RUTHLESS ROUNDUP

THE DOMINOS LINE UP FOR THE FALL

2012-02-02T21:38:00.000-08:00

An administrative law judge in Georgia could decide as early as this week whether voters in the state convinced him Barack Obama’s name should be removed from the 2012 presidential ballot because he is not qualified to hold the office.

But win, lose or draw, the fight isn’t going to be over, as other cases are erupting across the nation, with challenges being raised anew even in Obama’s own adopted political network in Illinois.

WORRIED AND SHOWING IT

The Georgia hearing was before Judge Michael Malihi, and while none of the lawyers who appeared in the proceedings was willing to predict what the decision will be, several did confirm that Malihi had considered simply granting them a default victory, because Obama and his lawyers expressly stated they would not participate in a hearing to provide evidence that he is qualified to be on the ballot.

A default presumably would have meant a recommendation from the judge that Obama’s name be stricken from the ballot, a decision which would head for review immediately by Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp.

He, however, was the one who warned Obama of the “peril” of not participating in the hearing when Obama and his attorney had asked that the event be canceled.

Discover what the Constitution’s reference to “natural born citizen” means and whether Barack Obama qualifies, in the ebook version of “Where’s the REAL Birth Certificate?”

Whatever the outcome in Georgia, the issue is gaining traction in other states, too, including Alabama, Tennessee, Arizona, New Hampshire, and even Illinois, Obama’s home political base.

There, in a complaint recently filed by Stephen F. Boulton of McCarthy Duffy LLP and Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation, their client is asking for a change in state law to allow the vetting of political candidates.

Obama isn’t even mentioned by name, but don’t think for a minute that the requested change wouldn’t include his candidacy.

The plaintiff is Sharon Meroni, who long has fought inside the system for a way to challenge the candidacies there. In her new case, filed in the Circuit Court of Cook County, she is petitioning for a judicial review of the state’s election procedures as they exist now.

Targeted are the state Board of Elections, members of the board, several county clerks and others, including candidates Dan Duffy and Amanda Howland.

Meroni, a registered voter in the 27th Legislative District in the state, said her concern is that “only candidates qualified for office under the Illinois and United States Constitutions appear on the ballot.”

The state’s primary is in March.

The case alleges the candidates did not provide sufficient proof that they are U.S. citizens as required to hold the office being sought “as is required by the Illinois Constitution of 1970.”

State officials refused to remove the names from the ballots, so Meroni has gone to court. Granting ballot access, she said in the complaint, “is contrary to law, against the manifest weight of the evidence, arbitrary and capricious, and a denial of the rights of the petitioner.”

Kreep told WND the way the system is established in Illinois it essentially allows political parties to determine who runs for office, and unless voters find out about a filing and can assemble a formal objection within five days, their concerns are dismissed.

And the system has no procedure for verifying the eligibility of candidates, he said.

That particular issue has been in the headlines for the past four years, since before Obama’s 2008 election victory, because of the questions that remain over his eligibility. The U.S. Constitution demands a “natural born citizen” be president and the Founders probably thought that to be the offspring of two citizen parents when they wrote the term.

But Obama’s father never was a citizen. There also are those who contend the junior Obama was not even born in the United States.

Kreep said the Illinois procedures make it virtually impossible for candidates to be challenged for their eligibility.

He said there likely will be raised in other states concerns similar to those in Illinois, where “barriers now in existence … bar voters from reasonable investigation of the citizenship of a candidate.”

That’s simply a deprivation of the constitutional right to due process, he said. The case seeks a declaration that the political maneuvers are unconstitutional.

There also have been assembled campaigns specifically to encourage voters to file eligibility complaints about candidates with states. One such effort is the Obama Ballot Challenge, which lists contacts for state elections offices across the country.

It is, of course, the states that actually run elections; a national election is just the compilation of the results from the 50 states.

“A candidate that is not legally qualified to be on the ballot, such as Barack Obama, steals votes from other candidates who are legally on the ballot,” the site advises.

WND previously reported that cases already have been begun in New Hampshire, where state officials rejected the claims; Alabama, Tennessee and Arizona.

The newest round of court actions do not try to have a judge determine Obama is not qualified for the Oval Office and remove him from it, they simply challenge his eligibility for the 2012 election.

Many of the cases cite Minor v. Happersett, a U.S. Supreme Court opinion from 1875 that said a “natural born citizen” would be a person whose parents both were citizens.

“This complaint does not request any injunction against any state or federal government official. Instead this complaint asserts that the private entity, Defendant Democratic Party, intends to act negligently or fraudulently in a manner that will cause irreparable harm to the plaintiffs, to the states, and to the citizens of the United States,” said one of the filings.

It continued, “Because Mr. Obama has admitted that his father was not a U.S. citizen, and because this fact has been confirmed by the U.S. State Department, any reasonable person with knowledge of these facts would doubt Mr. Obama’s constitutional qualifications. Therefore, any representation by the Democratic Party certifying said qualifications would be negligent, absent further evidence verifying Mr. Obama’s natural-born status.

“Plaintiffs further request an injunction prohibiting the Democratic Party from making any representation to any state official asserting, implying, or assuming that Mr. Obama is qualified to hold the office of president, absent a showing by the party sufficient to prove that said representation is not negligent.”

Van Irion, lead counsel for Liberty Legal Foundation, also is working on several of the issues, and has brought the question in court in Arizona.

“We picked the Arizona court for several reasons, but the main one being that it is part of the 9th Circuit. The 9th Circuit has indicated in dicta that an FEC-registered presidential candidate would have standing for this type of suit,” he said. The organization is working with John Dummett, a Liberty Legal Foundation member who is a candidate for the office of president in the 2012 election.

Irion said the other lawsuit was filed in state court in Tennessee.

“The focus of the state-court suit is to prevent certification to the Tennessee Secretary of State. This suit puts greater emphasis on the negligent misrepresentation/fraud aspects of a certification from the DNC. It includes more facts regarding Obama’s Indonesian dual citizenship and fraudulent Social Security Number,” he said.

He said if the cases succeed, the Democrats would not be able to list Obama as their candidate for 2012.

“Neither lawsuit discusses Obama’s place of birth or his birth certificate. These issues are completely irrelevant to the argument. LLF’s lawsuit simply points out that the Supreme Court has defined ‘natural-born citizen’ as a person born to two parents who were both U.S. citizens at the time of the natural-born citizen’s birth. Obama’s father was never a U.S. citizen. Therefore, Obama can never be a natural-born citizen. His place of birth is irrelevant,” Van Irion’s group said.

WND also has reported that Maricopa, Ariz., County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has launched a formal law enforcement investigation into concerns Obama may submit fraudulent documentation to be put on the state’s election ballot in 2012.

Other attorneys involved in the Georgia case are J. Mark Hatfield and Orly Taitz.

Hatfield has told WND that the goal is for a court determination on the definition of “natural born citizen,” which then could be applied directly to Obama’s candidacy.

TERRORISM BY GOVERNMENT THUGGERY - courtesy of OBAMA

2012-01-09T16:40:00.000-08:00

Note: Currently the EPA decisions CANNOT be taken/appealed to court by the accused-defendant. Right now this small landowner who wants to build a small house is facing $100 MILLION in EPA fines!!!!

by Lyle Denniston Reporter

January 9th, 2012

A weak defense of EPA (UPDATED)

Analysis

With a federal government lawyer conceding almost every criticism leveled at the way the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency compels landowners to avoid polluting the nation’s waterways, the Supreme Court on Monday seemed well on its way toward finding some way to curb that agency’s enforcement powers. Their task was made easier as Deputy U.S. Solicitor General Malcolm L. Stewart stopped just short of saying that EPA was just as heavy-handed as its adversaries — and several of the Justices — were saying.

Perhaps the most telling example: when several of the Justices expressed alarm that a homeowner targeted by EPA’s efforts might face a penalty of as much as $37,500 each day of alleged violation, Stewart made it clear that the fine actually might be doubled, to $75,000 a day, although he tried to recover by saying that was only “theoretical,” and that he did not think that EPA had ever taken that step.

The argument in Sackett, et al., v. EPA (docket 10-1062) did not appear to portend a slam-dunk loss for EPA during the first half of Monday’s argument, when the lawyer for an Idaho couple faced quite rigorous questioning about whether the couple had exercised options that might have been open to them to avert the dire consequences of EPA enforcement.

But the tenor of the session changed abruptly as soon as the line of argument chosen by EPA’s lawyer, Stewart, unfolded.

It all came to something of an explosive verbal climax when Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., suggested that the scheme that Stewart had outlined would be considered by the ordinary homeowner as something that “can’t happen in the United States.”

Alito ticked off the situation: the homeowner planned to build a house on a lot, the lot was found to have “a little drainage problem,” the homeowner was soon told by EPA that “you have wetlands,” that steps had to be taken to alleviate the environmental threat, that “you have to let us on your premises,” that every day “you face $75,000 in penalties,” that the homeowner cannot go to court to make a challenge, and that, if there is a court case, it won’t occur “until we choose.”

(UNBELIEVABLE: Justice delayed is justice denied!!!)

(Alan note: Obama proving his Terrorism against America is not just with bombs and bullets!)

Stewart did not dispute the recitation even in that accusatory fashion, and could only answer that such an order from EPA would not have been “the first communication” from EPA to the homeowner, since the agency would try earlier to alert property owners of their obligations under the law.

The argument that a homeowner — or a business firm, for that matter — could face a double penalty was raised early in the argument Monday by Damien M. Schiff, a lawyer for Chantell and Michael Sackett, the Priest Lake, Idaho, couple that has been fighting with EPA for four years over their plans to build a home on a lot they own — a lot that EPA says has wetlands on it. Schiff, continuing his legal team’s emphasis upon the personal plight of a couple supposedly of modest means, said the couple could be fined the maximum — $37,500 per day if they were found to violate federal environmental law itself, and a separate $37,500 if they took actions that violate EPA’s compliance order against them*. Schiff said that EPA had conceded that in its brief in the case.

(Alan note: in other words don't you DARE complain of we'll get you! Obama Chicago style policy and governance!)

It appeared to come, however, as a surprise to the Justices. And, at one point, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., intimated that Schiff was exaggerating the threat to his clients, since, Roberts said, the fine might actually be only $10 a day, not the maximum.

But when Schiff, in answer to the Chief Justice, sought to make a separate challenge to other obligations under the compliance order, even without fines, Scalia suggested that he stay on the fines. “So, you know, sufficient unto the day the evil thereof. We don’t have to consider more difficult cases.”

Indeed, as Schiff’s argument unfolded, he did not appear to be generating much sympathy for clients like his, since much of the argument was a detailed exploration of what processes they might have available to challenge EPA, and the prospect — described by some Justices as rather dim — that they could defeat EPA even if they did have court review of their challenge.

Indeed, as the Sacketts’ lawyer prepared to take his seat, the character of the case had moved well away from his preferred David vs. Goliath contest, into a somewhat dull exploration of administrative law, even though Schiff now and then would bring up again the $37,500 figure and the threat of “ruinous” financial penalty.

Apparently, however, Schiff had gotten the attention of the Justices on the issue of the double penalty, and that prompted Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart, as he began his response, to concede the possibility of double penalties. He said it had been put in the EPA brief “as an exercise of our duty of candor to the Court.”

He said it was “theoretical,” not “practical.” When Justice Stephen G. Breyer noted that the compliance order issued to the Sacketts had mentioned only $37,500, not double that, Stewart said that was all that the order needed to say.

Soon, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., said he was confused, asking whether there were double penalties? Stewart said it was a legal possibility, but he knew of no case in which it had been done.

The Justices, though, were now fully engaged on the double penalties, and other members of the Court pressed Stewart on it. Justice Alito, for example, got an admission from Stewart that the government had not adopted a policy to rule it out. “So,” said Alito, “‘it’s more than theoretical.”

And when the government lawyer continued to say double fining had not been done, Justice Scalia remarked sarcastically, “I’m not going to bet my house on that.”

When Stewart tried to defend himself by saying that the Sacketts had not even been aware of the double penalty prospect before reading the government’s brief, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy offered his own sarcastic thrust: “They were getting a good night’s sleep before they read your brief?” The audience laughed.

What had clearly happened, in the opening moments of Stewart’s argument, was that the threatened plight of the Sacketts had come fully into prominence again, and the government was exactly where Schiff had sought to put it: on the defensive. Stewart might have wished that he had chosen another way to open his side of the argument.

But the circumstances actually deteriorated further for EPA and its lawyer.

As Stewart answered other questions about how EPA’s compliance orders actually work, his responses sometimes simply produced more sarcasm. Scalia, for example, said “Well, that’s very nice” when Stewart said the Sacketts had been advised that they could tell EPA if they thought some of its demands were “infeasible.”

Scalia continued: “That’s very nice, when you have received something called a compliance order, which says you are subject to penalties of 32.5 for every day of violations.” ($32,500 was the former maximum penalty per day; it is now $37,500, as other comments during the argument made clear.)

Scalia warmed to the subject, suggesting flatly that the agency had been “high-handed,” demanding things of the Sacketts that simply were not required by the law.

It was Justice Alito, though, who completed Stewart’s embarrassment, with the devastating query that began this way: “Mr. Stewart, if you related the facts of this case as they come to us to an ordinary homeowner, don’t you think most ordinary homeowners would say this kind of thing can’t happen in the United States?”

(Alan note: unless it is the Obamination of the USA)

A good deal of time remained in the argument, but it seemed virtually over at that point. Schiff was obviously pleased; when his time for rebuttal came up, he offered to waive it if the Court had no more questions. There were a few, but there was nothing in them to bail out the EPA’s compliance order.

IS THERE NO END TO OBAMA 'S PLANNED THEFTS & CORRUPTION?

2011-12-14T21:43:00.000-08:00

WHILE OBAMA CARRIES OUT THESE THEFTS THROUGH OTHER PEOPLE HE IS A CO-CONSPIRATOR AND HELPING THESE "ASSISANTS" HE PROTECTS ROB THE USA BLIND!

Can anyone still have doubts that re-electing him is saying bye, bye to America? Read all about it!

TJ Glauthier

An adviser to Barack Obama who played a key role in developing the energy provisions of the so-called stimulus bill has served on the boards of several companies that recently received government funds, including hundreds of millions in "stimulus" money.

TJ Glauthier served on Obama's 2008 White House Transition Team. He is widely credited with helping to craft the energy provisions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, also known as the "stimulus."

In addition to serving on the boards of major energy companies, Glauthier previously held two presidential appointments during the Clinton administration.

He was the Energy Department's deputy secretary and chief operating officer, the second-highest ranking official.

Earlier, he served in the White House for five years as the associate director for natural resources, energy and science in the Office of Management and Budget.

Everything you wanted to know about Obama's advisers, in "Red Army: The Radical Network that must be defeated to save America."

Glauthier is tied to several energy companies that benefited from the "stimulus" bill he helped to craft.

One such company investigated by WND is GridPoint Inc., where he was appointed to the board in March 2008. GridPoint provides utilities with software solutions for electrical grid management and electric power demand and supply balancing.

The "stimulus" provides $4.5 billion for so-called smart grid projects. GridPoint has benefited from scores of smart grid deals funded by the "stimulus" bill.

The company partnered with the Electric Transportation Engineering Corporation (eTec), Nissan, the Idaho National Laboratory and others in a project to deploy electric vehicles (EVs) and their charging infrastructure in five states. The Energy Department had awarded eTec almost $100 million in "stimulus" funds to support the project.

GridPoint's role in the eTec project was to supply smart charging and data logging capability to utilities located in strategic markets of eTec's program in Arizona, California, Oregon, Tennessee and Washington.

GridPoint also benefited from "stimulus" funds when it recently provided home energy management, load management and electric vehicle management software solutions for a KCP&L's Green Impact Zone SmartGrid Demonstration in Kansas City, Mo. The project was the recipient of stimulus funding.

Additionally, GridPoint helped the Sacramento Municipal Utility District, or SMUD, manage power from its customers' rooftop solar panels.

The Arlington, Va.-based company had landed a contract to help the Sacramento, Calif.-based municipal utility manage renewable power integration, energy storage and home energy management systems. SMUD had won $127.5 million in stimulus funds from the Department of Energy to carry out the project, which also includes deploying 600,000 smart meters in its service territory.

Also, in early 2009, the Energy Department awarded Argonne National Laboratory nearly $2.7 million in stimulus funding for three solar-energy related research projects. In addition, Argonne reportedly shared another $5 million in stimulus funding for projects with GridPoint and other companies and the University of Illinois Sustainable Technology Center.

Besides benefiting from stimulus grants, GridPoint last year won a $28 million contract with the United States Postal Service to install energy management systems in selected post office locations across the U.S.

Glauthier, meanwhile, also had come under fire after Fox News reported the U.S. Navy has purchased 450,000 gallons of biofuel for about $16 a gallon, or about four times the price of its standard marine fuel, JP-5, which has been going for under $4 a gallon.

And HotAir reported last week that Glauthier is a "strategic adviser" to Solazyme, the California company that is selling a portion of the biofuel to the Navy.

HotAir noted Solazyme received a $21.8 million grant from the 2009 stimulus package.

Also, writing at BigGovernment two weeks ago, Whitney Pitcher found that prior to serving as adviser to Solazyme and after his time as part of Obama's transition team, Glauthier served on the advisory board of SunRun, a solar financing company.

In October of 2010, just a few short months after Glauthier joined SunRun's advisory board, SunRun secured a $6.73 million grant from a Treasury Department stimulus program. The company was the ninth largest recipient of such programs through December 2010.

With research by Brenda J. Elliott
Read more: Outrage! Author of 'stimulus' linked to companies it helped http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=377465#ixzz1gZpMjwBH

SUPREME COURT WILL HOPEFULLY FIND ANSWERS TO THESE

2011-11-14T11:28:00.000-08:00

Next Spring, probably around March 2012, the Supreme Court of the USA (SCOTUS) will hear the case brought by some 26 States about the Constitutionality of ObamaCare.

Usually allowing ONE hour for arguments the Court will allow FIVE and a half hours for the ObamaCare hearings!

AND it appears virtually certain that the eligibility of Obama himself to be in the Oval office will be part of the pleadings!

Happening in the middle of Obama's campaign for re-election, matters should be historic and divulge many of his secrets. His only hopes are the two judges he appointed to the Supreme Court, one of whom worked on his behalf in other procedings before being elevated.

She may have to recuse herself, thus even the playing field.

=====================================

President 0bama, will you finally come clean on your hidden records? You know, transparency and all. We want to know Why these questions are off limits?

1. The Original Birth Certificate - Yes, the absolute original, examined and certified by three independent forensic experts.

2. Please produce your Columbia University transcripts.

3. Please, your original Columbia thesis paper.

4. Please produce your Campaign donor analysis requested by 7 major watchdog groups.

5. Please produce your Harvard University transcripts.

6. Please produce your Illinois State Senate records including your voting record.

7. Please produce your Illinois State Senate schedule.

8. Please produce your Law practice client list and billing records/summary.

9. Please produce the locations and names of all half-siblings and stepmother.

10. Your complete Medical Records (we've only seen the one page summary released so far). Have you had drug tests done? Are you still using coke? Please, your liver function tests to clarify alcohol abuse. Have you had an AIDS test?

11. Please produce your Occidental College Transcripts. Also, any records of student aid received and under what names(s) and nationality.

11. Please show us your Parent’s original Marriage Certificate.

13. Please produce your record of Baptism.

14. Please produce your Selective Service registration records (Did you actually Register for Selective Service?) Also, why does your SS not pass e-verify?

15. Please provide us with schedules for all trips outside of the United States before 2007.

16. Please produce all Passport records for all passports, US and otherwise - before the scrubbing.

17. Can you show us a list of your scholarly articles?

18. Your SAT and LSAT test scores please. Did you even take the SAT and LSAT?

19. What's with no access to your grandmother in Kenya?

20. Please list of all campaign workers that currently are lobbyists.

21. Please produce Punahou grade school records.

22. Why are Noelani Kindergarten records are oddly missing from the the State of Hawaii Department of Education?

23. Please produce page 11 of Stanley Ann Dunham's divorce decree.

24. Why did you, President Barack Obama, resign from the Illinois bar and where are all of the relevant documents?

25. Why did Michelle Obama resign from the Illinois bar after only about four years of practice and where are all of the relevant documents?

Why are these records hidden? Who are you President Obama? Will these records be revealed before November 6, 2012? We the People care about our country deeply and are very concerned about a POTUS who has hidden every scrap of information about his life.

The voting public deserves to know these answers. We have many more questions, but please answer these first to show your transparency and good faith. We'll keep passing this list on until we get some answers.

REPUBLICANS SUCCUMB TO POLITICAL BLACKMAIL?

2011-10-22T19:00:00.000-07:00

by Lawrence Sellin (Oct. 22, 2011)
The Republican Party was founded in 1854 on an anti-slavery platform and came to dominate the northern region of the country by 1858

I have received information from multiple sources that Congressional Republicans are fully aware that Barack Hussein Obama is a Constitutionally illegal President and has committed felonies both before and after occupying the Oval Office.

Specifically, Obama is not a natural born citizen and, therefore, has never been eligible for the office of President. In addition, Obama has forged his birth documents and Selective Service registration and uses a Social Security number not issued to him.

The Republican establishment has decided that challenging Obama on those issues will be ineffective and will cause complete havoc in the country.

It is clear to me that Obama and the mainstream media have been thoroughly successful using Saul Alinsky’s Rules 5 and 9 of “Rules for Radicals”:

Rule 5 – “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.

Rule 9 – “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”

Republicans are fully intimidated by the Obama campaign and its supporters in the mainstream media with the certainty of being labeled and dismissed as “racists,” “birthers” and right-wing “conspiracy theorists” if they confront Obama regarding his violation of the Constitution and his felonies.

Republicans have also been intimidated by the threat of civil unrest instigated by the Obama campaign and executed by union thugs, left-wing radicals and Black Nationalist extremists.

In both cases, the Republicans have succumbed to political blackmail.

What goes unmentioned in the Republicans’ explanation is that, because of their complicity in the cover-up of Obama’s ineligibility and crimes, they are also vulnerable to political criticism and criminal prosecution.

The Republican strategy, therefore, is to challenge Obama on policy, educate the public and defeat him in the 2012 election.

Good luck with that approach, with the already anointed RINO candidate Mitt Romney and with a party platform of warmed-over platitudes and promises with post-election expiration dates.

In my opinion, regardless of who wins the Presidency in 2012, Obama’s ineligibility and his crimes will never be addressed.

Both the Democrats and the Republicans have too much to lose.

(WHAT WE THE PEOPLE OF AMERICA LOSE IN THE PROCESS APPEARS IRRELEVANT)

Exposure of the Obama fraud and criminal activity would reveal the depth of corruption in the two-party system.

The extent of the deception perpetrated by Obama supporters is mindboggling.

For example, attorney Leo Donofrio has evidence conclusively establishing that, during the run-up to the 2008 election, 25 U.S. Supreme Court opinions referencing Minor v. Happersett (1875), the case which proves that Obama is an illegal President, were sabotaged, then republished at Justia.com, the main resource on the web for all things related to United States Supreme Court holdings.

According to that report, Justia.com CEO Tim Stanley was associated with “Obama For America 2008.”

Instead of instruments to promote the general welfare, the Democrats and Republicans have become the tools of an invisible government, which owes no allegiance and acknowledges no responsibility to the American people.

We have been politically disenfranchised. We have the right to vote, but we have lost control of the government.

James Jackson, representative from Georgia to the First U.S. Congress stated:

“We must confine ourselves to the powers described in the Constitution, and the moment we pass it, we take an arbitrary stride towards a despotic Government.”

Congressional Democrats and Republicans have stridden far beyond that point and now feel free to ignore our petitions and treat our beliefs with disdain.

Political expediency has clouded their judgment and obscured their view of the danger our country faces.

There are anti-democratic and anti-American forces working aggressively inside the country to bring down our republic. These forces are promoting the interests of nations hostile to the United States, of global financiers and radical Islam.

The work of these forces is facilitated by corrupt or cowardly politicians, radical leftists and by useful idiots oblivious to the fact that they are aiding and abetting American enemies, who will ultimately eradicate our freedom and way of life.

Barack Obama represents the nexus of those treacherous forces.

Nevertheless, Republican leaders are asking the American people to tolerate violations of the Constitution and ignore extensive criminality at the highest levels of government so their party can win the 2012 election.

If the Constitution and the rule of law mean so little to either the Democrats or the Republicans, then what’s the point?

A Republican victory in 2012 may mean the revocation of Obama’s most onerous policies, but will they ever address his ineligibility and crimes?

