "got to"
If you doubt what I am saying could happen, remember Wounded Knee, Waco, Gresham, Tigerton, Ruby Ridge. Our Government has shown us, it will turn on us, any place any time. By the way Obama is member of CFR so is Biden, HIL AN BIL Clinton, Robert Gates, and all of those named in the first paragraph. Change? Don't look any different to me, Dad always said, "Names change, but the faces stay the same".
Transparent? Only if your on right side of the one way mirror.

Pass this along please, include a note if you like. Just say' hey, this guy is normal on everything else, I don't know why to doubt him on this. Check it out, verify the events, know what we are up against.

IS THERE ANYONE LEFT OUT THERE WHO WILL SEE THIS MAN IS ARRESTED AND TRIED FOR TREASON WHILE IT STILL MATTERS?

2009-12-31T19:03:00.000-08:00

HOW MUCH LONGER ARE WE GOING TO ALLOW THIS MAN TO DESTROY AMERICA?With the signing of an under-publicized amendment to Executive Order 12425, Barack Obama has fundamentally altered your constitutional rights. His actions are undermining your rights to protect personal privacy from a foreign internationalist police agency named Interpol. A one-paragraph executive order may seem inconsequential to many, but this action has far-reaching implications and threatens the sovereignty of America.

Obama's secretive executive order amended an order issued by President Reagan in 1983. Reagan's order recognized Interpol as an international organization and gave it privileges and immunities commonly extended to foreign diplomats. Reagan opened the door to allow Interpol to operate in partnership with the U.S. but with significant constitutional safeguards. Specifically, Interpol's property and assets remained subject to search and seizure by American law enforcement, and its archived records remained subject to public scrutiny under provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. Interpol had to answer to the FBI and U.S. courts under Reagan's order. These safeguards were stripped away by Obama's action the week before Christmas without debate or explanation. Obama picked the holiday season to make this radical change, to minimize media coverage.

This order marks a significant change in federal policy and usurps the constitutional power of our government by yielding it to an international organization. Michael van Der Galien writes, "This foreign law-enforcement organization can operate free of an important safeguard against government and abuse. Property and assets, including the organization's records, cannot now be searched or seized. Their physical operational locations are now immune from U.S. legal and investigative authorities."

Obama has given an international organization unsupervised freedom to investigate Americans on our own soil without recourse or the supervision of our own government.

Andy McCarthy writing for the National Review asks some very significant questions: "Why would we elevate an international police force above American law? Why would we immunize an international police force from the limitations that constrain the FBI and other American law-enforcement agencies? Why is it suddenly necessary to have, within the Justice Department, a repository for stashing government files which, therefore, will be beyond the ability of Congress, American law-enforcement, the media and the American people to scrutinize?"

Interpol is the enforcement arm of the International Criminal Court, or ICC. The United States never signed onto the Rome Treaty, which created the ICC, because of the potential for abuse by foreign interests. Obama has signaled he may sign the treaty over these objections and subject Americans to prosecution overseas in the ICC. This is harmful for two reasons. First, the U.S. Constitution clearly states that it is the supreme law of our land, and allowing the ICC to supersede the U.S. Constitution violates America's sovereignty. Second, the War on Terror is unpopular with Europeans, and the ICC may attempt to prosecute heroic American soldiers with trumped-up war crimes. Obama is putting brave American men and women at grave risk.

An added wrinkle to this executive order is that Interpol's operations center for the United States is housed within our own Justice Department. Many of the agents are Americans who work under the aegis of Interpol. This order has potentially created the new civilian security force that Obama proposed during his campaign. This group of law-enforcement officials is no longer subject to the restraints enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.

The order guarantees that Interpol officers have immunity from prosecution for crimes they may commit in the United States. Ironically, some Interpol nations are attempting to try American intelligence agents for their work abroad in the War on Terror.

This order shows blatant disregard for the U.S. Constitution. While Obama is extending due process rights to terrorists he is weakening those same rights for American citizens. If a citizen were to be prosecuted by Interpol, their newly granted immunity would interfere with the discovery process. Since Interpol files are immune to disclosure, a citizen could be denied his right to see the information used to prosecute him or her.

Obama's executive order has done more to weaken civil liberties than the much-maligned Patriot Act. The silence in the mainstream media on this issue should scare all freedom-loving Americans. Obama just signed away parts of our precious legal protections.

Warm regards,

Floyd Brown

ImpeachObamaCampaign.com is a project of the Policy Issues Institute.
Contributions are not deductible for tax purposes.
30011 Ivy Glenn Dr., Suite 223
Laguna Niguel, CA 92677

WHEN OBAMA IS GONE, GOD WILL COME BACK

2009-12-29T07:22:00.000-08:00

A FEW WORDS FROM THE MARTIAL ARTS MASTER HIMSELF, CHUCK NORRIS.

As I wrote last week, I knew that President Barack Obama's Christian message in his Christmas address was going to be the weakest in presidential history. But never did I expect to hear him dodge children on the main message of Christmas and then teach them a revised version.

Here's the actual transcript from the president's visit last week to the Boys & Girls Club in Washington, D.C. (with a little of my own parenthetical Christmas commentary, to boot -- identified by "CN" in parentheses):

THE PRESIDENT: I think one thing that's important to remember is that, you know, even though there's a lot of fun at Christmas ... especially when it's snowy like this, so it's pretty outside. You got the Christmas tree; you got the Christmas cookies; you've got presents. You know, I think that the most important thing is just to remember why we celebrate Christmas.

(CN: So far so good, Mr. President, but there's a child with his hand up right in front of you!)

CHILD: I know!

THE PRESIDENT: Do you know?

CHILD: The birth of baby Jesus.

(CN: Not exactly the response the president was looking for. If you can't see him in your mind's eye getting a little hot around the collar, check out the video version here.)

THE PRESIDENT: The birth of baby Jesus and what he symbolizes for people all around the world is the possibility of peace and people treating each other with respect. And so I just hope that spirit of giving that's so important at Christmas -- I hope all of you guys remember that, as well. ...

CN: Where is Rep. Joe Wilson when you need him? Wrong, Mr. President! You didn't speak for the majority of Americans when you declared in Turkey last April that "we are not a Christian nation," and you don't speak for "people all around the world" about the birth of the baby Jesus, especially when you define him merely as a community coordinator and social reconciler. His main mission and message was as the Redeemer of mankind -- the savior with a self-confessed mission to "give his life as a ransom for many" to forgive all our sins and reconcile God and humans' relationship.)

THE PRESIDENT: ... You know, it's not just about getting gifts but it's also doing something for other people. So being nice to your mom and dad, grandma, aunties, showing respect to people -- that's really important, too; that's part of the Christmas spirit, don't you think? Do you agree with me?

(CN: Nothing like a little presidential social pressure to prompt an affirmative answer from children.)

CHILDREN: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: You do?
(CN: Then another child raises his hand, so the president leans over and asks him a question.)

Do you have an interesting observation?

CHILD: I know why we give gifts to other people.

THE PRESIDENT: Why is that?

CHILD: Because the three wise men gave gifts to baby Jesus.

(CN: Could this get any better? Out of the mouths of babes! But you know there's some presidential spin coming, don't you?)

THE PRESIDENT: That's exactly right. But the three wise men -- the reason

(CN: A sign literally falls off the wall. Sign from God? What timing!)

-- uh-oh, I thought that was the cookies going down. We couldn't have that. You know, the three wise men -- if you think about it, here are these guys. They have all this money; they've got all this wealth and power, and yet they took a long trip to a manger just to see a little baby. And it just shows you that just because you're powerful or you're wealthy, that's not what's important. What's important is what's -- the kind of spirit you have.

(CN: The wise men traveled across the desert "just to see a little baby"? Let me quote from the Gospel according to Matthew 2:11: "And they bowed down and worshipped him" as the savior of the world. Why is it -- any chance Obama has to dive deeper into Christianity's creed? -- he rises to the surface and neuters the subject?)

THE PRESIDENT: So I hope everybody has a spirit of kindness and thoughtfulness and everybody is really thinking about how can they do for other people -- treating them well, because that's really the spirit of Christmas. Does everybody agree with that?

CHILDREN: Yes!

THE PRESIDENT: I agree with that. Well, you guys all seem like really sharp, sharp young people. And I'm very proud of you. And let me just ask you one last question. Is everybody here working pretty hard in school?

CHILDREN: Yes!

THE PRESIDENT: OK, because the thing that I want everybody to remember, the most important message I can leave is, is that you guys have so much potential; one of you could end up being president someday. But it's only going to happen if you stay focused and you work hard in school. And, you guys, there's nothing wrong with having fun and fooling around and playing sports and listening to rap music and all that stuff. But I want you guys to read and hit the books and do your math, because that's really what's going to determine how you do in the future. All right? That's the most important thing you can do.

(CN: "Most important message"? "Most important thing you can do"?)

So let me see whether I have this straight. Obama's Christmas theology and mission is thus: Jesus is Gandhi. The wise men were non-greedy corporate executives on a baby tour. The "most important message" at Christmas is personal potential. And the "most important thing" children can do for their futures is read and do math.

God help us.

(If you want to help children understand the role religion had in our early republic, I encourage you to support the efforts of the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools, which, to date, has had its Bible curriculum voted into 515 school districts -- 2,026 schools -- in 38 states, and more than 360,000 students have taken the course).A

LAUGH IT ONLY HURTS A LITTLE WHILE

2009-12-26T15:34:00.000-08:00

If you can't take it don't dish it out.

If ObamaCare makes sense to you, it's time to up your medication.

Here's another sign of ObamaCare. Examination rooms have tip jars.

Q: What is the ObamaCare plan to encourage physical fitness?
A: Higher gas taxes to encourage walking.

The new ObamaCare slogan is "Give till it hurts!"

Barack Obama announced that his ObamaCare team will be headed by Joe Biden. Obama admitted that his team has many problems to overcome, the biggest one being that Joe Biden is heading the team.

If Barack Obama had been the Commander in Chief of the Sioux and the Cheyenne, George Armstrong Custer would have died of old age.

The aliens forgot to remove Obama's anal probe.

If Obama had half a brain, his butt would be lopsided.

President Obama is to statesmanship as an Etch-A-Sketch is to art.

Top Twenty Five Features of ObamaCare
"No Shirt, No Shoes, No Surgery"

1. Medical degrees from Devry.
2. Mandatory organ donor cards.
3. Lighters used to sterilize syringes.
4. Stomach stapling done at Office Max.
5. Coin operated morphine dispensers.
6. Tap water is a plasma substitute.
7. Homeless people all have only one kidney.
8. Free cremation with any major operation.
9. Bunkbeds in the Intensive Care Unit.
10. Your first dose of narcotics is free.
11. Special "showers" for the elderly.
12. Tongue depressors taste like Popsicles.
13. None of the nurses speak English.
14. The hospital cafeteria failed its health inspection.
15. Ambulances have meters.
16. Hospital walls are infested with "lab" rats.
17. Do-it-yourself heart bypass kits.
18. Wind up pacemakers.
19. You make up your own hospital bed.
20. Anesthesia comes in a bong.
21. Patients' meals are MREs.
22. Leeches make a comeback!
23. Hospital TVs are all turned to MSNBC.
24. Sears surgical tools.
25. A visit to the hospital will automatically cancel your life insurance policy.

Q. Why did Obama change his name from Barry to Barack?
A. He thought Barry sounded too American.

. What will Barack Obama get for Christmas?
A. Your job, your car and your house.

Q. Why did the Supreme Court block having a Nativity Scene displayed at the White House this year?
A. Plenty of donkeys, but no wise men.

If Obama promises to be good next year, maybe Santa will give him a clue for Christmas.

MANY THANKS TO MY FRIENDS AT http://barackobamajokes.googlepages.com/
and their fine contributers. Looking Forward to more Jokes, Should be Plenty of Material.

Obama is having such a hard time selling his health care plan that he's thinking about putting it on eBay.

THE SOLUTION

2009-12-23T04:52:00.000-08:00

IT HAS BEEN SEVERAL DAYS SINCE I ADDED ANY THOUGHTS TO THESE PAGES. I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO DIGEST A BITTER PILL. THE TRUTH IS, OUR GOVERNMENT LEADERS ARE DILLUSIONAL IDIOTS. AND POWER HUNGRY FOOLS. THEY ARE BENT ON DESTROYING THIS COUNTRY AND ALL I CAN DO IS TRY TO DESTROY THEM. NOT ONE SENATOR WHO VOTED FOR HEALTH REFORM IS GOING TO ESCAPE MY RATH. IT IS MY INTENTION TO PLACE THEM ALL IN JAIL WHERE ALL SCRUFFY WORTHLESS CRIMINALS BELONG. MASS MURDER,(ABORTION) IS PUNISHABLE BY DEATH, BUT I WOULD RATHER SEE THEM WASTE AWAY IN A DARK JAIL CELL FOR AS LONG AS POSSIBLE. THEY SHOULD GET THE MEDICAL CARE THEY ARE TRYING TO SHOVE DOWN OUR THROATS. JUST SO THEIR ORDEAL LASTS LONGER. THEY HAVE INCURED MY RATH AND THE SENTENCE WILL REFLECT MY ANGER. THEY SHALL GET THE JUSTICE THEY HAVE GIVEN. MY FIRST TARGET WILL BE SENATOR NELSON FROM NE. HE HAS SOLD AMERICA OUT FOR MONEY AND (HE THINKS FAME) INFAMY IN PRISON WILL BE HIS FATE. THEN IT IS PELOSI, REID, FRANK, DODD, FEINGOLD, SNOW AND THE LIST GOES ON. IN MY RETIREMENT YEARS I NOW HAVE A HOBBY, JAILING THOSE WHO HAVE FAILED AMERICA BY DECEIT AND FRAUD, TREASONISTS ALL....AND WORSE, ABORTIONISTS! IT IS MY INTENTION TO RAISE MONEY FOR ANYONE RUNNING AGAINST THEM AND SPEAKING OUT IN VOICE OF THE PEOPLE NEWSPAPER ADDS AND ON THE INTERNET. THE PIPER MUST BE PAID.

OBAMANOMICS????????????OBAMARUPTCY

2009-12-17T15:27:00.000-08:00

Floyd Brown is once again the guest author of my blogspot.

Barack Obama is demonstrating just how little he understands basic economics. He believes growing the government at a rapid rate is what causes prosperity, declaring America must spend our way out of this recession. He also in recent weeks scolded "fat cat bankers," telling them they need to loan more money out in order to get our economy going again. Obama's economic illiteracy is plunging our country into economic ruin.

From bailouts, to company takeovers, healthcare reform and stimulus bills: if it involves greater taxpayer involvement Obama supports it.

When Obama reported that the Treasury had received back $200 billion in TARP funds, he declared that he planned to spend that money on a second stimulus while paying down the debt. This is patently untrue. America will not be paying down any debt. The Senate is moving to raise the debt ceiling by over $1.8 Trillion. Actually, we will be borrowing a record sum, as Obama mortgages our future to “spend us out of this recession.

The problem with his policy is that it doesn't work. Government spending has never created prosperity. Every dollar the government spends must be taken from someone else. Government engages in wealth transfer not wealth creation. Borrowing money and running sizable deficits is transferring wealth from the future generation, which faces paying off Obama's credit card. The bill must be paid someday. Obama is robbing future generations in order to support his binge spending.

Obama's first Stimulus was nothing more than a slush fund of money, used by Democrats to support their liberal pet projects. $6 Million worth of stimulus money lined the pockets of Democratic pollster Mark Penn who used it to create three jobs. $18 Million from the stimulus went to fund Obama’s recovery website, which reported on jobs saved and stimulus money spent in Congressional districts that do not exist. With that kind of success rate it should surprise no one that Obama's approval rating has plummeted to 45%. American voters understand government spending is not the recipe for recovery.

Recently, Obama met with leading bankers, individuals he referred to as “fat cats.” In his meeting Obama pushed these banks to lend more and loosen up their capital requirements on loans. Nobody is arguing that these banks need or deserve the outrageous bonuses they have been pocketing after Obama bailed them out with the taxpayers' dime, but the idea that they need to lend more is nearly ludicrous.

The reason the housing market collapsed in the first place was because Congress pushed Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac to loan nearly half of their assets to families with incomes below the national median. Coupled with the Community Reinvestment Act, which forced banks to make imprudent loans, overzealous lending created an artificial housing bubble that collapsed. After the CRA was expanded in 1995, bank loans going to low- and moderate-income families increased by 80%. These were the same banks that were later attacked for being predatory for taking undue risks. They were making poor loans, but it was at the behest of a federal government that was trying to artificially increase home ownership amongst people not equipped for the responsibilities of home ownership.

Fast forward back to today, Obama is now encouraging banks to make more loans, asking banks to take more risk. This is the same Obama who has criticized banks for making risky loans in the past. By creating business climate uncertainty Obama is not helping our country to stabilize. Obama's conflicting messages are confusing. Which Obama are banks suppose to listen to; the one who demonizes risky behavior, or the one who demonizes banks for sitting on their assets?

Obama's meeting with bank leaders was simply political theatre as was his recent jobs summit. Jobs aren't created by bureaucrats sitting around talking. They are created when people are free to innovate and create without undue fear of erratic government behavior. If the government would cut back on its wild spending, cut taxes and promote a stable regulatory environment, the private sector would start creating new jobs.