Having become complicit, I think not.

HIS WORK IS ALMOST DONE! RE-ELECTION WOULD FINISH IT! AND US!

2011-10-08T14:16:00.000-07:00

ALMOST DONE - NEED RE-ELECTION TO MAXIMIZE IT

With all the fetid stench of slime splashed down on us by the most corrupt, radical, Chicago ganster administration in our lifetimes, humor has also taken on a new twist. The twist was always there but restrained.

Now more and more people are showing their protest of the “protection racket” the Dept. of INJustice is implementing in many sensitive areas, specially with pro-Islamist bias, even to the extent of breaking the law to protect Moslems and Sharia law while suppressing Christian beliefs and freedoms.

Illegal gun running, or funding terrorists to buy them, refusing to charge and deport criminal even felonious illegals are just a sector. Even overriding Federal judiciary decisions to prevent States from implementing LAWS - puts them beyond Organized Crime and they should be charged with the RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Criminal Organization Act) statutes.

OVER-spending all OUR hard earned money as if it were theirs (free money for them) and crony financing such as the last humongous loan of nearly a HALF BILLION for a green project belonging to Nancy Pelosi’s close relative is pushing Americans to the brink.

Except the most naively ignorant and teat sucking free loaders gorging themselves at the public trough, while contributing little of nothing to the “wealth” being spread around to THEM.

Thus want Obama there to continue their free ride while they do NOT pay THEIR fair share as he insists others should.

As long as he is helping create a Caliphate of which he hopes one day to become the leader, Obama, beyond a desire to be re-elected and continue the destruction he is raining down on America and much of the world, cares nothing about the misery, pain and DEATH he is causing by his proxies like the Moslem Brotherhood he harbors inside the White House, the Islamic regime of Iran and Syrian myriad deaths of their countrymen.

MOSTLY by some 20,000 Iranian Suppression forces exported to do this in Syria.

The slow and painful awakening of “we the people” is still being thwarted by Obama via his Islamists, Union thugs, oppressive Dept. of Injustice and corrupt Senators, who have just removed any obstacle to riding roughshod over us with their “nuclear option” change of filibuster rules.

The most urgent question appears to be whether when saner Republicans, Independents (or coming to their senses Democrats) increase their voting presence in the Senate and vote Obama out of office next year will there be anything left to salvage from the rubble he is leaving behind!

Seriously, at this rate, not much of our financial or cultural infrastructure in America will be left - nor in much of the rest of the world.

Hope springs eternal but we are borderline already past the point of rescue! Many waiting for the final axe to fall or simply delaying the inevitable if Obama stays in office.

Having watched this happen in Iran after Khomeini took power (via Jimmuh the ideologue idiot Carter) Obama is a replay with a vengeance in spades. For those old enough to have seen or even read how Communism or the Bolsheviks took over, it’s a virtual replay of that ruthless madness, too.

He has yet to have an excuse to start killing us with any impunity.

DON'T be astonished if that comes to pass if he declares martial law and suspends or cancels elections.

No! Based on his mindsets not such an overly fanciful speculation.

Americans have mostly been immune from facing such gut wrenching, lethal and devastating events and misery inside America so fail to recognize the multiple signs of what Obama is doing to them and the whole world.

Which verges on immature, ideological insanity not someone who wants to improve the world.

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION ALLOWS FOREIGN BORN TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT 2012

2011-09-03T10:39:00.000-07:00

By Alex Knott

ALAN NOTE: Eligibility is NOT decided by the FEC nor the Federal Government but by the individual States and by Congress AND there are NO legal provisions nor requirement NOR legal OBLIGATION for ANYBODY, at any level anywhere, to VERIFY a candidate's CONSTITUTIONAL eligibility.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) ruled Friday that a Guyana-born American citizen could file papers and raise money to run for president of the United States. But the agency also told the prospective candidate, Abdul Hassan, that his campaign may not receive federal matching funds because he was not born in America.

The FEC’s unanimous vote allows Hassan — who was born in the South American country in 1974 — to be a candidate, solicit funds and requires him to file disclosure reports for a presidential bid. However, the agency’s decision stopped short of addressing the constitutional issue of whether someone born outside the United States can be president.

Instead, the agency told Hassan he may not receive any presidential primary matching funds by quoting the Constitution, stating “[n]o Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

Hassan’s request appeared to put the FEC in the rare role of deciding a large constitutional issue that has only a few intersections with campaign finance law. The two commonly held constitutional requirements to run for president are that the candidate be 35 years of age or older and be a “natural born citizen.”

But FEC commissioners said repeatedly that their decision to define Hassan as a candidate had nothing to do with his birth country. They said that current federal election law allows for someone to be a candidate, regardless of whether they can legally hold the office they seek and that the FEC is not charged with deciding presidential criteria including one’s natural-born citizenship.

(Alan note: is this their escape tactic for avoiding responsibility for allowing Obama, whose eligibility qualification is being challenged in the courts AND NEVER VERIFIED, to run for the White House?)

“This does not mean that he can go and say ‘look the FEC has said that I am a candidate, give me money, I’m official,’” said Republican Commissioner Donald McGahn. “That is not what we do here; we don’t certify you as a candidate. That’s what the states do.”

During Thursday’s meeting, commissioners said they had trepidation about voting for Hassan’s candidacy because of how it might be perceived.

“By saying that it is okay — it does give the impression that we don’t see a problem,” said Democratic Commissioner Steven Walther. “I think that we really need to be cognizant of how this could be misconstrued.”

The FEC’s decision to allow Hassan to go through the initial steps to run for president took place outside of its normal publicly attended open meetings and instead was approved by a tally vote as commissioners tried to reach a consensus.

One of the final sections added to approved opinion states: “Notwithstanding this conclusion, the Commission expresses no opinion on Mr. Hassan’s potential liability arising out of his proposed activities under any other Federal or State law, including any laws concerning fraudulent misrepresentation. Any such issues are outside the Commission’s jurisdiction.”

“For us this is really all about what we are empowered to decide and what we are not empowered to decide,” said Democratic Commissioner Ellen Weintraub. “Nobody is saying that it is fine and nobody is saying it’s okay for this guy to be going out and raising funds.’”

Shortly after Hassan made the request, the FEC signaled that it would decide the technicalities of filing requirements while leaving the broader issue of who can run for president to the judicial branch. In an email to Hassan on July 18, the FEC stated that he understood “that although the Commission can respond to the questions asked in [his] advisory opinion, the Commission cannot make any determination as to whether [Hassan] can, as a naturalized citizen, serve as President.”

The issue was made more contentious by comments and Internet postings by citizens, Tea Party advocates and “birthers,” who continue to press long-refuted claims that President Barack Obama was not born in America. About a dozen of these individuals wrote letters to the FEC stating that Hassan should not be allowed to run for president.

In the face of this opposition, Hassan said before the vote that he believed that the FEC was making the decision in good faith based on the facts. But he added that it would be hard for commissioners not to be “influenced by the political sensitivity of the issue.”

Hassan told Roll Call that his candidacy is not a stunt but rather an effort by a “political junkie” with various legislative interests. “I follow politics closely, but I have never held elected office,” he said. “I would admit that I am not well-known, and I would admit that my chances of winning are not as good as other candidates. That’s obvious.”

OBAMA A LIVING & BREATHING NIGHTMARE

2011-08-24T20:08:00.000-07:00

An Israeli news columnist is scorching Barack Obama as possibly the worst U.S. president in history, calling him "a living and breathing nightmare."

Yigal Walt of Ynetnews says Obama "is solidifying his status as the worst president in American history. The leader who promised us a bright future of peace and fraternity is leading the American empire – and the rest of the world with it – into a dark abyss."

"Ever since he settled into the Oval Office, Obama has been hopping from one disaster to the next, making every possible mistake, boosting enemies and disregarding allies while ruining everything he touches in the process," Walt writes.

"The Return of the Great Depression" warns everyone "it is not over. It has only begun" ...

He says Obama was silent when the masses hit Iran's street and threatened to topple the ayatollah's regime.

"Why should he support a struggle waged by freedom-hungry citizens against a radical Islamic dictatorship and chronic human rights violator? And so, a rare opportunity to change the face of a state that today constitutes the gravest threat to world and regional peace slipped away."

Instead, Walt says, Obama buddied up to Syrian President Bashar Assad and remained silent, again, when Assad started butchering his own people.

"For the time being, Obama keeps muttering, Assad keeps murdering, and the world keeps watching and doing nothing," Walt writes.

Obama is also criticized for allegedly eroding NATO in the effort to oust Libya's Muammar Gadhafi.

"And so, the once-intimidating NATO alliance found itself entangled above Libya's deserts for long months in a 'battle of giants' against a state whose army is sometimes reminiscent of a Jenin street gang from a decade ago," says Walt.

"Now, with Gadhafi's rule finally drawing to an end, the president kindly took time off from his vacation to festively declare that the future is in the Libyan people's hands – while local tribes are preparing for the imminent bloodshed and al-Qaida is reinforcing its hold on the country."

Walt's blistering attack on Obama concludes with a fondness communicated for Obama's predecessor.

"The ongoing disaster called Obama may prompt some of us to apologize to another American president, one George W. Bush," Walt writes. "He was called stupid, incoherent and naive; he was said to understand nothing and know nothing – yet now it turns out that the cowboy from Texas had a much better grasp on reality than his many critics. Even if his motives were at times as naive as Obama's, the former president combined them with an iron fist, immense determination and admirable loyalty to his allies.

"Yet Bush is alread y a distant dream, while Obama is a living and breathing nightmare. Now all that's left is to wait and see whether America's citizens will be able to remove him from the White House before he destroys everything."

Read more: News column: Obama a 'living and breathing nightmare' http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=337173#ixzz1W0O4udcU

POINTS TO PONDER

2011-08-15T18:04:00.000-07:00

Question of the day :

If you can answer this correctly, you can answer the question on what action to take on raising the Federal debt ceiling.

You come home from work and find there has been a sewer backup and you have sewage up to your ceilings.

What do you do? - raise the ceilings, or pump out the shit
CHARLES BRESSLER

But of course the Democrat Party blames the Tea Party for bringing this existential threat to the attention of the people !

“If you voted for Obama the first time to prove you were not racist, vote against him this time to prove you are not an idiot.”

Los Angeles Times ^ | 8/9/11 | Andrew Malcolm

This is the 931st day of the Barack Obama presidency. (Snip) Being a Real Good Talker (RGT) helped him get the job heading the law review. And entering politics. And succeeding early there, albeit within Chicago's rigged system. And being an RGT thrust him onto the national stage at the Democratic National Convention in 2004 when delegates had the foolish notion that John Kerry and John Edwards could win. Obama is very proud of his talking. In May this year he told a Boston fundraiser: "Back in 2004, I gave a little speech here that got some attention."

“If you voted for Obama the first time to prove you were not racist, vote against him this time to prove you are not an idiot.”

Illegitimate but voted in legally (like Obama himself), yet UNCONSTITUTIONAL "Gang of 12 Committee" that will decide on the Debt Ceiling, throws over 500 Members of Congress and Senators under the bus and removes their National, constitutionally power to legislate and make laws and obliges them to be ruled by a gang of 12 VERY entrenched partisans, who collectively have received $64,000,000 IN CONTRIBUTIONS from lobbyists!

A video posted online appears to show a Verizon picketer placing his young daughter in front of an oncoming truck — presumably carrying non-union employees — and then taunting the passengers with profanity-laced statements.

Using that kind of foul language in front of a young girl, his daughter or not, is manipulative and wrong. He may or may not have a legitimate gripe but this action and also other strikers rippping apart wiring and phone equipment is wrong. Destruction by them is no better than what they claim as their grievance and their actions puts them in the wrong.

http://www.nj.com/business/index.ssf/2011/08/verizon_strike_picketing.html

A bit like Obama ignoring dead SEAL family member requests to have no press to selfishly take advantage of a photo opportunity.

SARAH PALIN ANALYSIS AUGUST 10, 2008

2011-08-09T20:07:00.000-07:00

THIS ANALYSIS WRITTEN BACK IN AUGUST 2008 HANDILY ADDRESSES FALSELY FOUNDED ATTACKS ON SARAH PALIN AND LAME-STREAM MEDIA DISINFORMATION.
AND EXAMINES HER STRENGTHS!

WHICH HAVE BEEN ENRICHED AND INCREASED MULTIFOLD SINCE THEN AND WILL SERVE US ALL WELL WHEN SHE GETS ELECTED TO THE WHITE HOUSE .

OBAMA IS OUR PAIN!

THE SOLUTION IS OUR PALIN!

===================================

Governor Sarah Palin: a different image
By Mark S. McGrew

Why all the mis-statements and vicious lies about Alaska’s Governor Sarah Palin? Why do the major newscasters show polls looking like McCain/Palin are neck and neck with Obama/Biden? Major newscasters use polls based on 700 people polled, or 1,000 people polled and in one case, less than 200 people were polled. There is no way such a small list can reflect a public opinion. I think it is fraudulent to suggest that it can.

The day after the Palin-Biden debate, major network polls were showing again, a neck and neck rating, from small polls. But, DrudgeReport.com, with millions of readers ran a poll that over 550,000 readers responded to. The results, in the morning, when only 60,000 people had voted, showed Palin at 70% against Biden’s 28%. That same figure stayed the same all day long, until over 550,000 people had voted: Palin 70% vs Biden 28%.

That figure seems a more accurate portrayal of informed people. Especially when you compare it with Governor Palin’s 84% approval rating in her home State.

Why is Governor Palin so popular? It’s not her “home style” image. It’s not her looks or her winning personality or her old beauty pageants.

It is solely due to the fact that she respects and obeys her State Constitution and she respects and obeys the US Constitution. She respects and obeys the majority will of the citizens of Alaska and does what they want, not what powerful politicians or businesspeople want.

Exxon has owned some oil leases on Alaska’s North Slope for over 30 years, without developing them. Oil leases are good for 10 years and they expire, unless oil or gas is produced, and then the leases are valid as long as the production continues. Exxon has not produced any oil or gas from those leases in the entire 30 years they have controlled them. Year after year, they have filed a plan to drill and produce, but never followed through.

The State of Alaska, under Governor Palin, decided enough was enough and cancelled Exxon’s rights to those leases this past spring. Exxon was using that land as a giant storage vault for oil that they knew to be there. Their inactivity deprived Alaska of income. Which in turn, deprived the citizens of Alaska of income and services. Exxon was not doing any favors for the citizens of Alaska by simply filing development plans for 30 years, so Alaska kicked them out.

The right to bid on and control oil and gas leases in Alaska is open to any person who is eighteen years old or older. Alaska’s Constitution specifies that the policy of the State of Alaska is to “encourage the development of its resources by making them available for maximum use”.

Allowing Exxon to control those leases, without exploiting them, was in violation of the Alaskan Constitution. Exxon is still fighting in the courts to get those leases back and just may succeed.

A few years ago, after a State of the Union speech by President William J. Clinton, a man and a lady politician gave a summation after the address. The lady said, on national television, “We are not going to do things the Constitutional way anymore. We’re going to do things the practical way.” Amazingly, very few people watching “heard” what she said. It was just too bizarre to comprehend.

Television, radio talk shows, movies, newspapers, news reporters, our police, courts, teachers, professors and politicians have gone to great lengths to make the American public believe that Constitutional Rights are “just something you see on television”. I think quite a few of the “authorities” actually believe that.

Sarah Palin respects and obeys the Constitutions of both Alaska and The United States of America. This is why she is so vilified by the media liars and anti-American politicians.

When she was the Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, she attended a meeting along with a few Republican party members of Alaska. After she spoke, one of the men, Richard Wagner, told a good friend, “She should run for Governor.” His friend kind of rejected the idea as she was

“only a small town Mayor”. But, he saw more of her and the more he saw, the more he liked. In time, they did launch her candidacy for Governor and she won. She won because of her staunch position to let the citizens of her State decide what the State should or should not do. Alaska was no longer under 100% control of the major oil companies and other corporations. The State had been retuned to the citizens who live there. What kind of a person would hate the people who did that?

Richard Wagner and his friends are some of the very few individuals, out of thousands, who have bid on oil and gas leases and actually made a decent return. They knew first hand, with 40 years experience, just how difficult it was to buck the major oil companies. Forty years of trying, taught them just how difficult it was to deal with the State of Alaska officials and employees, many of whom were major oil company loyalists and ex-employees of oil companies. They were working overtime to stifle competition from private citizens, who were legally trying to get a fair share of the incredible oil wealth of Alaska. They fought long and hard to deprive Alaskan citizens of the right to provide a decent life for their families.

Sarah Palin entered and changed the attitude and policies of her employees to give the little guys a chance. That is only one small reason why 84% of Alaskans respect her. And it is also the reason why 16% do not. In their minds, she robbed the rich to give to the poor.

But she, and Rick Wagner’s friends, and most people in Alaska had only seen the rich robbing from the poor. And they set about to change that old feudal system. And they did.

What if Sarah Palin were to win this Vice Presidential election and take her place in the new administration? What if she were to demand that our Constitution be respected and enforced? What if she demanded that libel and slander laws be enforced? What if she were to demand that all newscasters and radio talk show hosts stop lying? What if she were to demand that decency laws be enforced on movie makers and television show producers? What if she were to demand and enforce honesty in government? What if she were to enforce honesty in local governments?

We are ruled and educated by liars. What if they were to disappear?

These are the people who object to Sarah Palin. They would at the least, be out of a job, because all they know how to do is lie. At the best, they would all be put in prison for a long long time. This is why they do not want her in any position where she can change their ways.

Sarah Palin is a serious threat to the evil entities that are in control now. She is a threat to their jobs and their way of life. They stand to lose their homes and their private bank accounts.

24,000 lobbyists, just in Washington D.C. would be out of work. A lobbyist is someone who pays government officials and employees to either make a law for their benefit, or to eliminate a law that is not to their benefit. Most people call this bribery. Somehow, this system of lawmaking became acceptable and legal in the United States. If each lobbyist, doles out only $10,000 a year, each Senator and each Congressman would pocket about $400,000 a year in legal bribes. They very well may lose that source of fraudulent income with Palin running loose.

The evil doers stand a good chance of losing their freedom as well.

Sarah Palin says time after time, it never changes, “I do what the people want me to do”.

Governor Palin says, “Drill baby drill”. Why does she keep saying that?

Because the citizens of Alaska want that to happen. Why do the citizens of Alaska want to destroy their pristine wilderness with dirty nasty drilling operations?

Because, Alaska has some of the strongest environmental protection laws in the world. A person can travel all over, in and out, across the tundra of the North Slope oil fields. That person can lay his lunch on top of any pipeline and not worry about getting oil on it. That person can sit down next to or under pipeline joints and not worry about staining his pants with oil. The North Slope is CLEAN.

Caribou, Polar Bear and other wildlife populations have grown since developing Prudhoe Bay. Sarah Palin, and the people of Alaska advocate killing wolves and bears. That is because their population has grown to a point that these dangerous predators are hurting people and livestock. The predator population has to be thinned out to protect people, livestock and other wild animals.

All States control predators. She is respecting the will of the people.

Why else would citizens of Alaska want to Drill baby drill? Because it is insane not to.

A hundred miles north of Fairbanks, population 50,000 or so, are two underground natural structures that may contain 500 million barrels of oil, each.

A responsible oil producer, lacking unbridled greed and simply wanting to make a fair dollar and pass his discoveries on to the society that allowed him to make some serious money, may do something like this:

He can take three wells, costing $8 million each and send 3,000 barrels per day to the local refinery in Fairbanks. He can have the oil refined into gasoline and sell his gasoline for $1.25 a gallon to every resident and tourist in Fairbanks. The 3,000 barrels per day will supply gasoline at that price and there are still more products that can be extracted and sold from that crude oil. One barrel of oil produces, according to Chevron Oil Company, 19.4 gallons of gasoline. It costs about $20 to find oil and get it to the refinery. Selling at $1.25, the producer will earn $24 per barrel, with $4 profit which would pay for the three wells in 10 years or less.

The barrel of oil will also produce, home heating and diesel fuel 10.5 gallons, 4.1 gallons of kerosene jet fuel, 2.2 gallons of coke, 1.1 gallons of residual fuel oil, 1.5 gallons of liquefied refinery gases, 1.8 gallons of still gas, 1.4 gallons of asphalt and road oil, 1.1 gallons of raw material for petrochemicals, .4 gallons of lubricants, .2 gallons of kerosene and .4 gallons of other products that can be sold for cash.

That 42 gallons in a barrel of oil produces 44.7 gallons of sellable product, which will give the producer another $20-50 for each barrel of oil. The profit then would be $24 to $54 on each barrel, for 3,000 barrels a day, making $26,000,000 to $60,000,000 a year. Half of that will go to expenses. Those two lonely oil fields, if produced, can supply Fairbanks for Nine Hundred Years. Those two oil fields, which are small by Alaska standards, could supply $1.25 a gallon gasoline and heating fuel for all the people of Alaska for 100 years or more.

This is why Alaskans say, “Drill baby drill”. And this is why Sarah Palin strives to obey their will. That one lone man, producing oil in Alaska can give the entire State of Alaska gasoline for $1.25 and still make himself a fortune. And if he could also afford to give Alaskans $1.25 heating fuel, Alaskans would have the God given opportunity to prosper like no other State in America.

Sarah Palin wants to increase the income of her fellow citizens. Her enemies want to decrease their income. With all the oil in Alaska, Alaskans pay the highest gasoline rate in the country. If someone did offer gasoline and heating fuel at $1.25 a gallon, the average family would be able to add $200 to $500 into their family’s budget each month. Fishing and crabbing boats could save $30,000 on a six week catch. Her enemies want that money to go to Golden Parachutes for major oil company executives.

An average oil well on the North Slope of Alaska produces 3,000 barrels of oil per day. There are over 600 oil wells on the North Slope. Just 12 of those wells could produce gasoline and heating fuel for $1.25 a gallon for every citizen of Alaska.

Jobs would be created, food would be cheaper, Alaskan Salmon would be cheaper, ALL Alaskan products would be cheaper to the world wide buyers. Citizens would not have to work two jobs and have their wives work full time. They would have the time and the finances to raise their kids to be good, loyal, productive Americans, respectful of all nations on Earth. The Native people of Alaska would be able to live the kind of life they want and not have to leave their ancestral homes and migrate to the foreign culture of cities, as they are doing now.

Sarah Palin is about people. She is not about politics or corporations. She is a reflection of what the people in her State want. Isn’t this what all people on Earth want?

Why is this person demonized? There has been no proof of wrong doing provided. Newscasters and writers provide only an onslaught of unsubstantiated accusations and insults, using a well planned list of adjectives backed up with a Thesaurus. If politicians and newscasters have to lie to the public to keep us from voting for her, they are enemies of the people and enemies of our United States Constitution. They have no legal right and no business trying to persuade people who to vote for. They are “Election Tampering” certainly, with any law breaking being ignored.

The major problem in America now is that the policing authorities are out eating donuts.

What if Sarah Palin were to make them do their jobs?

People lie out of fear or because they want something that they can not get any other way.

Obviously, if the media and the politicians are lying about Sarah Palin, they have a reason. And it’s not because of her personality, or her wardrobe, or her normal family or her so called “inexperience”.

They lie about her and spread false rumors because they are afraid of her or because they want something they can not get any other way.

What if Sarah Palin were to be elected and her President were to become incapacitated?

This could be a very dangerous scenario for her enemies. Her enemies are our enemies.

Would the people of the world suffer because of her beliefs and methods?

Yes, some would suffer. But which ones?

Mark McGrew has been active in the Alaska oil business for over 20 years. His website is at MincOil.com or you may email him at McGrewMX@aol.com

YIKES! THE POORLY "HIDDEN" COMMUNIST SUPPORT SURFACES!

2011-08-05T00:15:00.000-07:00

Yikes! Look who just endorsed Obama for four more years - Accuses GOP of 'racism, lies, economic sabotage' (August 03, 2011)
By Aaron Klein

Barack Obama at a presidential debate
at Hofstra University in New York.

It may be early in the campaign season, but the Communist Party USA already has seen fit to endorse Barack Obama for the 2012 election.

While noting he is disappointed with "some aspects" of the Obama administration's domestic and foreign policy, Sam Webb, chairman of the Communist Party USA, threw his support behind Obama's re-election bid.

In an article last week at People's Weekly World, the official newspaper of the Communist Party USA, Webb discussed the need for a third party consisting of the so-called working class and labor as well as "racially and nationally oppressed people, women, youth, immigrants, seniors, gay and straight."

Webb, however, recognized that such a party is not likely to emerge by next year.

"Millions who have to be at the core of this party still operate under the umbrella of the Democratic Party, albeit increasingly in an independent fashion," he noted.

Webb said that for communists there are major differences between Democrats and Republicans. He urged his supporters to continue to back the Democrats.

Wrote Webb: "Neither party is anti-capitalist, but they aren't identical either. Differences exist at the levels of policy and social composition. And despite the many frustrations of the past two years, the election of Barack Obama was historic and gave space to struggle for a people's agenda."

He argued that to separate from the Democrats now "would be contrary to our strategic policy of building maximum unity against right-wing extremism now and in next year's elections."

Continued Webb: "We are keenly aware of the fact that the agenda of the far right is to bring this administration and country to its knees, with a heavy dose of racism, lies and economic sabotage, setting the stage for a full blown return to power of the most reactionary, racist, anti-labor, anti-women, homophobic and militarist grouping in U.S. politics."

"We want no part of that," wrote Webb. "We don't have any illusions about the Democratic Party, but we don't have any illusions about the Republican Party either."

Webb concluded: "Furthermore, we are also aware of the undeniable fact that no other party besides the Democratic Party stands a chance of beating the GOP next year."

Communist party covers up support for Obama

Last November, the Communist Party USA was caught scrubbing its website of references that stated it "actively supported" President Obama's election, as WND reported.

An article posted on the party's official website on Dec. 30, 2007, previously stated, "Our Party actively supported Obama during the primary election."

The article was referring to Obama's 2004 election to the Senate. It detailed how the African-American community and trade unionists played key roles in defeating the "ultra right."

(Screen shot of original article)

"This was also reflected in the historic election of Barack Obama. Our Party actively supported Obama during the primary election," stated the article, a screen shot of which was captured by the New Zeal blog. The website has since been scrubbed of the reference to the Community Party USA aiding Obama, with the article now reading simply, "This was reflected in the historic election of Barack Obama."

WND previously reported the official magazine of the Communist Party USA had lauded the important role of labor unions in electing Obama to the presidency in 2008.

The American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, or AFL-CIO, sponsored a poll showing union members supported Obama by a 68-30 margin and strongly influenced their family members.

According to the survey, Obama won among white men who are union members by 18 points. Union gun-owners backed Obama by 12 points, while union veterans voted for Obama by a 25-point margin.

In the general population, Obama lost these groups by significant margins.

Political Affairs, the Community Party USA's magazine, quoted AFL-CIO President John Sweeney, a longtime member of the Boston chapter of the Democrat Socialists for America, expressing hope labor unions can continue working with Obama.

"The election is just step one in delivering the change we need," Sweeney said. "Working men and women are poised to keep the energy pumping to help the Obama administration lead the change we need. There will be no gap or letdown."

The communist magazine said priorities for labor unions are "regulating Wall Street and restoring fairness to international trade," as well as "health-care reform" to provide coverage to "nearly 50 million people without insurance and make medical care affordable for all."

Communists map out Obama agenda

Immediately following the November 2008 presidential election, WND reported the Communist Party USA mapped out policies crucial for Obama to push through in his first term, including a "single payer" socialist health-care system; laws to make joining a labor union easier; raising the minimum wage and increasing labor union support.

In May 2009, WND reported the leader of the Communist Party USA declared that with Obama as president, health care and the economy can be "reformed," U.S. troops can be evacuated from the Middle East, a second stimulus bill can be passed, the criminal justice system can be overhauled and union rights can be expanded.

"All these – and many other things – are within our reach now!" exclaimed Webb in a New York banquet speech for the People's Weekly World, the official newspaper of the Communist Party USA.

Yikes! http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=329449#ixzz1U7bErtxp

SPENDING WHILE DEMOCRATS CONTROLLED ALL THREE BRANCHES

2011-07-31T14:05:00.000-07:00

November 2006 .....8.5 Trillion Democrats win over Congress
January 2007 ........8.7 Trillion Democrats in charge of Congress
November 2007 .....9 Trillion
January 2008 .........9.2 Trillion
November 2008 ....10.5 Trillion Democrats & Obama in Control
January 2009 .........10.6 Trillion
January 2010 .........12.3 Trillion
November

OBAMA UNABLE/UNWILLING TO GET A BUDGET PASSED EVEN THOUGH HE AND DEMOCRATS CONTROLLED ALL THREE PARTS OF GOVERNMENT! STILL HAS NOT PASSED A BUDGET AFTER OF OVER TWO YEARS OF TOTAL POWER BY DEMOCRATS. The last Obama budget (more than 800 days ago) was defeated in the SENATE 97-0 (zero). NOBODY voted for it, showing how bad it was.

2010 .....13.7 Trillion Republicans win over US House BUT NOT SENATE

January 2011 .........14 Trillion Republicans control US House only
Democrats continue CRAZY spending

July 2011 ...............14.3 Trillion

SAUDI FATWA AND SHARIA LAW IN AUSTRALIA - all being brought to America by ObaHussein

2011-07-30T18:31:00.000-07:00

Also note the comments made after this Saudi Fatwa article and the video below:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/07/raymond-ibrahim-new-saudi-fatwa-defends-pedophilia-as-marriage.html

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/07/sharia-polygamy-and-wife-beating-in-australia.html

DEMOCRAT SENATORS - INCLUDING OBAMA - VOTED AGAINST RAISING THE DEBT CEILING

2011-07-16T17:28:00.000-07:00

March 16th, 2006 - Every Senate Democrat - who VOTED "NO" to raise the debt ceiling and risk DEFAULT - are now - under runaway drunken spending demanding the GOP caves to their demands and White House threats to with-hold payments to our citizens rather than cut out and cut down SPENDING!

These are who voted against a debt ceiling inrease. (Some no longer there!)

Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Burns (R-MT)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coburn (R-OK)
Conrad (D-ND)
Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Ensign (R-NV)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Wyden (D-OR)

They NOW claim that not voting for the raising of the deficit AND RAISING TAXES is RECKLESS but REFUSE to acknowledge that the WILD spending by lunatic ideologist OBAMA and his administration is EVEN MORE RECKLESS since we can get around a default. We have had our government shut down a few times and under REPUBLICAN captainship came through with flying colors - NOT A DEFAULT!

And we are still financing IMF (International Monetary Fund) with HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS of tax dollars and to support GREECE in the BILLIONS, the UNITED NATIONS in billions AND while we cannot pay for essential roads and infrastructure in the USA we are paying some 150 BILLION to RESTORE AND REPAIR, REBUILD MOSQUES - YES, ISLAMIC BUILDINGS IN EGYPT AND ELSEWHERE WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS!!!!!!!!!!!!

OBAMA BACK ON HEAVY DUTY DRUGS OR VERY, VERY BRAIN DAMAGED?

2011-06-24T20:53:00.000-07:00

By Jim Hoft (with editing by AntiMullah)

This was absolutely awful.

Barack Obama made another horrible mistake today. The president visited the 10th Mountain Division today and congratulated them on their service. Then he told the soldiers that he had given the Medal of Honor to Jared Monti who came back from Iraq alive. Jared Monti was actually killed in Iraq in 2006. How sad.

“First time I saw 10th Mountain Division, you guys were in southern Iraq. When I went back to visit Afghanistan, you guys were the first ones there. I had the great honor of seeing some of you because a comrade of yours, Jared Monti, was the first person who I was able to award the Medal of Honor to who actually came back and wasn’t receiving it posthumously.“

Blackfive caught the president’s horrible gaffe.

As we all know, SSG Sal Giunta, of the 173rd Airborne, was the first and ONLY living recipient EVER IN USA HISTORY (2011) of the MOH who fought in Iraq/Afganistan. SFC Jared Monti, 10th Mountain Division, was KIA in Afghanistan in 2006. He was posthumously awarded the MOH by Obama in 2009.

LOOK! OBAMA PRESENTS MEDAL OF HONOR WITH A SNEER OF DISTASTE

How does the "Commander-in-Chief" mix these heroes up? He put that medal around Giunta’s neck and he stood with Monti’s parents as they grieved.

We have a 25th Amendment, Article 4 individual in the Oval Office, who needs to be removed from office for inability to carry out the responsibilities of the office of President. Unless aiding and abetting our enemies has been recently added to those duties. In that he does very well.

BILL O'REILLY HAS BECOME AN OBAMABOT SHILL!

2011-06-16T20:31:00.000-07:00

INVESTIGATION GETTING CLOSER TO UNRAVELLING THE OBAMA SOCIAL SECURITY RECORDS despite Bill O'reilly runnning interference!

Much information has been reported – and much more still is being sought – about Barack Obama’s original birth documentation and whether it reveals his eligibility to be president under the Constitution’s requirement those in the Oval Office be a “natural born Citizen.”

But under the radar of most news organizations a case has been moving forward in Washington, D.C., through which California attorney Orly Taitz is seeking the original application for Obama’s Social Security number, a document that could reveal a multitude of factors about the president’s early life.

U.S. District Court Chief Judge Royce Lamberth this week rejected a defense concern over procedure in the dispute, and Taitz told WND today the case has moved into discovery and she can issue subpoenas to those holding the documentation she is seeking.

For those who never wondered about how Social Security Numbers are generated, the first three digits represent the state of the applicant’s mailing address. In other words, if you applied for a Social Security Number while living in Connecticut, for example, the first three digits of your SSN will correspond to the Connecticut code.

The first three digits of Obama’s SSN are 042. That code of 042 falls within the range of numbers for Connecticut, which according to the Social Security Administration has been 040 through 049.

The national news media has been virtually silent on this potentially criminal fact.
Indeed, when Fox News finally attempted to explain it, it broadcast false information and then scrubbed it from its website.

When WND asked the White House about it, then-Press Secretary Robert Gibbs dodged the question.

Taitz’ case is against Social Security commissioner Michael Astrue and explains that because of the multitude of questions surrounding Obama’s eligibility, his birth certificate and his other records, the Freedom of Information Act request was submitted.

The Social Security Administration rejected it, and that decision was affirmed by a district court ruling that found the administrative procedures still had a course to run. But that now has been completed and the case is before Lamberth again.

He ruled this week that FOIA actions “are exempt” from a local court “meet and confer” requirement and he gave Astrue 30 days to file “any dispositive motions.”

The federal government had argued that Taitz’ process to subpoena individuals with access to the long-sought documentation was out of order, but the court ruling means it is within procedures.

According to a report in the Post & Email online blog, Taitz reported, “We’re now in discovery, so I can issue subpoenas.”

That is a level that no other case challenging Obama’s eligibility or birth certificate ever has reached.

She said she already has contacted the Hawaii Department of Health, which is custodian of Hawaiian records, about her requests, and she said another recipient very well could be the White House.

She noted that White House Counsel Robert Bauer resigned that post on June 2, and suggested Bauer might not have wanted to be deposed regarding questions about Obama’s “Certificate of Live Birth,” a document presented to the nation as genuine when the White House released it on April 27 Taitz suggested that Bauer’s move back into private practice may have been speeded by worries over the eligibility dispute.

In fact, Jerome Corsi, Ph.D., and author of “Where’s the Birth Certificate? The Case that Barack Obama Is Not Eligible to be President,” said he’s convinced Bauer’s move is because he fears the “Certificate of Live Birth” document would not stand up to the scrutiny of any serious investigation.

Corsi believes Bauer “felt compelled” to resign because of the growing substance to worries that the eligibility issue will blow up into a full-scale investigation.

“Bauer sent Perkins and Coie attorneys to Honolulu to pick up from the Hawaii Department of Health what he believed would be two certified copies of Obama’s 1961 long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate,” Corsi said. “When the White House released to the public the birth certificate in the form of a PDF computer file obviously created on Adobe software and a Xerox copy, Bauer realized the Hawaii DOH had participated in the fraud.”

He said he had been tipped off early in February that a long-form birth document for Obama had been forged and that the document was to be released. As WND has reported, there long have been concerns about the Social Security number.

“There is obviously a case of fraud going on here,” says Ohio licensed private investigator Susan Daniels. “In 15 years of having a private investigator’s license in Ohio, I’ve never seen the Social Security Administration make a mistake of issuing a Connecticut Social Security number to a person who lived in Hawaii. There is no family connection that would appear to explain the anomaly.”

“There is obviously a case of fraud going on here,” says Ohio licensed private investigator Susan Daniels. “In 15 years of having a private investigator’s license in Ohio, I’ve never seen the Social Security Administration make a mistake of issuing a Connecticut Social Security number to a person who lived in Hawaii. There is no family connection that would appear to explain the anomaly.”

Does the Social Security Administration ever re-issue Social Security numbers?
“Never,” Daniels told Corsi. “It’s against the law for a person to have a re-issued or second Social Security Number issued.”

Daniels said she is “staking my reputation on a conclusion that Obama’s use of this Social Security Number is fraudulent.”

“A person who wants to hide their true identity often picks up the Social Security Number of a deceased person, thinking that nobody would ever look into it,” Daniels added. “I think it was sometime in the 1980s that Obama decided to hide who he really is.”

ALAN NOTE: assuming he even knows!

There is no indication in the limited background documentation released by the Obama 2008 presidential campaign or by the White House to establish that Obama ever lived in Connecticut.

Nor is there any suggestion in Obama’s autobiography, “Dreams from My Father,” that he ever had a Connecticut address.

Also, nothing can be found in the public record that indicates Obama visited Connecticut during his high-school years.

An affidavit filed by Colorado private investigator John N. Sampson specifies that as a result of his formal training as an immigration officer and his 27-year career in professional law enforcement, “it is my knowledge and belief that Social Security Numbers can only be applied for in the state in which the applicant habitually resides and has their official residence.”

Daniels told WND she believes Obama had a different Social Security Number when he worked as a teenager in Hawaii prior to 1977.

“I doubt this is President Obama’s originally issued Social Security Number,” she told WND.

“Obama has a work history in Hawaii before he left the islands to attend college at Occidental College in California, so he must have originally been issued a Social Security Number in Hawaii.”

The published record available about Obama indicates his first job as a teenager in Hawaii was at a Baskin-Robbins in the Makiki neighborhood on Oahu. USA Today reported the ice-cream shop still was in operation one year after Obama’s inauguration.

Just last month some 11 months after WND began publicizing Obama’s Connecticut-based SSN, Bill O’Reilly of the Fox News Channel briefly addressed the issue while reading his viewer mail on the air.

Unfortunately for O’Reilly, the news anchor falsely asserted the president’s father lived in Connecticut.

In his viewer email segment April 13, O’Reilly was asked: “What about Obama having a Connecticut Social Security Number? He never lived there.”

“His father lived in Connecticut for several years,” O’Reilly claimed, adding that “babies sometimes get numbers based on addresses provided by their parents.”

In reality, there is no evidence Barack Obama Sr. ever lived in Connecticut. He left Hawaii in 1962 to study at Harvard in Massachusetts and then returned to his home country of Kenya.

When WND publicized O’Reilly’s major error, the information vanished from the Fox News Channel’s website, as well as BillOReilly.com

The BirtherReport.com website, responding to complaints by Fox podcast customers that O’Reilly’s Social Security claim, broadcast on Fox, had gone missing from the audio archive, trumpeted the headline:

“Busted: Fox News scrubbed Bill O’Reilly’s 4/13 mailbag segment on Obama’s Social Security Number reserved for Connecticut applicants.”

The site added, “Not only did Fox News scrub the podcast, they also left out the viewer email about Obama’s Social Security number at O’Reilly’s website. I report, you decide!”

WHITE HOUSE SPECIAL COUNSEL QUITS

2011-06-03T23:00:00.000-07:00

The author of the best-selling "Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case That Barack Obama Is Not Eligible To Be President" charged today the resignation of White House counsel Bob Bauer is the result of his participation in the release of Barack Obama's "Certificate of Live Birth," which he fears would not stand up to the scrutiny of any serious investigation by the FBI, Congress or the media.

When the announcement about Bauer's departure was made today, the AP said he was returning to private practice and to represent Obama as his personal attorney and as general counsel to Obama's re-election campaign.

Jerome Corsi's new book, "Where's the Birth Certificate?," is now available for immediate shipping, autographed by the author, only from the WND Superstore.

He's being replaced by Kathy Ruemmler, a former assistant U.S. attorney.

The AP reported Obama praised Bauer, who before his White House post had defended Obama against lawsuits that challenged his eligibility to be president.

But Jerome Corsi, Ph.D., who authored the "Where's the Birth Certificate?" book that debuted at No. 6 on the New York Times best-sellers list after reaching No. 1 several weeks earlier at Amazon.com, said, "I think Bauer's resignation marks the beginning of the Obama eligibility cover-up starting to unwind."

Corsi believes Bauer "felt compelled" to resign because of the growing substance to worries that the eligibility issue will blow up into a full-scale investigation.

"Bauer sent Perkins and Coie attorneys to Honolulu to pick up from the Hawaii Department of Health what he believed would be two certified copies of Obama's 1961 long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate," Corsi said.

"When the White House released to the public the birth certificate in the form of a PDF computer file obviously created on Adobe software and a Xerox copy, Bauer realized the Hawaii DOH had participated in the fraud," Corsi charged.

Corsi said he had been tipped off early in February that a long-form birth document for Obama had been forged and that the document was to be released.

"The information came from a mole within the Hawaii DOH who had been examining the vault logbook for months," Corsi explained. "Until just prior to February 24, no Obama long-form hospital-generated birth record could be found in the Hawaii DOH."

Corsi, whose book also has ascended to the upper reaches of other best-seller tabulations, said that when Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie "could not find the Obama birth records he had been searching for and radio journalist Mike Evans said so in a broadcast repeated over a series of radio stations across the nation, a decision was made within the White House to use a forgery that may have been in the works since as early as 2008."

Corsi said he believes the scenario developed this way:

Obama and Valerie Jarrett wanted to continue the stonewalling strategy they had used since 2008, relying on the short-form Certification of Live Birth and having Hawaii DOH claim that long-form birth certificate copies were no longer available, not even to Obama.

Obama and Jarrett had planned to use the forged birth certificate as an October surprise, just prior to the November 2012 election, if the pressure on Obama's eligibility remained an obstacle to his reelection.

But this strategy was overruled by White House Chief of Staff Bill Daley. He determined that a birth certificate, if it existed, had to be released now – to prevent the issue from gaining momentum.

"I believe both Daley and Bauer believed until recently that Obama was telling the truth and that the birth certificate was really there in the Hawaii DOH," Corsi said. "But when they realized that the last-modified date stamp on the computer file of the Obama birth certificate – put up on the White House website on April 27 – was that very same morning, it contradicted the idea the file was an earlier scan of the original Obama birth certificate in the Hawaii vault log book. What modifications to the file were being made at the White House?

Was the file originally created at the White House? Why wasn't the file made and closed in Hawaii where the scan of the original document was supposedly made? Bauer realized the White House was lying to say a scan of the original document was being released."
Corsi said he's convinced that now top White House operatives such as Daley and Bauer believe there is no document in the Hawaii Department of Health that can withstand forensic analysis.

He said the legal challenges to a specific document that has been made public could be harder to deflect than a lawsuit generally alleging an ineligibility on Obama's part.

Corsi also said he believes top operatives in the Democratic Party "have concluded that if Obama does not kill the birther issue soon, he may have to resign – with the likelihood that Hillary Clinton will be elevated into the DNC presidential candidate in 2012."

Corsi suggested Republicans also are staying away from the "birther" issue because they have reached the same conclusion – and the RNC does not want "to have to face Hillary in the 2012 presidential election in the wake of an Obama resignation."

"What forced the release of the birth certificate on April 27 was the coming publication of the [Where's the Birth Certificate?] book," said Corsi.

"Bauer's resignation is the first step in the crumbling of inside support for Obama in the White House."

Corsi said pursuit of the "forger" who created the Obama Certificate of Live Birth already is well under way.

"The forgery consists of a composite of these various Hawaii 1961 legitimate documents, onto which was added Obama-specific information, with the result that the final version was composed in Adobe software," Corsi said.

WND reported when Bauer joined the White House.

Obama announced at that point he was waiving ethics rules for Bauer, his personal and campaign lawyer – and the same attorney who has defended Obama in lawsuits challenging his eligibility to be president.

But Executive Order 13490, "Ethics Commitments by Executive Branch Personnel," prohibits political appointees from participating in any matter involving specific parties that is directly and substantially related to former employers or former clients. The rule typically expires two years after the date of appointment.

According to the ethics waiver posted on the White House website, Bauer was exempted from the requirements of the ethics pledge "solely with respect to his former client the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and with respect to his former employer Perkins Coie LLP (Perkins Coie) in its capacity as counsel to the DNC and to President Barack Obama in his personal capacity."

The waiver suggested the ethics rules would have prevented Bauer from working on Obama's financial disclosure forms or issues related to the Democratic National Committee.

As WND reported, in April 2009, Bauer sent a letter to plaintiff Gregory Hollister of Hollister v. Soetoro, a retired Air Force colonel, threatening sanctions if he didn't withdraw his appeal of the eligibility case that earlier was tossed by a district judge because the issue already had been "twittered."

"For the reasons stated in Judge Robertson's ruling, the suit is frivolous and should not be pursued," Bauer's letter warned. "Should you decline to withdraw this frivolous appeal, please be informed that we intend to pursue sanctions, including costs, expenses and attorneys' fees, pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 38 and D.C. Circuit Rule 38."

Bauer also represented Obama and the DNC in Philip Berg's eligibility lawsuit and various other legal challenges.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, Bauer functioned as an "attack lawyer," threatening with FEC complaints groups wanting to run anti-Obama television ads.

Also during the 2008 presidential campaign, Bauer as counsel for the Obama campaign wrote letters to television station managers and to Department of Justice Assistant Attorney General John Keeney arguing that airing an anti-Obama ad pointing to the known association between Obama and Weather Underground radical Bill Ayers would violate federal election rules.

Additionally, during the 2008 campaign, Bauer intervened on behalf of Obama to block the California-based American Leadership Project from running a television ad campaign over support from unions, including the Service Employees International Union.

Again, Bauer filed a complaint with the FEC alleging that the union-funded television campaign the American Leadership Project planned to run in Indiana against Obama was illegal under federal election laws.

In addition to representing Obama on eligibility cases, Bauer also served as legal counsel to represent the president in the criminal probe into the activities of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

Read more: Author: 'Birth certificate' prompts departure of White House counsel http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=306425#ixzz1OHfJFFJ0

LIP SERVICE TO OUR TROOPS, OUR DISPOSSESSED BUT HOURS FOR GOLF!

2011-05-30T14:20:00.000-07:00

Any wonder the troops have such little regard for Obama?

Token visit to Arlington then more golf.

Did anyone notice he was disgracefully chewing gum during the Joplin, Missouri

church service for those who had lost their lives and everything they owned?

THE MALICIOUS Islamic PRETENDER/USURPER - WORTH REPEATING

2011-05-14T14:22:00.000-07:00

According to this article no-one knew "Obama" at Columbia.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2365625/posts

"NOBODY REMEMBERS OBAMA AT COLUMBIA
(But heck, we're all just racist birthers...yea right! )

www.antimullah.com | 10/18/2009 | Alan Peters

Posted by kellynla

Looking for evidence of Obama's past, Fox News contacted 400 Columbia University students from the period when Obama claims to have been there, but none remembered him.

Wayne Allyn Root was, like Obama, a political science major at Columbia who also graduated in 1983. In 2008, Root says of Obama, "I don't know a single person at Columbia that knew him, and they all know me.

I don't have a classmate who ever knew Barack Obama at Columbia. Ever! Nobody recalls him. I'm not exaggerating, I'm not kidding." Root adds that he was also, like Obama, "Class of '83 political science, pre-law" and says, "You don't get more exact or closer than that. Never met him in my life, don't know anyone who ever met him.

At the class reunion, our 20th reunion five years ago, who was asked to be the speaker of the class? Me.

No one ever heard of Barack! And five years ago, nobody even knew who he was. The guy who writes the class notes, who's kind of the, as we say in New York, the macha who knows everybody, has yet to find a person, a human who ever met him. Is that not strange?

It's very strange." Obama's photograph does not appear in the school's yearbook and Obama consistently declines requests to talk about his years at Columbia, provide school records, or provide the name of any former classmates or friends while at Columbia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayne_Allyn_Root#column-one

NOTE: Root graduated as Valedictorian from his high school, Thornton-Donovan School, then graduated from Columbia University in 1983 as a Political Science major (in the same class as President Barack Obama WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN IN)"

OBAMA BROTHER'S "CHARITY" COMING UNDER INVESTIGATION?

2011-05-08T19:14:00.000-07:00

Another part of the Obama political and financial Criminal Enterprise being run out of the White House? To gather UNREPORTED election money? Pad their own pockets?