Warm regards,

Floyd Brown

WHERE WE CAME FROM IS NOT WHERE WE ARE HEADING AND THIS CERTAINLY IS THE WRONG DIRECTION.

2009-12-15T10:56:00.000-08:00

Mary Jones has asked that we share this with as many people as we can, so here it is in my Blog, and let me say It says It ALL!

Our real roots...A history lesson that needs to be told....

OUR REAL ROOTS:
Did you know that 52 of the 55 signers of The Declaration of Independence were orthodox, deeply committed Christians? The other three all believed in the Bible as the divine truth, the God of scripture, and His personal intervention.
It is the same congress that formed the American Bible Society.. Immediately after creating the Declaration of Independence, the Continental Congress voted to purchase and import 20,000 copies of scripture for the people of this nation.

Patrick Henry, who is called the firebrand of the American Revolution, is still remembered for his words, 'Give me liberty or give me death.' But in current textbooks the context of these words is deleted. Here is what he said: 'An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death.'

These sentences have been erased from our textbooks.

Was Patrick Henry a Christian? The following year, 1776, he wrote this 'It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For that reason alone, people of other faiths have been afforded freedom of worship here.'

Consider these words that Thomas Jefferson wrote on the front of his well- worn Bible: 'I am a Christian, that is to say a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus. I have little doubt that our whole country will soon be rallied to the unity of our Creator and, I hope, to the pure doctrine of Jesus also.'

Consider these words from George Washington, the Father of our Nation, in his farewell speech on September 19, 1796:

'It is impossible to govern the world without God and the Bible. Of all the dispositions and habits that lead to political prosperity, our religion and morality are the indispensable supporters. Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that our national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.'

Was George Washington a Christian? Consider these words from his personal prayer book: 'Oh, eternal and everlasting God, direct my thoughts, words and work. Wash away my sins in the immaculate blood of the lamb and purge my heart by the Holy Spirit. Daily, frame me more and more in the likeness of thy son, Jesus Christ, that living in thy fear, and dying in thy favor, I may in thy appointed time obtain the resurrection of the justified unto eternal life. Bless, O Lord, the whole race of mankind and let the world be filled with the knowledge of thy son, Jesus Christ.'

Consider these words by John Adams, our second president, who also served as chairman of the American Bible Society.

In an address to military leaders he said, 'We have no government armed with the power capable of contending with human passions, unbridled by morality and true religion. Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.'

How about our first Court Justice, John Jay?

He stated that when we select our national leaders, if we are to preserve our Nation, we must select Christians. 'Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers and it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian Nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.'

John Quincy Adams, son of John Adams, was the sixth U.S. President.

He was also the chairman of the American Bible Society, which he considered his highest and most important role. On July 4, 1821, President Adams said, 'The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity.'

Calvin Coolidge, our 30th President of the United States reaffirmed this truth when he wrote, 'The foundations of our society and our government rest so much on the teachings of the Bible that it would be difficult to support them if faith in these teachings would cease to be practically universal in our country.'

In 1782, the United States Congress voted this resolution: 'The congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools

William Holmes McGuffey is the author of the McGuffey Reader, which was used for over 100 years in our public schools with over 125 million copies sold until it was stopped in 1963. President Lincoln called him the 'Schoolmaster of the Nation.'

Listen to these words of Mr. McGuffey: 'The Christian religion is the religion of our country. From it are derived our notions on character of God, on the great moral Governor of the universe. On its doctrines are founded the peculiarities of our free institutions. From no source has the author drawn more conspicuously than from the sacred Scriptures. From all these extracts from the Bible I make no apology.'

Of the first 108 universities founded in America, 106 were distinctly Christian, including the first.

Harvard University , chartered in 1636. In the original Harvard Student Handbook rule number 1 was that students seeking entrance must know Latin and Greek so that they could study the scriptures:

'Let every student be plainly instructed and earnestly pressed to consider well, the main end of his life and studies is, to know God and Jesus Christ, which is eternal life, John 17:3; and therefore to lay Jesus Christ as the only foundation of all sound knowledge and learning. And seeing the Lord only giveth wisdom, let everyone seriously set himself by prayer in secret to seek it of him (Proverbs 2:3).'

For over 100 years, more than 50% of all Harvard graduates were pastors!
It is clear from history that the Bible and the Christian faith, were foundational in our educational and judicial system. However in 1947, there was a radical change of direction in the Supreme Court.

Here is the prayer that was banished:

'Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence on Thee. We beg Thy blessings upon us and our parents and our teachers and our country.

Amen.'

In 1963, the Supreme Court ruled that Bible reading was outlawed as unconstitutional in the public school system. The court offered this justification: 'If portions of the New Testament were read without explanation, they could and have been psychologically harmful to children.'

Bible reading was now unconstitutional , though the Bible was quoted 94 percent of the time by those who wrote our constitution and shaped our Nation and its system of education and justice and government.

In 1965, the Courts denied as unconstitutional the rights of a student in the public school cafeteria to bow his head and pray audibly for his food.

In 1980, Stone vs. Graham outlawed the Ten Commandments in our public schools.

The Supreme Court said this: 'If the posted copies of the Ten Commandments were to have any effect at all, it would be to induce school children to read them. And if they read them, meditated upon them, and perhaps venerated and observed them, this is not a permissible objective.'

Is it not a permissible objective to allow our children to follow the moral principles of the Ten Commandments???

James Madison, the primary author of the Constitution of the United States, said this: 'We have staked the whole future of our new nation, not upon the power of government; far from it. We have staked the future of all our political constitutions upon the capacity of each of ourselves to govern ourselves according to the moral principles of the Ten Commandments.'

Today we are asking God to bless America. But how can He bless a Nation that has departed so far from Him?

Most of what you read in this article has been erased from our textbooks. Revisionists have rewritten history to remove the truth about our country's Christian roots. I , Mary Jones, the designer of this web page, encourage all who read and agree with the words herein, to share it with others, so that the truth of our nation's history may be told.

FOR REAL CHANGE WE MUST RELY ON GOD, FOR ONLY HE ANSWERS PRAYER..

UNJUSTIFIESD TAXATION OR HIGH CRIME AGAINST THE CITIZENS OF THE U.S.A.

2009-12-14T07:51:00.000-08:00

The issue of direct v. indirect taxes has been debated in Congress beginning not long after the constitutional ink had dried. From page 1898 of The Annals of Congress (the 4th Congress, 1797) Representative Williams from New York was recorded as reminding Congress of the Roman example of direct v. indirect taxation.

"History, Mr. W. said, informed them of the annihilation of nations by means of direct taxation. He referred gentlemen to the situation of the Roman Empire in its innocence, and asked them whether they had any direct taxes? No. Indirect taxes and taxes upon the luxuries and spices from the Indies were their sources of revenue but, as soon as they changed their system to direct taxation, it operated to their ruin; their children were sold as slaves, and the Roman Empire fell from its splendor. Shall we then follow this system? He trusted not."

By the late 1800s and up until the passage of the 16th Amendment in 1913 the people of this country demanded their legislators levy an income tax on accumulated wealth. This was because families such as the Camegies and the Morgans were virtually untaxed and controlling national politics with their vast and ever-increasing fortunes. By reading the Congressional Record, House and Senate documents, newspapers, magazines, law journal articles of the time and the writings of the people who were intimately involved in the development of the 16th Amendment, we will find that the intent was to tax the annual profit from unincorporated businesses and the net annual income from personal property. Wages and salaries from labor were not considered income within the original meaning and intent of the 16th Amendment.

Taxes on labor, as currently collected by the IRS as an "income" tax, cannot be described as anything other than a direct tax.

Senator Norris Brown from Nebraska, the man who wrote the 16th Amendment, defined clearly what income was and what the income tax was intended to accomplish. Not once did Sen. Brown mention that Congress intended to pass an amendment that would grant the federal government a new power to directly tax the wages or salaries of working people.

These comments are from the forward to the book, Constitutional Income: Do You Have Any?

Read this book to discover how our civil leaders have defrauded you and the rest of the hard working people of this great nation of their hard-earned wages. They have squandered the money on social programs that have fostered laziness and bred criminals -- all for the sake of political power. You need to read the rest of the story -- Order your copy of the book today!

Notice:

Much of the information presented in this work is taken directly from Congressional Record, court case opinions and court files. The information has been provided in this format to give the reader a new perspective on the income tax, based upon the intent of those who debated the issue at the time the 16th Amendment was offered for ratification. The author sees himself as only a messenger bringing forward information from established legal authorities.

The reader should realize that defending one's rights is risky, especially against big government. The right to pursue happiness has been denied to many Americans who have found themselves destitute after entanglements with the tax collector. How the reader uses the information in this book, either directly or indirectly, is not the responsibility of the author.

"There is no art which one government sooner learns of another, than that of draining money from the pockets of the people." Adam Smith (1776), Wealth of Nations, pg. 532 (Prometheus Books, Amherst, New York 1991)

mail@constitutionalincome.com

All material presented at this site
©2000 - 2005, Phil Hart

PATRIOTS OR TRAITORS

2009-12-14T07:46:00.000-08:00

Heres my point,
I do not know if Palin is going to run, or if her intent is to throw road blocks up to slow down the leftist agenda. I do believe she is qualified to be President based on the real qualities needed. Intelligent, integrity, and common sense. Things not present in current leadership.
I am a conservative, however I am of the Wiley C Sampson variety. Wylie as you may or may not know wrote ‘The Patriots Primer’ He covered a lot of ground, but what I feel is very important and a belief I have adopted as my own, is, he wrote,
“there is no such thing as an ultraconservative, you either are conservative or you are liberal”. There is no room in the conservative movement for moderates or centrists. I have traveled most of this country, I have talked to people in taverns, churches, schools, factories, retail stores, dock workers, ditch diggers, law-enforcement officers at every level, city county and state, and if there is one thing they have in common more often than not, they are conservative. A conservative, a true conservative does not need to seek a bigger tent to win. But first they have to prove they are conservative. Palin has done that.
Next issue, who does she get for a running mate that fills the bill? Guys, this country is at risk of being lost to the socialist holding the majority of power at this time. Let me assure you they are cowards and if we show we are not afraid to stand up to them, they will slink away. WRITE. CALL, FAX, EMAIL DAILY, THEY CAN BE HELD AT BAY UNTIL WE GET THE COUNTRY BACK. Oh, by the way Wylie’s book is still available but hard to find, also read “DIVIDING THE WEALTH” by James Kirshner, he will open your eyes to what is happening in D.C. I intend to add to this post in the coming days, please read it again in the future. I got your back. Joe

Have you ever been asked by your represenative what you want them to do in Congress?

2009-12-13T15:00:00.000-08:00

WASHINGTON –
Senate Democrats overcame a Republican (means they got the republicans to lay down)
filibuster to clear the way for a vote Sunday on a huge end-of-year $1.1 trillion spending bill that includes money to run much of the government and pay for Medicare and Medicaid benefits. (substitue, inflation building bill)
The spending measure gives the Education Department, the State Department, the Department of Health and Human Services and others generous budget increases far exceeding inflation. ( JUST THE RIGHT THING TO DO AT THIS TIME, WHEN WE ARE SO FLUSH IN THE FERDERAL COFFERS.)
On Saturday, the Democratic controlled Senate voted 60-34 to end the GOP filibuster that threatened to hold up the legislation.( Well they have to make it look good.)
A final vote was set for Sunday afternoon whether to send the measure to President Barack Obama. ( Pre-determind outcome, is yes, spend it, we are not deep enough in debt yet to enslave every middle class citizen to the poor house.

Democrats held Saturday's vote open for an hour to accommodate Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, an Orthodox Jew,( a weak man who knows he can't cut it
out of the protected halls of congress in the real world)
who walked more than three miles to the Capitol to vote on the Sabbath after attending services at his synagogue. Lieberman, wearing a black wool overcoat and bright orange scarf, finally provided the crucial 60th vote. (NOT TO MENTION HIS COAT WAS ALSO REVERSABLE, YOU KNOW A TURNCOAT.)

The 1,000-plus-page bill (Where is the enviromental police when they cut down all the trees needed to make the paper for the 2,000 page health bill and now this 1,000 page joke on the American people.)(attack on our wallet)
brings together six of the 12 annual spending bills that Congress had been unable to pass separately even though the new fiscal year began Oct. 1 because of partisan roadblocks. (Because none of them had enough merit on their own).
It includes $447 billion in operating budgets with about $650 billion in mandatory payments for federal benefit programs such as Medicare and Medicaid as well as an estimated $3.9 billion for more than 5,000 back-home projects sought by individual lawmakers in both parties.( 5,000 porkbarrel projects would be more like it.)
The bill increases spending by an average of about 10 percent to programs under immediate control of Congress, blending increases for veterans' programs, NASA and the FBI with a pay raise for federal workers and help for car dealers.
(YEP, I SURE ENOUGH GOT A 10% INCREASE IN MY WAGES THIS YEAR.)
Republicans who fought the bill said it provides too much money at a time when the government is running astronomical deficits. "Obviously we need to run the government, but do you suppose the government could be a little bit like families and be just a little bit prudent in how much it spends?" said Sen Jon Kyl R. Az.
( A LITTLE BIT)?????????But the second-ranking Senate Democrat, Dick Durbin of Illinois, said the measure restores money for programs cut under former President George W. Bush such as popular grant programs for local police departments to purchase equipment and put more officers on the beat.
The legislation also:
_Includes an improved binding arbitration process to challenge the decision by General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC to close more than 2,000 dealerships.
_Renews a federal loan guarantee program for steel companies.
_Permits detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to be transferred to the U.S. for trial, but not to be released.
_Calls for federal worker pay increases averaging 2 percent.

When are we going to hold our elected officials accountable for their actions? Watch close now. remember how a less than quorm of congress passed the tax bill in 1916 by having those who supported the bill stay after Christmas break, they were told to hang around and not say anything to those who might oppose this bill. Then with fewer members then is required they voted on and passed the income tax bill that John D. oilrichfeller had bought and paid for. It is not a crime to be rich, it is a crime to be rich and try to cheat others by buying influence. How many elected officials have been bought? How do you know your has not been bought? This is the time to take charge of our country, time to hold elected officials accountable. It is time to get the career Senators and Congressmen out of office, insist on term limits, and make it a national referendum vote before congress can spend more money than they take in. We have been taken over by the builderburgers and did not see them coming. Obama is their puppet, and so are most of our polititions.
GOD BLESS AMERICA AGAIN, AND HE WILL WHEN WE THANK GOD FOR OUR BLESSING and GET rid of the president who says we are not a Christian Nation.

COME ON WISCONSIN, JOIN THE SOUTH IN HEART IF NOT IN HEAT.

2009-12-12T09:12:00.000-08:00

OKLAHOMA MAY JUST BE THE PLACE

TO LIVE!

An update from

Oklahoma :
Oklahoma law passed, 37 to 9, had a few liberals in the mix, an amendment
to place the Ten Commandments on the front entrance to the state capitol.
The feds in D.C., along with the ACLU, said it would be a mistake. Hey this
is a conservative state, based on Christian values...! HB 1330

Guess what.......... Oklahoma did it anyway.
Oklahoma recently passed a law in the state to incarcerate all illegal
immigrants, and ship them back to where they came from unless they want to
get a green card and become an American citizen. They all scattered. HB
1804. Hope we didn't send any of them to your state. This was against the
advice of the Federal Government, and the ACLU, they said it would be a
mistake.
Guess what.......... Oklahoma did it anyway.

Recently we passed a law to include DNA samples from any and all illegals to
the Oklahoma database, for criminal investigative purposes. Pelosi said
it was unconstitutional. SB 1102

Guess what........ Oklahoma did it anyway.

Several weeks ago, we passed a law, declaring Oklahoma as a Sovereign state,
not under the Federal Government directives. Joining Texas , Montana
andUtah as the only states to do so. More states are likely to follow:
Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, the Carolina's, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri,
Arkansas, West Virginia, Mississippi, Florida. Save your confederate money,
it appears the South is about to rise up once again. HJR 1003

The federal Government has made bold steps to take away our guns. Oklahoma,
a week ago, passed a law confirming people in this state have the right to
bear arms and transport them in their vehicles. I'm sure that was a set
back for the criminals (and Obamaites). Liberals didn't like it -- But
....

Guess what........... Oklahoma did it anyway.

Just this month, my state has voted and passed a law that ALL driver's
license exams will be printed in English, and only English, and no other
language. We have been called racist for doing this, but the fact is that
ALL of our road signs are in English only. If you want to drive in
Oklahoma , you must read and write English. Really simple.

- - OKLAHOMA , YES !

By the way,
The Attorney General does not like any of this.
Guess what....who cares...

Oklahoma is doing it anyway.

GOD HELP US FROM THIS IDIOT

2009-12-08T12:15:00.000-08:00

The plan was to retire the debt as soon as possible. But this IDIOT wants to spend the "paidback money",(to create Jobs) No one is going to hire any employees as long as OBAMA continues to insure there will be higher inflation that will keep any of us from having enough money to eat, let alone buy produce or service we can get along without. Someone give this man a brain, please! If you owe the government any money, do not, I repeat, do NOT give it to this guy before you absolutly have to. He will throw it a way and ask for more. Truely taxation without brains. DUMB ARE SPELLED OBAMA. He would not know what job was if he had one.