IRS Asked to Investigate Charity Run by Obama's Brother
NLPC (National Legal and Policy Center) by Peter Flaherty

NLPC is asking the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to investigate the Barack H. Obama Foundation [1], which is soliciting tax-deductible contributions from the public although it is not tax exempt. The Foundation is named for Obama's father and is apparently based in Kenya. Its founder and chairman is Abon'go Malik Obama (in photo), whose father is also the father of President Obama.

The Foundation has addresses in Kenya and in Arlington, Virginia [2] to which it asks that donations be sent. Two members of the NLPC staff went to the Arlington address on May 6. It is a commercial mail drop facility where the clerk touted the fact that the address "looked like a real office address" and the facility could arrange to forward mail to any location in the world.

Isabel Vincent and Melissa Klein report today in the New York Post [3] that there are questions about what happens to the money:

A group of Missouri State college students who visited the Obama family village of Kogelo in 2009, and who met the president's half-brother, felt something was amiss. They sensed he was an "operator" and decided to give their donation of 400 pounds of medical supplies directly to a local clinic.

"We didn't know what he was going to do with them," said Ken Rutherford, a former Missouri State professor who led the trip and who shared in the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize for his work to ban landmines.

The Foundation's original registered agent in the United States is an American named Alton Ray Baysden, who admitted to the Post that the group has not even applied for tax-exempt status.

As pointed out in our Complaint, federal law requires that organizations seeking to be 501(c)(3) tax-deductible charities must first make a successful application to the Internal Revenue Service and satisfy the standards ensuring the applicant would adhere to the requirements associated with operating a 501(c)(3).

Among the requirements following the certification of an applicant as a 501(c)(3), is the requirement that the group file an annual IRS Form 990 which sets forth income, expenditure, salary, consultant compensation and a host of other details which allow the public, the IRS and the media to assess whether the group is carrying out its obligations in an ethical and legal manner.

Since the Obama Foundation appears never to have applied for 501(c)(3) status and consequently never filed an IRS Form 990, these apparent violations of Federal tax law and regulations constitute grounds for an investigation and the application of sanctions, if appropriate.

Our Complaint asks the IRS to determine the following:

(1) How much money was raised since the Barack H. Obama Foundation began soliciting public donations?

(2) To what bank account(s) were such funds deposited?

(3) How many individuals relied upon the misrepresentations as to the tax-deductibility of donations to the Obama Foundation found on their web page and made improper deductions?

(4) Were the funds collected ever used for charitable purposes or were they diverted to personal use by anyone associated with the Obama Foundation?

(5) If there was such a diversion, was income tax paid by individuals for any such income received by the Obama Foundation through its mail drop operation in Arlington, Virginia?

(6) Were the representations of charitable activities made on the Obama Foundation web site just as false an inducement as the misrepresentations as to the groups 501(c)(3) status.

It is not known to what extent President Obama is approving, or is aware, of his half-brother's activities. In any case, the IRS must not give special treatment to the Obama Foundation.

•Abon'go Obama http://www.freerepublic.com/category/people/abongo-obama
•Barack H. Obama Foundation http://www.freerepublic.com/category/keywords/barack-h-obama-foundation
•Barack Obama http://www.freerepublic.com/category/people/barack-obama
•Government Integrity Project http://www.freerepublic.com/category/project-name/government-integrity-project

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source URL: http://nlpc.org/stories/2011/05/08/irs-asked-investigate-charity-run-obamas-brother
Links:
[1] http://www.barackhobamafoundation.org/
[2] http://www.barackhobamafoundation.org/donate.html
[3] http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/prez_brother_has_trust_issues_8rW5Gm1Dl9DLb5bcLAhmLM#ixzz1LkrMnHkq

RARE PHOTO of DAVID

David Opiyo Obama (1968-1984), son of Barack H. Obama and baby brother of Abon'go Malik Obama.
---------------------------------------------------------------

Barack Hussein Obama Sr., was killed in an automobile accident in 1982 leaving seven sons and one daughter, the mothers of whom are four.

All but one of his children live in Britain or the United States.

OBAMA MAY HAVE UNLEASHED GHADDAFI ONTO THE USA

2011-05-01T16:40:00.000-07:00

Alan Note: when President Reagan was in charge and bombed Ghaddafi, killling one of his CHILDREN, it pushed Ghaddafi into a conciliatory mind set. And he came out of the cold - as the spy expression indicates.

With Obama in charge it appears to be pointing into a different direction: REVENGE

A whole bunch of embassies and foreign diplomatic missions were attacked and ransacked in retaliation.

Still to come: revenge by his TRIBE against the rebels and foreigners in general.

STILL TO COME on the horizon: terror and suicide bomb attacks on our malls and public places INSIDE THE USA and IED's on the sides of our freeways, if he is killed and there is no longer a restraining Libyan person in charge and his half dozen remaining sons or close relatives decide to wreak their vengeance.

PERHAPS starting with such attacks in European countries.

Let's see what the hawks like McCain and a mealy mouthed colleague, who are pushing for him to be assassinated will say when we get killed in our shopping centers or while driving on our highways.

The terrorists to do this are already in place all around the USA and Europe, so it is simply a matter or money being paid to them or their families in their countries of origin (which Ghaddafi still has in plentiful supply) and the contacts to put this into play.

==========================================

Tripoli, Libya (CNN) -- Government forces pounded rebel-held cities and crowds ransacked empty embassies in Tripoli on Sunday after Libyan authorities reported a NATO airstrike killed one of longtime strongman Moammar Gadhafi's sons and three of his grandchildren.

The U.S. Embassy was attacked by what one U.S. official called an "organized mob," along with the British, French, Italian and Qatari embassies, British and Italian officials told CNN. Meanwhile, pro-Gadhafi forces stepped up their shelling of rebel positions in Misrata after Libya's government reported the deaths.

"It's going to be like revenge," one eyewitness in the embattled coastal city of Misrata said.

The eyewitness reported significant damage and some casualties in Misrata, the country's third-largest city. The city remains in rebel hands, with no forces aligned with Gadhafi remaining in the city itself, he said.

Another witness, who agreed to be identified only as Mohammed, said "very heavy shelling" targeted the coastal city's port.

"I have been here during all days of the conflict," he told CNN. "Last night was the worst."

And a third man, who wanted to be identified only as Abdsalam, said the port was heavily bombarded. Electricity is out in nearly the entire city, and food and fresh water are running scarce, he said.

"They are using every every possible type of weapon," he said.

The Libyan government said Sunday that Gadhafi's son, Saif al-Arab Gadhafi, and three grandchildren died in the strike that destroyed the son's home in Tripoli. The Libyan government identified the children as Saif al-Arab's sons Gartaj Hannibal Muammar al-Gadhafi, age 3, and 2-year-old Saif Mohammad al-Gadhafi, as well as Mastoura Hamid Abuzitaia, the daughter of the leader's daughter Aysha.

State TV aired video of two bodies, wrapped in white shrouds and draped with flags, one of which was reported to be the body of Gadhafi's son. A funeral procession and burial for the fallen "martyrs" will be held on Monday, state TV said.

The Libyan leader and his wife were in the house when it was targeted, but they are in good health, government spokesman Musa Ibrahim told journalists.

The building was in a residential area of Tripoli that houses several embassies. Ibrahim called the bombing a "war crime." The strike destroyed the two-bedroom, single-story house, leaving a massive crater in its place.

CNN could not independently confirm the reports, and NATO said in a statement Sunday that the alliance was "aware of unconfirmed media reports that some of Gadhafi's family members may have been killed."

"We regret all loss of life, especially the innocent civilians being harmed as a result of this ongoing conflict," said Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard, commander of NATO's military operations. However, Bouchard said, all targets "are military in nature and have been clearly linked to the Gadhafi regime's systemic attacks on the Libyan population ... We do not target individuals."

But U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, a leading supporter of the Libya campaign, called the elder Gadhafi a "murderer" and "a legitimate military target."

"He's not the legitimate leader of Libya, and the way to get this to end is to go after the people around him and his support system," Graham told "Fox News Sunday." The South Carolina Republican is a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

In Benghazi, a hub for rebel forces and their transitional government, the news triggered celebratory gunfire even as a rebel spokesman dismissed the reported death as "a desperate attempt to get sympathy."

"In all honesty, we never heard of Saif al-Arab until the start of the uprising," said Hafiz Ghoga, deputy chairman of the Transitional National Council in Benghazi, on Sunday.

"We don't believe this is true ... This regime constantly lies and keeps lying," he added.

Opposition members, citing witness reports, also warned that pro-Gadhafi troops in the town of Zintan, 50 kilometers (31 miles) west of Misrata, and other nearby areas have been equipped with gas masks. The opposition figures say that suggests the government forces are preparing to use chemical weapons against rebel forces -- but the accounts lacked detail, and CNN could not independently confirm the reports.

Ibrahim dismissed the allegations as "all lies."

"Every time they come with a lie, they jump out to the next lie," he said. "The media cannot report from one side of reports. It is the same lie when they said we are using cluster bombs."

Human Rights Watch reported in mid-April that pro-Gadhafi troops were firing cluster munitions into Misrata and displayed a portion of a Spanish-made mortar shell that releases 21 smaller bombs across a wide area. The Libyan government denies the allegation.

Fighting also intensified Sunday near the rebel-held Djerba border crossing into Tunisia, witnesses and Tunisia's state news agency reported. The TAP news agency said the flow of refugees out of Libya had slowed, possibly as a result.

NATO began bombarding Libya on March 19, after the U.N. Security Council approved a resolution authorizing any means necessary to protect civilians demanding the end of Gadhafi's nearly 42-year rule. The alliance said it targeted a "command-and-control building" in Tripoli on Saturday, as well as hit seven ammunition depots around the capital.

According to a NATO military official, the airstrike that Libya says killed Gadhafi's son involved four precision-targeted bombs, one of which failed to detonate. The official, who declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the matter, said the alliance was certain the target was a command-and-control facility and said the building hit, although above ground, had reinforced portions.

The official said NATO had "no evidence" that Gadhafi's relatives had been killed.

A photograph of the site showed the unexploded bomb, a 2,000-pound weapon designed to penetrate reinforced concrete, but NATO would not confirm what other types of ordnance may have been dropped. Nor would it disclose which nation's aircraft carried out the strike, or what type of aircraft were used.

Libyan officials attacked the U.S. Embassy compound in Tripoli Sunday, as well as the British, French and Italian missions, according to a senior U.S. official in Washington. All four NATO nations are taking part in the airstrikes.

Mark Toner, a U.S. State Department spokesman, said he had seen reports of violence against the diplomatic facilities and that if true, "we condemn these attacks in the strongest possible terms."

Italian officials told CNN that the embassy of Qatar, a Gulf Arab state that supports the campaign and is supplying arms to the rebels, was also targeted.

The senior U.S. official said Turkey, the protecting power for U.S. interests in Libya, is trying to keep an eye on the American compound -- but "there isn't much they can do when you have an organized mob, as this appeared to be."

In London, British Foreign Secretary William Hague expelled Libya's ambassador to the United Kingdom after the attacks. Hague said the Tripoli government is breaching its international obligation to protect diplomatic missions by allowing the vandalism.

"The attacks against diplomatic missions will not weaken our resolve to protect the civilian population in Libya," Hague said.

Ibrahim told CNN the attacks happened because "the people were upset" and that Libyan security forces stopped the attacks and prevented the embassies from being destroyed.

"There are embassies that have not been touched," he said.

Libyan Deputy Foreign Minister Khaled Kaim said later the government deeply regrets the looting and violence at the embassies. Angry crowds simply overwhelmed police, he said.

In addition, 12 U.N. international staffers left Tripoli because of the unrest and are in Tunisia, the world body said Sunday. Spokeswoman Eri Kaneko said the United Nations would not identify the staffers or their agencies for safety reasons. U.N. national staffers are still in the country and international staffers remain in Benghazi.

CNN's Frederik Pleitgen, Richard Roth, Barbara Starr, Elise Labott, Richard Allen Greene and Holly Yan contributed to this report.

LIST OF INVITED TO OBAMA'S FUND RAISER (includes two Iranian names)

2011-04-23T16:24:00.000-07:00

Obama’s $3 million S.F. dinner — the complete guest list.

TWO clearly Iranian names - both female - on the list. (Also "Shari" could be Iranian and short for Sharareh among some other possibilities)

Craig Newmark, Cissie Swig, Steve Westly and will.i.am each happily dropped $35,800 to dine with President Obama at billionaire Marc Benioff’s San Francisco home Wednesday evening. These are just some of the 85 famous names on the fundraiser’s guest list which was plainly visible to rubberneckers as attendees checked in. Combined, Obama’s take for the 90-minute event was a cool $3 million — or $3,043,000 to be exact (85 guests x $35,800 each).

The record-setting price tag for the dinner was part of Obama’s highly profitable fundraising swing through the San Francisco Bay Area on Wednesday, April 20.
A small cluster of onlookers — a few Obama fans, a few protesters, but mostly local residents who happened to pass by — watched and waited on the sidewalk at the intersection of Presidio and Pacific avenues for the President to arrive. While his motorcade was delayed for hours, a steady stream of well-dressed guests showed up and were let in one by one. Each name was checked on a master list of attendees held by a staffer who (unintentionally, one presumes) allowed nearby rubberneckers to get a glimpse of it as she flipped the pages.

The photographs below (use link at the end of the article) were taken of the fundraiser’s official guest list as the staffer checked the ID of each arrival. In total, 85 entries are visible on two different pages, though only about 50 of the names are fully legible.

Craig Newmark is the founder of craigslist and is a well-known internet entrepreneur. Cissie Swig is a wealthy philanthropist and a member of San Francisco’s famous Swig clan. Steve Westly is a California politician, candidate for governor, venture capitalist, and ardent Obama supporter. And will.i.am is a musician and producer, best known as the leader of the Black Eyed Peas.

Several other famous names are on the list. Readers interested in seeing who can afford to spend $35,800 for a 90-minute dinner can scan the photos below.

The full list of legible names is presented after the photos. (This short report will be followed by a more thorough photo essay soon.)

Here’s the only report I could find from a pool reporter allowed into the event. A snippet — yes, that really is the “Stevie Wonder” on the list!:

The press corps was ushered into a large tent set up in the courtyard in the middle of Benioff’s block-wide residence, to find Stevie Wonder entertaining the crowd; his final song was a new one composed for the occasion, entitled “Ten Billion Hearts,” about joining together to heal the world.

The President was seated at Benioff’s table; Wonder returned to sit at the President’s side as Benioff introduced POTUS, saying that in a time of many crises, “we have the right person to lead us here.” Recording artist Will.I.am was seated at the same table.

…and the rest seemed to be not much more than a boilerplate stump speech. But…will.i.am at the table of honor?

Denise Bauer
Russell Benioff
Joelle Benioff
Lynne Benioff
Marc Benioff
Jan Birenbaum
Larry Birenbaum
Zachary Bogue
Brian Buenneke
Kelly Bulkeley
Jon Burgstone
Lee Christensen
Ron Conway
Frank Currie
Stephen Davis
Quinn Delaney
Michelle Douglas
Alec Douglas
Jake Douglas
Becky Draper
Leni Eccles
Tawnie Farmer
Jerry Fiddler
Denise Foderaro
Rufus Gifford
Cindy Goldberg
Evan Goldberg
Lisa Goldman
Doug Goldman
Matthew [Goldman]
J… [Goldman]
M… Goldman
Jim Greenberg
Eric [Green]
Lee Greenberg
Bob Gregory
[Colleen Haas]
Doug [Haas]
Drew [Hickory]
Wayne Houston
Jon Jordan
Tony Kap…
John
Terry
Lee
Steve
Katherine
…
M…
M…
Craig Newmark

Lisa O…
Rafael O…
Renuka P…
Frank Q…
Azita R…(IRANIAN NAME)
Lorna R…
Andy R…
Deborah R…
Peter R…
Sandy R…
Jeanne R…
Mendel R…
Autumn S…
John [Scully]
Regina [Scully]
Steve Spinner
Garen Staglin

Noosheen Hashemi (IRANIAN NAME)

Shari Staglin
Jeremy Stoppelman
Jon Streeter
Cissie Swig
Ronald Taylor
Sandi Thompson
Ellen Thrower
Jeff Ubben
Raju Vegesna
Bala Vegesna
Steve Westly
Stevie Wonder
Pegi Young
will.i.am

http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/04/21/obamas-3-million-s-f-dinner-the-complete-guest-list/

NOT SO "FAIR" WHEN "YOUR" EFFORT RESULT IS REDISTRIBUTED

2011-04-19T01:07:00.000-07:00

Give up some of your GPA scores to less successful students! Just like taking away money from successful people to give away to those who are less so or just lazy.

See how different it seems to students when approached with that concept. Give away the fruit of THEIR studying and scores? NOT so fair!

IRAQ IGNORES AMERICA, BOWS TO IRANIAN PRESSURE

2011-04-17T22:34:00.000-07:00

By Rania Abouzeid

For years, Iraq’s increasingly pro-Iranian government has threatened to evict the 3,400 Iranian members of the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), a fiercely anti-Tehran group, from its sprawling former military base at Camp Ashraf, some 40 miles (65 km) from Baghdad, the Iraqi capital, and 50 miles (80 km) from the Iranian border. Despite the heated rhetoric, however, Baghdad has never fully articulated how it will uproot the exiles — who refuse to leave their decades-old enclave — beyond saying it will not forcibly do so. That has now been given the lie, after an Iraqi military raid on the base last week left some 34 people dead and dozens (some 300) wounded, according to the U.N.

The dead include at least seven women, according to Rupert Colville, spokesman for the U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. “Most of those killed appear to have been shot. However, several suffered other types of injuries that would suggest they were hit by vehicles,” he told TIME from Geneva. “It has been extremely difficult to gain access to the camp, and many details about the exact circumstances surrounding this tragedy remain unknown at this point. The Iraqi authorities and the [MEK] are giving wildly differing accounts.”

The Iraqi military, which rings the perimeter of the 19-sq.-mi. (49 sq km) camp, denies using firearms and says only three residents were killed — when they threw themselves in front of military vehicles. Major General Ali Ghaidan, commander of Iraqi ground forces, told a group of reporters briskly bused to the vicinity of (but not into) Camp Ashraf that violence broke out after security forces sought to give parts of the camp back to farmers who allegedly owned it before Iraq’s then dictator Saddam Hussein gave the land to the MEK in the 1980s. He insisted that only batons and water cannons were used. Government spokesman Ali Dabbagh sought to explain the shooting deaths by telling Agence France-Presse that “the dead were killed by their own guards because they were trying to escape.”

“The Iraqi military were well aware of the risks attached to launching an operation like this in Ashraf,” said Navi Pillay, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, in a statement. “There is no possible excuse for this number of casualties. There must be a full, independent and transparent inquiry, and any person found responsible for use of excessive force should be prosecuted.”

Shahriar Kia, an MEK representative in Camp Ashraf, said the attack started before dawn and involved “armored vehicles, commando forces, motorized, engineering and antiriot forces, with the help of police and rapid-deployment forces.” “The attack lasted more than seven hours,” he told TIME from Iraq on Friday, April 15. The Iraqi forces continue to occupy the northern part of the camp, he said, adding that he fears they are preparing another attack. (See “Iraq’s Assault on Camp Ashraf: The Tenuous Life of a Fringe Iranian Faction.”)

The camp is a major irritant to Baghdad’s ties with Tehran and is perhaps one of the strangest holdovers from the dramatic shift in relations between Iraq, its once bitter foe Iran and their former and current mutual enemy the United States. The MEK, which is also known by the acronym MKO and by the name the People’s Mujahedin, was given Camp Ashraf by Hussein during his bitter eight-year war with neighboring Iran. He funded and armed the group, which launched attacks on Iran from Iraq.

Although the camp was disarmed in 2003 by the U.S. military, both Baghdad and Washington consider the MEK a terrorist organization. Washington has blacklisted the group for its attacks against U.S. interests in the 1970s and ‘80s. Iraqi officials have frequently said the Iranian exiles are “illegal aliens” with no legal right to remain in the country and that they must travel to either Iran or another country. They have repeatedly warned that they will close the camp, which was under U.S. military protection until 2009, when responsibility was transferred to Iraq under a comprehensive bilateral agreement. Deadlines for closing Camp Ashraf have come and gone. This week Iraq said the group must leave the country by the end of the year.

Camp Ashraf, with its gender-segregated dormitories, manicured lawns, flower beds and tree-lined streets, is the only home many of the residents have known. The MEK maintains firm control over its members, preventing them from marrying and restricting or preventing contact with family elsewhere. (See “Humanitarian Intervention: Whom to Protect, Whom to Abandon.”)

The standoff is unlikely to end well or soon, given that the MEK won’t even consider relocating within Iraq (the government wants to move the group away from the Iranian border), let alone overseas, unless strict (and some say unrealistic) conditions are met. Kia, the MEK representative, says the group will consider returning to Iran if “freedom of speech and political activities are guaranteed,” an impossibility for a group determined to bring down Tehran’s clerical leaders. “The second option is to transfer all of the residents to the U.S. or one of the E.U. member states,” he says.

In his statement, U.N. commissioner Pillay said, “I am well aware that this is a contentious group with a complicated history, but leaving them to fester in Camp Ashraf was never going to be a solution. Clearly, since they are unable to go back to Iran and are in danger in Iraq, the solution is most likely to involve moving them to third countries. I urge governments to take the necessary pragmatic and generous steps to resolve what is an untenable situation.”

The recent raid wasn’t the first instance of bloodshed between the Iraqi military and the camp’s residents since the U.S. handed over responsibility for it, but it was the most serious. In mid-2009, Iraqi security forces briefly tried to wrench control of the MEK base from its leaders after the Iraqis were denied a request to establish a police station inside the camp. At least six residents were killed and dozens wounded in the ensuing clashes. Things can rapidly devolve into violence once again, given growing Iraqi frustration with the organization, whose members exhibit a cultlike obedience and willingness to sacrifice themselves for their cause. (See pictures from the Fars News Agency in Iran.)

The MEK’s slick and efficient p.r. machine is well primed to exploit the situation. It has a ready list of European and American political figures eager to defend it (and who are looking for reasons to argue against its terrorist designation in the U.S.). These include former Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge, former National Security Adviser General James Jones and former Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean. After a legal battle, the E.U. removed the organization from its terrorist list in 2009; the U.K. did so in 2008.

While the U.N. continues to try to determine the details of this most recent raid, the rhetoric continues to be ratcheted up by both sides. “The crime committed by [Iraqi Premier Nouri al-]Maliki and the Iranian regime clearly indicates Maliki’s filthy intention to satisfy Tehran’s mullahs, to whom he owes his renewed premiership,” Kia says. Things are unlikely to calm down anytime soon.

FREE SPEECH IS A GREAT IDEA? OR BEDROCK PRINCIPLE?!

2011-04-05T20:59:00.001-07:00

OBAMA - OR WHATEVER HIS NAME REALLY IS!

2011-03-31T22:43:00.000-07:00

Mr. Obama or whatever his true name is has lived for almost 50 (alleged) years without leaving any footprints -- none!

There is no Obama documentation -- no bona fides -- no paper trail -- nothing.

Original, vault copy birth certificate -- Not released (lawyers' fees greater than $2,000,000 ~ birth certificate is $15)

Certification of Live Birth -- Released --

Counterfeit Amended Certification of Live Birth -- Released --

Counterfeit Obama/Dunham marriage license -- Not released (if one exists)

Obama/Dunham divorce -- Released (by independent investigators)

Noelani Kindergarten records -- Records lost (this is a big one -- read two frames)

Soetoro/Dunham marriage license -- Not released

Soetoro adoption records -- Not released

Fransiskus Assisi School School application -- Released (by independent investigators)

Punahou School application -- Missing

Punahou School records -- Not released

Noelani 3rd Grade records -- Not released

Soetoro/Dunham divorce -- Released (by independent investigators)

Selective Service Registration -- Released -- Under suspicious Social Security Number -- Released (by independent investigators) --

Under suspicion Occidental College records -- Not released

Financial Aid Records -- Not released

Passport -- Not released and records scrubbed clean by Obama's terrorism and intelligence adviser

Columbia College records -- Not released

Columbia thesis -- "Soviet Nuclear Disarmament" -- Not released

Harvard College records -- Not released

Harvard Law Review articles -- None

Illinois Bar Records -- Not released

Baptism certificate -- None

Medical records -- Not released -- nor is the source of his nasty scar

Illinois State Senate records -- None

Illinois State Senate schedule -- Lost

Law practice client list -- Not released

University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None

White House Visitors list -- The complete list unavailable

The Blagojevich Interview -- judge denies access to the FBI report

The Illinois State Archives told Judicial Watch that they never received any request from Senator Obama to archive any records in his possession.

In 2007, Obama told Tim Russert that his records were "not kept."

And there's less on the web every day.

In time, the entire Obama body of knowledge will consist of 3 documents -- "Dreams From My Father" -- "The Audacity of Hope" -- and the latest -- "Change We Can Believe In" -- all written by Barack Hussein Obama or his "ghost-writers."

Just an accident? I don't think so.

And this is the original list -- it has been copied all over the Internet -- but this is the original source. http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/34972

The Fraud has been committed and now it has been revealed:

1. Click on this video that you probably have seen before.

2. Run/drag the cursor plug up to the 3:30 mark and stop 3.

Right click the mouse and hold and run the video up to 3:40 and then back to 3:30 doing this numerous times.

4. This proves the picture was photo-shopped and Obama was inserted into the picture http://noiri.blogspot.com/2011/03/is-anything-about-obamas-past-real-even.html

VICE-PRESIDENT BIDEN KIDNAPES, IMPRISONS REPORTER

2011-03-26T13:59:00.000-07:00

Suppression of the Free Press has been attributed to Middle East or North African disctators. How about our Vice-President Biden being added to that list?

An incident at a Florida Democratic political fundraiser this week should be front page news in every paper in the country, and the lead story on TV newscasts, but it has been virtually buried…. until now

Here are the details.

On Wednesday morning, Vice President Joe Biden attended a fundraiser for Democratic Senator Bill Nelson. The event was at the home of billionaire real estate developer Alan Ginsberg, a long-time Dem supporter. Ginsberg’s enormous lakefront home is in an exclusive section of Winter Park, an uber-upscale Orlando suburb. To give you an idea of the size and opulence of the home, it was originally built for Orlando Magic and NBA superstar Horace Grant.

The Orlando Sentinel assigned longtime reporter Scott Powers to cover the event. But when he arrived, Biden staffers decided they didn’t want him mingling with the 150 guests who had forked over $500 to meet Biden, so they locked him in a closet! A member of the Biden advance team even stood guard outside the door to prevent Powers from escaping.

Powers has all the details, even pictures of the inside of the closet where he was held; but it appears the Sentinel editors have refused to let him report on all the details of what some are calling a kidnapping! There was a very brief, and very “vanilla” mention of the incident in Thursday’s paper. One attendee later emailed the Sentinel to say “I was in attendance at the Fundraiser and enjoyed a nice lunch. If I had known there was a reporter stuffed in the closet, I would have been compelled to stand up and demand answers. I would also like to know if this is actually legal to treat people like caged animals. I’m disgusted by these actions.”

Despite this outrage, Sentinel editors have dropped the story.

Some longtime journalists are furious with Biden’s team over the incident. Some are more angry at Sentinel editors for downplaying the story. Others are asking “where was the Secret Service when a crime was obviously being committed?” Others appear to have no problem with it, since it involves their “Administration that can do no wrong.”

So far, none of the DC papers or TV networks has covered the story, but of course, they are the first to cry in outrage when dictators imprison reporters overseas. What have we become: Cuba, Iran, Libya, or Stalinist Russia, that we would allow such police-state tactics to muzzle the media?

Does the “Free Press” still exist in America? Or are we relegated to the status of a Banana Republic where the media approves anything Team Obama does?

Some people saw this coming when then-Vice Presidential candidate Joe Biden exploded and flatly refused to answer the insightful questions of an Orlando television reporter when she asked about Obama’s connections to ACORN, socialism and his “spread the wealth” comments to Joe the Plumber. Since then, Biden’s mandate seems to have changed from refusing to answer embarrassing questions, to imprisoning reporters who might ask them.

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT - THUGGISH CRIMINAL INTIMIDATION

2011-03-20T20:59:00.000-07:00

The federal government is REPORTEDLY now petitioning to have these signs removed or Washington state will be denied additional monies for interstate highways.

The State of Washington replied, they will secede from the Union rather than be intimidated. These are a matter of free speech paid for by a private citizen.

It seems the Obama government uses intimidation and ignores the first amendment when they want to silence someone.

Signs - Northbound on I-5 near Chehalis , WA (88 miles south of Seattle )

LAZY, INEPT, INEXPERIENCED, DISINTERESTED OBA-HUSSEIN DOES NOT CARE - EXCEPT ABOUT HIMSELF

2011-03-10T13:48:00.000-08:00

Barack Obama's executive ineptitude is on display at the highesty level of government. While he has been repeatedly meeting with union leaders over the last two years and playing golf, he has not been so attentive to his cabinet members, and all is not peaceful.

The Nobel Peace Prize winner needs to work his magic close to home.

According to an article in New York magazine by veteran journalist John Heilemann, Obama has not yet conferred with some six Cabinet members since becoming President. He certainly has been busy appointing czars and czarinas, however, and advisers such as Elizabeth Warren who is the de facto head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Full article: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/03/inside_the_obama_administratio.html

WHAT SCARES THEM MOST?

2011-03-02T16:34:00.000-08:00

Two magazines, Country Living (95.99% white readership) and Ebony /Jet (99.99% black readership) did surveys on....

"WHAT DO PEOPLE FEAR MOST?"

The results were interesting, to say the least...

Country Living magazine's top three answers were:

1. Nuclear war/terrorist attack in U.S.
2. Child/spouse dying.
3. Terminal illness.

Ebony/Jet magazine's top three answers were:

1. Ghosts
2. Dogs
3. Registered mail.

No Kidding... And these are the people who put Obama over the top.

AND TO GO ALONG WITH ALL OF THIS, I'LL SHARE TWO QUOTES; ONE PITIFUL AND ONE GREAT!

"My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join with me, as we change it."--

Barack Obama

''Life's tough pilgrim, and it's even tougher if you're stupid.'--

John Wayne

Born 1776, Died 2008 (the U.S.A.)

It doesn't hurt to read this several times.

Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law in St. Paul , Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning 2008's Presidential election:

a.. Number of States won by: Obama: 19, McCain: 29
b.. Square miles of land won by: Obama: 580,000, McCain: 2,427,000
c.. Population of counties won by: Obama: 127 million, McCain: 143 million
d.. Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Obama: 13.2, McCain: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory McCain won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country.

Obama territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in low income tenements and living off various forms of government welfare...."

Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.

If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegals and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years.

If you are in favor of this DESTRUCTION, then by all means, delete this message.

If you are not, then pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.

WHITE HOUSE MEETS LOBBYISTS AT OFF SITE LOCATION TO AVOID DETECTION

2011-02-26T01:28:00.000-08:00

Politico says it has uncovered a stubborn little detail about the Obama administration’s practices regarding meeting with lobbyists. Sources, including actual lobbyists, tell the news outlet the administration regularly meets with them outside the White House — in a nearby complex — in order to hide the meetings from visitor logs and the public.

Politico opens its report this way:

Caught between their boss’ anti-lobbyist rhetoric and the reality of governing, President Barack Obama’s aides often steer meetings with lobbyists to a complex just off the White House grounds — and several of the lobbyists involved say they believe the choice of venue is no accident.

It allows the Obama administration to keep these lobbyist meetings shielded from public view — and out of Secret Service logs kept on visitors to the White House and later released to the public.

Administration officials denied the allegation to Politico, saying that the meeting place in question — the Jackson Place complex (which is a group of row houses) just off Lafayette Square — has legitimate meeting rooms.

“The White House conference facilities are just that: facilities for large meetings. They are also an option when rooms inside the complex don’t have the capacity for a given meeting or are booked,” White House spokesman Reid Cherlin told Politico.

That’s true. According to administration, the extra meeting space is used when the White House is full or when there’s no time to clear attendees through security.

But at least four lobbyists involved in such meetings tell Politico “they had the distinct impression they were being shunted off to Jackson Place — and off the books — so their visits wouldn’t later be made public.”

“Without question, I think that there’s a lot of concern about being seen meeting with the same lobbyists or particular lobbyists over and over again,” one business lobbyist, who’s attended such meetings, told Politico.

Politico notes other reports that a nearby Caribou coffee shop also serves an off-site meeting place.

Considering Obama’s propensity to rail against lobbyists, some are confused and even offended.

“Lobbyists are particularly stung by what they see as a double standard,” Politico says, “with Obama bashing their profession as part of what’s wrong with Washington while his staff routinely sits down with lobbyists to discuss key issues.”

“When they need us, they call us. When they don’t, we’re evil,” another lobbyist told the news outlet, who has also been to Jackson Place meetings.

At least one lobbyist scoffs at the idea that the meetings take place outside the White House because of necessity.

“My understanding was they were holding the meeting there because it included several high-level business and trade association lobbyists,” a senior business lobbyist who attended a meeting about immigration reform last year recalled. “This was an effort to not have to go through the security protocols at the White House which could lead to the visitor logs at some point being released to the public and embarrass the president.”

OBAMA HAS AT LEAST 16 DIFFERENT SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS OR MORE

2011-02-19T00:24:00.000-08:00

16 Different Social Security Numbers

Private investigator Neil Sankey, using Intelius, Lexis Nexis, Choice Point and other public records, found around 25 Social Security numbers connected with Barack Obama’s name.

However, it may not be as many as 25, since Sankey also searched using closely related names such as: “Barak Obama,” “Batock Obama,” “Barok Obama,” and “Barrack Obama.” There may very well be some Kenyans living in America with the same last name and a similar first name. In any case, I will exclude these records for the purpose of this research and focus only on names spelled exactly like his name.

Moreover, we can verify many of the Social Security numbers as valid since they’re connected to addresses at which we know Obama resided. Needless to say, there are also a slew of address and social security numbers connected to addresses in states that Obama has no known connection to.

In Obama’s home state, Illinois, Sankey tracked down 16 different addresses for a Barack Obama or a Barack H. Obama, of which all are addresses he was known to have lived at. Two Social Security numbers appear for these addresses, one beginning with 042, and one starting 364.

In California, where Obama attended Occidental College, there are six addresses listed for him, all within easy driving distance of the college. However, there are three Social Security numbers connected to these addresses, 537 and two others, each beginning with 999, which are not valid SSNs.

There are no addresses listed in New York where he attended Columbia University, but there is one listed for him in nearby Jackson, NJ, with a Social Security number beginning with 485.

In Massachusetts — where Obama attended Harvard Law School — we find three addresses, all using the 042 Social Security number. After Obama was elected to the United States Senate in 2005, he moved into an apartment at 300 Massachusetts Ave NW; the Social Security number attached to that address is the 042 one.

Yet, three years later, Obama used a different Social Security number for an address listed as: 713 Hart Senate Office Building. This was the address of his United States Senate office. This Social Security number began with 282 and was verified by the government in 2008.

This mystery grows even stranger as other addresses and Social Security numbers for Barack Obama appear in a dozen other states not known to be connected to him. Again, I am excluding those records names not spelled exactly like his name.

Tennessee, one address with a Social Security number beginning with 427

Colorado, one address, with a Social Security number beginning with 456.

Utah, two addresses, with two Social Security numbers beginning with 901 and 799.

Missouri has one address and one Social Security number beginning with 999.

Florida has two addresses listed for his him, three if you count one listed as “Barry Obama.” One is connected to a Social Security number beginning with 762.

In Georgia there are three addresses listed for him, all with different Social Security numbers: 579, 420, and 423.

In Texas there are four different addresses listed for him, one is connected to Social Security number 675.

There are two addresses listed for Barack Obama in Oregon and one address listed for him in the states of Wisconsin, Michigan, South Carolina, and Pennsylvania.

All told, there are 49 addresses and 16 different Social Security numbers listed for a person whose name is spelled “Barack Obama.” In some cases, the middle initial “H” is listed. If you were to expand the search to include closely related names such as: “Barac,” “Barak,” and “Barrack” Obama, you would find more than a dozen additional addresses and Social Security numbers.

Finally, the one Social Security number Obama most frequently used, the one beginning with 042, is a number issued in Connecticut sometime during 1976-1977, yet there is no record of Obama ever living or working in Connecticut. Indeed, during this time period Obama would have been 15-16 years old and living in Hawaii at the time.

Extracted from an article by Steve Baldwin. Read the whole thing here . . .

Susan Daniels, a second investigator filed an affidavit, with true and correct copies below, in the Barnett v. Obama case. Susan Daniels is a private investigator, licensed by the State of Ohio.

In her affidavit, Daniels states that she has located Barack Obama’s Social Security Number. She states it was issued between 1977 and 1979 in the State of Connecticut. She states that it is the only Social Security Number Barack Obama ever used.

The number assigned to Barack Obama “appears to be associated with someone born in the year 1890.”

http://www.theobamafile.com/_eligibility/SocialSecurity.htm

OBA-HUSSEIN POLICY - KILL AMERICA'S ENERGY RESOURCES TO KILL OUR NATION

2011-02-11T16:05:00.000-08:00

Having choked off our ability to produce oil both onshore and offshore, Oba-Hussein is now shutting down our use of coal - even CLEAN coal technology. Final strangle hold on our throats to bring America down - not just to its knees but all the way down to flat on the ground.

Obama Energy Secretary Steven Chu has launched the next phase of the White House’s publicly stated agenda to bankrupt the coal industry via EPA regulations after announcing the prospect of “massive” coal plant closures even as Texas and other states suffer rolling blackouts as a result of maxed-out power plants that cannot cope with demand.

The Obama administration’s strict enforcement of draconian EPA regulations has led to new clean-burning coal-fired plants being mothballed and other existing ones being shut down, which has in turn led to Texas and other states becoming energy-dependent, leading to shortages and blackouts exacerbated by freezing temperatures.

Despite White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer’s brazen lie in claiming that the blackouts are solely a result of “mechanical failures,” the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, the agency that oversees the state’s power, confirmed this morning that the threat of blackouts was ongoing as a result of a “maxed out grid”.

This “maxed out grid” is a consequence of federally enforced EPA restrictions that have led to the delay, mothballing and closing down of coal-fired plants. In Texas, approval for the much-needed Las Brisas Energy Center has been delayed for 3 years as a result of EPA meddling in Texas’ energy policy.

A federal court ruling last month gave the EPA permission to proceed with greenhouse gas regulation in Texas, temporarily superseding Texas’ non-compliance with the new regulations which came into force on January 2. The White House’s claim that EPA regulations are not currently affecting Texas is a complete fabrication.

Now White House Energy Secretary Steven Chu has made it clear that “massive” amounts of coal-fired plants in the United States will be closed down over the next five to eight years.

Read More-http://is.gd/wRi3pu

NEW UNIVERSAL FLU VACCINE

2011-02-06T16:53:00.000-08:00

Flu breakthrough promises a vaccine to kill all strains ... jab targets ... every type
By Alok Jha

A team at Oxford University has had success testing a vaccine that can neuter any strain of flu virus. Photograph: Science Photo Library

The treatment ... targets a different part of the flu virus to traditional vaccines, meaning it does not need to be expensively reformulated every year to match the most prevalent virus that is circulating the world.

Developed by a team led by Dr Sarah Gilbert at Oxford's Jenner Institute, the vaccine targets proteins inside the flu virus that are common across all strains, instead of those that sit on the virus's external coat, which are liable to mutate.

If used widely a universal flu vaccine could prevent pandemics... and end the need for a seasonal flu jab.
The process of developing a seasonal vaccine takes at least four months and if the flu strain is highly pathogenic – as in 1918 when millions of people died – the delay means more people get sick and die before the vaccine is ready.

While traditional vaccines prompt the body to create antibodies, Gilbert's vaccine boosts the number of the body's T-cells, another key part of the immune system. These can identify and destroy body cells that have been infected by a virus.

Though a small study, it was significant in that it was the first vaccine of its type to be tested on people.
It is believed that the vaccine could provide better protection against flu for older people. The Jenner Institute scientists are already testing it on people over 50, a group that does not respond so well to traditional vaccines.

OBAMA'S "C" WORD "CHANGE" IS REALLY "C for CANCER"

2011-02-05T15:45:00.000-08:00

YOU HAD CONFIDENCE IN OBAMA AND HIS CHANGE- As time goes on you may wish to revise your belief.

By Kyle-Anne Shiver
I overcame my incredulity in Nov. of 2007 when I saw what Obama brought to Nairobi, Kenya in support of the Somali Muslim Brotherhood through the Orange Party and his cousin Rial Odinga , whose campaign Obama ran and supported.

The result was 15,000 genocidal deaths; and so the pattern of Obama liberal fascist “into the steets” continues in Cairo, in the cause of a false democratic movement.Its all about the subjugation of our weaker US allies by the Muslim Brotherhood, and Obama’s goals are strategic.

And to think that Obama has the power to order the US Marines into the middle of his fiascos. I shudder.

These links describe Obama’s role perfectly in the liberal fascist movement centered in Chicago and now resident in Washington.Obama may indeed be stupid, but not in the way you might think. I think he is stupid for traducing the entire Western Alliance.It is only a matter of time before Obama turns this same method on his political opponents here at home. Will you be strong enough to stay the course
of liberty?

ex-CIA Agent Reveals: “Muslim Brotherhood” has infiltrated Obama Administration ( excellent video summary):

http://notalemming.wordpress.com/2011/02/03/ex-cia-agent-reveals-muslim-brotherhood-has-infiltrated-obama-administration/

*********************************************
Barack Obama, the Quintessential Liberal Fascist

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html

They fear that the development and building of People’s (community) Organizations is the building of a vast power group which may fall prey to a fascistic demagogue who will seize leadership and control and turn an organization into a Frankenstein’s monster against democracy.”

- Saul Alinsky responding to his critics, Reveille for Radicals; p. 199

When Saul Alinsky began building his community-organization movement in 1930s Chicago, observers were watching Alinsky with one eye, while with the other eye observing the building of communist and fascist movements in Europe. It wasn’t hard then to see in Alinsky’s programs at home, elements of the people’s revolution from Russia, as well as some of the same “in your face” tactics being employed by Hitler’s Brownshirts.

What Alinsky’s critics saw was the burgeoning of a national movement, the carefully manipulated construction of people’s organizations, which all had two elements in common: (1) a collectivist creed, which denied the existence of personal responsibility; and (2) an amoral dogma, in which all means were justified by an imaginary utopian end.

While most modern Americans remember well Hitler’s Holocaust and the Cold War waged by a solid U.S.S.R., many of these same Americans have swallowed some false history regarding the movements that spawned such widespread, horrendous results. In what may be regarded as the most triumphant propaganda victory of our time, fascism has been scrubbed of all its Marxist roots, while communism has been scrubbed of its millions of callous murders.

This post-WWII propaganda coup undeniably set the stage for the early Alinsky critics’ most feared eventuality, that the massive organizations could be shrewdly adopted by a fascist demagogue, someone who could “seize leadership and control” and turn them into a “Frankenstein’s monster against democracy.”

But perhaps the most cunning propaganda feat in history has been undertaken for the past 8 years. As Jonah Goldberg expertly expounds in his book, Liberal Fascism, American left-wing ideologues have managed to dissociate themselves from all the horrors of fascism with a “brilliant rhetorical maneuver.” They’ve done it by “claiming that their opponents are the fascists.”

Alinsky himself employed this method, quite deviously. Alinsky biographer, Sanford D. Horwitt provides an anecdote using precisely this diabolical tactic to deceive the people. From Horwitt’s Let Them Call Me Rebel:

“...in the spring of 1972, at Tulane University...students asked Alinsky to help plan a protest of a scheduled speech by George H. W. Bush, then U.S. representative to the United Nations - a speech likely to include a defense of the Nixon administration’s Vietnam War policies. The students told Alinsky they were thinking about picketing or disrupting Bush’s address. That’s the wrong approach, he rejoined, not very creative - and besides causing a disruption might get them thrown out of school. He told them, instead, to go to hear the speech dressed as members of the Ku Klux Klan, and whenever Bush said something in defense of the Vietnam War, they should cheer and wave placards reading, ‘The KKK supports Bush.’ And that is what they did, with very successful, attention-getting results.”

In what may eventually prove to be a devious rhetorical feat of monstrous proportions, while the left has been indulging and fostering the “Bush Is Hitler” meme, they may have just put a genuine ideological fascist heir in the White House.

There is inherent danger in making scurrilous comparisons (as were perpetrated unceasingly against George W. Bush), but there seem to be some very worrisome signs in the rise of Barack Obama that we Americans would be foolish to ignore.

Obama, the Closer

As I put forth last year in “Obama, the Closer”, Barack Obama, did not start his movement; Alinsky did.

Nor did Obama amass the organizations that propelled him. As detailed by Heidi J. Swarts, in her book, Organizing Urban America, the movement begun by Saul Alinsky in the 1930s has morphed into thousands of secular and faith-based leftist political organizations. ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) has perhaps the highest public profile, is most reputed for radicalism, and is the organization with which Barack Obama was first aligned. But ACORN is the mere tip of a veritable iceberg of Alinsky-styled community organizations that sweep across the entire United States and make up the backbone of faith-based progressive movements as well.

These euphemistically called “community” organizations have next to nothing to do with improving the communities and everything to do with politics, primarily strong-arming government money to advance their political aims.

Prior to Reagan’s election, these groups worked independently for the most part, each seeking to effect local change towards leftist ends.

But with Reagan’s victory, ACORN founding member Wade Rathke sent out a memo (published by Swarts; Organizing Urban America; p. 29) that would reverberate all the way to Barack Obama’s moment. ACORN had been behaving as a sort of “Lone Ranger of the Left” for too long, wrote Rathke. Ronald Reagan had formed a coalition among the middle-class that threatened to bring greater prosperity without left-wing Statists calling the shots. Rathke put out the call to the ACORN troops to stop antagonizing those who would be allies, especially unions and church organizations, once shunned by ACORN as too placid for the real fight for power. For the next 25 years, the community organization network built, proliferated and formed a solid, nation-wide base of political strength, purely according to Alinsky’s original vision, and all just waiting for the right candidate to tap into it and lead it.

When folks from all corners of America proclaimed, seemingly with one voice, Barack is the “One we’ve been waiting for,” they were speaking out of the vast Alinsky-originated network.

Neither did Barack Obama invent the political “ideology of change,” nor design its carefully crafted propaganda. While media folks talked of the tingles up their legs and the brilliant rhetoric of Barack Obama, they were heralding the speaker only, not the creator of the movement and its slogans. That would have been Saul Alinsky, the man who took fascism and cunningly made it appear to casual observers every bit as American as apple pie.

Barack Obama is merely the movement’s closer, the quintessential liberal fascist with a teleprompter.

Alinsky’s Ideology of Change: The Third Way

Goldberg fastidiously notes the comparison between Alinsky’s “in your face” rules for radicals, studied and perfected by Barack Obama, and shows them to have profoundly fascist roots:

“...there’s no disputing that vast swaths of his (Alinsky’s) writings are indistinguishable from the fascist rhetoric of the 1920s and 1930s...His worldview is distinctly fascistic.

Life is defined by war, contests of power, the imposition of will.

Moreover, Alinsky shares with the fascists and pragmatists of yore a bedrock hostility to dogma. All he believes in are the desired ends of the movement, which he regards as the source of life’s meaning...But what comes through most is his unbridled love of power. Power is a good in its own right for Alinsky. Ours ‘is a world not of angels but of angles,’ he proclaims in Rules for Radicals, ‘where men speak of moral principles but act on power principles.”

Saul Alinsky was the man who transformed politics in America into all-out war mode. Alinsky’s tenth rule of the ethics of means: “You do what you can with what you have and clothe it with moral garments.” All’s fair in love and war, and politics, to Alinsky, was war.

“A People’s (community) Organization is not a philanthropic plaything or a social service’s ameliorative gesture. It is a deep, hard-driving force, striking and cutting at the very roots of all the evils which beset the people. It thinks and acts in terms of social surgery and not cosmetic cover-ups.

A People’s Organization is dedicated to an eternal war. A war is not an intellectual debate, and in the war against social evils there are no rules of fair play.”
Saul Alinsky; Reveille for Radicals; p. 133

Alinsky includes an entire section in Rules for Radicals on “The Ideology of Change.” The watchword of the Obama campaign was “change.” Just as Hitler mobilized the masses with a calculatingly undefined demand for “change,” so did Alinsky disciple, Barack Obama.

“Everything must be different!” or “Alles muss anders sein!,” Hitler’s own campaign slogan, morphed into “Unite for Change,” and the Obama transition team’s change.gov. Even the idea of a vast “movement” was borrowed from Hitler. As Goldberg states, Hitler used the phrase, “the Movement,” more than 200 times in Mein Kampf.