While acknowledging increasing concerns in Congress and among the public over the nation's growing debt, Obama said critics present a "false choice" between paying down deficits and investing in job creation and economic growth.
To pay for the new programs, the administration is citing the Treasury Department's report on Monday that it expects to get back $200 billion in taxpayer-approved bank bailout funds faster than expected.
Obama suggested this windfall would both help the government spend money on job creation while also paying down the nation's debt, which now totals $12 trillion.
Obama called the bank bailout, under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), "galling."
"There has rarely been a less loved — or more necessary — emergency program," Obama said. The program is expected to go out of business at the end of this year unless extended by Congress.
Since the program is costing taxpayers at least $200 billion less than expected, Obama said, "This gives us a chance to pay down the deficit faster than we thought possible and to shift funds that would have gone to help the banks on Wall Street to help create jobs on Main Street."
But Republicans continued to insist that the leftover and repaid TARP money must be used exclusively for deficit reduction and not for a new jobs program.
"The president's announcement is further proof that TARP has morphed from an emergency injection of liquidity to thaw frozen credit markets into a $700 billion revolving slush fund to promote the Democrats' political, social and economic agenda," said Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas.
Obama said he is backing the measures he outlined because they "will generate the greatest number of jobs while generating the greatest value for our economy."

THIS IS HOW HE GOT THE NAME "DIRTY HARRY" JUST SOME MORE OF HARRY'S TRUTH TWISTING

2009-12-08T11:12:00.000-08:00

Reid Compares Opponents of Health Care Reform to Supporters of Slavery.

FOXNews.com

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid took his GOP-blasting rhetoric to a new level Monday, comparing Republicans who oppose health care reform to lawmakers who clung to the institution of slavery more than a century ago. The Nevada Democrat, in a sweeping set of accusations on the Senate floor, also compared health care foes to those who opposed women's suffrage and the civil rights movement -- even though it was Sen. Strom Thurmond, then a Democrat, who unsuccessfully tried to filibuster the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and it was Republicans who led the charge against slavery. Senate Republicans on Monday called Reid's comments "offensive" and "unbelievable." But Reid argued that Republicans are using the same stalling tactics employed in the pre-Civil War era. "Instead of joining us on the right side of history, all the Republicans can come up with is, 'slow down, stop everything, let's start over.' If you think you've heard these same excuses before, you're right," Reid said Monday. "When this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery, there were those who dug in their heels and said 'slow down, it's too early, things aren't bad enough.'"

IT IS TIME TO REMOVE HARRY FROM POLITCS.

The Lies Continue

2009-12-08T11:03:00.000-08:00

President Obama Again Violates No Abortion Funds Pledge by Backing Senate Bill.

By Steven Ertelt, Life News

President Barack Obama told the American people in a national speech in September that "my" health care plan would not include taxpayer funding of abortion. Obama broke that pledge once by lobbying members of the House to support a pro-abortion funding bill and he did it again this weekend in the Senate. Obama met with Senate Democrats in a closed door session on Sunday and told them to support the Harry Reid-sponsored bill that includes massive abortion funding and could force insurance companies to cover abortions with taxpayer's premiums. Although the media wasn't allowed into the event, senators described the speech as one in which Obama asked them for their votes for the bill and said voting for the legislation was a historic opportunity. "It would be very hard to have listened to the president's presentation and not have been persuaded of the historic importance of what's being discussed here," Senator Kent Conrad, Democrat of North Dakota, said after the address. "It was a powerful speech." Obama did not take questions during the event, but if he did, and if pro-life groups were present, they would have asked him why he is violating his pledge again that the health care reform bill he supports would not fund abortions.

IT IS PAST TIME TO STOP THIS MAN AND HIS AGENDA OF DESTROYING THE U.S.A.

THE HEAT IS ON, BUT IT AIN'T ON THE EARTH

2009-12-06T16:46:00.000-08:00

ONCE AGAIN I SHARE A REPORT FROM FLOYD BROWN. THE MAN BEHIND THE IMPEACH OBAMA MOVEMENT. WE CAN HELP HIM IN THIS GOAL.

Just like in the Wizard of Oz, the curtain was torn back and leading proponents of anthropogenic (people caused) global warming have been caught lying.

Called Climategate, the scandal exposes the global warming shysters who are conning the public into a massive restructuring of the global economy, while attempting to silence any dissent. But don't expect to see this in our mainstream media, because they are the spinsters who promote this manipulation of data and propaganda.

With Obama preparing to head to Copenhagen for UN meetings on global warming, expect to see "green" propaganda exponentially increasing.

The scandal all began when an anonymous person accessed the computers at the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit in England, releasing 61 megabites of confidential files, including 1079 e-mails and 72 documents onto the internet. These files are a wealth of information.

The most damning indictment of proponents of global warming hysteria is a long series of communications discussing how best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process. The e-mails even included fantasies of violence against those who question anthropogenic global warming. These e-mails show disturbing patterns of “Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organized resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more, says Australian Sun's, Andrew Bolt.

Man-made global warming hysteria has long been fueled by people using junk science, fear and hyperbole to support an agenda that they personally profit from. As they attempt to lead the world into a green revolution, these propagandists are hiding the truth that the average global temperature has fallen since 1998.

The leading profiteering propagandist is Al Gore. After losing the presidential election in 2000, Al Gore became the leader of the hysteria movement. However, this Eco-Prophet” has hidden a few inconvenient truths of his own. He just happens to be involved with a venture capital firm that has invested approximately a billion dollars in green companies that stand to make a bundle if Obama's Cap-and-Trade bill becomes law.

Reports state that Gore's net worth now stands at $100 Million, when it was $2 million when he left politics. He’s laughing all the way to the bank.

Al Gore has a history of playing loose with the facts.

Recently on TV, while discussing Geo-thermal energy, Al Gore made the outrageous claim that the interior of the earth is extremely hot, several million degrees. However, the actual temperature here on earth is between 5,000 and 9,000 degrees. This is a gaffe that if Sarah Palin had made, the media would ridicule as her stupid.

Speaking of hypocrisy, Al Gore is a living embodiment of it. As he lectures the world on energy use, and lobbies Congress to regulate productive American companies out of business, Gore consumes more than twenty times more energy as the average American, according to the Tennessee Center for Policy Research. This doesn’t count the energy consumption of his jet.

Gore's Inconvenient Truth is full of instances where he plays loose with the facts. A 2007 British court ruled that Gore's film has nine significant refutable errors. These are examples of Gore's scare tactics to induce the public to take radical action (to his financial benefit.)

Not only is Gore prone to hyperbole, hypocrisy and blatant distortions, he is also a bully. Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT, wrote about scientists being "in the crosshairs" of Gore, who "tried to bully" them into changing "their views and supporting his climate alarmism." Lindzen also refers to a failed Gore effort to "enlist Ted Koppel (then a TV host) in a witch hunt to discredit anti-alarmist scientists."

When one side tries to shut another side out of the debate, it is typically because they feel their arguments won’t stand up to scrutiny.

These propagandists use various tactics. A favorite is to make people feel guilty if they don’t jump on the “green” bandwagon, and those who do, feel good are praised for helping the environment. Obama is an expert at this tactic.

Open your eyes to these manipulators of data and people, who while acting like do-gooders, see great (green as in money) gain.

Warm regards,

FLOYD BROWN.

PLEASE INCLUDE THIS ADDRESS IN YOUR CONTACTS LIST
ImpeachObamaCampaign.com is a project of the Policy Issues Institute.
Contributions are not deductible for tax purposes.
30011 Ivy Glenn Dr., Suite 223
Laguna Niguel, CA 92677

THE BUS HAS LEFT THE STATION, ARE YOU ABOARD?

2009-12-05T07:36:00.000-08:00

This just one small example of the deceit we have happening in Washington, more important it is an example of two standards, one for us and one for them. We have a President flying all over the world, gaining nothing as a result of his trips, yet congress told our auto manufacturing CEO's, YOU FLY IN HERE IN CORPERATE JETS AND DARE ASK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO BAIL YOU OUT OF YOUR BAD BUSINESS DECISIONS? Has anyone counted the number of flights our congress has taken since that time, have they shut off any lights in their homes, or in the White House? As for carbon emissions, have you noticed any reduction in the hot air comming out of D.C. lately? You and I are being asked, no, TOLD we have to cut back, use less resources, drive small bread boxes, (may as well, we won't be able to AFFORD to put bread in them anyway) that are less safe in collisions, can't haul our families on trips so we have to take two vehicles. (that really saves fuel) Of course we must remember that Obamas' science advisor co-wrote a book supporting putting chemicals in the water supply to cause sterilisation of humans,(he did not want it to have an adverse affect on animals) he also suggested the use of implants in male and female children before the age of puberty. These would be removed with government approval so you could have one child and then replaced. With just one child per family, the smaller cars will do just fine. WAKE UP OUT THERE! BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE! TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY FROM THE SOCIALIST ENEMY WE HAVE RUNNING THIS COUNTRY. VOTE THEM OUT.
Read on:

Gore Should Give Back Oscar, Two Academy Members Say

Friday, December 4, 2009 1:05 PM

By: James Hirsen Article Font Size

Two members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences have called on the group to take back the Oscar awarded to former Vice President Al Gore for the documentary "An Inconvenient Truth."

Roger L. Simon and Lionel Chetwynd made the request based on the e-mails that a hacker/whistle blower released revealing that so-called scientists at the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England systematically falsifying data to support the theory that the earth is heating up and that humans caused it.

"An Inconvenient Truth," a film based on a climate-change speech that Gore developed, won the Academy Award for best documentary feature in 2007. (Coincidentally, the next day, the Tennessee Center for Policy Research uncovered that Gore’s Nashville home guzzled 20 times more electricity than the average American household. )

That same year, the Academy elevated Gore's PowerPoint lecture, helping him to snag a Nobel Peace Prize as well.

The academy members' request that Gore return his statue is happening as preparations are under way for next week's United Nations climate change meeting in Copenhagen, where 16,500 people from 192 countries will fly in using private jets, consume 200,000 meals, and produce an estimated 41,000 tons of carbon dioxide, roughly the same as the carbon emissions of Morocco in 2006.

© 2009 N

TERRORISTS AIN'T TERRORISTS IF YOU AIN'T TERRIFIED

2009-12-03T16:57:00.000-08:00

I have checked this out and there is no doubt in my mind, it is true. GOD BLESS AMERICA, we still have heros. Here is the story as told by them.

One week ago, I went to Ohio on business and to see my father. On Tuesday, November the 17th, I returned home. If you read the papers the 18th you may have seen a blurb where a AirTran flight was cancelled from Atlanta to Houston due to a man who refused to get off of his cell phone before takeoff. It was on Fox.

This was NOT what happened.
I was in 1st class coming home. 11 Muslim men got on the plane in full attire. 2 sat in 1st class and the rest peppered themselves throughout the plane all the way to the back. As the plane taxied to the runway the stewardesses gave the safety spiel we are all so familiar with. At that time, one of the men got on his cell and called one of his companions in the back and proceeded to talk on the phone in Arabic very loudly and very aggressively. This took the 1st stewardess out of the picture for she repeatedly told the man that cell phones were not permitted at the time. He ignored her as if she was not there.
The 2nd man who answered the phone did the same and this took out the 2nd stewardess. In the back of the plane at this time, 2 younger Muslims, one in the back, isle, and one in front of him, window, began to show footage of a porno they had taped the night before, and were very loud about it. Now..they are only permitted to do this prior to Jihad. If a Muslim man goes into a strip club, he has to view the woman via mirror with his back to her. (don't ask me..I don't make the rules, but I've studied) The 3rd stewardess informed them that they were not to have electronic devices on at this time. To which one of the men said "shut up infidel dog!" She went to take the camcorder and he began to scream in her face in Arabic. At that exact moment, all 11 of them got up and started to walk the cabin. This is where I had had enough! I got up and started to the back where I heard a voice behind me from another Texan twice my size say "I got your back." I grabbed the man who had been on the phone by the arm and said "you WILL go sit down or you Will be thrown from this plane!" As I "led" him around me to take his seat, the fellow Texan grabbed him by the back of his neck and his waist and headed out with him. I then grabbed the 2nd man and said, "You WILL do the same!" He protested but adrenaline was flowing now and he was going to go. As I escorted him forward the plane doors open and 3 TSA agents and 4 police officers entered. Me and my new Texan friend were told to cease and desist for they had this under control. I was happy to oblige actually. There was some commotion in the back, but within moments, all 11 were escorted off the plane. They then unloaded their luggage.
We talked about the occurrence and were in disbelief that it had happen, when suddenly, the door open again and on walked all 11!! Stone faced, eyes front and robotic (the only way I can describe it). The stewardess from the back had been in tears and when she saw this, she was having NONE of it! Being that I was up front, I heard and saw the whole ordeal. She told the TSA agent there was NO WAY she was staying on the plane with these men. The agent told her they had searched them and were going to go through their luggage with a fine tooth comb and that they were allowed to proceed to Houston . The captain and co-captain came out and told the agent "we and our crew will not fly this plane!" After a word or two, the entire crew, luggage in tow, left the plane. 5 minutes later, the cabin door opened again and a whole new crew walked on.
Again...this is where I had had enough!!! I got up and asked "What the hell is going on!?!?" I was told to take my seat. They were sorry for the delay and I would be home shortly. I said "I'm getting off this plane". The stewardess sternly told me that she could not allow me to get off. (now I'm mad!) I said "I am a grown man who bought this ticket, who's time is mine with a family at home and I am going through that door, or I'm going through that door with you under my arm!! But I am going through that door!!" And I heard a voice behind me say "so am I". Then everyone behind us started to get up and say the same. Within 2 minutes, I was walking off that plane where I was met with more agents who asked me to write a statement. I had 5 hours to kill at this point so why the hell not. Due to the amount of people who got off that flight, it was cancelled. I was supposed to be in Houston at 6pm. I got here at 12:30am.
Look up the date. Flight 297 Atlanta to Houston .
If this wasn't a dry run, I don't know what one is. They wanted to see how TSA would handle it, how the crew would handle it, and how the passengers would handle it.
I'm telling this to you because I want you to know..
The threat is real. I saw it with my own eyes..

I have the names and addrss of the two guys from texas but, withheld them as they are being bombarded with calls, day and night. as is often the case with heros.

HOW LONG ARE WE GOING TO ACCEPT THIS CLOWN

2009-12-03T16:45:00.000-08:00

THIS IS FROM THE DESK OF FLOYD BROWN, I SUPPLIED THE HIGHLIGHTS ACTUALLY OBAM DID. HIS IGNORANCE GOES BEFORE HIM SHOUTING, "LOOK AT ME, LOOK AT ME" I HAVE AND I FIND IT REPULSIVE AND HARD TO STOMACH.

Last night before an audience of Cadets at West Point, the Commander in Chief, Barack Obama, displayed his gross ignorance of strategic affairs and inexperience with military affairs. In a speech in which Americans were eager to hear a plan for victory, Obama instead laid the seeds of defeat without honor.