The word ‘movement’ itself is instructive. Movement, unlike progress, doesn’t imply a fixed destination. Rather, it takes it as a given that any change is better.
(Goldberg; Liberal Fascism; p. 176)

Perhaps the most intoxicating allure to the fascist demagogue and his movement for undefined change is its misleadingly conciliatory flavor. Barack Obama continually, throughout his campaign and even now, portrays himself as the Third Way between the cantankerous factions that have polarized America for the past 80 years, since liberal fascism took root as the Progressive Movement.

Obama claimed that Bush was too much the ideologue, that his policies were driven by the Christian right, involved “false choices” between all-out war on the one hand and diplomacy on the other, between the welfare state and cold-hearted, do-nothing conservatism, between absolute sovereignty and cowardly submission to the global community, between doing all and doing nothing. And if any of this gibberish were a true reflection of our political disagreements, Obama would be somewhat correct. But as any sentient person knows, this radical presentation of Obama’s is absolutely false. That gets lost, though, in the leader’s conciliatory tone.

What must not get lost, however, is the very real fact that this Third Way movement for change is as fascist as anything we have ever seen in the USA. As Alinsky described his own “Ideology of Change,” the lure is in the claim that the leader has no ideology that would confine his outlook to hard choices between what is moral or immoral, that there are no boundaries set by either religion or politics, that everything can change and the only thing that matters is one’s end intention to do something good.

As Hitler, before Alinsky, proclaimed, “Our program is to govern,” not delve into theory and dogma. This is in itself very appealing, especially to an electorate sick of the contentiousness of the past decade. This undefined “ideology of change” for the sake of change, for some action that will break through the roadblocks of polarization, has tremendous allure.

But Goldberg bursts that bubble:

The ‘middle way’ sounds moderate and un-radical. Its appeal is that it sounds unideological and freethinking. But philosophically the Third Way is not mere difference splitting; it is utopian and authoritarian. Its utopian aspect becomes manifest in its antagonism to the idea that politics is about trade-offs. The Third Wayer says that there are no false choices -‘I refuse to accept that X should come at the expense of Y.’ The Third Way holds that we can have capitalism and socialism, individual liberty and absolute unity. Fascist movements are implicitly utopian because they - like communist and heretical Christian movements — assume that with just the right arrangement of policies, all contradictions can be rectified.
(Goldberg; Liberal Fascism; p. 130)

Of course, thinking people — when they are indeed thinking — know this is an utterly false promise. Life will never be made perfect because all human beings are imperfect.

Unity, the Diabolical Lure

What of this longed-for unity then? Barack Obama proclaimed he was leading a movement of people “united for change.” What is the appeal of unity?

The modern liberal fascist seeks that state between mother and child which exists early on before the child seeks his own independence, before mother must set herself at odds with him. It is the perfectly secure state of childhood where all is lovely and peaceful and nurturing, but cannot continue indefinitely if the child is to be prepared to face a world of difficulty and hard choices. Nevertheless, the yearning continues. It is this primordial yearning which sets itself in the crosshairs of the fascist demagogue.

But in adult life, this type of unity is anything but desirable, anything but virtuous. As Goldberg states, however, “elevation of unity as the highest social value is a core tenet of fascism and all leftist ideologies.”

The allure of this mystical unity is so great that its demand to sacrifice reason and thought on the false altar of infantile security is seemingly lost to many. But as Goldberg also reminds us, “unity is, at best, morally neutral and often a source of irrationality and groupthink.”

Rampaging mobs are unified. The Mafia is unified. Marauding barbarians bent on rape and pillage are unified. Meanwhile, civilized people have disagreements, and small-d democrats have arguments. Classical liberalism is based on this fundamental insight, which is why fascism was always anti-liberal.

Liberalism rejected the idea that unity is more valuable than individuality. For fascists and other leftists, meaning and authenticity are found in collective enterprises - of class, nation, or race - and the state is there to enforce that meaning on everyone without the hindrance of debate.
(Goldberg; Liberal Fascism; p. 172)

Just as the healthy relationship between parent and developing child demands friction, so does the healthy relationship between truly liberal citizens. Unity is the siren song of tyranny, not the call to genuine progress.

Fascism: The Two Birds with One Stone Approach

I think of Obama’s liberal fascism as a cancer that attempts to kill the two birds of American exceptionalism with one stone. It is a deviously appealing Third Way that in the end, if allowed to triumph completely, kills both individual liberty and Judeo/Christian religion with its single stone.

And, indeed this was the precise goal of Adolph Hitler. Unlike the outspoken hatred of private property and religion espoused by communists under Lenin and Stalin, Hitler preferred the more moderate-seeming incremental takeover of private enterprise in the interest of the “common good,” and the slow-death of Judeo/Christian religion by chipping away at it and replacing the people’s dependence upon God gradually with reliance on the state (Hitler).

[Note: Hitler’s Holocaust was based on the Progressive Eugenics principles set forth by Social Darwinist scientists and social engineers of the 1920s, widely accepted both in Europe and in the United States. Religion was not at the core of the Holocaust; race was. However, Hitler’s other chief aim was to destroy the Judeo/Christian religions, which he believed had ruined the Germanic race’s world predominance.]

Of course, as the German people were duped into giving Hitler totalitarian powers to work his magic “change,” he took off the kid gloves and accelerated the program.

In the end, however slow the process, however seemingly benign the growth of the state may seem, liberal fascism has the same result of all tyrannies before it: hell on earth for most and a self-indulgent feast for the Statists in power.

As Barack Obama speaks, thinking Americans ought to hear the echoes of past fascist demagogues and remember. Remember.

When Barack Obama promises “collective redemption” through his profligate spending programs and vast overtures to a new world order built on love for our fellow man, we ought to shudder not swoon.

We ought to remember that healthy global relationships are built upon respect, not all-encompassing love, and that redemption for one’s soul is a commodity the state is not empowered to offer.

As Pope Benedict XVI has so presciently warned:

Wherever politics tries to be redemptive, it is promising too much. Where it wishes to do the work of God, it becomes, not divine, but demonic.

Be not fooled, America. The movement, which appears most benign is instead the most malignant growth ever seen on our soil. It’s a cancer that will kill, and however slowly it grows or however nice it may look on the surface, doesn’t change a thing.

Kyle-Anne Shiver is a frequent contributor to American Thinker. She welcomes your comments at kyleanneshiver@gmail.com .

NO EARMARKS = POWER GRAB!

2011-01-29T16:58:00.000-08:00

Ban on “Earmarks” Called “Power Grab”
A Semi-News/Semi-Satire from AzConservative ^ | 29 Jan 2011 | John Semmens

President Barack Obama’s pledge to veto legislation containing so-called “earmarks” has so rankled Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev) that he has vowed “to fight to my last breath against this power grab.”

“The President isn’t the only one who gets to say who will be on the receiving end of government spending,” Reid said. “All of us who must face the voters need campaign donations if we’re to be reelected. Channeling federal dollars to the businesses and interest groups who fill our campaign coffers is the payback that’s expected from these donors.

Without it their incentive to give will dry up.”

Reid said he wasn’t entirely unsympathetic to “the President’s desire to focus the gratitude of potential donors on his own bid for reelection in 2012. I mean, raising a billion dollar campaign fund is a huge task. But trying to hog it all for himself overlooks the fact that he needs Congress’ support to govern.

He’s not going to get that support from a body comprised of legislators who are forced to run on their merits alone.”

“Without the quid pro quo of earmarks we’ll likely end up with a Congress controlled by Tea Party fanatics,” Reid warned. “Which, I would think is about the last thing we all want to have happen.”

Alan note: Speak for yourself Harry! Many wouldn't mind at all.

OBAMA 5-YEAR SPENDING FREEZE IS DEFICIT PRESERVATION!

2011-01-26T13:15:00.000-08:00

Fox News ^ | January 26, 2011

President Obama's pledge to freeze some federal spending for five years was met with yawns Wednesday from a slew of fiscally minded Republicans who say that if the president is serious about tackling the national debt, he'll have to do a lot better than that.

Congressional Republicans want to see deep cuts in the budget, as demonstrated by a GOP proposal last week to slash $2.5 trillion over the next decade and a proposal Tuesday from Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., to cut $500 billion in one year.

Their calls to dismantle entire agencies and departments might not get much bipartisan support. But by comparison, the president's call to freeze domestic spending for five years, yielding a projected savings of $400 billion over a decade, looked too tame to many lawmakers.

"We're continuing to spend at a deficit level, so if we do that for the next five years, we'll continue to add to our debt," Rep. Kristi Noem, R-S.D., told Fox News. "The reality of his speech last night is very difficult to imagine."

DRIVE SAFELY AND OBEY THE RULES

2011-01-14T21:54:00.000-08:00

Having noticed a huge increase in the police presence in the streets and lots of traffic stops - including of pedestrians, it i interesting to note the cost of fines.

California needs money, so pay close attention to the rules of the road!

HUGE California Traffic Tickets Fines

California State

Effective 01/06/2011

Please be extremely careful in your driving and car registration/ insurance matters. State of California is broke and they are trying hard to squeeze all of us hard to collect money.

Effective immediately, if you do not stop at the red light, be ready to pay $436 in fines or if you pass a school bus with flashing red signals, you will be charged $616. The state of California is going for blood, so be extra careful in driving, You cannot afford messing with them. I have been hearing that Highway Patrols are under pressure to issue a lot more tickets than last year with at least 30% increase in fines over 2009, so beware of radar guns, highway and traffic cameras installed everywhere and the tougher enforcement of parking rules.

Just for your info, the next time you park in the handicapped zone, even for a minute, you will be looking at almost $ 1000 in parking tickets , so it'd better be worth it.

California needs money, so pay close attention to the rules of the road!

Traffic Ticket Fines (Effective 01/06/2011)

VC 12814.6 $214 Failure to obey license provisions.

VC 14600(A) $214 Failure to notify DMV of address change within 10 days

Note: The fine may be reduced with valid proof of correction.

VC 16028(A) $796 Failure to provide evidence of financial responsibility (insurance)

Note: This fine may be reduced with proof of insurance on or after the violation date.

VC 21453(A) $436 Failure to stop at a red signal.

VC 22349 $214 Unsafe speed, 1 to 15 miles over the limit.

VC 22350 $328 Unsafe speed, 16 to 25 miles over the limit.

VC 22450 $214 Failure to stop at a stop sign.

VC 22454(A) $616 Passing a school bus with flashing red signals.

VC 23123(A) $148 Driving while using a wireless phone not hands free, first offense .

I know someone who got this and it ending up being $274

VC 23123(B) $256 Driving while using a wireless phone not hands free, each subsequent offense.

VC 23123.5 $148 Driving while using a wireless device to send, read or write text.

VC 23124 $148 Minor driving while using a wireless phone.

VC 22500 $976 Parking in a bus loading area.

VC 22507(A) $976 Violation of disabled parking provisions, first offense.

VC 22507(B) $1876 Violation of disabled parking provisions, second offense.

VC 26708 $178 Unlawful material on vehicle windows.

VC 27150 $178 Adequate muffler required.

VC 27315 $148 Mandatory use of seat belts.

VC 27360 $436 Mandatory use of passenger child restraints.

Note: This fine may be reduced by completing a court authorized child seat diversion program .

VC 27400 $178 Headsets or Earplugs covering both ears.

VC 27803 $178 Violation of motorcycle safety helmet requirements.

VC 34506 $616 Commercial Driver - Log book violation.

VC 4000 $256 No evidence of current registration.

Note: The fine may be reduced with valid proof of correction.

VC 4159 $178 Notify DMV of change of address within 10 days.

Note: The fine may be reduced with valid proof of correction.

VC 5200 $178 Proper display of license plates.

Note: The fine may be reduced with valid proof of correction.

.
VC 9400 $178 Commercial weight fees due.

Note: The fine may be reduced with valid proof of correction

Look out for the money grabbers in Sacramento but don‘t always blame the cops. They don’t set the fines or collect them BUT they can use "selective/biased" judgment - not usually in your favor - in writing the tickets! There are a few bad apples among the otherwise dedicated forces and the most prominent "hardliners" are the motorcycle ones. Their total reason for being is traffic, so there is no offset in their duty mindsets and what denotes doing their job well.

One very common habit is to write up speed ticket swith a speed of more than 15 miles over the posted limit - for instance claiming the radar gun showed a speed of 51 repeat 51 miles in a 35 mile zone to hike the fine amount.

VC 22349 $214 Unsafe speed, 1 to 15 miles over the limit.

VC 22350 $328 Unsafe speed, 16 to 25 miles over the limit.

They have no obligation to show you any proof of the speed registered on their radar or similar instrument at the stop so it is what they say it is. If urged to meet a "quota" or a minimum number of stops during their shift by their city or superiors, they often behave as we fallible humans do.

A survey of speeding traffic tickets issued across California would probably amaze the researcher as to how high this "over 15" percentage proves to be! And the huge difference in revenue this engenders. (With less work for the pressured officers, who after all are human beings not saints).

OBAMA AGAIN ON ANNUAL MOST CORRUPT LIST

2010-12-20T20:39:00.000-08:00

OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL

Encore! Obama repeats appearance on 'most corrupt' list
Joined by Boxer, Emanuel, Ensign, Pelosi, Rangel, Waters

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Bob Unruh

Barack Obama has been encored on the "Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians" for 2010, a list published annually by the a Washington-based organization that focuses on transparency, accountability and integrity in the government, politics and law of the United States.

"Remember the promise President Obama made just after his inauguration in 2009? 'Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency,'" said Judicial Watch in today's announcement.

"Instead, Americans have suffered through lies, stonewalling, cover-ups, corruption, secrecy, scandal and blatant disregard for the rule of law … this has been the Obama legacy in its first two years."

The full list, in alphabetical order, names:
Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.;
Former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel;
Sen. John Ensign, R-N.V.;
Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass.;
Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr., D-Ill.;
Barack Obama,
Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.;
Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y.;
Rep. Hal Rogers, R-Ky.; and
Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif.

About Obama, the report said he was "caught in a lie" over what he knew about Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich's "scheme to sell the president's vacated Senate seate."

The report explained, "Blagojevich's former Chief of Staff John Harris testified that Obama had personal knowledge of Blago's plot to obtain a presidential cabinet position in exchange for appointing a candidate handpicked by the president. In fact, according to Harris's court testimony, Obama sent Blagojevich a list of 'acceptable' Senate candidates to fill his old seat. Obama was interviewed by the FBI even before he was sworn into office. He claimed he and his staff had no contact with Blagojevich's office."

The White House did not respond to a WND request for comment.

According to Judicial Watch, "Unfortunately federal prosecutors never called the president or his staff to testify under oath."

Further, Obama broke "his famous pledge to televise health-care negotiations."

"In 2010, we learned why he broke his pledge. In what is now known as the 'Cornhusker Kickback' scheme, Obama and the Democrats in the Senate 'purchased' the vote of one of the last Democrat hold-outs, Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson, who opposed Obamacare over the issue of covering abortions with taxpayer funds," the report said.

"Nelson abandoned his opposition to Obamacare after receiving millions of dollars in federal aid for his home state, helping to give the Democrats the 60 votes they needed to overcome a Republican filibuster. Same goes for Louisiana Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu, who received a $100 million payoff in what has been called 'The Louisiana Purchase.' (The Kickback was so corrupt that Democrats stripped it out at the last minute. The Louisiana Purchase, on the other hand, became law of the land.)" the report said.

"Obama lied about his White House's involvement in this legislative bribery that helped lead to the passage of the signature policy achievement of his presidency," the report said.

Founded in 1994, Judicial Watch describes itself as a constitutionally conservative, nonpartisan education foundation that promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law."

The other celebrities "honored" on the list:

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. – who, it appears, "still needs an ethics lesson," the report said. She's chair of the Senate Select Committee on Ethics, and presided over a year-long investigation into the "preferential treatment" Sens. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., and Kent Conrad, D-N.D., may have gotten from Countrywide Financial. Senate rules prohibit members from getting loan terms not available to the general public, Judicial Watch said.

"The evidence clearly showed that Dodd and Conrad knew they were receiving preferential treatment despite repeated denials. Yet Boxer's Senate Ethics Committee allowed Dodd and Conrad to wriggle off the hook with a light admonition that suggested the two senators should have exercised better judgment.

But that's not all, the report said. "Boxer failed to mention (or disclose on her official Senate Financial Disclosure documents) that she and her husband have signed no less than seven mortgages with Countrywide! At the time of the hearing, Boxer reportedly indicated she had paid off two Countrywide mortgages, but did not mention the others.

Former Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel – who "didn't earn the nickname 'Rahmbo' for being a mild-mannered shrinking violet," Judicial Watch said. Among his issues cited: He served as Bill Clinton's chief money-man when the Clinton campaign was "corrupted by foreign money." He was a "ruthless political combatant" in defending Clinton in the Lewinsky scandal. He allegedly interfered with Senate elections in Pennsylvania and Colorado by offering federal appointments to Rep. Joe Sestak and Andrew Romanoff and participated "in the Blagojevich scandal."

"According to sworn testimony during the 'Blago' trial, Emanuel served as Obama's chief negotiator with the Blagojevich team as the former Illinois governor attempted to illegally sell Obama's former Senate seat to the highest bidder. Unfortunately, the federal prosecutor cut short the case against Blagojevich and Emanuel and other Obama insiders were never called to testify," Judicial Watch reported.

And, regarding the elections, "Sestak and Romanoff were not Obama's favored candidates, so Emanuel and Messina apparently attempted to unlawfully persuade them to abandon their campaigns.

"Emanuel left the White House under an ethical cloud and has decided to throw his hat in the ring for mayor of Chicago, where he again stands accused of ignoring the rules and violating the law regarding candidate residency requirements," the report said.

Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev. – publicly admitted an affair with the wife of a staff member, and evidence "indicates" he tried to cover up his shenanigans "by bribing the couple with lucrative gifts and political favors," Judicial Watch said.

The New York Times said, JW reported, that, "Payments of $96,000 to the Hamptons also were made by Sen. Ensign's parents, who insist this was a gift, not hush money. Once a lobbying job was secured, Senator Ensign and his chief of staff continued to help [Doug] Hampton, advocating his clients' cases directly with federal agencies."

But Judicial Watch reported not only did the lobbying apparently violate Senate rules, the "$96,000 in 'gifts' provided to the Hamptons were clearly hush payments."

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass. – Where to start? He allegedly "intervened" for Rep. Waters on behalf of his home-state OneUnited Bank to get Troubled Asset Relief Program money, and "to this day, Barney Frnak continues to defend his role in the meltdown of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying he was just as blindsided as the rest of America when the two government sponsored enterprises collapsed, triggering the financial crisis."

But the report said The Boston Globe documented that Frank should have known.

"Frank wasn't wrong," said Judicial Watch. "He was just lying through his teeth. Frank claims that he 'missed' the warning signs with Fannie and Freddie because he was wearing 'ideological blinders,' which was just his lame attempt to blame Republicans. But he did not miss them. According to evidence uncovered by Judicial Watch, he just chose to ignore them," the report said.

Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Ill. – was described by the Chicago Sun-Times as directing "a major political fundraiser to offer former Gov. Rod Blagojevich millions of dollars in campaign cash in return for an appointment to the U.S. Senate." Judicial Watch said while "Blago" was convicted on one of 24 charges related to the scheme, it is Jackson "who should be on the hot-seat."

"According to Jackson's fundraiser, Raghuveer Nayak, the Illinois congressman asked him to offer not $1.5 million, but a whopping $6 million in campaign cash to Blagojevich to secure the Senate seat!" Judicial Watch said. "In addition to his corrupt deal-making, in 2010 Jackson was also nailed for conducting an improper and potentially criminal relationship with a female 'social acquaintance.'"

Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. – Judicial Watch said "Air Pelosi" now is grounded.

"Judicial Watch uncovered documents back in 2009 detailing attempts by Pentagon staff to accommodate Pelosi's numerous requests for military escorts and military aircraft for herself and her family as well as the speaker's 11th-hour cancellations and changes. In 2010, Judicial Watch kept the pressure on Pelosi, uncovering documents that demonstrated the speaker was using U.S. Air Force aircraft as her own personal party planes. Overall, the speaker's military travel cost the United States Air Force $2,100,744.59 over a two-year period — $101,429.14 of which was for in-flight expenses, including food and alcohol," the report said.

Among the purchases were Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey's Irish Cream, Maker's Mark whisky, Courvoisier cognac, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewar's scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey, Corona beer and several bottles of wine.

"Moreover, Pelosi also abused the rules by allowing members of her family to join her on taxpayer-funded Air Force flights. For example, on June 20, 2009, Speaker Pelosi's daughter, son-in-law and two grandsons joined a flight from Andrews Air Force Base to San Francisco International Airport. That flight included $143 for on-flight expenses for food and other items. On July 2, 2010, Pelosi took her grandson on a flight from Andrews Air Force Base to Travis Air Force Base in Fairfield, California, which is northeast of San Francisco," the report said.

Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., – Earlier this month the U.S. House voted 333-79 to "censure" Rangel, which, the report said, is next to expulsion as the most serious sanction that can be taken. Judicial Watch said Rangel's ethics violations included forgetting to pay taxes on $75,000 in rental income, misusing his congressional office to raise money for his private center, misusing his residentially zoned Harlem apartment as a campaign headquarters and failing to report $600,000 in income.

"It is worth noting that the [House] committee did not consider other serious corruption charges against Rangel. For example, it has been alleged that Rangel preserved a tax loophole for an oil company in exchange for a Rangel Center donation. The committee also did not consider the charge that Rangel used improper influence to maintain ownership of his highly coveted rent-controlled apartment – the same apartment he improperly used for campaign activities," Judicial Watch said.

"As this is Washington, politicians of both parties will pretend that censure is a serious punishment. But it is a 'punishment' that simply requires Rangel to come to the well of the House and hear a disapproving statement read by lame-duck House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. In the real world, you get fired or thrown in jail for abusing your office and not paying your taxes," the report said.

Rep. Hal Rogers, R-Ky. – Judicial Watch said Rogers, even though the 2010 election focused on cutting government spending, was named chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, and according to ABC, "In two years, Rogers pushed through 135 earmarks worth $246 million. He's brought tens of millions of dollars into his hometown of Somerset, Ky., so much so that the town has been dubbed 'Mr. Rogers' neighborhood.'" Judicial Watch said those earmarks included $17 million for an airport that is so disused the last commercial airline pulled out in February [2010].

Other expenditures he sought included $5 million for a Namibia-based group that employs his daughter.

Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif. – The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (known informally as the House Ethics Committee) plans to hold hearings on Waters, according to the AP, on allegations "Waters broke the rules in requesting federal help for a bank where her husband owned stock and had served on the board of directors."

Judicial Watch has investigated the Waters/OneUnited Bank scandal for months. In fact, JW successfully sued the Obama Treasury Department to get documents and obtained explosive e-mails from the Treasury that provide documented evidence to support the charges against Waters.

It also reported a lobbyist reportedly paid Waters' husband $15,000 in consulting fees at the time she was co-sponsoring legislation that would help save a client.

Judicial reported among those listed on the "most wanted" list in earlier years was former lobbyist Jack Abramoff, later sentenced to nearly six years in prison for a fraudulent casino deal.

Another individual previously cited was former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, who recently was convicted of funneling corporate money to Texas candidates. He's planning an appeal.

A third is Dodd, who announced he would not run for re-election and as of January, will be out of office.

The 2009 list included Dodd, Obama, Frank, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, Attorney General Eric Holder, Pelosi, Rep. John Murtha, Ensign, Jackson and Rangel.

IS OBAMACARE ON ITS DEATHBED?

2010-11-28T15:36:00.000-08:00

WASHINGTON — As the Obama administration presses ahead with the new health care law, officials are bracing for the possibility that a federal judge in Virginia will soon reject its central provision as unconstitutional and, in the worst case for the White House, halt its enforcement until higher courts can rule.

The judge, Henry Hudson of U.S. District Court in Richmond, has promised to rule by the end of the year on the constitutionality of the law's requirement that most Americans obtain insurance, which does not take effect until 2014.

Although administration officials remain confident that it is constitutionally valid to compel people to obtain health insurance, they also acknowledge that Hudson's preliminary opinions and comments could presage the first ruling against the law.

"He's asked a number of questions that express skepticism," said one administration official who is examining whether a ruling against part of the law would raise questions about whether other provisions would automatically collapse. "We have been trying to think through that set of questions," said the official, who insisted on anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the case freely.

While many newly empowered Republican lawmakers have vowed to repeal the health care law in Congress, a more immediate threat may rest in the federal courts in cases brought by Republican officials in dozens of states. Not only would an adverse ruling confuse Americans and attackthe law's underpinnings, but it could frustrate the steps hospitals, insurers and government agencies are taking to carry out the law.

"Any ruling against the act creates another PR problem for the Democrats, who need to resell the law to insured Americans," said Jonathan Oberlander, a University of North Carolina political scientist, who wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine last week that such a ruling "could add to health care reform's legitimacy problem."

So far, there has been only one ruling on the merits among nearly two dozen legal challenges to the act. Last month, a U.S. district judge in Michigan upheld the law. Another judge, Roger Vinson of U.S. District Court in Pensacola, Fla., has joined Hudson in writing preliminary opinions that seemingly accept key arguments made by state officials challenging the law.

Unlike the judge in Michigan, who was appointed by President Bill Clinton, both Hudson and Vinson were appointed by Republican presidents.

"We are not operating under the assumption that those two judges are inevitably going to rule against us," the administration official said. "But of course we're planning for the possibility that judges will reach different conclusions."

The novel question before the courts is whether the government can require citizens to buy a commercial product like health insurance. Because the Supreme Court has said the commerce clause of the Constitution allows Congress to regulate "activities that substantially affect interstate commerce," the judges must decide whether the failure to obtain insurance can be defined as an "activity."

Administration officials, as well as some lawyers for the plaintiffs, agree that Hudson seems unlikely, based on his comments from the bench, to enjoin the entire law. The judge volunteered at a hearing last month that his courtroom was "just one brief stop on the way to the Supreme Court."

If he does not enjoin the law, the immediate impact of a finding against the insurance mandate would be limited because that provision, and others that might fall with it, do not take effect for more than three years.

Virginia's attorney general, Kenneth Cuccinelli II, a Republican who filed the Richmond lawsuit, argues that if Hudson rejects the insurance requirement he should instantly invalidate the entire act on a nationwide basis.

Cuccinelli and the plaintiffs in the Florida case, who include attorneys general or governors from 20 states, have emphasized that congressional bill writers did not include a "severability clause" that would explicitly protect other parts of the sprawling law if certain provisions were struck down.

The administration argues that other key provisions do not depend on the insurance mandate. Those provisions include establishing health insurance exchanges, subsidizing premiums through tax credits and expanding Medicaid eligibility, all scheduled for 2014.

Nor, administration officials said, would an adverse ruling necessarily undermine certain insurance regulations that recently took effect, like the requirement that insurers cover children younger than 26 on their parents' policies.

Any illusion the cases are not highly politicized was lost when Republican leaders raced this month to file friend-of-the-court briefs in Pensacola, and Democrats responded with briefs from state legislators and supportive economists. Among the Republicans intervening in the case are Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, the future speaker; 32 U.S. senators; and Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, a possible presidential candidate.

TARZAN

2010-11-08T00:39:00.000-08:00

This is a naughty joke ! But in the interest of humor and freedom of speech, it is my duty not to censure, nor censor the Email we received.

I was at the store yesterday, and I ran into Tarzan!

I asked him how it was going and if he was into making anymore movies.

He told me that he could no longer make any more movies as he had severe arthritis in both shoulders and could no longer swing from vine to tree.

I asked how Jane was doing, he told me she was in bad shape, in a nursing home, has Alzheimer's and no longer recognizes anyone.

How sad.

I asked about Boy, and he told me that Boy had gone to the big city, got hooked up with bad women, drugs, alcohol, and the only times he heard from him was when he was in trouble or needed something.

I asked about Cheeta. He beamed and said she was doing good.
She married a lawyer, had gotten some plastic surgery, and now lived in the White House!!!

I'm so ashamed of myself!

OBAMA SPENDING LIKE A DRUNKEN SAILOR ON JUNKETS

2010-10-31T17:11:00.000-07:00

COST OF TWO DAY INDIA JAUNT

My guess would be WELL OVER ONE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS - OR MORE when one considers these details:

TO DO WHAT?

Did I not hear something about selling India about $127 million worth of aircraft? Spending $100 million or more to achieve this means you have already spent all or more of the project INCOME let alone any profit.

On a trip to take your wife and kids to see the Taj Mahal?

And visit a Moslem mosque?

And a Brothel? Yes! See itinerary below. Good grief!

I was questioning who paid for his partisan campaign trips all around America.

It's understandable that Obama wants to be on the other side of the world when results from the mid-term elections are being realized.

But, in a time of hardship for so many Americans, one can only wonder what the extravagance of his November 6th trip to India will cost. Here are a few highlights:

- The President has booked all 570 rooms, banquet rooms, and restaurants at the 5-star Taj Mahal hotel.

- In addition to the Taj Mahal Hotel, 125 rooms at the Taj President, and 80 to 90 rooms at each the Grand Hyatt and Oberoi Hotels have been booked for his additional entourage.

- In addition to Air force one, two jumbo jets and military figher escorts will be usd to ferry his staff.

- 45 cars will be used in his motorcade.

- 40 military fighter aircraft to provide air protection.

- Because the Taj Mahal Hotel is seaside, the U.S. Navy will be patrolling the waters out to 330 km off the coast.

- The administration has booked the entire India National Center for the Performing Arts to meet with business leaders.

- The security detail will be HUGE.

- Michelle is going to meet with 'commercial sex workers'. (Brothels) Why, I don't know. But the additional cost of her security to enter the seediest areas of Mumbai must be quite a bit.

- The distruption of life and traffic in Mumbai will cost the locals plenty.

Read the article from the Economic Times here:

"US President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle will be extremely busy in Mumbai, upon landing on November 6 for a two day India visit. As the world’s most powerful man and his wife zip around the city visiting the 26/11 memorial on Marine Drive, the National Centre for Performing Arts (NCPA), Mani Bhawan and other locations in south Mumbai, the security obviously will be water-tight .

Adding to the Obamas’ busy schedule is Michelle’s likely visit to Kamathipura, where she will meet commercial sex workers on the invitation of an NGO. The highprofile visit is likely to inconvenience the citizens, as there could be a complete clampdown on traffic on some main roads of south Mumbai and sanitisation of buildings flanking them.

The Obamas will stay at the Taj Mahal Hotel, and his itinerary practically means Marine Drive will be shut for vehicular traffic on the day of the President’s visit, while buildings flanking it will be sanitised with security personnel manning them until Obama has left the place. Same would be the case with Obama’s visit to Mani Bhawan and Michelle going to Kamathipura.

An officer with the security establishment said, “Several other arterial roads in south Mumbai will also see restricted traffic movement, with tight security all around. The Obamas are not expected to schedule any engagements in the night due to security reasons.”

Since Obama is expected to arrive in the afternoon on November 6, and will travel by road to the Taj Mahal Hotel, the entire stretch from airport to the hotel will be under heavy security. The officer said, “There will be no vehicular movement on Western Express Highway at that time. Traffic on roads leading up to the highway will also be stopped. All buildings flanking the entire stretch will be sanitised.

However, there is no threat from the snipers as the President will travel in a bullet-proof car with 4.5-inch thick sheets, which are impenetrable for any gun.”

Obama’s personal security staff itself will be huge, and it has already started making its own arrangements in Mumbai. “A team of secret service agents has already arrived, and has surveyed the areas of his stay and the roads and places on his itinerary,” the officer said.

To ensure fool-proof security, the President’s team has booked the entire the Taj Mahal Hotel, including 570 rooms, all banquets and restaurants. Since his security contingent and staff will comprise a huge number, 125 rooms at Taj President have also been booked, apart from 80 to 90 rooms each in Grand Hyatt and The Oberoi hotels. The NCPA, where the President is expected to meet representatives from the business community, has also been entirely booked. The officer said, “Obama’s contingent is huge.

There are two jumbo jets coming along with Air Force One, which will be flanked by security jets. There will be 30 to 40 secret service agents, who will arrive before him. The President’s convoy has 45 cars, including the Lincoln Continental in which the President travels.”

Since Obama will stay in a hotel that is on sea front, elaborate coastal security arrangements have been made by the US Navy in consonance with the Indian Navy and the Coast Guard. “There will be US naval ships, along with Indian vessels , patrolling the sea till about 330-km from the shore. This is to negate the possibility of a missile being fired from a distance,” the officer said.

The President will be accompanied by his chefs, not because he would not like to savour Indian cuisine, but to ensure his food is not spiked.

US President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama are scheduled to land in Mumbai on November 6."

HAT TIP - FreeRepublic contributor "IbJensen" (Our government is a disease masquerading as its own cure.)

47% OF DEMS WANT A 2012 PRIMARY CHALLENGER AGAINST OBAMA

2010-10-30T16:36:00.000-07:00

By ALAN FRAM

WASHINGTON (AP) - Democratic voters are closely divided over whether President Barack Obama should be challenged within the party for a second term in 2012, an Associated Press-Knowledge Networks Poll finds.

That glum assessment carries over into the nation at large, which is similarly divided over whether Obama should be a one-term president.

A real Democratic challenge to Obama seems unlikely at this stage and his re-election bid is a long way off. But the findings underscore how disenchanted his party has grown heading into the congressional elections Tuesday.

The AP-KN poll has tracked a group of people and their views since the beginning of the 2008 presidential campaign. Among all 2008 voters, 51 percent say he deserves to be defeated in November 2012 while 47 percent support his re-election _ essentially a tie.

Among Democrats, 47 percent say Obama should be challenged for the 2012 nomination and 51 percent say he should not be opposed. Those favoring a contest include most who backed Hillary Rodham Clinton's unsuccessful faceoff against Obama for the 2008 nomination. The poll did not ask if Democrats would support particular challengers.

Political operatives and polling experts caution that Obama's poll standings say more about people's frustrations today with the economy and other conditions than they do about his re-election prospects. With the next presidential election two years away _ an eon in politics _ the public's view of Obama could easily improve if the economy revives or if he outmaneuvers Republicans on Capitol Hill or in the presidential campaign.

"Democrats currently disappointed with Obama will likely be less disappointed if he spends the next two years fighting a GOP Congress" should Republicans do well on Election Day, said Charles Franklin, a University of Wisconsin political science professor and polling analyst.

Even so, the poll illustrates how Obama's reputation has frayed since 2008. It suggests lingering bad feelings from Democrats' bitter primary fight, when he and Clinton _ now his secretary of state _ roughly split the popular vote. Political professionals of both parties said the findings are a warning for the president, whose formal re-election effort is expected to begin stirring next year.

"It's an indicator of things he needs to address between now and then," said Kiki McLean, a Democratic strategist who worked in Clinton's 2008 campaign.

The White House declined comment on the results.

Alan note: something that could knock Obama down, maybe out, has started to brew in South Carolina. Watch the news.

ILLEGAL ACTIVITY BY PRO-OBAMA UNIONS UNDER WAY

2010-10-24T16:13:00.000-07:00

AND OTHER ITEMS........

PERSONAL RECORDS (HOW ABOUT OBAMA'S?)

Right? I mean, all we now have to do is to run to this Judge in Alaska and point out that if Joe Miller's confidential personnel file from a prior employer needs to be made public because running for Senate is so important, certainly we are entitled to more information about Obama than he tells us in his books, right? From the Anchorage Daily News, Judge orders Miller documents released: In an unusual weekend hearing, retired Superior Court Judge Winston Burbank ruled that the public's right to know about candidates outweighed Miller's right to privacy.

============

Mr. Andy Martin, JD, will be holding a “Third National Conference on Barack Obama’s Missing Birth Certificate, College Records and Religion” in Honolulu on November 9-16, 2010. ...On October 17, 2008, Mr. Martin filed a lawsuit in Hawaii to obtain access to Barack Obama’s original long-form, typewritten birth certificate. He has stated that Hawaii officials admitted that the online COLB which has been presented as a “birth certificate” by Factcheck.org and Politifact.com is not the same as “the original” which the Department of Health has on file....Mr. Martin has filed a second lawsuit against Hawaii Governor Linda Lingle

===========

Another election related lawsuit states that three vans of Hughes High school students were taken to the polls to vote last week during school hours. They were given sample ballots only for Democratic candidates and then taken for ice cream. The suit goes on to allege that the students were chaperoned by campaign workers for U.S. Rep. Steve Driehaus, D-West Price Hill. Brinkman is demanding a restraining order from Common Pleas Court Judge Beth Myers.
============

THIS IS WHY YOU NEED TO LOAD UP YOUR CAR LIKE WHEN YOU WHERE IN SCHOOL AND TAKE ALL YOUR CONSERVATIVE FRIENDS TO THE POLLS...We need to turn out in mass numbers to counter the corruption

Do you remember when Barack Obama said “The SEIU Agenda Is My Agenda”? Now we know why.

The same SEIU offshoot group that is accused of turning in thousands of bogus voter registrations in Arizona has come under fire in Colorado. Mi Familia Vota is accused of turning in 6,000 bogus voter registrations in Colorado. The Denver Post reported:

A federal judge declined to force the secretary of state to reactivate approximately 6,000 new voters whose registrations were canceled under Colorado’s 20-day rule.

In a decision issued Monday, Senior U.S. District Judge John L. Kane denied a motion for a preliminary injunction that was requested by several labor and voting-rights groups.

===================
LEFT WING INTOLERANCE OF FREE SPEECH

A stagehand working on the stage set up for President Obama's appearance in Los Angeles was told to go home when he refused to remove his hat and shirt honoring the aircraft carrier named USS George H. W. Bush. His son is in the US Navy and serves on the ship.

================

"The Post & Email has been requesting Certificates of Nomination from the Hawaii Elections Office since July but has been denied access, even though the documents in question have been in the public domain for many months and have been reported on extensively by other researchers and bloggers. We previously reported that our requests to both the Department of Health and the Elections Office and those of many other citizens have been stonewalled, denied, ignored, or responded to by an attempt to bill the other party for an item that was never produced."

=================

A few weeks ago, I referred to President Obama as a “dhimmi president,” a subservient kowtower to Islamic power. Maybe it’s time to rethink that designation. He’s not a dhimmi. He’s a spineless, supine, surrendering subject of submission – in other words, a dhimmi-plus.

How else to explain Obama’s complacency with regard to a crescent-shaped monument (which Alec Rawls advances in “Crescent of Betrayal: Dishonoring the Heroes” his claim that the memorial is in fact the world’s largest open-air mosque), being built on National Park Service federal land at the Shanksville, PA Flight 93 crash site, while at the same time ignoring the desecration, theft and need to replace the Mojave Desert War Memorial Cross (our nation’s sole WWI federal memorial) also on National Park Service federal land? And how else to explain Obama’s stumping on behalf of the Ground Zero mosque while at the same time ignoring multiple written requests from veterans’ organizations and a host of distinguished American citizens including Speaker Newt Gingrich, Senator Rick Santorum, a few Medal of Honor recipients, Major Generals, Vice Admirals and many other esteemed citizens, asking that he restore the Memorial Cross?

==================

POLITICAL CORRECTNESS GONE AMUCK!

A civil rights complaint has been filed against a woman in Grand Rapids, Mich., who posted an advertisement at her church last July seeking a Christian roommate. The ad "expresses an illegal preference for a Christian roommate, thus excluding people of other faiths,” according to the complaint filed by the Fair Housing Center of West Michigan. "It's a violation to make, print or publish a discriminatory statement," Executive Director Nancy Haynes told Fox News. "There are no exemptions to that." Haynes said the unnamed 31-year-old woman’s case was turned over to the Michigan Department of Civil Rights.

==============

800 HOTEL ROOMS, TWO EXTRA 747 AIRCRAFT AND A HUGE RETINUE FOR HIM AND HIS WIFE - ON A TWO DAY VISIT! MORE COLLOSAL SPENDING OF OUR MONEY ON THEIR PLEASURE TRIPS TO A TEMPLE AND A LOCAL SEX PLEASURE PROVIDING LOCATION (BROTHEL?).

"Adding to the Obamas’ busy schedule is Michelle’s likely visit to Kamathipura, where she will meet commercial sex workers on the invitation of an NGO".

As the world’s most powerful man and his wife zip around the city visiting the 26/11 memorial on Marine Drive, the National Centre for Performing Arts (NCPA), Mani Bhawan and other locations in south Mumbai, the security obviously will be water-tight .

Frantic preparations are underway for US president Barack Obama’s visit to Mumbai. Sources in the security establishment said 547 rooms and all banquet halls at the Taj Mahal hotel near the Gateway of India are likely to be booked for the president’s visit. Apart from this, 125 rooms at the Taj President in Cuffe Parade and 80-90 rooms in ITC Grand Hyatt will be booked for Obama’s entourage.

The US president is expected to arrive in the city on the afternoon of November 6 and is likely to leave the next day in the evening. “Michelle, Obama’s wife, is expected to visit an NGO in Kamathipura on the second day. We have to chalk out security plans for her visit since the area is densely populated,” a source from the security establishment said.

“Rooms at the Hyatt are for the air crew and other members who will accompany Obama. The US president will also bring his chef along,” he said.

“Three theatres at the NCPA have also been booked as Obama is expected to visit the place. He will also go to the Police Gymkhana, which has a memorial for policemen killed in the 26/11 terror attack.”

An officer told DNA that Obama would travel to the hotel from the airport via road instead of a chopper. He travels in a Lincoln Continental, which has a thickness of four-and-a-half inches of metal. “Two jets and 45 cars will be part of Obama’s convoy. The jets will be armed with highly-advanced communication and security system,” he said.

Advance Security Liaison officers have conducted a recce of the places Obama is likely to visit. They will conduct another recee and submit a report to their bosses.

WHITE HOUSE INSIDER - LAZY PRESIDENT IS LOSING IT!

2010-10-13T20:46:00.000-07:00

Published by Ulsterman on September 7, 2010 in Opinions [WSJ]

A longtime Washington D.C. insider, and former advisor to the Obama election campaign and transition team, speaks out on an administration in crisis, and a president increasingly withdrawn from the job of President.

2008 gave America an incredibly charismatic candidate for President of the United States. Speech after speech showed a candidate with increasing momentum as primary race after primary race concluded. And then came the nomination, more speeches, culminating in an election night victory.

According to the person sitting across from me, those were incredibly exciting times, even for one who had been a participant with three previous presidential hopefuls. Barack Obama appeared to move from one city to the next effortlessly, gaining confidence and motivation with each campaign stop. He was remarkable to watch . He took the script, elevated it with his oration, left the crowds screaming for more, and then would do it all over again, time after time after time. On the campaign trail, Obama is a machine.

When I asked this insider if the media gave candidate Obama an assist throughout his campaign, it elicits a sly smile.

Sure – we definitely had people in the media on our side. Absolutely. We went so far as to give them specific ideas for coverage. The ones who took that advice from the campaign were granted better access, and Obama was the biggest story in 2008, so yeah, that gave us a lot of leverage.

Could Obama have succeeded without the media’s help?

Yeah, I think so. As I said, on the campaign trail he is very-very good. The opposition didn’t have near the energy, or the celebrity attraction that Obama brings. Plus, the country was burned out after eight years of Bush. We knew that going in. We knew that if we won the Democrat nomination, we were likely going to cruise our way to the White House – and that is exactly what we did.”

But after Obama was sworn in, things began to change?

Almost immediately. Obama loved to campaign. He clearly didn’t like the work of being President though, and that attitude was felt by the entire White House staff within weeks after the inauguration.

Obama the tireless, hard working candidate became a very tepid personality to us. And the few news stories that did come out against him were the only things he seemed to care about. He absolutely obsesses over Fox News. For being so successful, Barack Obama is incredibly thin-skinned. He takes everything very personally.

And you state he despises Joe Biden?

Oh yeah. That is very well known in the White House. Obama chose Biden for one reason – to have an older white guy with some international policy credentials. Period.

If Biden has all of this international experience that Obama found so valuable, why has he buried him under the pile of crap that became the stimulus bill? What does Joe Biden know about budgets and economics ? Not much – but Obama didn’t care.

Give Joe a job and get him the hell out of my hair – that pretty much sums up the president’s feelings toward Joe Biden.

What about Hillary Clinton?

Obama is scared to death of Hillary. He doesn’t trust her – obsesses over her almost as much as he does Fox News. He respects her though, which might be why he fears her so much as well.

He talks the game, but when it comes down to it, she has played the game on a far tougher level than he has, and Obama knows that.

How about Bill Clinton?

I never heard Obama say anything about Bill Clinton personally, though I was told he has cracked a few jokes about the former president since getting into the White House. I have heard that Bill Clinton does not like Barack Obama.

That really started when Obama played the race card against him during the primary campaign. Apparently Clinton was apoplectic over that and still hasn’t gotten over it. If there is one thing I have learned in this town – don’t make an enemy of Bill Clinton.

So if Obama doesn’t appear interested in the job of president, what does he do day after day?

Well, he takes his meetings just like any other president would, though even then, he seems to lack a certain focus and on a few occasions, actually leaves with the directive that be given a summary of the meeting at a later date.

I hear he plays a lot of golf, and watches a lot of television – ESPN mainly. I

’ll tell you this – if you want to see President Obama get excited about a conversation, turn it to sports.

That gets him interested. You start talking about Congress, or some policy, and he just kinda turns off. It’s really very strange. I mean, we were all led to believe that this guy was some kind of intellectual giant, right? Ivy League and all that. Well, that is not what I saw. Barack Obama doesn’t have a whole lot of intellectual curiosity.

When he is off script, he is what I call a real “slow talker”. Lots of ummms, and lots of time in between answers where you can almost see the little wheel in his head turning very slowly. I am not going to say the president is a dumb man, because he is not, but yeah, there was a definite letdown when you actually hear him talking without the script.

That sounds like you are calling Obama stupid to me.

No – I am not going to call him stupid. He just doesn’t strike me as particularly smart. Bill Clinton is a smart guy – he would run intellectual circles around Barack Obama. And Bill Clinton loved the politics of being president. Obama seems to think he shouldn’t have to be bothered, which has created a considerable amount of conflict among his staff.

So how bad are things at the White House these days?

I don’t know about right now, because I have not been there in over a month. But I still hear things, and I know what it was like when I left. It’s not good.

As bad as it might look to voters based on what they do know, it’s much worse.

The infighting is off the charts. You got a Chief of Staff who despises cabinet members, advisors who despise the Chief of Staff, a President and First Lady having their own issues…

Come again – what about the First Lady?

(The insider takes a deep breath) Ok, look, just like any other marriage, folks have issues. The Obamas are no different, except of course they are very high profile. I was told they were having issues before the campaign, and they have even more issues now. Maybe that is why Obama seems so detached – not so much the stress of the White House, but the stress of personal issues. I can certainly relate to that kind of situation.

Care to clarify some more on the Obama marriage?
No. That is all I will say about that. Don’t ask again.

Ok, back to President Obama then. In just a few words, how would you describe him these days?

Like I said, it’s been a while since I was last at the White House, but I don’t have a problem saying that the president is losing it. I don’t mean he is like losing his mind. I mean to say that he is losing whatever spark he had during the campaign.

When you take away the crowds, Obama gets noticeably smaller. He shrinks up inside of himself. He just doesn’t seem to have the confidence to do the job of President, and it’s getting worse and worse.

Case in point – just a few days before I left, I saw first hand the President of the United States yelling at a member of his staff. He was yelling like a spoiled child. And then he pouted for several moments after.

I wish I was kidding, or exaggerating, but I am not. The President of the United States threw a temper tantrum. The jobs reports are always setting him off, and he is getting increasingly conspiratorial over the unemployment numbers. I never heard it myself, but was told that Obama thinks the banking system is out to get him now. That they and the big industries are making him pay for trying to regulate them more. That is the frame of mind the President is in these days. And you know what? Maybe he is right, who knows?

Will Obama run again in 2012?

I don’t know. That subject was never brought up again after 2008, at least not around me. If he does, I think it would have more to do with allowing him another year and a half of campaigning again.

He just loves it so much. He really needs the crowds, the cheering, the support of the people. (Alan note: narcissist moron?)

Can he win in 2012?

Oh – absolutely. Who else campaigns as well as Barack Obama? Nobody. What politician is more loved and supported by the media? Nobody. I don’t see the Republicans offering up a candidate as powerful as Obama.

I mean Sarah Palin? Really? Obama would defeat her by a 20 point landslide!

Romney? The Republicans will enjoy these midterm elections, but 2012 is Obama’s year if he chooses to run again.

As a president, Obama has many flaws, but as a candidate, he is near flawless.

But would another four years of an Obama presidency be the best thing for America?

(Long pause) Now that is a much more interesting question right there, and a question I think more and more Democrat Party insiders are asking themselves these days, myself included.

I am going to come right out and say it – No. Obama is not up to the job of being president. He simply doesn’t seem to care about the work involved.

You want to know what? Obama is lazy. He really is. And it is getting worse and worse.

Would another four years of Obama be the best thing for America? No it would not.