His lack of insight was on display for the world to see. He was there to announce his new strategy developed over his last three months of dithering and indecision on the future of Afghanistan.
Clearly this is the biggest decision of his term so far. He had to choose between the recommendation of his commanding General on the ground, Stanley McChrystal, or options developed by the feckless doves who control the White House. He chose the latter. In so doing, he ended hope of American success and doomed thousands of young soldiers to death far from home in a quagmire he has exacerbated.
Obama, obsessed with pleasing and looking good to liberals, is desperate for an "end game." He wants to "get in there quickly" and transfer responsibility for security to the Afghan military as rapidly as possible. Obama aims to begin winding down troop numbers as early as July 2011, regardless of military realities.
The heart of the decision is to send two brigades, one from the Marines and one from the Army, plus reserves, amounting to 30,000 soldiers. They are to be deployed to Afghanistan over the next six months, bringing the number of American troops in Afghanistan to 100,000. They are to be stationed in the south and east, where US forces are under pressure and needing reinforcements.
But the real kicker, which will doom his new strategy, was the announcement of an unrealistic timetable for withdrawal of 12 to 18 months. Announcing to Al-Qaida and the Taliban his exit strategy, he has given away all the information our enemies need to counter his moves. By telegraphing his moves to the enemy, he just commited one of the biggest strategic blunders possbile.
So his errors are compounded and will America bumble to a withdrawal before victory because the extra 30,000 troops will not be enough to counter an increasingly confident Taliban. Plus, the timetable for training the Afghan army and police is unrealistic. Finally, it is likely that the troops sent will be sitting ducks because of his wrongheaded change to the rules of engagement earlier in the year.
Overnight polling shows Americans are uneasy with his policy with only 35% supporting his Afghanistan policy. I am not surprised. He has now completed a trifecta of bad decision in Afghanistan. More reasons why he should be impeached.
Warm regards,

Floyd Brown

ImpeachObamaCampaign.com is a project of the Policy Issues Institute.
Contributions are not deductible for tax purposes.
30011 Ivy Glenn Dr., Suite 223
Laguna Niguel, CA 92677

OVER KILL ANOTHER WAY TO SAY GOVERNMENT

2009-12-03T13:32:00.000-08:00

AS I START MY NEW CAREER, I AM OF MIXED FEELINGS, ON ONE HAND, I WANT ALL THE WORK I CAN GET. AS THINGS STAND RIGHT NOW I AM SITTING HOME TOO MANY DAYS. YET WHEN I AM OUT, I THINK WHAT A WASTE OF TAX PAYERS MONEY. I AM WHAT IS KNOWN AS AN OCCUPANCY INSPECTOR, WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT I GO TO HOMES WHICH ARE ON A LIST GIVEN TO ME, AND I CHECK, IF SOMEONE IS, AND WHO IS LIVING THERE, IF THERE IS NO ONE LIVING THERE, I CHECK TO SEE THE HOME IS SECURE, LOCKED DOORS AND WINDOWS, HAS IT BEEN WINTERIZED, IS THERE ANY HAZARDOUS CONDITION TO BE REPAIR., I AM HIRED THOUGH VARIOUS COMPANIES WHO ARE PAID BY MORTGAGE COMPANIES OR BANKS FOR THIS SERVICE. SOMETIMES I HAVE A (CALL BACK) CARD I HAND TO THE OCCUPANT OR HANG ON THE DOOR. THIS IS TO NOTIFY THE MORTGAGEE THAT THEY NEED TO CALL THEIR BANK. THERE ARE MANY THINGS THAT CAN RAISE A FLAG IN SOME BANKS COMPUTER TO START THIS PROCESS. A LATE PAYMENT, APPLICATION FOR A MODIFIED LOAN, EXCESSIVE CREDIT CHECKS, APPLICATION FOR ANOTHER LARGE LOAN, ETC. MOST TIMES WHAT EVER THE PROBLEM IT IS RESOLVED IN A COUPLE OF MONTHS, YET I GET SENT BACK OVER AND OVER TO THE SAME HOUSES. NOW YOU SAY, WHAT AM I COMPLAINING ABOUT, I GET WORK FROM THE REPEAT INSPECTIONS, RIGHT? YES I DO. LETS EXAMINE THIS CLOSER. MOST OF THESE INSPECTIONS ARE A RESULT OF BANKS MAKING LOANS WITH LITTLE REGULATION OR FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS TO PEOPLE WITH QUESTIONABLE INCOME AND ABILITY TO PAY THE LOAN BACK. MAKING A LOT MORE LOANS IN THIS DEREGULATED MARKET, THE BANKS LIQUID ASSESTS GOT TOO LOW, SO THEY SOLD THE LOANS TO MORTGAGE BANKS, THEY IN TURN BUNDLED THESE MORTGAGES TOGETHER AND SOLD THEM TO WALL STREET, WHERE THEY WERE THEN SOLD TO INVESTMENT GROUPS. NOW WHEN THE ORIGINATER OF THE LOAN GETS IN TROUBLE HE IS THREE STEPS AWAY FROM THE LOAN HOLDER. THE LOAN HOLDER IS NO LONGER A BANK. THEREFORE HE CANNOT GO DOWN TO THE BANK AND GET AN EXTENTION, OR BE FORGIVEN ONE MONTH AND EXTEND THE LOAN. HE HAS NO WHERE TO GO. ONE THING LEADS TO ANOTHER, HE FEELS HELPLESS AND JUST THROWS IN THE TOWEL. PACKS UP AND MOVES IN WITH RELATIVES. SOMETIMES UP NORTH, IT FREEZES BEFORE ANYONE FIGURES OUT HE HAS MOVED, THE WATER PIPES BREAK, FLOODING THE HOUSE, THE HOUSE IS RUINED. SO THE REASON TO INSPECT IS VALID, BUT HAD LOANS ONLY BEEN GRANTED TO THOSE WHO COULD AFFORD TO BUY A HOUSE, MOST OF THIS WOULD NEVER HAPPEN. NOW THE INVESTMENT GROUP OR THE MORTGAGE BANK HAS NOT ONLY LOST THE PROPERTY , THEY HAVE TO PAY SOMEONE TO DEMOLISH IT. LOSS PILED ON LOSE. ALONG COMES UNCLE SAM, BAILOUT TIME. NOW YOU AND I THROUGH OUR TAXES HAVE TO PAY FOR THE LACK OF REGULATION IN THE BANKING INDUSTRY. THE GOVERNMENT INSTEAD OF CHANGING THE RULES, JUSTS CONTINUES TO TELL THE BANKS THEY HAVE TO MAKE THESE ILL ADVISED LOANS. BUT, THEY ALSO MUST KEEP BETTER TRACK OF WHAT IS GOING ON. THAT IS HOW MY JOB CAME INTO EXISTENCE. BUT LIKE ALWAYS, THE BANKS HIRE SOMEONE ELSE TO DO THEIR CHECKING, AND THAT COMPANY HIRES SOMEONE ELSE AND THAT COMPANY HIRES ME. THEN THE BANKS NEVER FOLLOW UP ON THE INFORMATIO I PROVIDE AND THEY KEEP ON SENDING ME OR SOMEONE ELSE OUT TIME AFTER TIME. I HAVE BEEN REQUESTED TO LEAVE DOOR TAGS AT HOMES WHERE THE OWNER HAS BEEN DEAD 4 YEARS AND NO ONE PICKS UP THE TAGS FOR MONTHS. I HAVE BEEN INSTRUCTED TO LEAVE A DOOR TAG AT A HOME THAT HAS NO DOORS, IT BURNED DOWN SIX MONTHS AGO. THIS COST, AND I MUST SAY I DO NOT GET RICH DOING THIS, BUT BY THE TIME THE TWO COMPANIES BETWEEN ME AND THE BANK THAT ORDERS THE INSPECTION TAKE A CHUNK OF THE MONEY AND I BUY MY GAS FOR MY VEHICLE. THE TOTAL COST IS SUBSTANTIAL. AND YOU AND I ARE PAYING FOR THIS THROUGH OUR TAXES, BECAUSE THE BANKS ARE PAYING FOR THIS WITH BAILOUT MONEY. IF CHRIS DODD, BARNEY FRANK AND CHARLES SCHUMMER HAD BEEN DOING THEIR JOB INSTEAD OF GIFTING THEIR FRIENDS AT FANNIE MAY AND FREDDIE MACK, WE WOULD NOT BE OUT BILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT THE TAX PAYER HAS TO PAY BACK.
WASTE NOT, WANT NOT. NOW WE ARE GETTING GOVERNMENT IN OUR HEALTH CARE, YOU KNOW HOW MUCH THAT IS GOING TO COST, THE WASTE MORE BOYS ARE IN CHARGE. FUNNY EVEN WITH ME CHECKING EVERY MONTH MORE AND MORE HOUSES BECOME VACANT AND NO ONE IS TAKING CARE OF THEM.
I want to thank all of you tax payers for hiring me...

THE FIRST THANKSGIVING

2009-11-26T09:48:00.000-08:00

I THOUGHT PERHAPS SOME WOULD SEE SOME VALUE IN THIS, SO I COPIED AND PASTED IT HERE, HAPPY THANKSGIVING FROM LASTMANSTANDING. THIS IS FROM THE DESK OF FLOYD BROWN, MY HERO FOR HIS ATTEMPT TO IMPEACH OBAMA.

As we all prepare for Thanksgiving, I thought you might enjoy reading a column Mary Beth (my wife) penned this week on the true meaning of Thanksgiving. Enjoy and Happy Thanksgiving!

The True Reason for ThanksgivingOver time, myths and distortions have arisen, twisting the reason for Thanksgiving Day. For starters, the Pilgrims did not hold their harvest festival to thank the local Indians. Unfortunately, this myth is often perpetuated in schools and textbooks. Many children and adults now believe we celebrate the help given to the Pilgrims by Native Americans. If the Pilgrims were to visit this Thanksgiving, they would be shocked. The Pilgrims focused on thanking and praising God for His love, for all that He had done for them, and for the freedom they enjoyed in the New World.

A glimpse into the history of Thanksgiving Day gives a greater appreciation of this great American holiday. Even earlier than the Pilgrims, people of faith set aside days for prayer and thanksgiving to God. Many times rather than a feast, they were a time dedicated to prayer. It may come as a surprise to some that the word holiday is actually from old English compound word combining holy and day. Merriam-Webster dictionary defines holiday as a day set aside for special religious observance. The ancient Hebrews had many days set apart to worship, praise and thank God. Passover and Succoth are holy days of gratitude to God for His loving-kindness and deliverance from Egypt.

Early Americans often held days of thanksgiving in the various states and commonwealths. Washington and Madison each proclaimed a day of thanksgiving while president. In October 1789, President George Washington signed a proclamation requested by Congress to recommend to the people of the United States a Day of Public thanksgiving and Prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to form a government for their safety and happiness. Washington then assigned the twenty-sixth day of November to be devoted by the people to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; and to all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country It was to remember, Washington said, Gods manifold mercies and providence, for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and, in general, for all the great and various favors. He gave them.

In the dark days of the Civil War in 1863, Lincoln proclaimed, by Act of Congress, an annual National Day of Thanksgiving following a letter campaign promoting the idea by Sarah Hale. As a mother, widowed at the age of 34, Hale was the editor of the first womans magazine in America and campaigned for over 40 years to make Thanksgiving a national holiday. Lincolns words are especially timely now with our soldiers fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq, I do therefore invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign land, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens.He recommends that we commend to his tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners or sufferers from the war and to look at the many blessings we have been given by God including which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come Almighty God...

But we have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious hand which preserved us in peace and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us, and we have vainly imagine, by the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessing were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own...In conclusion, Lincoln says, It has seemed to me fit and proper that God should be solemnly, reverently and gratefully acknowledged, as with one heart and one voice, by the whole American people Even amongst the pain, upheaval and difficulties of the Civil War, the nation came together for a day of thanksgiving and praise. Sadly, someone erroneously wrote in Wikipedia, Thanksgiving Day is a time to give thanks for the harvest and express gratitude in general. While perhaps religious in origin, Thanksgiving is now primarily identified as a secular holiday. Maybe this is true for some Americans, but certainly not for all. And definitely not the way the Mother of the American Thanksgiving, Sarah Hale visualized it. Hale wrote, Let this daybe the grand Thanksgiving Holiday of our nation, when the noise and tumult of worldliness may be exchanged for the laugh of happy children, the glad greeting of family reunion, and the humble gratitude of the Christian heart. And Edward Martin wisely reminds us, "Thanksgiving Day comes, by statute, once a year; to the honest man it comes as frequently as the heart of gratitude will allow."
Warm regards, Floyd Brown

SOUNDS KINDA LIKE THE TAX STIM U LOST PLAN

2009-11-20T04:41:00.000-08:00

The Plan, The Scam, The Man, Don't ya just love it when a plan comes together? The ScamHere is what a learned friend had to say about my Democratic Math e-mail. It's even worse apparently than I first thought:
It's way worse than that. Ignore all the gas crap and just look at how the stupid car buyer got taken to the cleaners:
If you traded in a clunker worth $3500, you get $4500 off for an apparent "savings" of $1000.
However, you have to pay taxes on the $4500 come April 15th (something that no auto dealer will tell you). If you are in the 30% tax bracket, you will pay $1350 on that $4500.
So, rather than save $1000, you actually pay an extra $350 to the feds. In addition, you traded in a car that was most likely paid for. Now you have 4 or 5 years of payments on a car that you did not need, that was costing you less to run than the payments that you will now be making.
But wait; it gets even better: you also got ripped off by the dealer. For example, every dealer here in LA was selling the Ford Focus with all the goodies, including A/C, auto transmission, power windows, etc for $12,500 the month before the "cash for clunkers" program started.
When "cash for clunkers" came along, they stopped discounting them and instead sold them at the list price of $15,500. So, you paid $3000 more than you would have the month before... (Honda, Toyota , and Kia played the same list price game that Ford and Chevy did).
So let's do the final tally here:
You traded in a car worth: $3500 You got a discount of: $4500 ---------Net so far +$1000But you have to pay: $1350 in taxes on the $4500 --------Net so far: -$350And you paid: $3000 more than the car was selling for the month before ---------- Net -$3350
We could also add in the additional taxes (sales tax, state tax, etc.) on the extra $3000 that you paid for the car, along with the 5 years of interest on the car loan, but let's just stop here.
So who actually made out on the deal? The feds collected taxes on the car along with taxes on the $4500 they "gave" you. The car dealers made an extra $3000 or more on every car they sold along with the kickbacks from the manufacturers and the loan companies. The manufacturers got to dump lots of cars they could not give away the month before. And the poor, stupid consumer got saddled with even more debt that they cannot afford.
Obama and his band of merry men convinced Joe consumer that he was getting $4500 in "free" money from the "government" when in fact, Joe was giving away his $3500 car and paying an additional $3350 for the privilege. Think this was stupid for those who were crazy enough to swallow this wonderful scheme?
Just wait until we get health care with no additional costs over what most of us now pay for health insurance and the best medical care in the world. Think that scheme might be designed by the same people who came up with Cash for Clunkers?

MAKES YOU WONDER

2009-11-19T05:52:00.000-08:00

Poll Watch: The Latest ABC News Polls
Swine Flu Poll: Problems With Vaccine Supply and Safety Concerns
Nearly half of parents now don't intend to have their children vaccinated against the swine flu virus ? and among those who do plan to get the vaccine, more than half say they've been deterred by supply problems, a new ABC News/Washington Post poll finds.
Others, meanwhile, continue to steer clear as a result of undiminished skepticism about the safety of the vaccine itself. Despite federal reassurances, a third of Americans say they're not confident it's safe, much like the 30 percent who said so last month. And 66 percent of adults say they themselves don't plan to get vaccinated ? slightly up from 62 percent last month.

NOT GOING TO GET ONE MYSELF.

JUST ONE OF A THOUSAND LIES FROM BHO AND COMPANY

2009-11-18T21:50:00.000-08:00

Recovery.gov Shows Taxpayer Money Going to Congressional Districts That Don’t Exist(CNSNews.com) – The 86th congressional district of Rhode Island received $10.2 million in federal economic stimulus funds to save 57.9 jobs, according to the Obama administration’s Recovery.gov Web site. In neighboring Connecticut, the state’s 42nd congressional district did not receive any stimulus money, but 25 jobs were still saved or created. The problem is that R.I. has only two congressional districts and Connecticut has just five.

THE B.H.O. INDIAN GIVER TAX RELEIF TRICK

2009-11-16T16:11:00.000-08:00

I found this AP release and copied and pasted it here. Hopfully some of the links at the bottom will help those who did not know this was going to happen. I know THEY say THEY cautioned people last spring but, how many of you heard about it. I did, but that is because I have the connections to information like this at my disposal. Actually until I saw this report I had forgotten about it. It was a topic of conversation on the Jason Lewis radio program one afternoon, if you google Jason Lewis, you will find if he is carried on a station near you. Believe me he is worth listening to. This should just about kill Christmas for many millions of people who have to give the money back. Of course you can pretend you did not know and just wait for Obama to bail you out. Trust me folks, it aint gonna happen, this was an intentional ploy to get you to think you made a good choice last Nov. Now we get the door slamed in our face. He has more up his sleave than a good magician, watch close, now you see it, now you don't. It is called misdirection, and he is not going to take the blame when the trick fails. ICE CREAM ANYONE?

WASHINGTON — More than 15 million taxpayers may owe the government $250 or more because of how the IRS last spring set up President Barack Obama's tax break that was designed to help consumers spend the U.S. economy out of recession.
Individuals with more than one job and married couples in which both spouses work may have to repay the government $400, either through a smaller tax refund or a larger tax bill, according to a report released Monday by the Treasury Department's inspector general for tax administration. Social Security recipients who also earn taxable wages may have to repay $250.
The tax credit, which is supposed to pay individuals up to $400 and couples up to $800, was Obama's signature tax break in the massive stimulus package enacted in February. The credit has increased weekly paychecks for 95 percent of working families, giving them cash to help boost consumer spending during the worst economic recession in decades.
Workers concerned about whether they are withholding enough taxes can use a calculator on the IRS Web site to find the appropriate amount that should be withheld.
Taxpayers can adjust their withholding by filing a new W-4 form with their employer. But with only a month and a half remaining in the 2009 tax year, it's getting late to make adjustments.
Most workers started receiving the credit through small increases in their paychecks in April. The tax credit was made available through new tax withholding tables issued by the Internal Revenue Service.
The withholding tables, however, do not take into account several common categories of taxpayers. And that could force some people to repay what the government gave them.
For example, a worker with two jobs gets a $400 boost in pay at each job, for a total of $800. That worker, however, only is eligible for a maximum credit of $400, so the remaining $400 will have to be paid back at tax time — either through a smaller refund or a payment to the IRS.
The IRS recognized there could be a similar problem for married couples if both spouses work, so it adjusted the withholding tables. The fix, however, was imperfect.
A married couple is eligible for an $800 credit. However, if both spouses work and make more than $13,000, the new withholding tables give them each a $600 boost — for a total of $1,200.
There were 33 million married couples in 2008 in which both spouses worked. That's 55 percent of all married couples, according to the Census Bureau.
Also, a single student with a part-time job gets a $400 boost in pay. However, if students are claimed as dependents on their parents' tax returns, they don't qualify for the credit and would have to repay it when they file their returns.
Some retirees face even bigger headaches.
More than 50 million Social Security recipients received $250 payments in the spring as part of the economic stimulus package. Those lump sum payments were intended to provide a boost for people who didn't qualify for the tax credit.
However, the payments were sent to many retirees who also received the tax credit. Those retirees will have the $250 payment deducted from their tax credit — but not until they file their tax returns next year, long after the money may have been spent.
"More than 10 percent of all taxpayers who file individual tax returns for 2009 could owe additional taxes," said J. Russell George, the Treasury inspector general for tax administration.
Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, the senior Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, called problems with the tax credit "another unfortunate example of what can happen when Congress and the White House rush through legislation like the stimulus without thinking through the consequences."
The tax credit is also available for 2010. George said the problems will continue if workers don't adjust their withholding for next year.
For many, the new tax tables will simply mean smaller-than-expected tax refunds. The average tax refund this year was about $2,800. A little more than three-fourths of the 143 million taxpayers filing a return last spring received refunds, according to the IRS.
But for 15.4 million taxpayers, the new tax tables will mean an unexpected tax bill, according the IG report.
The IRS was aware of the issues when the withholding tables were released last spring and waged a public awareness campaign to get people to check their tax withholding, said Michael Mundaca, acting assistant treasury secretary.
"It's just technically how withholding works," Mundaca said. "It's an approximation and therefore for some people there will be overwithholding and for some people there will be underwithholding."
Separately, the IRS estimated that about 65,000 taxpayers could face penalties for not withholding enough taxes in 2009 because of the Making Work Pay tax credit. However, those taxpayers will be eligible to have the penalty waived, IRS spokeswoman Michelle Eldridge said.
The credit pays workers 6.2 percent of their earned income, up to a maximum of $400 for individuals and $800 for married couples who file jointly. Individuals making more than $95,000 and couples making more than $190,000 are ineligible.

ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT THESE PEOPLE HANDLING YOUR HEALTH CARE?
__YOU HAVE TO GIVE IT BACK TO MAKE THE DOWN PAYMENT ON YOUR WONDERFUL GOVERNMENT HEALTH PLAN, YOU KNOW TO COVER THE COST OF THE ILLEGALS WHO DO NOT PAY TAXES.
On the Web:
IRS Making Work Pay tax credit: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/ap/ap_on_bi_ge/storytext/us_tax_credit_pickle/34107690/SIG=10m74tvmd/*http://tiny.cc/g7d83
IRS withholding calculator: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/ap/ap_on_bi_ge/storytext/us_tax_credit_pickle/34107690/SIG=10mqnel17/*http://tiny.cc/AtuhO
Related Searches:
irs withholding calculator
new tax withholding tables
economic stimulus

BURKA ANYONE?

2009-11-16T12:46:00.000-08:00

I HAVE SPOKE OF THIS IN A PAST POST HERE, THERE IS EVEN MORE A STAKE THEN THE AUTHOR WHO WROTE THIS INDICATES, YES I COPIED AND PASTED, SO SUE ME.

Islamic Nations Seek Legally Binding Way to Counter Religious ‘Defamation’Monday, November 16, 2009By Patrick Goodenough, International Editor
Support at the U.N. for OIC-sponsored resolutions on religious 'defamation' has been dropping over the past four years. (CNSNews.com graph)

As support wanes for its campaign to secure controversial but non-binding "defamation of religion" resolutions at the United Nations, the Islamic bloc is pushing ahead with an alternative route – one that would carry the weight of international law.The OIC is now attempting to have a key U.N. panel amend an existing international treaty to encompass supposedly religiously defamatory speech.Unlike the resolutions, changing the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) to cover religion would be legally enforceable.The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) has for the past decade overseen the passage of non-binding resolutions at the U.N. General Assembly and human rights bodies.Last week, the most recent effort passed in the General Assembly’s Third Committee, which deals with social, cultural, and humanitarian issues. It will go before the full General Assembly for a vote next month, but the committee vote indicates a continuing, measurable decline in support.Eighty-one countries voted for the resolution, 55 opposed it and 43 abstained. The result showed less support for and more opposition against the resolution than for those introduced by the OIC over the last three years.
As in past years, most support came from the 57-member OIC (although two members, Burkina Faso, and Cameroon, abstained) plus non-Muslim allies in the developing world, led by China, Russia, Cuba and Venezuela.Comparisons of voting records from 2006 to date reveal a continuing erosion of support in Latin America. Chile, Mexico, Panama, Uruguay all voted against the OIC-led resolution this year, having abstained in 2008. Elsewhere, Lesotho and Sri Lanka were among those who moved from supporting the resolution in 2008, to abstaining this year.The OIC argues that religion needs to be protected from "defamation" – acts such as the publication of newspaper cartoons satirizing Mohammed, or the suggestion that the Koran promotes violence against non-Muslims. (WHICH IT DOES) Although its resolutions purport to cover all religions, Islam is the only one cited by name. The text passed by the Third Committee voices concern that "Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism."The OIC campaign has been confronted by freedom of expression advocates who say the bloc is trying to shield Islam, its teachings, practices, institutions and leaders, from legitimate criticism or scrutiny.Critics say defamation prohibitions should cover individuals, not religions. They charge that resolution proponents are trying to introduce in Western societies similar restrictions to those enforced in some Islamic countries, where converts from Islam or those with dissident views risk trial for apostasy or blasphemy.‘Binding normative standards’Unlike the nonbinding U.N. resolutions, the OIC’s alternative strategy proposes to develop "new binding normative standards relating to religious ideas, objects and positions," including "legal prohibition of publication of materials that negatively stereotypes, insults or uses of offensive language on matters regarded by followers of any religion or belief as sacred."
Organization of the Islamic Conference Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu. (OIC)
Its target in this part of the campaign is a panel known as the "ad hoc committee on the elaboration of complementary international standards." The committee’s function is to update ICERD and other existing international human rights conventions, filling in "gaps" and ensuring that the conventions cover "all forms of contemporary racism, including incitement to racial and religious hatred."Article four of the ICERD prohibits the "dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred" as well as "incitement to racial discrimination, as well as acts of violence or incitement to such acts."The OIC wants the "ad-hoc committee" to expand the racial focus to include religion.In a position paper earlier this year, the U.S. Commission for International Religious Freedom said expanding provisions like the ICERD to cover religion "would undermine international human rights guarantees, including the freedom of religion" and "undermine the institutions that protect universal human rights worldwide."The U.S. commission also noted that the U.N. treaty body established to oversee the ICERD, the Committee on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination, said in a 2007 opinion paper that the drafters of the convention never meant to include religion, and that "discrimination based exclusively on religious grounds was not intended to fall within the purview of the Convention."In a statement issued Sunday to mark the "International Day for Tolerance," OIC secretary general Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu said that "Muslims continue to suffer from the rising trend of Islamophobia and the acts of incitement of hatred and stereotyping and discrimination based on their faith and culture in the West."He complained that "some media outlets" were misusing freedom of speech and expression "to justify their acts of incitement to hatred."Ihsanoglu said he wanted to reiterate that "Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance" and "Islamic teachings promote peaceful coexistence and respect for human dignity and honor."

IF YOU READ THE KORAN IN ARABIC INSTEAD OF THE TRANSLATED VERSION, YOU WOULD KNOW WHAT THEY PREACH AND WHAT THEY TEACH ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS, IT IS EITHER JOIN THEM OR DIE.

Impeachment is too good for him

2009-11-16T07:03:00.000-08:00

“Treason is any attempt to overthrow the government or impair the well-being of a state to which one owes allegiance; the crime of giving aid or comfort to the enemies of one's government,” according to the Random House Dictionary. By that definition, Barack Hussein Obama and his Attorney General Eric Holder should be impeached.
By ordering that the trial of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the self-proclaimed mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on America, be in a federal courtroom, Barack Obama’s administration has seriously undermined your safety.
If these trials are allowed to go forward, they will do more damage to America than any single act since our withdrawal from Vietnam dooming Saigon and the people of Southeast Asia to communism and genocide.

For seven years after the 9-11 attack, the US Government has done an outstanding job of keeping us safe. Under the leadership of the Bush Administration with the approval of the US Congress, our soldiers and CIA operatives scoured the world for terrorists. They brought those terrorists to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba and kept them from killing more Americans.

Last year, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and his band of thugs tried pleaing guilty to murder and asked to be sent to Allah.

At the time under pressure from the Left, the Bush Administration created a military commission designated with the task of bringing them to justice.
By canceling this process for the Islamic radicals in Guantanamo, Obama has guaranteed that the CIA and the other foreign and domestic government agencies will have their secrets paraded before the largest television audience in world history.
According to legal experts, it may be impossible to present evidence that would confirm their guilt, and the reputation of America will once again be dragged through the mud. K. S. Mohammed will be particularly difficult to prosecute in the US because his defense lawyers will twist it and put the United States on trial, arguing that he was illegally tortured by the CIA. America learned vital information that thwarted additional attacks by waterboarding him.
Writing in National Review, Andrew McCarthy said:

“We are now going to have a trial that never had to happen for defendants who have no defense. And when defendants have no defense for their own actions, there is only one thing for their lawyers to do: put the government on trial in hopes of getting the jury (and the media) spun up over government errors, abuses and incompetence. That is what is going to happen in the trial of KSM et al. It will be a soapbox for al-Qaeda's case against America. Since that will be their "defense," the defendants will demand every bit of information they can get about interrogations, renditions, secret prisons, undercover operations targeting Muslims and mosques, etc., and — depending on what judge catches the case — they are likely to be given a lot of it. The administration will be able to claim that the judge, not the administration, is responsible for the exposure of our defense secrets. And the circus will be played out for all to see — in the middle of the war. It will provide endless fodder for the transnational Left to press its case that actions taken in America's defense are violations of international law that must be addressed by foreign courts. And the intelligence bounty will make our enemies more efficient at killing us.”

The damage that Barack Hussein Obama is continuing to afflict on the brave men and women who are protecting and defending us is unconscionable. How could you not call providing these murdering thugs all of the legal protections afforded an American Citizen anything but aid and comfort? If no earlier action demanded his impeachment, this sole act of treason does.
This is proof that BHO hates the America we love. No wonder he failed to salute the honored dead at a recent ceremony. Don’t believe me. Believe your own eyes.

Friends let us be straight forward here, President Obama is a lawyer, he knows the rules of presenting evidence, he knows what evidence will have to brought forward in a public court, he knows the damage that it will do to our intelligence gathering network, he knows it will help our enemy in their terrorist attacks, he knows what he is doing. I know what he is. BHO IS A TREASONIST TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. They have already plead guilty, what other reason could he have for having these trials in New York City. I will tell you, as this turmoil of conflicting feelings washes accross this nation, he is planning to slip something else through as law while we are distracted, but those of us who know are watching and waiting, he will screw up somewhere and we will catch him with the smoking gun. More important GOD is watching him and saying, tisk tisk, naughty boy, is off to the woodshed for you.

GLOBAL WARMING, NOT!!!!!!!!!

2009-11-15T19:08:00.000-08:00

IS THIS JUST BEEN AN EXCUSE FOR THE LIBERALS TO PUSH CAP AND TRADE? YEP!

A team of scientists has sent a letter to all U.S. senators warning that a claim there is "consensus" in the scientific community on the climate change issue is false.
The letter dated Oct. 29 reads in part: "You have recently received a letter from the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), purporting to convey a 'consensus' of the scientific community that immediate and drastic action is needed to avert a climatic catastrophe. . .
"The claim of consensus is fake, designed to stampede you into actions that will cripple our economy, and which you will regret for many years. There is no consensus, and even if there were, consensus is not the test of scientific validity. Theories that disagree with the facts are wrong, consensus or no."
The five signees of the letter include professors from Princeton University, the University of Virginia and the University of California, Santa Barbara.
The letter refers to an earlier open letter sent to Congress by those five signees and others declaring: "The sky is not falling. The earth has been cooling for 10 years, without help. The present cooling was NOT predicted by the alarmists' computer models, and has come as an embarrassment to them. . .
"We are flooded with claims that the evidence is clear, that the debate is closed, that we must act immediately, etc., but in fact there is no such evidence. It doesn't exist."
The Oct. 29 letter also notes that the American Physical Society, an organization of physicists, did not sign the AAAS letter and states the society is "at this moment reviewing its stance on so-called global warming, having received a petition from its membership to do so. That petition was signed by 160 distinguished members and fellows of the society, including one Nobelist and 12 members of the National Academies. Indeed a score of the signers are Members and Fellows of the AAAS, none of whom were consulted before the AAAS letter to you."
The petition reads in part: "Studies of a variety of natural processes, including ocean cycles and solar variability, indicate that they can account for variations in the Earth's climate on the time scale of decades and centuries. Current climate models appear insufficiently reliable to properly account for natural and anthropogenic contributions to past climate change, much less project future climate.
"The APS supports an objective scientific effort to understand the effects of all processes natural and human on the Earth's climate."
The 160 signees of the petition range alphabetically from Harold M. Agnew, former White House science councilor and former director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, to Martin V. Zombeck, a physicist formerly with the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, and include Ivar Giaever, who shared the Nobel Prize in physics in 1973.

2009-11-15T19:00:00.000-08:00

U.S. Rep. Steve King suggests there is more than a coincidence between the resignation of White House communications director Anita Dunn and a raid on ACORN's national office — pointing out that Dunn's husband is "a leading ACORN defender."
Dunn, who is stepping down at the end of the month, created controversy when she led an Obama administration attack on Fox News, calling it "a wing of the Republican Party."
King, an Iowa Republican and a vociferous critic of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, issued a statement on Tuesday under the headline "King: Dunn Departure a Coincidence?" It read in part:
"Four days after Louisiana Attorney General Buddy Caldwell raided ACORN's national office in New Orleans, seizing paper records and computer hard drives, White House communications director Anita Dunn — the wife of a leading ACORN defender — has resigned abruptly from her position.
"Dunn was the lead critic of Fox News for reporting on the ACORN prostitution scandal, which originally broke on September 10. Dunn subsequently launched a public attack against Fox News on October 11, and she even stated 'let's not pretend they're a news network' in reference to Fox. . .
"Not only has Dunn lavished praises on Chairman Mao and compared him to Mother Teresa, Dunn’s husband has a public record of protecting ACORN and protecting President Obama’s relationship to ACORN. . .
"Anita Dunn is married to Robert Bauer, who served as general counsel for Obama for America. In 2008, Bauer sent a letter to then-Attorney General Michael Mukasey arguing that Department of Justice should not investigate election-related fraud allegations against ACORN. . .
"The letter also claims that Republican concerns regarding ACORN-related fraud were 'manufactured.' Subsequent revelations have validated these Republican concerns and proven the existence of additional fraudulent activities."
Bauer may have figured into Dunn's resignation in another way. On Friday, he was named to replace Greg Craig as White House counsel, and the prnewser Web site observed: "Did [Dunn] have to clear room for her husband to join the administration and remove any potential concerns about conflict of interest?"

BOW, BOW, BOW AGAIN, SHOW YOUR TRUE COLORS, NO PRIDE IN YOUR OWN OFFICE OR COUNTRY

2009-11-15T17:12:00.000-08:00

There is no doubt about it, he was at belly button height looking at the floor. I guess he must know he does not belong in this company, he is a pretender to the office of PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES of AMERICA. A WARM HANDSHAKE IS WHAT IS REQUIRED, THATS IT.
This was just a one hand handshake with Japans Emperor, no reason to bow, but he did anyway.
Remember when Barack Obama bowed before the King of Saudi Arabia at the G-20 summit in London last April? Even though the bow was captured by still and video photographers, the White House denied that it had taken place. "It wasn't a bow," an unnamed White House official told the Politico's Ben Smith. "He grasped his hand with two hands, and he's taller than King Abdullah."
The controversy raged in the blogosphere, but most of the old press ignored the question -- especially after the National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee injected a bit of partisanship when it said Obama had "paid fealty" to Abdullah with the bow. Obama's defenders, while not conceding that the president had bowed to the king, said George W. Bush had done the same thing earlier. The issue festered for a few days until a CNN reporter asked White House press secretary Robert Gibbs about it:
QUESTION: When the President met with King Abdullah, there was something that took place which I believe the White House explained was just the president being taller than the king. We took a look at the video, and it does appear that the president actually bowed to King Abdullah. Did he bow or didn't he?
GIBBS: No, I think he bent over with both, to shake -- with both hands to shake his hand, so I don't--
QUESTION: Did he bow or didn't he?
GIBBS: No.
So the official word was: Obama didn't bow. Now, we have a new photo of the president bowing to the emperor of Japan. It's the kind of image that just doesn't sit well with many Americans. The president, as the elected representative of the United States, should not be in the habit of bowing to foreign leaders, royal or not. Obama's deep, subservient bow makes it even worse; this was no little nod.
What will the White House explanation be? Emperor Akihito is certainly shorter than Obama, so perhaps the White House will roll out the old "he's taller than King Abdullah" story. Perhaps Gibbs will deny that it happened at all. Neither will fly. This is something the president should explain.
UPDATE: White House press secretary Robert Gibbs and some other senior administration officials held a press briefing a few hours ago in Singapore. No reporter asked about the bowing matter, and neither Gibbs nor the other officials mentioned it.
However, the Politico's Mike Allen says he received a "raft of email" about the bow, and so, on the urging of readers, asked a "senior administration official" about it. That official said the president "observes protocol," suggesting -- but not actually saying -- that the bow itself was part of protocol. The full response: "I think that those who try to politicize those things are just way, way, way off base. [Obama] observes protocol. But I don’t think anybody who was in Japan -- who saw his speech and the reaction to it, certainly those who witnessed his bilateral meetings there – would say anything other than that he enhanced both the position and the status of the U.S., relative to Japan. It was a good, positive visit at an important time, because there’s a lot going on in Japan."
There is, in fact, no protocol calling for an American president to bow to the emperor of Japan, or anyone else, for that matter.

Dem senator opposes trying terrorists in civilian courts

The coming campaign: Obama will sell himself as deficit hawk. Really.

Dems' slick fix: $210 billion of fiscal restraint

I'LL TAKE 3 SCOOPS

2009-11-15T16:36:00.000-08:00

THE COW AND THE ICE CREAM ONE OF THE BEST EXPLANATIONS OF WHY OBAMA WON THE ELECTION --
From a teacher in the Nashville area "We are worried about 'the cow' when it is all about the 'Ice Cream.' The most eye-opening civics lesson I ever had was while teaching third grade this year... The presidential election was heating up and some of the children showed an interest. I decided we would have an election for a class president. We would choose our nominees. They would make a campaign speech and the class would vote. To simplify the process, candidates were nominated by other class members. We discussed what kinds of characteristics these students should have. We got many nominations and from those, Jamie and Olivia were picked to run for the top spot. The class had done a great job in their selections. Both candidates were good kids. I thought Jamie might have an advantage because he got lots of parental support. I had never seen Olivia's mother. The day arrived when they were to make their speeches. Jamie went first. He had specific ideas about how to make our class a better place. He ended by promising to do his very best. Everyone applauded and he sat down. Now is was Olivia's turn to speak. Her speech was concise. She said, "If you will vote for me, I will give you ice cream." She sat down. The class went wild. "Yes! Yes! We want ice cream." She surely would say more. She did not have to. A discussion followed. How did she plan to pay for the ice cream? She wasn't sure. Would her parents buy it or would the class pay for it. She didn't know. The class really didn't care. All they were thinking about was ice cream. Jamie was forgotten. Olivia won by a landslide. Every time Barack Obama opened his mouth he offered ice cream and 52 percent of the people reacted like nine year olds. They want ice cream. The other 48 percent know they're going to have to feed the cow and clean up the mess." Remember, the government cannot give you anything until it taxes it from you to start with and you never get back as much as you give. ICE CREAM ANYONE?

ARE WE GOING TO SIT AND TAKE THIS?

2009-11-15T16:23:00.000-08:00

Opinion

Climate bill's 'emergency provision' gives Obama strong-man powers UPDATED!
By: EXAMINER EDITORIAL HOT ZONE ALERT -November 10, 2009

Both the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade energy approved earlier this year and the version just okayed by Sen. Barbara Boxer’s Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s Democrats (Republicans boycotted the vote) contains an obscure but nasty bureaucratic provision that requires President Obama to act like Venezuelan strong man Hugo Chavez.
Here’s how: The bills require a federal declaration of a “climate emergency” if world greenhouse gas levels reach 450 parts per million. Guess what? The Pacific Northwest National Lab says it is a virtual certainty that level will be reached within a few months. The bill then requires the president to “direct all Federal agencies to use existing statutory authority to take appropriate actions...to address shortfalls" in achieving needed greenhouse gas reductions.
When Vitter asked EPA Administrator what would be done in such a situation, she refused to say. So it must be asked: Would the president be empowered to do things like nationalize whole sectors of industry, ban coal use, restrict private automobile use, or anything else the “emergency” requires?
The Examiner's David Freddoso reports that Sen. David Vitter, R-LA, is holding a news conference later today concerning this provision. Vitter wonders if companies that support cap-and-trade in the hope they will profit from going green realize what could happen to them soon after enactment. More to the point, we wonder what the American people will do when they realize what is actually going on here.
UPDATED: CEI's Horner says it's about power, not climate
In a detailed post on BigGovernment.com, Competitive Enterprise Institute scholar and environmental expert Chris Horner warns that this provision is clearly intended to concentrate power in an unprecedented manner:

"But as we have been warning you in detail, this agenda transparently is not about GHG concentrations, or the climate. It’s about what this provision would bring: Almost limitless power over private economic activity and individual liberty for the activist president and, for the reluctant leader, litigious greens and courts that in this case would only have two choices. Those are follow the law, or declare it unconstitutional knowing the predilections of the appellate courts and what will very soon be Obama’s Supreme Court."

UPDATE II: Foundry sees more regs on top of cap-and-trade
The Heritage Foundation's sagacious blog authors at The Foundry took a look at this issue and concluded that the provision will lead to more regulations on top of the cap-and-trade bill's mandates. Yeah, that's the ticket - the economy is suffocating under regulatory weight now, so let's add more to it.

IS HILARY THROWING THE U.S. UNDER THE BUS TOO?

2009-11-15T16:15:00.000-08:00

It’s bad enough that President Obama could not be bothered to attend the celebrations marking the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. But Hillary Clinton’s refusal to even acknowledge the role played by Ronald Reagan in the Wall’s demise as well as the downfall of Communism was highly insulting towards one of the greatest figures of our time, and reeked of petty and partisan mean-spiritedness.
The Secretary of State’s remarks yesterday in Berlin completely erased from history the huge contribution played not only by President Reagan but also by the United States in confronting the Soviet Empire. In her speech she applauded half of Europe, but could not bring herself to thank those Americans who bravely served their country and in many cases laid down their lives in defeating Communism, under Reagan’s leadership.
Here is what Clinton said in Berlin on behalf of the Obama administration:
“We remember the allies who conducted the largest humanitarian airlift in history, completing more than a quarter million flights to sustain the people of West Berlin. We remember the Poles – (applause) – who waged a campaign for liberty that began with a strike in the shipyards of Gdansk and ended by shattering a system of tyranny. We remember a Polish Pope who spoke out for the aspirations of people across Europe and the world. (Applause.) We remember the people of the Baltics who joined hands across their lands and helped to break the chains that held their nations captive. We remember the students of Prague who propelled a dissident playwright from a jail cell to the presidency of a free republic. And tonight, we remember the Germans on both sides of the wall, but particularly the Germans in the East who stood up and finally were able to say, “No more. Freedom is our birthright and we will take it by our own hands.”
Incredibly, Clinton ended her remarks, with a tribute not to the tens of millions of victims of Communism, but to Barack Obama!
“I am deeply honored to introduce now a message from someone who represents the fall of different kinds of walls – of walls of discrimination, of stereotype, of character, the walls that too often are inside minds and hearts. Let me introduce a message from President Barack Obama.”
Hillary Clinton would do well to learn from Margaret Thatcher, a great friend of the United States, whom I had the privilege of working for in her private office. Like Ronald Reagan she is a statesman who understands that evil must be confronted and defeated, and a true leader who believes in the greatness of America as a force for good on the world stage.
As Lady Thatcher observed in her eulogy to Reagan at his funeral service at the National Cathedral in Washington in June 2004:
“We live today in the world that Ronald Reagan began to reshape… It is a very different world, with different challenges and new dangers. All in all, however, it is one of greater freedom and prosperity, one more hopeful than the world he inherited on becoming president. .. With the lever of American patriotism, he lifted up the world. And so today, the world – in Prague, in Budapest, in Warsaw and Sofia, in Bucharest, in Kiev, and in Moscow itself, the world mourns the passing of the great liberator and echoes his prayer: God bless America.”
These were the words that Clinton should have echoed in front of the Brandenburg Gate – a recognition of President Reagan’s huge contribution to the advancement of freedom in Europe and across the world.

Recent Posts
Hillary Clinton scrubs Ronald Reagan from history
November 10th, 2009 17:41
40 Comments
Barack Obama’s shameful absence from Berlin: Four Key Reasons why the President stayed away
November 9th, 2009 17:13
54 Comments

HEALTH CARE, OVER MY DEAD OR JAILED BODY

2009-11-15T13:03:00.000-08:00

Another post from Floyd Brown, another warning. I am not going to hold my breath that any one will read this and wake up! America has chosen the ice cream and they cannot see past the dish. even though it is still empty. Well here is a flash, when it gets here, it will be the flavor of rotten apples. And talk about making you sick.

The cat is out of the bag... under Pelosi-Care, American citizens who refuse to purchase an Obama-approved health insurance plan will face fines of up to 250,000 dollars and up to five years in jail.
When asked what gave Congress the right to institute such a tyrannical mandate, Democratic Senator Jack Reed actually had the nerve to tell CNS News that it was constitutionally justified.
Why? Because, according to Reed, it was no different than making people “sign up for the draft.”
Got that?
As far as Nancy Pelosi and Barack Hussein Obama and Jack Reed and radical leftists in Congress are concerned, they have every right to force you to purchase a Pelosi-Obama-approved health care plan under penalty of law.
And apparently, like the draft, it's your solemn duty to purchase their so-called health care plan... or else.
If you cross them... if you are not covered by a health care plan that has the Obama-Pelosi Seal Of Approval, the IRS will assess a penalty of up to 2.5 percent and if you resist paying this penalty, you can go to jail for up to five years and/or be fined up to 250,000 dollars.
Congressman Dave Camp, the Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee, put it this way:
“This is the ultimate example of the Democrats’ command-and-control style of governing – buy what we tell you or go to jail.”
Specifically, when asked for the justification, under the Constitution, for Congress to make the draconian requirement, Reed told CNS News:
“Let me see... I would have to check the specific sections, so I’ll have to get back to you on the specific section. But it is not unusual that the Congress has required individuals to do things, like sign up for the draft and do many other things too, which I don’t think are explicitly contained [in the Constitution]."
"Get back to you?" ... on the Constitution? ... Is this man actually a United States Senator? ... it should be obvious, Reed has no idea what's in the Constitution. And it should be equally obvious that leftists like Reed and Pelosi and Barack Hussein Obama have little regard, if any, for the Constitution anyway.
And lastly, it should be painfully obvious exactly why Pelosi-Care (the spawn of ObamaCare) must be stopped.
Oh... one more thing just recently became obvious... it seems Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will try to ram Pelosi- Care down our throats before we even know what hit us after all.
Right after some Senior Democrats claimed last week that so-called "health care reform" would not be resolved in the Senate this year, Reid immediately (and quietly) moved to bring Pelosi-Care to the Senate floor.
Debate will start on Tuesday... even though Reid has not even finalized the Senate version of the legislation.
Whoa... just last week, Reid said, "They want us to do this the right way, not the fast way."
What a turnaround.... Why the rush Harry?
If we're going to stop Pelosi-Care, we must act now, because time is short.

Use the hyperlink below to send your urgent, personalized and individual Blast Faxes to Barack Hussein Obama and each and every one of the Democratic and Republican Leaders of the House and Senate.
Tell them that you, and the overwhelming majority of Americans, are tired of the stealth tactics... the intimidation tactics... the deceptions that are being employed to pass Pelosi-Care behind the the American people's back... behind closed-doors... and against the will of the American people.
Tell them that whether it's called ObamaCare... or Pelosi-Care... or anything else for that matter... the overwhelming majority of Americans flat-out reject government-run health care… period. Tell them that no American should be threatened with fines or imprisonment for refusing to purchase a government-regulated commodity (in this case, an inferior government-run health care plan). And finally, remind them that the American people fought a revolution over 200 years ago under similar circumstances.

Free Speach

2009-11-14T19:18:00.000-08:00

I just got banned from the blog "Crooks and Liers" if it wasn't so sad that one cannot express an opinion and not get sanctioned, I would laugh for even though I did not curse or use any objectionable language, they decided my point of veiw could not be tollerated. That is not the purpose of a blog, it is to exchange veiw points, to argue your side, to hear and maybe learn from the other side. I want any and all who agree or disagree with what I publish, to make their point in the comment box. The site monitor first told me my post had been pulled because it was all in caps. So I redid it and submitted it again. Then I was told I had been banned from the sight. Please feel free to fire away at my postings, but please keep it clean, no swearing. I will tollerate name calling if it does not get into my family relationships. Ok, Ok.

THERE WILL BE NO CHOICE IF HEALTH CARE PASSES

2009-11-14T05:46:00.000-08:00

A Declaration of Dependence
By Tom Doheny
Created 11/10/2009 - 15:16
There is an ancient Chinese proverb that says “give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.” The proverb encompasses two philosophies of the role of government: nanny state vs. infrastructure. By ramming through the House version of the healthcare bill on Saturday night, the message is clear from the government: “Gone Fishing”.
The government is involved in a delicate tango between convincing the American public that it will have the tools and funding necessary for the healthcare bureaucracy to pay for itself while establishing a system of permanent dependency. It is the latter element that is so troubling that it verges on sinister.
Last week, John Cassidy the left-leaning columnist for the New Yorker Magazine explained the real goals of the healthcare movement. In a surprising admission, he revealed what free market opponents had thought all long: that the eventual goal is to create a permanent middle class dependency on government entitlements. The party pushing these so-called reforms is actually creating a political movement where vast sectors of the population become trapped. The left no longer needs to sugar coat their proposals with false assumptions of fiscal responsibility. This has never been their goal, their goal has been to manage and provide…permanently.
It is now or never for the 21st century socialists. As the tide of public anger and opposition to the healthcare proposals continues to escalate, the only option is to force it through while they are still in power. And as we have seen with government programs of the past fifty years, once it has passed it will never go away.
I’ll leave you with Mr. Cassidy’s own words:
( “But let’s not pretend that it isn’t a big deal, or that it will be self-financing, or that it will work out exactly as planned. It won’t.
Many Democratic insiders know all this, or most of it. What is really unfolding, I suspect, is the scenario that many conservatives feared. The Obama Administration, like the Bush Administration before it (and many other Administrations before that) is creating a new entitlement program, which, once established, will be virtually impossible to rescind. At some point in the future, the fiscal consequences of the reform will have to be dealt with in a more meaningful way, but by then the principle of (near) universal coverage will be well established. Even a twenty-first-century Ronald Reagan will have great difficult overturning it.” )
Write to tdoheny@afphq.org

Source URL: http://www.americansforprosperity.org/node/17895

WHAT DO YOU MEAN, GRAFT?

2009-11-13T18:35:00.000-08:00

Just another tidbit to think about.

At the top right hand corner of Page 17 of the New York Post of January 24th, 2009 , was a short column entitled “Replacing Michelle” in the National Review “The Week” column.. So here it is, word for word, as it appeared:
Some employees are simply irreplaceable. Take Michelle Obama: The University of Chicago Medical center hired her in 2002 to run “programs for community relations, neighborhood outreach, volunteer recruitment, staff diversity and minority contracting” .
In 2005 the hospital raised her salary from $120,000 to $317,000 - nearly twice what her husband made as a Senator.
Oh did we mention that her husband had just become a US Senator? He sure had. In fact, he requested a $1 million earmark for the University of Chicago Medical Center. Way to network Michelle!
But, now that Mrs. Obama has resigned, the hospital says her position will remain unfilled. How can that be, if the work she did was vital enough to be worth $317,000?
Let me add that Michelle’s position was a part time, 20 hour a week job. And to think they were critical of Blagojevich’ s wife for taking $100,000 in fuzzy real estate commission.
My thoughts: How did this bit of quid pro quo corruption escape the sharp reporters that dug through Sarah Palin’s garbage and kindergarten files? Unbelievable!

I hope this is forwarded so many times that the media will HAVE to cover it. (

FORT HOOD, IS THIS A WAKEUP CALL?

2009-11-13T16:06:00.000-08:00

THE FOLLOWING IS FROM THE DESK OF FLOYD BROWN, HE IS ACTIVE IN THE IMPEACHMENT OF OBAMA MOVEMENT AND HAS YEARS OF INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING EXPERIENCE.

Please take the time right now to add impeachobama@impeachobamacampaign-news.com to your Contacts List, Buddy List or Safe Senders List so you do not miss a single issue.

I have always enjoyed watching the mainstream media play catch up. It put a smile on my face to see that ABC News was courageous enough to call Major Nidal M. Hasan a Soldier of Allah.
I have been glued to the coverage of the Ft Hood shootings because it shows so clearly why Barack Obama cannot handle the job of president. This is prime material for those of us demanding his impeachment.
Here is what ABC News reported:"United States Army Major Nidal Hasan proclaimed himself a 'soldier of Allah' on private business cards he obtained over the Internet and kept in a box at his apartment near Fort Hood, Texas.Hasan, the alleged perpetrator of last week's fatal shootings in Fort Hood, TX, was charged Thursday with 13 counts of premeditated murder under Article 118 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which can carry a sentence up to death or life imprisonment.The cards make no mention of his military affiliation, but underneath his name he listed himself as SoA (SWT). SoA is commonly used on jihadist Web sites as the acronym for Soldier of Allah, according to investigators and experts who have studied such sites. SWT is commonly used by Muslims as an acronym for Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala, Glory to God.'He was making no secret of allegiances,' said former FBI agent Brad Garrett, an ABC News consultant."Funny, those of us following the FT Hood Jihad online learned the tale of the business card on the November 9th just after the shooting, thanks to the excellent work over at the blog Atlas Shrugs. I thank you Pamela Geller even if the arrogant “msm” types at ABC won’t reference your blockbuster early story.Here is a column I penned for WorldNetDaily.com this morning on the whole Ft Hood bloodbath and what it says about BHO. I hope you enjoy it.Jihad: Not in BHO's lexiconPresident Obama needs to throw his "Muslims can do no evil" rose-colored glasses off and see the real world. After listening to remarks by Barack Hussein Obama in Fort Hood, Texas, we were struck by how unemotional he is to tragedy. That is, Obama appears to be genuinely mourning the victims of the brutal jihad-inspired massacre that left 13 dead; but even now, he refuses to understand the gravity of the events and underlying reasons that lead to this terrorist attack on America's valiant soldiers.To Obama, terrorism and Islamist jihad are words stricken from his presidential lexicon. Without these words, you cannot adequately understand these brutal events on America's homeland. Jihad flows from very specific Islamic teachings. This attack was a premeditated act of unspeakable terrorism, including the ritual pre-jihad (pre-attack) cleansing routine caught in part on convenience store cameras. Politically correct denial of Islam's role in this bloodletting is foolishness and dangerous. And Obama and his administration will not be able to protect us against further similar acts if they continually refuse to admit reality.What is the evidence to substantiate our claims?The FBI knew that Fort Hood shooter Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan had communicated with a radical, extremist imam nearly a year before the attack. Yet, they wrongly determined the Army officer was no threat. Why was he categorized as a nonthreat? What official or officials cleared him? For what reason did they clear him?We have learned from Rep. Pete Hoekstra of Michigan, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, that the Obama administration knew months ago that Hasan and the radical Yemeni imam "had exchanged 10 to 20 e-mails."The imam influencing the Muslim shooter is Anwar al-Awlaki. He was released from a jail in Yemen last year. Al-Awlaki writes an anti-American blog that repeatedly denounces the war on terror. He presided at the mosque in Falls Church, Va., that Hasan attended, a center known for radical Islamic teaching.When will these radical mosques on American soil be shut down? We expect radical pro-jihad teaching and Islamic-fascism in the Middle East, but we don't need to accept it in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. We all enjoy freedom of religion, but not the freedom to incite others to violence, which is exactly what is happening in some American mosques.The news that FBI Director Robert Mueller ordered "an internal investigation into whether the agency mishandled an 'assessment' of Hasan" is not enough. This investigation shouldn't be handled internally. We need an independent investigation to assess why the Obama administration's intelligence was so inadequate. No cover-ups to protect themselves this time. They're paid to protect American citizens, not themselves.Why was no FBI agent still tracking Islamic extremist Hasan's activities and website postings?Another scary thought. What other targets of investigations have been ruled nonthreats by these same officials who misjudged Hasan?The Army is under intense pressure from liberals to become politically correct proponents of Islam and other so-called downtrodden minorities. Servicing pet causes of the Washington elite is not, nor has it ever been, the proper role of the military. They are a fighting machine with the very specific job of killing enemies. It is imperative that Americans be better informed about how the Obama administration is changing the military and allowing it to be infiltrated by Islamists.A number of complaints were made to commanding Army officers about Hasan. What officer in the Army ignored those complaints and cleared Hasan for duty? Since Hasan is a psychiatrist, what was he saying to American soldiers when he counseled them? According to the Washington Post, Hasan "warned a roomful of senior Army physicians a year and a half ago that to avoid 'adverse events,' the military should allow Muslim soldiers to be released as conscientious objectors instead of fighting in wars against other Muslims. As a senior-year psychiatric resident at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Maj. Nidal M. Hasan was supposed to make a presentation on a medical topic of his choosing as a culminating exercise of the residency program. Instead, in late June 2007, he stood before his supervisors and about 25 other mental health staff members and lectured on Islam, suicide bombers and threats the military could encounter from Muslims conflicted about fighting in the Muslim countries of Iraq and Afghanistan." Clearly, the Army cannot say they didn't know his views. The innocent souls murdered at Fort Hood will only rest in peace when the politically correct thought police who protected Hasan are court-martialed by the Army and Obama trashes his rose-colored glasses while he is president.

Warm regards, Floyd Brown

ImpeachObamaCampaign.com is a project of the Policy Issues Institute.Contributions are not deductible for tax purposes.30011 Ivy Glenn Dr., Suite 223Laguna Niguel, CA 92677

TERRORIST HITS FORT HOOD

2009-11-12T18:32:00.000-08:00

I AGREE WITH MR. MORRIS, THIS WAS AN ACT OF TERRORISIM AND POLITICAL CORRECTNESS KEPT THOSE WHO HAD SUSPICIONS FROM COMEING FORTH AND THAT COST MANY FAMILIES, THOSE WHO WHERE VICTIMS AND THOSE WHO REALISE WHAT THE IMPORT OF THIS EVENT REALLY MEANS. NONE OF US ARE SAFE. WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE PROFILING ANYMORE, IT IS NOT POLITICALY CORRECT, SURE THING, IT IS NOT POLITICALY CORRECT, BUT IT WORKS, IT WORKS SO WELL THAT THAT IS THE REASON IT GREW INTO COMMON USE BY POLICE DEPARTMENTS AT EVERY LEVEL NOW IT WILL GET YOU A LAW SUIT TO EVEN LOOK LIKE YOUR PROFILING. NOW THERE IS REASON TO BELIEVE IF THERE HAD NOT BEEN THE FEAR OF BEING ACCUSED OF PROFILING, A LOT OF LIVES WOULD BE BETTER TODAY. PROFILING WORKS, SORRY BUT IT DOES. THE DEGREE OF ACCURACY, THE RESULTS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES. SO HERE IS DICK MORRIS AND WHAT HE HAS TO SAY.

Dick Morris: Obama Handcuffs Terror Probers
Thursday, November 12, 2009 5:06 AMBy: Jim Meyers
Article Font Size
Veteran political analyst Dick Morris tells Newsmax that the Obama administration is "deliberately mischaracterizing" the Fort Hood massacre by refusing to admit it was a terrorist attack.
Morris also said the failure to recognize the danger posed by Major Nidal Hasan, the Army psychiatrist accused of the killings, points to "Obama's failures in the war on terror."
Newsmax.TV's Kathleen Walter asked why President Obama, when he visited Fort Hood on Tuesday, stopped short of calling the massacre of 13 Americans an act of terrorism.
See Video: Dick Morris looks at how the Obama administration is dodging the real meaning behind the Fort Hood massacre - Click Here Now

"I think that ever since the gunfire ceased, the administration has been engaged in a shameful attempt to disguise the true nature of this attack," Morris said. "It was a terrorist attack.
"The difference between terror and murder does not relate to whether you're part of an organized group or not. It relates to the motivation behind the killing. If the motivation is political, it's terrorism. If it's not, it's just ordinary vanilla murder.
"Obviously this guy was motivated by the same passions that animate the terrorists that are attacking the United States ... Yet the administration from the very first second spoke of it as an act of violence. In his statement [Tuesday] Obama speaks of it as an act of violence, and then says no faith justifies this — as if this was a religious expression" and not a "political, terrorist attack.
"This was not religious, this was terrorism. And by failing to call it what it really is, Obama is doing a serious disservice to the men and women who gave their lives."
Walter noted that the FBI launched an internal review of how it handled early information about Hasan, and asked how this attack could occur eight years after 9/11.
"I think it's because Obama, from the very minute he's taken office, has second-guessed and handcuffed and marginalized those who are trying to keep us safe," Morris responded.
"He has investigators investigating their every action. Every time they interrogate a terror suspect, they take their careers — if not their lives — into their hands. And the fear of political correctness, the fear of opening a can of worms, of being accused of racial profiling, obviously had a big impact in stopping the FBI from passing this information on to the Army or from acting on it.
"We're witnessing the fruits of Obama's failures in the war on terror. And that's precisely why he doesn't want it to be called a terrorist act. He doesn't want us to realize that he is responsible, at least on his watch, for the first attack on our soil since 9/11...
"This entire process of spinning and deliberately mischaracterizing the attack is insidious and horrendous.
"I think the other fact we need to focus on is that these killings did not take place in a shopping mall or a high school. They took place on a military base. And if we don't have good security at a military base, where can we possibly have good security?"
Regarding the in-depth probe being called for by members of Congress, Morris declared: "I think we clearly need a probe. But I think what we need is an attitude adjustment, where we stop vilifying those who are trying to defend us and stop bending over backwards to accord every kind of sensitivity and presumption of innocence to those who are trying to attack us and kill us.
"We are demeaning the memory of these brave men and women by pretending that they were shot by an act of a psychotic killer as opposed to a military attack by a terrorist."

OPEN AND TRANSPARENT, OH REALLY!???

2009-11-12T18:00:00.000-08:00

I DID NOT WRITE THIS, I WISH I HAD THE CONNECTIONS TO EXPOSE THESE THINGS MYSELF. THIS IS TAKEN FROM A CNS NEWS RELEASE. SORRY NO DRIVE-BY MEDIA HERE. IT IS GOOD TO CATCH THEM WITH THEIR PANTS DOWN.

The acting inspector general of AmeriCorps said he shredded White House documents at the request of an agency press spokeswoman that pertained to the controversial firing of the previous inspector general, who was ousted after investigating a political ally of President Obama.The e-mail message from agency spokeswoman Ranit Schmelzer seemed urgent, as she wrote: “WH documents were sent in error. Can you please destroy them? And can you confirm you receive this e-mail?” Acting IG Kenneth Bach responded 13 minutes later writing, “Confirmed, documents were shredded.”The email exchanges between Bach and Schmelzer, as well as other documents pertaining to the firing of the AmeriCorps inspector general, were obtained by CNSNews.com through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.The documents referenced in the Bach-Schmelzer email exchange included a draft of a letter to be signed by President Obama that would be sent to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to inform her that Obama was firing Gerald Walpin as inspector general for the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), which runs AmeriCorps, and also a set of talking points to be used in explaining to the media why Walpin was being fired.An inspector general is the designated watchdog for a public agency who is supposed to have autonomy from the agency’s officials in guarding against waste, fraud and abuse of taxpayer dollars.When interviewed by CNSNews.com, Walpin said he thought a request from an agency spokeswoman to an inspector general to destroy documents and an inspector general’s compliance with such a request to be “shocking.”“It’s an erroneous view that an IG should accept orders from the agency that it’s overseeing,” Walpin said. “I want to make clear that I think that Ken Bach is honest. It’s just that I don’t think he had the experience and background to understand that it’s wrong to accept instructions to destroy something that was given to the files of the inspector general’s office, and those instructions come from the entity that he should be overseeing.”Bach had led an investigative team at the Interior Department’s inspector general’s office prior to joining the inspector general's office at CNCS, according to his biography posted on the CNCS Web site. Earlier, he had served for more than 20 year in the U.S. Army working as a Criminal Investigative Division agent focusing on white collar crime.Walpin is suing in U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia to get his job back. He said the request to Bach to destroy the documents indicates AmeriCorps’ “recognition that they’re doing something wrong and they did not want to have a paper trail of it. To me that is an admission of their wrongdoing.”The firing happened on June 10 and documents show that the White House already had a media strategy worked out to respond to questions about the firing. Before being fired, Walpin had aggressively investigated Kevin Johnson, director of the Sacramento, Calif.-based charitable organization St. Hope Academy. Walpin determined that Johnson, a political ally of President Obama, had misused some of the grant money the group had received from AmeriCorps. Johnson later was elected mayor of Sacramento.After the ouster of Walpin, both Republican and Democratic members of Congress demanded that the White House provide a reason for firing Walpin. Under the Inspector General Reform Act, the president must notify Congress 30 days before firing an IG and provide a specific reason. To comply with the 30 day rule, the CNCS put Walpin on a 30 day suspension from June 10 before the firing became official.President Obama’s letter to Congress explaining the firing said only that he had lost confidence in Walpin. Republican members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee are investigating the matter and preparing a staff report on the issue. U.S. Attorney Lawrence Brown of the Eastern District of California alleged that Walpin acted improperly in the investigation of St. Hope for talking publicly about the case too often. The Counsel of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, the oversight organization of inspectors general who looked into the matter at Brown’s urging, determined that Walpin’s conduct was satisfactory. But the counsel’s ruling came after the firing. “We know that how Mr. Walpin has acted certainly has been deemed adequate and sufficient,” Kurt Bardella, spokesman for Republican oversight committee members, told CNSNews.com. “What we still have questions on are the things you are looking into obviously here and just the overall issue of what the White House has said and what the circumstances actually were. We’re trying to reconcile that.”On the day the White House notified Walpin that he was fired, Nicola Goren, the chief executive officer for AmeriCorps e-mailed board members to notify them that Walpin was out and that Kenneth Bach, the chief technology officer for the Office of Inspector General, would become the acting inspector general. That same day, White House Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest e-mailed the draft letter to Pelosi and the White House talking points to Schmelzer, the corporation’s director of the office of public affairs. The draft letter and talking points showed that firing Walpin had been planned for some time. The draft letter was dated June 5, five days before the firing took place.“I should have forwarded this to you last week,” Earnest wrote Schmelzer. “It’s the basic language that we’ve agreed upon that should be helpful to you as you draft a news release today. I’m in a meeting in the morning--but you can get me on bberry at this e-mail address or on my cell at [redacted].”Schmelzer told Earnest in a return e-mail that she had talked with an Associated Press reporter.“She wants to know what the circumstances were,” Schmelzer wrote of the AP reporter. “I stuck to our TP [talking points] on background (as an official from CNCS). I assume she’ll call the WH tomorrow for comment if she writes. Let me know if you have Qs.”Earnest responded at 9:58 p.m., “I’ll let u know if I hear from her.”The talking points that Earnest sent on June 10 had a headline of “CONFIDENTIAL: FOR BRIEFING PURPOSES ONLY.” They went on to say that Walpin had “delivered a disastrous presentation” at a May 19 CNCS board meeting and that he “displayed excessively antagonistic behavior to agency grantees and espoused a ‘gotcha’ mentality.” The White House talking points also criticized Walpin for living in New York and working in Washington, and pointed to the ethics complaint made against Walpin by Brown regarding Walpin’s investigation of Johnson’s non-profit group, St. Hope Academy because Walpin “spoke with the press, inappropriately, during the pendency of the investigation.” At 8:33 a.m. on June 11, Schmelzer forwarded the talking points to Bach at the IG’s office. She copied that message to Goren and the corporation’s General Counsel Frank Trinity. “Ken--here are the WH materials in case they’re helpful.”At 9:10 a.m., she sent another e-mail to Bach. “The send [sic] two WH documents were sent in error,” Schmelzer’s e-mail to Bach said. “Can you please destroy them? And can you confirm that you receive this e-mail?”At 9:23 a.m., Bach replied: “Confirmed, the documents were shredded.”At 9:25 a.m., Schmelzer forwarded the message about the shredded documents to Trinity, the general counsel for AmeriCorps. Schmelzer sent a statement to CNSNews.com in response to questions seeking clarity about why the documents sent to Bach needed to be destroyed.“The documents in question were the same ones that were provided in the FOIA [to CNSNews.com],” Schmelzer said in the statement, referring to the fact the White House talking points and the draft letter to Pelosi that she had sent to Bach had been included in the FOIA release.“I mistakenly forwarded these documents to Kenneth Bach,” said Schmelzer. “I advised him that the documents had been forwarded in error and requested that he not keep them as they were not intended for his receipt. Mr. Bach complied with the request. The agency, however, retained the documents.”Bach spokesman Bill Hillburg said the IG’s office had no comment on the e-mail exchange. “I think you would have to talk to Ms. Schmelzer on that,” Hillburg told CNSNews.com. “Those aren’t documents in our control. I’m familiar with the documents. I think we’ve answered all the FOIA requests, everything that we have. I don’t believe those are ours. So you would have to ask her. I’m not familiar with that.”Asked specifically why Bach would shred documents at the request of AmeriCorps’ public affairs office, Hillburg responded, “We don’t have any comment on anything like that.”AmeriCorps General Counsel Trinity could not be reached for comment.Eisen, the White House ethics counsel, said in a letter to the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee that was sent on June 16 (six days after Walpin was fired) that the CNCS board wanted Walpin out because at the “May 20, 2009, board meeting Mr. Walpin was confused, disoriented, unable to answer questions and exhibited other behavior that led the board to question his capacity to serve.”The issue of Walpin’s behavior at the board meeting, which was first publicly raised in Eisen’s letter to the Homeland Security Committee, had also been included in the White House talking points that Schmelzer sent on June 11 to acting AmeriCorps IG Bach.

FUNNY I THOUGHT OBAMA SAID HE LOST CONFIDENCE IN WALPIN, NOT THE CNCS BOARD. LETS GET OUR STORIES STRAIGHT OK?

TIDBITS

2009-11-11T06:23:00.000-08:00

SOME NEWS YOU WON'T SEE ON TV. AND SOME SITES TO CHECK MORE FUN AND GAMES.

More than 200 amendments were rejected by the House Rules Committee ahead of Saturday’s vote on the Democrats’ health care bill, Eleven of those rejected amendments would have required members of Congress and other government officials to be enrolled in the same federal insurance plan proposed for the American people. "If Congress forces our constituents into a public option plan over time, then members of Congress should be expected to do the same," Rep. Howard McKeon (R-Calif.) told CNSNews.com.
Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.) told CNSNews.com that the health care bill pushed by the Democratic House leadership will "shred the Constitution" and that Democrats have not given Republicans "any time to showcase" their ideas on health care reform. "I mean, the thing we need to do right now is just point out how ugly the Pelosi bill is," Hoekstra told CNSNews.com at a Nov. 5 rally on Capitol Hill to protest the Democrats’ health care bill.
Virginia’s Republican Governor-elect Bob McDonnell says his administration will not participate in a government-run health insurance plan, if one is passed by Congress and signed into law. He also urged other governors to "stand up" against federal proposals if they are not good for their states.
Thousands of Americans opposed to the Democrats’ health care plan marched on Capitol Hill Thursday, urging lawmakers to "kill the bill." Among the speakers at the rally was Hollywood actor Jon Voight who told CNSNews.com he does not believe the Constitution authorizes Congress to require individuals to purchase health insurance. He also said there are "a lot of things that are unconstitutional" going on in Congress.

Democrats Raise Alarms Over Costs of Health Bills
'Fuzzy math' could drive health care bill's cost higher
US congressman won grants for agencies linked to his wife

Endorsements, What the Bribe Was

2009-11-09T15:45:00.000-08:00

What the Bribe Was;
As the suicidal Democratic congressmen proceed to rubber-stamp the Obama healthcare reform despite the drubbing their party took in the '09 elections, the president trotted out the endorsements of the AMA and the AARP to stimulate support. But these – and the other endorsements – his package has received are all bought and paid for.
Here are the deals:
The American Medical Association (AMA) was facing a 21 percent cut in physicians' reimbursements under the current law. Obama promised to kill the cut if they backed his bill. The cuts are the fruit of a law requiring annual 5 percent to 6 percent reductions in doctor reimbursements for treating Medicare patients. Bravely, each year Congress has rolled the cuts over, suspending them but not repealing them. So each year, the accumulated cuts threaten doctors. By now, they have risen to 21 percent. With this blackmail leverage, Obama compelled the AMA to support his bill...or else!

The AARP got a financial windfall in return for its support of the healthcare bill. Over the past decade, the AARP has morphed from an advocacy group to an insurance company (through its subsidiary company). It is one of the main suppliers of Medi-gap insurance, a high-cost, privately purchased coverage that picks up where Medicare leaves off. But President Bush-43 passed the Medicare Advantage program, which offered a subsidized, lower-cost alternative to Medi-gap. Under Medicare Advantage, the elderly get all the extra coverage they need plus coordinated, well-managed care, usually by the same physician. So more than 10 million seniors went with Advantage, cutting into AARP Medi-gap revenues.

Presto! Obama solved their problem. He eliminates subsidies for Medicare Advantage. The elderly will have to pay more for coverage under Medigap, but the AARP -- which supposedly represents them -- will make more money.

The drug industry backed ObamaCare and, in return, got a 10-year limit of $80 billion on cuts in prescription drug costs. (A drop in the bucket of their almost $3 trillion projected cost over the next decade.) They also got administration assurances that it will continue to bar lower-cost Canadian drugs from coming into the U.S. All it had to do was put its formidable advertising budget at the disposal of the administration.

Insurance companies got access to 40 million potential new customers. But when the Senate Finance Committee lowered the fine that would be imposed on those who don't buy insurance from $3,500 to $1,500, the insurance companies jumped ship and now oppose the bill, albeit for the worst of motives.

The only industry that refused to knuckle under was the medical device makers. They stood for principle and wouldn't go along with Obama's blackmail. So the Senate Finance Committee retaliated by imposing a tax on medical devices such as automated wheelchairs, pacemakers, arterial stents, prosthetic limbs, artificial knees and hips and other necessary accoutrements of healthcare.
So these endorsements are not freely given, but bought and paid for by an administration that is intent on passing its program at any cost.

BOW DOWN " OBAMA" TO "ALLAH"

2009-11-09T06:44:00.000-08:00

Speaking out against Islam could put YOU in jeopardy.

Sounds ridiculous, but it's true.

The United Nations (U.N.) is currently considering a ''Defamation of Religions'' resolution being pushed by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the largest group of nations within the U.N.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), comprised of 57 Muslim nations, has intensified its efforts - vigorously pushing the U.N. to vote yet again on a cleverly worded ''tolerance'' resolution, which would criminalize the proclamation of the Gospel!

The resolution would criminalize the proclamation of the Gospel worldwide - an issue with such international ramifications, we must respond with forcefully. A minister behind the pulpit of his church would not be able to tell his congregation the message of the Gospel for fear of being jailed for, by inferance, that Islamic teaching is a lie if the Gospel he is teaching is true, therefore he has defamed the Islamic religion by speaking hsi belief in the gospel.

We cannot let Christianity and evangelism be criminalized - not now, not ever.

It's painfully clear - the radical Islam movement is dedicated to the destruction of Christianity ... and Christians. We are seeing worldwide persecution of Christians as part of the radical Muslim mission to ''take the world for Islam'' by purging Christianity from the face of the earth.

Not just in faraway countries. Worldwide. Christians are being burned alive, tortured ... homes looted ... churches destroyed ... shootings, bombings ... it's outrageous.

And to think that the U.N. could fan the anti-Christian flames by voting in favor of the OIC's resolution criminalizing the proclamation of the Gospel ... that's unimaginable.

THE WAY OF COMMUNISIM VIA OBAMA

2009-11-08T17:38:00.000-08:00

Fellow American,

When you take a hard look at what Barack Obama already has done and plans to do, you quickly realize he is not Jimmy Carter. He is not even Bill Clinton. That's because Barack Obama, working in concert with the ultra-liberal socialists that run the Democrat party, is radically transforming America.

As more mainstream Americans see what is behind the Obama agenda, they realize how dangerous it is to our nation - an agenda driven by the writings of a man who hated America, Saul Alinsky. In the short time Obama has been in power, we've witnessed: The virtual bankruptcy of our economy. The deficit is at $2 trillion and rising with the overwhelming majority of the money spent to grow the federal government. More than 35 "Czars" controlling billions of dollars and making management decisions about everything from our auto industry to "green" jobs to urban development. These Czars answer to no one but Barack Obama!
A maniacal attempt to socialize our health care! Contrary to his stylish rhetoric, the Obama plan will put private insurers out of business and put bureaucrats in charge of our health care. Anyone who has stood in line at the Post Office or waited in a security line at an airport has had a glimpse of a future with government-controlled health care. Raising our taxes. Obamas first budget will consume 28% of the entire GDP! 28%! He plans to repeal the Bush tax cuts, raise income taxes, the capital gains tax and block the repeal of the estate tax (death tax) for the sake of "morality," he said. But there is nothing moral about taking more and more of your familys income to feed his socialist agenda. Each action designed to undercut our independence, ALL moves found in " Alinskys Rules for Radicals, " his "how to" book on destroying America.

This isn't like four bad years of Jimmy Carter or even eight years of Bill Clinton. This is the systematic transformation of our nation from an open, capitalist society, to a Big Brother-type socialist nation. We must stop it. Now! JOIN US IN IMPEACHING OBAMA BEFORE HE BANKRUPS THE U.S.A. http://www.c4strategies.com/ImpeachObama/impeachobama.html
Press control and click on hyperlink.

STOP OBAMA/PELOSI HEALTH BILL NOW

2009-11-07T17:08:00.000-08:00

I recieved this up-date from Floyd Brown just this evening, it shows how incidious our government has become. It is pure ALINSKY in nature, it is a communist plan to destroy AMERICA Join us in stopping this monster in its' track. Read this friends. (The more we learn about the ObamaCare bill the less we like it. A shocking revelation was made today by the Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI, who released a letter from the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) confirming that the failure to buy health insurance under the Pelosi health care bill (H.R. 3962, as amended) could land people in jail. That is right jail.The JCT letter makes clear that Americans who do not maintain “acceptable health insurance coverage” and who choose not to pay the bill’s new individual mandate tax (generally 2.5% of income), are subject to numerous civil and criminal penalties, including criminal fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years.In response to the JCT letter, Camp said: “This is the ultimate example of the Democrats’ command-and-control style of governing – buy what we tell you or go to jail. It is outrageous and it should be stopped immediately.”Key excerpts from the JCT letter appear below:“H.R. 3962 provides that an individual (or a husband and wife in the case of a joint return) who does not, at any time during the taxable year, maintain acceptable health insurance coverage for himself or herself and each of his or her qualifying children is subject to an additional tax.” [page 1]“If the government determines that the taxpayer’s unpaid tax liability results from willful behavior, the following penalties could apply…” [page 2]“Criminal penaltiesProsecution is authorized under the Code for a variety of offenses. Depending on the level of the noncompliance, the following penalties could apply to an individual:• Section 7203 – misdemeanor willful failure to pay is punishable by a fine of up to $25,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year.• Section 7201 – felony willful evasion is punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.” [page 3]“The Senate Finance Committee had the good sense to eliminate the extreme penalty of incarceration. Speaker Pelosi’s decision to leave in the jail time provision is a threat to every family who cannot afford the $15,000 premium her plan creates.” said Camp.According to the Congressional Budget Office the lowest cost family non-group plan under the Speaker’s bill would cost $15,000 in 2016.And Obama and Pelosi do this on the weekend after it is announced that the U.S. unemployment rose to 10.2% to hit its highest level in more than 26 years, a sign the jobs market continues to struggle as the economy tries to exit this deep recession.ObamaCare will only increase unemployment and prolong the recession. Act fast they are working to ram this down the throats of Americans in a late night vote as early as today.
Obama gives more reasons to impeach him every day. ) join us in this fight tonight, go to...https://fs6.formsite.com/exposeobama/form475341234/secure_index.html We are not helpless to fight back, but we need to fight back now.

TODAYS POST IS ABOUT &$#^&@

2009-11-07T09:46:00.000-08:00

Yes, you heard me right, swearing. I was wondering what to write about today when I saw a post on another blog. The poster was commenting on the name calling going on in blogs and posts and this reminded me of a conversation I had a couple months ago. I had went into a Bar & Grill to get something to eat. There are tables away from the bar where you could sit and be served your food. It was however close enough to the bar so that you could hear what was being said there. I, who have worked construction, drove truck, and been in fishing camps have never heard such a continuous flow of fowl language in my life. There were besides myself, seven people in the place, plus a cook (female) waitress (female) bartender (female). One patron at the bar was also female, yet these men and they were from 21 to 55 swore in the most vulgar terms imaginable in loud voices with no thought to those present. I appologosed to the waitress for my fellow man and their lack of decent language, she said she had learned to tune it out. Shame, I say Shame on our society for raising such uncouth individuals, no manners, no respect. I am still sorry that my fellow man has so little respect for themselves or others that they would behave in such a manner. Women let it be known, you do not want any man with so little intelligence he can only express himself so rudely.

MY EMPLOYER IS YOU

2009-11-06T08:11:00.000-08:00

I am relieved, I saw the unemployment figures for October and to my amazement, only 512,000 new filings for unemployment comp. Only 190,000 more people lost their jobs last month. That according to the department of labor, based on a survey of business payrolls. However they do not include self employed, and under count job loss in small business. Other surveys show as many as 558,000 more people are out of work in October than were in September. SO who ever is right, there are still 15 plus million Americans out of work. Another extension of workmans comp is just a bandaid on the real problem. The people who do have money do not trust our government and with good cause. I can see we are making great strides forward in the OBAMANATION WAR ON JOBS. My question is he fighting the loss of jobs, or is he fighting jobs. I know some of you think it is unfair of me to point out the timelap between an administrations fiscal behavior and the actual results showing up, and them knock Obama for what is going on. Let me point out, I am not saying he caused this downturn, although it is his fiscal style of spending that has brought this on, but the increased rate of throwing money into the market, along with borrowing from other countries is not lending any confidence to the market, or manufacturing. The current program will keep employers from hiring employees who will not be spending wages at the store for hard goods, so no one will invest in new product or existing manufacturing. Anyone with a bit of sense reguarding economics can see the only way to survive is hide your money until someone does something about our govenment leadership. If we wait until the inflation predicted by econimists all over the world to get here, it will be too late to do anything about it. We as Americans have to do all we can to protect the dollar, it is time to look at what we spend our money on, is it made here or over there, can it be done without, can we repair it instead of buying a new one. Let us be generous with friends and neighbors, but not to the point we are unable to care for ourselves. We then become part of the problem. Let us elect officials who will confront ugly truth and employ honest effort to resolve our economic issues. Officials who will make hard decisions and stick by them. Officials who want what is right, not just to get re-elected. And last but not least and probably only last for todays entry, we as Americans need to determine what our freedom is worth, tighten our belts, put on our work gloves and work harder and ask for less then we have for years. All of us, not just the rich, not just the poor, all of us. Let those that can, give. Let those who can, try harder. And don't forget to pray. You will recieve strength for your efforts and blessing from God.

2009-11-05T19:03:00.000-08:00

Today, November 5th 2009, the organization known as ARRP signed its own unassisted suicide pact when it chose to endorse the liberal democrates health care bill. Anyone who has read even a portion of this bill knows that it does not bode well for senior citizens in any of the basic needs of the elderly. It is a waste of paper in size, it calls for fines of citizens who either cannot or chose not to enroll, it pushes seniors to consider ending their lives prematurely by enforcing the idea they are a burden on their families. If you have aquired your own insurance in probably less then one year you will have get the coverage the government tells you to have, and if this is not enough it will cost you eight to twelve percent of your income before taxes. It does nothing to reduce expensive litigation, which is one of the major reasons health care is so expensive. It is estimated as many as forty percent of todays doctors will stop practicing if this goes through. They refuse to have their fees set by politiions who can not even run their own businesses. TRY TO GET MEDICAL HELP WHEN THOSE NUMBERS ARE IN PLACE. THIS WILL DOUBLE YOUR TIME AT THE EMERGENCY ROOM. With the reduced incomes the doctors will likely spend less time with the ill, make more incorrect diagnoses, and push more harmful pills then ever. Our health care will be a joke with no one left alive to laugh.

WHY NOW, NOT NEXT WEEK?

2009-11-05T13:15:00.000-08:00

Are you wondering like I am, why all this rush to spend billions of dollars. Are you wondering what is the rush, when we have already seen that the results are not going to be forthcoming anytime soon. Did you know it normally takes 6 to 8 years to see the results of an administrations fiscal activity? Do you realise that would mean the good years while Clinton was in office were a result of the REAGAN TRICKLE DOWN YEARS? And that would mean the downturn years that Bush saw were the results of the Clinton years. Yes there were many new jobs created during Clintons years as president. However most of them were in the service industry,(Burger King, McDonalds, K-mart, Walmart, the dotcom takeoff.) not jobs that created product, only consumption. That means no real growth in (Ill show my age here) gross national product. Many of the good paying jobs in the internet field went to imported workers, programers, program writers from India, Pakistan and other parts of the world. These programers came into the Silicon Valley needing housing where there is no room for new housing and they proceeded to drive the housing market up by triple where it had been. Then reason took hold and it fell to natual need levels. But again these businesses did not create hard goods, the backbone of real economic growth. Nothing I have seen looks to be different in this headlong spending spree we are engaged in today. Not only can we not afford the spending happening and being planned, but the spending is once again not being consentrated into industrys that produce real products, hard goods. Products that would support the money being floated into the market by a firehose, by having value in and of itself. This means there will again be more money than product or goods available and this will cause a bidding war for the product available, can you say "INFLATION" It is past time to remove Barney and company from positions of power and decision making along with their ALINSKY TRAINED LEADER, OBAMA.

OBAMANATION WHY?

2009-11-05T11:57:00.000-08:00

In a world filled with instant information, there seems to be something amiss. Where is the personal information about the president of the United States of America? Why in this time of twitter, facebook, and blogovia is nothing being written about the man by people he grew-up with? WHY DID HE SPEND 1.3 MILLION DOLLARS TO KEEP THIS INFORMATION A SECRET? WHAT IS IT WE SHOULD NOT KNOW? Who is he really, where are the people who really know him, why would a native Hawian decide to live in the mid-west? What is his connection to Saul Alinsky. How could he not know who Bill Ayres was. Why is he in such a hurry to get these spending bill passed? Why did he throw Rev. Wright under the bus? Why is he violating constitutional law at every turn? Like the bribe to states to redo their schools top to bottom to teach the things he thinks are important? 5 Billion dollars is a huge bribe, even for Obama and Arnie Duncan, where do they get the power and authority to make such a deal? Why is it he is still running for office even though it appears to the rest of us he already won? Why did the representative from N.Y. file a resolution last January 6th. to recind the 22nd. amendment? (thats the one concerning term limits for presidents) By the way it takes seven years to change a constitutional amendment. Just in time for the 2016 election if you wanted to be KING of AMERICA. Just a thought, foolish one really as the direction OBAMA AND FRIENDS ARE TAKING US ON WOULD HAVE THE U.S.o A. IN A 3RD WORLD POSITION BY THAT TIME. Do you want to let this happen, not me. That is why I went to this website and signed up and on to their petition. http://www.c4strategies.com/ImpeachObama/impeachobama2.html I urge one and all to ask yourselves these questions and more. CAN WE AFFORD TO LET THIS CONTINUE? NO!