What this country needs is a president who is focused on the job more than on themselves. Obama is not that individual. I actually hope he doesn’t run again. Looking back, as much fun as the campaign in 2008 was, Hillary Clinton should have been the nominee. Hillary was ready to be president. Obama was not ready.

He had never lost a campaign. Everything was handed to him. He doesn’t really understand the idea of work – real, hard, get your heart and soul into it work. And frankly, that is very disappointing to a whole lot of us…

'Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional,
illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream
media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible
to pick up a turd by the clean end.’
AG

HIS IMPERIAL HIGHNESS PRINCE REZA PAHLAVI RECENT MINDSETS

2010-10-03T19:19:00.000-07:00

When he turned 21, Reza Cyrus Pahlavi publicly declared himself Shahanshah (King of Kings). He became Reza Pahlavi II and formally staked his claim to the Peacock Throne, after the death of his father, the exiled Shah of Iran.

Now, 29 years later, the tall, dark and silver-haired resident of Potomac, Va., on the suburban outskirts of Washington, simply signs himself "Mister."

His office's press releases refer to him as "the former Crown Prince of Iran," but his staff privately persists in referring to him as "His Majesty."

At 50, Mr. Pahlavi dismisses talk of restoring the monarchy in Iran and says his life is now dedicated to creating a non-violent, democratic revolution there.

"The choice of future government should be left to the Iranian people to decide in a free election," he says. "What form it ultimately takes is up to them. The essential point to me is that there is no way we can achieve our aspirations as a nation unless we have a secular regime, as opposed to this theocracy."

"Without a clear separation of the state and religion you cannot have the beginning of any form of democratic system," he adds.

Mr. Pahlavi was 17 the last time revolution swept over Iran. He was studying to be a fighter pilot at a U.S. Air Force base in Lubbock, Tex., when his father, sick with cancer, fled and surrendered Iran to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the Islamic fundamentalist leader.

"Whatever happened in 1979, today people see the net results," he says. "Where the country was going; where are we now. Whatever analysis is made of Iran — positive, negative, good or bad — it is something for history to decide and for Iranians to draw their conclusions."

"Are we better off today than we were 30 years ago?" he asks.

"We know the country, its potential, its resources, where it was and where it could have been. We should be at the level of a Taiwan or a South Korea today, not ranked 150th in the world, even though we are an oil-producing country...

"We should not have our Iranian rap artists say the regime is promising us yellow cake when we don't even have bread to eat."

His disdain for Iran's current rulers is evident, but the anger is touched by the pain and longing of separation and the loneliness of 33 years of exile.

"I don't doubt ever that this regime will end," he says. "There is no question about that. The question is when and at what cost and how can we help expedite the process to reduce the toll and the cost to our nation."

In the years immediately after the 1979 revolution, Mr. Pahlavi promoted the case of monarchy and kept his claim to the Peacock Throne alive through books, a website and personal appearances.

Now, he says he promotes nothing more than what he calls the common denominator of Iranian politics: demands for a secular democratic state that observes and protects human rights.

"Every circumstance around the world has its own time in history," he says, shoving any further discussion of monarchy into the background.

"Those who have been able to move on and adjust to today's reality will not render the best service to the cause by rekindling issues that are no longer relevant to today's predicament."

Iran's future, he insists, will be determined by a massive generation of young people who have all been born since the 1979 revolution.

Exiles like himself can only offer them assistance and advice in trying to overthrow a repressive theocracy.

"I don't want anything in return," he says. "I do it because it is my duty."

While he urges foreign governments to come to the aid of Iran's fledgling internal opposition movements, he insists regime change must be internally induced to be legitimate.

He also warns the West not to harm Iranian society while trying to destabilize the Iranian government.

"Sanctions in themselves can not be enough," he says. "Because if you weaken society, while you weaken the regime, it has less means to really combat [the government]. If [the opposition] is reinforced and reinvigorated, then the whole dynamics of the situation is changed."

Mr. Pahlavi rejects all talk of outside military intervention or a preemptive strike against Iran's nuclear programs. Such moves would alienate potential democratic allies within its government and could jeopardize the lives of thousands of innocent people.

"What I am saying to heads of state and decision-makers around the world is that it would be historically criminal for you not to let the Iranian people stand for themselves and give them their day in court before you adopt much more dire measures," he says.

"We need to draw lessons from the past," adds the man who once stood to inherit a kingdom. "We all do."

"Sometimes people ask me who are the future leaders of Iran," he says.

"I say I don't know who they are, but I know that they exist by the thousands. They are the artists and engineers; they are poets and businessmen; they are entrepreneurs and they are there — waiting to inherit this future.

"And it is, by God, our obligation, our duty to the nation, to help them the best way possible to minimize the toll and the cost of change."

pgoodspeed@nationalpost.com
.

Read more: http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/duty/3577579/story.html#ixzz11LtViYSE

OBAMA REMOVES GOD/CREATOR FROM PREAMBLE TO THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

2010-09-18T13:15:00.000-07:00

PICTURE DEPICTS OBAMA AT THE VERY MOMENT HE REMOVED GOD/CREATOR

Friday evening President Obama addressed the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute. At around 22:30, he incorporates part of the preamble of The Declaration of Independence, removing "Creator".

"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal..... endowed with certain unalienable rights, life and liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"

After President Obama says "created equal...", there is a long pause during which he scowls and blinks several times.

For once, he may actually have opted to not read something that was on the teleprompter. Is looks like he is disgusted and decided it would be better not to read what the preamble actually says.

President Obama, if our Creator is not the purveyor of our human rights, then who is? The government? Allah?

FULL VIDEO SO YOU CAN SEE FOR YOURSELF

IN DEPTH LOOK AT ISLAM AND THE MODERN WORLD

2010-09-06T17:15:00.000-07:00

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/27343

OBAMA ADMINSTRATION A CORRUPT CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION

2010-09-04T12:22:00.000-07:00

FEC allows SEIU's illegal political fund-raising scheme with unethical trickery .

NOTE: SEIU boss one of the most frequent visitors to the White House

Rick Moran

This is just a bit heavy handed, even from the thugs at SEIU:

Imagine the outcry if McDonalds executives demanded that franchise owners collect "voluntary" contributions totaling $25,000 for the company's Political Action Committee (PAC) from employees at every restaurant.

What if the fast food titan's headquarters followed up with a threat - pay us, or face a $37,500 fine? Do you think this heavy-handed scheme would raise a few eyebrows at the Federal Election Commission (FEC)?

Replace "McDonalds" with "SEIU" in that description and you've got a pretty good idea of Big Labor's latest political fundraising strategy. To meet their ambitious fundraising targets, Service Employees International Union bosses are now threatening to fine any local affiliate that doesn't meet its PAC contribution requirements.

The only problem with this racket is that FEC guidelines explicitly prohibit organizations from collecting PAC funds by threatening members with financial reprisals. SEIU bosses aren't exactly hiding their intentions, either - they actually wrote this fundraising provision into the union's constitution at their annual convention.

Despite a complaint filed by the Right to Work Foundation with the FEC, the union appears to have gotten away with their fund raising skulduggery.

How they did it is an object lesson in power politics.

When unions run the government, we get this kind of powerplay by an agency supposedly "independent of politics":

Although the FEC dismissed the Foundation's complaint in April, Foundation attorneys were only notified of the decision 23 days after the fact.

Adding insult to injury, the FEC finally got around to releasing the reasoning behind its dismissal in August, 111 days after the original decision was made.

Coincidentally, all FEC appeals must be filed within 60 days of any ruling.

By delaying its announcement and only releasing its reasoning until well after the window period had expired, the FEC effectively made it impossible to appeal the decision to federal court.

Thus endeth the lesson. Now sit down, shut up, and take it.

SCIENCE POINTING TO ACCURACY OF MAYAN 2012 PREDICTION

2010-08-27T23:30:00.000-07:00

"BE HAPPY, DON'T WORRY" goes the Caribbean song from some years back and this is now my advice to you AND TO MYSELF. This article reminded me to remember.

With Obama uncaringly taking our country and possibly the world to hell in a handbasket probably on an Islamic built slide to oblivion, the Mayan Calendar or more closely their several combined calendars had long predicted the 2012 Winter Solstice to be the end of the world.

In their calculations the alignment of the Sun with a Black Hole in that part of 2012 would create a devastating electro-magnetic, solar wind storm - sucked from the Sun into that Black Hole and this time the Planet Earth would be directly in between and the blast would be strong enough to move oceans, change gravity and level mountains. So imagine what it will do to cities, humanity or animals.

There won't be much left to worry about - nor probably anyone left to worry.

That's all only a bit over a year from now! In that scenario who cares about what Obambi and his wrecking crew do?

Well, it depends.

While my advice is to be happy and not worry, I still would not want to see this piece of evil go out triumphantly instead of November elections totally paralyzing his activities. And making him as miserable in his last year or so as he is making all of us "we the people".

However he seems to have received and accepted the Mayan message and plans to spend his days vacationing, living high off the hog and not worrying about anything other than inflicting his hate of America onto all of us while he still can.

=================================

Massive solar storm to hit Earth in 2012 with 'force of 100 MILLION HYDROGEN bombs'

Melbourne: Astronomers are predicting that a massive solar storm, much bigger in potential than the one that caused spectacular light shows on Earth earlier this month, is to strike our planet in 2012 with a force of 100 million hydrogen bombs.

Several US media outlets have reported that NASA was warning the massive flare this month was just a precursor to a massive solar storm building that had the potential to wipe out the entire planet's power grid.

Despite its rebuttal, NASA's been watching out for this storm since 2006 and reports from the US this week claim the storms could hit on that most Hollywood of disaster dates - 2012.

Similar storms back in 1859 and 1921 caused worldwide chaos, wiping out telegraph wires on a massive scale. The 2012 storm has the potential to be even more disruptive.

"The general consensus among general astronomers (and certainly solar astronomers) is that this coming Solar maximum (2012 but possibly later into 2013) will be the most violent in 100 years," News.com.au quoted astronomy lecturer and columnist Dave Reneke as saying.

"A bold statement and one taken seriously by those it will affect most, namely airline companies, communications companies and anyone working with modern GPS systems.

"They can even trip circuit breakers and knock out orbiting satellites, as has already been done this year," added Reneke.

No one really knows what effect the 2012-2013 Solar Max will have on today's digital-reliant society.

Dr Richard Fisher, director of NASA's Heliophysics division, told Reneke the super storm would hit like "a bolt of lightning", causing catastrophic consequences for the world's health, emergency services and national security unless precautions are taken.

NASA said that a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences found that if a similar storm occurred today, it could cause "1 to 2 trillion dollars in damages to society's high-tech infrastructure and require four to 10 years for complete recovery".

100 MILLION hydrogen bombs will do only this amount of infrastrcture damage? ARE YOU KIDDING?

The reason for the concern comes as the sun enters a phase known as Solar Cycle 24.

Most experts agree, although those who put the date of Solar Max in 2012 are getting the most press.

They claim satellites will be aged by 50 years, rendering GPS even more useless than ever, and the blast will have the equivalent energy of 100 million hydrogen bombs.

"We know it is coming but we don't know how bad it is going to be," Fisher told Reneke.

"Systems will just not work. The flares change the magnetic field on the Earth and it's rapid, just like a lightning bolt. That's the solar effect," he added.

The findings are published in the most recent issue of Australasian Science. (ANI)

WITHOUT A REVOLUTION WE ARE A COOKED GOOSE

2010-08-17T16:12:00.000-07:00

Founder Of Reaganomics Says That "Without A Revolution, Americans Are History"

By Tyler Durden

The United States is running out of time to get its budget and trade deficits under control. Despite the urgency of the situation, 2010 has been wasted in hype about a non-existent recovery. As recently as August 2 Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner penned a New York Times column, “Welcome to the Recovery.”

As John Williams (shadowstats.com) has made clear on many occasions, an appearance of recovery was created by over-counting employment and undercounting inflation. Warnings by Williams, Gerald Celente, and myself have gone unheeded, but our warnings recently had echoes from Boston University professor Laurence Kotlikoff and from David Stockman, who excoriated the Republican Party for becoming big-spending Democrats.

It is encouraging to see some realization that, this time, Washington cannot spend the economy out of recession. The deficits are already too large for the dollar to survive as reserve currency, and deficit spending cannot put Americans back to work in jobs that have been moved offshore.

However, the solutions offered by those who are beginning to recognize that there is a problem are discouraging. Kotlikoff thinks the solution is savage Social Security and Medicare cuts or equally savage tax increases or hyperinflation to destroy the vast debts.

Perhaps economists lack imagination, or perhaps they don’t want to be cut off from Wall Street and corporate subsidies, but Social Security and Medicare are insufficient at their present levels, especially considering the erosion of private pensions by the dot com, derivative and real estate bubbles. Cuts in Social Security and Medicare, for which people have paid 15 per cent of their earnings all their lives, would result in starvation and deaths from curable diseases.

Tax increases make even less sense. It is widely acknowledged that the majority of households cannot survive on one job. Both husband and wife work and often one of the partners has two jobs in order to make ends meet. Raising taxes makes it harder to make ends meet–thus more foreclosures, more food stamps, more homelessness. What kind of economist or humane person thinks this is a solution?

Ah, but we will tax the rich. The rich have enough money. They will simply stop earning.

Let’s get real. Here is what the government is likely to do. Once Washington realize that the dollar is at risk and that they can no longer finance their wars by borrowing abroad, the government will either levy a tax on private pensions on the grounds that the pensions have accumulated tax-deferred, or the government will require pension fund managers to purchase Treasury debt with our pensions. This will buy the government a bit more time while pension accounts are loaded up with worthless paper.

The last Bush budget deficit (2008) was in the $400-500 billion range, about the size of the Chinese, Japanese, and OPEC trade surpluses with the US. Traditionally, these trade surpluses have been recycled to the US and finance the federal budget deficit. In 2009 and 2010 the federal deficit jumped to $1,400 billion, a back-to-back trillion dollar increase. There are not sufficient trade surpluses to finance a deficit this large. From where comes the money?

The answer is from individuals fleeing the stock market into “safe” Treasury bonds and from the bankster bailout, not so much the TARP money as the Federal Reserve’s exchange of bank reserves for questionable financial paper such as subprime derivatives. The banks used their excess reserves to purchase Treasury debt.

These financing maneuvers are one-time tricks. Once people have fled stocks, that movement into Treasuries is over. The opposition to the bankster bailout likely precludes another. So where does the money come from the next time?

The Treasury was able to unload a lot of debt thanks to “the Greek crisis,” which the New York banksters and hedge funds multiplied into “the euro crisis.” The financial press served as a financing arm for the US Treasury by creating panic about European debt and the euro. Central banks and individuals who had taken refuge from the dollar in euros were panicked out of their euros, and they rushed into dollars by purchasing US Treasury debt.

This movement from euros to dollars weakened the alternative reserve currency to the dollar, halted the dollar’s decline, and financed the US budget deficit a while longer.

Possibly the game can be replayed with Spanish debt, Irish debt, and whatever unlucky country is eswept in by the thoughtless expansion of the European Union.

But when no countries remain that can be destabilized by Wall Street investment banksters and hedge funds, what then finances the US budget deficit?

The only remaining financier is the Federal Reserve. When Treasury bonds brought to auction do not sell, the Federal Reserve must purchase them. The Federal Reserve purchases the bonds by creating new demand deposits, or checking accounts, for the Treasury. As the Treasury spends the proceeds of the new debt sales, the US money supply expands by the amount of the Federal Reserve’s purchase of Treasury debt.

Do goods and services expand by the same amount? Imports will increase as US jobs have been offshored and given to foreigners, thus worsening the trade deficit. When the Federal Reserve purchases the Treasury’s new debt issues, the money supply will increase by more than the supply of domestically produced goods and services. Prices are likely to rise.

How high will they rise? The longer money is created in order that government can pay its bills, the more likely hyperinflation will be the result.

The economy has not recovered. By the end of this year it will be obvious that the collapsing economy means a larger than $1.4 trillion budget deficit to finance. Will it be $2 trillion? Higher?

Whatever the size, the rest of the world will see that the dollar is being printed in such quantities that it cannot serve as reserve currency. At that point wholesale dumping of dollars will result as foreign central banks try to unload a worthless currency.

The collapse of the dollar will drive up the prices of imports and offshored goods on which Americans are dependent. Wal-Mart shoppers will think they have mistakenly gone into Neiman Marcus.

Domestic prices will also explode as a growing money supply chases the supply of goods and services still made in America by Americans.

The dollar as reserve currency cannot survive the conflagration. When the dollar goes the US cannot finance its trade deficit. Therefore, imports will fall sharply, thus adding to domestic inflation and, as the US is energy import-dependent, there will be transportation disruptions that will disrupt work and grocery store deliveries.

Panic will be the order of the day.

Will farms will be raided? Will those trapped in cities resort to riots and looting?

Is this the likely future that “our” government and “our patriotic” corporations have created for us?

To borrow from Lenin, “What can be done?”

Here is what can be done. The wars, which benefit no one but the military-security complex and Israel’s territorial expansion, can be immediately ended. This would reduce the US budget deficit by hundreds of billions of dollars per year. More hundreds of billions of dollars could be saved by cutting the rest of the military budget which, in its present size, exceeds the budgets of all the serious military powers on earth combined.

US military spending reflects the unaffordable and unattainable crazed neoconservative goal of US Empire and world hegemony. What fool in Washington thinks that China is going to finance US hegemony over China?

The only way that the US will again have an economy is by bringing back the offshored jobs. The loss of these jobs impoverished Americans while producing oversized gains for Wall Street, shareholders, and corporate executives. These jobs can be brought home where they belong by taxing corporations according to where value is added to their product. If value is added to their goods and services in China, corporations would have a high tax rate. If value is added to their goods and services in the US, corporations would have a low tax rate.

This change in corporate taxation would offset the cheap foreign labor that has sucked jobs out of America, and it would rebuild the ladders of upward mobility that made America an opportunity society.

If the wars are not immediately stopped and the jobs brought back to America, the US is relegated to the trash bin of history.

Obviously, the corporations and Wall Street would use their financial power and campaign contributions to block any legislation that would reduce short-term earnings and bonuses by bringing jobs back to America. Americans have no greater enemies than Wall Street and the corporations and their prostitutes in Congress and the White House.

The neocons allied with Israel, who control both parties and much of the media, are strung out on the ecstasy of Empire.

The United States and the welfare of its 300 million people cannot be restored unless the neocons, Wall Street, the corporations, and their servile slaves in Congress and the White House can be defeated.

Without a revolution, Americans are history.

"CORDOBA" EXPLAINED

2010-08-15T18:57:00.000-07:00

What the Ground Zero, terror sponsoring, Imam wanted ignorant Americans to believe:

For hundreds of years during the middle ages, Cordoba was the capital of Muslim Spain. During much of its “golden age” from the 8th to 12th centuries, the Cordoba Caliphate witnessed a great flowering of culture, art, and philosophical inquiry amid a remarkable climate of religious tolerance. Religious freedom, while not perfect, was sufficient that many Jewish and Christian intellectuals emigrated to Cordoba, where they lived, wrote and flourished side by side with their Muslim counterparts in a strikingly pluralistic society. The Cordoba name reminds both Muslims and non-Muslims that a great Islamic civilization was once the most open and tolerant of its era.

The Cordoba Caliphate? An Islamic civilization?

That’s right. As Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch pointed out, Rauf has already abandoned the Cordoba name, Ground Zero mega-mosque group ditches name redolent of Islamic supremacism:

The name “Cordoba” has been marketed to gullible Americans as being a place where Muslims, Jews, and Christians lived in harmony and peace, but actually Medieval Muslim Spain enforced the dhimma and systematically oppressed the Jews and Christians, and was the site of a Muslim pogrom against the Jews in the year 1011

Maybe enough people caught on to the name’s bitter irony, and the deceivers decided it was best deep-sixed.

Maybe. Jihad Watch points to an article by Raymond Ibrahim for more detail:

Oddly enough, the so-called “tolerant” era of Cordoba supposedly occurred during the caliphate of ‘Abd al-Rahman III (912-961) – well over a thousand years ago. “Eight hundred years ago,” i.e., around 1200, the fanatical Almohids–ideological predecessors of al-Qaeda–were ravaging Cordoba, where “Christians and Jews were given the choice of conversion, exile, or death.” A Freudian slip on the part of the Cordoba Initiative?

At any rate, the true history of Cordoba, not to mention the whole of Andalusia, is far less inspiring than what Western academics portray: the Christian city was conquered by Muslims around 711, its inhabitants slaughtered or enslaved. The original mosque of Cordoba–the namesake of the Ground Zero mosque–was built atop, and partly from the materials of, a Christian church.

Modern day Muslims are well aware of all this. Such is the true–and ominous–legacy of Cordoba….

More pointedly, throughout Islam’s history, whenever a region was conquered, one of the first signs of consolidation was/is the erection of a mosque atop the sacred sites of the vanquished:

the pagan Ka’ba temple in Arabia was converted into Islam’s holiest site, the mosque of Mecca;

the al-Aqsa mosque, Islam’s third holiest site, was built atop Solomon’s temple in Jerusalem;

the Umayyad mosque was built atop the Church of St. John the Baptist; and

the Hagia Sophia was converted into a mosque upon the conquest of Constantinople.

So, why the name change after touting it as such a model of historical tolerance? Why did Rauf flush his Cordoba explanation down the memory hole prior to announcing his plans for a mosque at Ground Zero?

Then flush the name too?

Screen shot here in case they flush the memory hole down the memory hole.
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2010/08/15/why-is-the-ground-zero-mosque-removing-web-pages-and-changing-its-name/

WRIT OF MANDAMUS

2010-07-30T19:52:00.000-07:00

Case Against Arizona AND Governor Brewer

ONLY the US Supreme Court has Constitutional Authority to Conduct the Trial

By Publius Huldah Thursday, July 29, 2010

Does anyone read the U.S. Constitution these days? American lawyers don’t read it. Federal Judge Susan R. Bolton apparently has never read it. Same goes for our illustrious Attorney General Eric Holder. But this lawyer has read it and she is going to show you something in Our Constitution which is as plain as the nose on your face.

Article III, Sec. 2, clause 2 says:

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction…

“Original” jurisdiction means the power to conduct the “trial” of the case (as opposed to hearing an appeal from the judgment of a lower court). You all know quite well what a “trial” is - you see them all the time on TV shows: Perry Mason, Boston Legal, The Good Wife, etc. Witnesses testify and are cross-examined, etc.

The style of the Arizona case shows quite clearly that the named defendants are:

State of Arizona; and Janice K. Brewer,

Governor of the State of Arizona, in her

Official Capacity, Defendants.

Judge Susan R. Bolton has no more authority to preside over this case than do you

See where it says, “State of Arizona”? And “Janice K. Brewer, Governor of the State of Arizona, in her official Capacity”? THAT (plus Art. III, Sec. 2, clause 2) is what gives the US Supreme Court “original Jurisdiction”, i.e., jurisdiction to conduct the trial of this case. THAT is what strips the federal district court of any jurisdiction whatsoever to hear this case. Judge Susan R. Bolton has no more authority to preside over this case than do you (unless you are a US Supreme Court justice).

In Federalist No. 81 (13th para), Alexander Hamilton commented on this exact provision of Art. III, Sec. 2, clause 2:

...Let us now examine in what manner the judicial authority is to be distributed between the supreme and the inferior courts of the Union. The Supreme Court is to be invested with original jurisdiction, only “in cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls, and those in which A STATE shall be a party.”

Public ministers of every class are the immediate representatives of their sovereigns. All questions in which they are concerned are so directly connected with the public peace, that, as well for the preservation of this, as out of respect to the sovereignties they represent, it is both expedient and proper that such questions should be submitted in the first instance to the highest judicatory of the nation.

Though consuls have not in strictness a diplomatic character, yet as they are the public agents of the nations to which they belong, the same observation is in a great measure applicable to them. In cases in which a State might happen to be a party, it would ill suit its dignity to be turned over to an inferior tribunal….[boldface added, caps in original]

Yet Attorney General Eric Holder filed the case in a court which is specifically stripped of jurisdiction to hear it!

So! Counsel for the State of Arizona should consider:

1. File a Petition for Removal before federal district court Judge Susan R. Bolton demanding that the case be removed to the Supreme Court on the ground that under Art. III, Sec. 2, clause 2, US Constitution, only the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to conduct the trial of this case.

2. If Judge Bolton denies the Petition for Removal, file a Petition for Writ of Mandamus in the Supreme Court asking that court to order Judge Bolton to transfer the case to the Supreme Court.

A Petition for Writ of Mandamus is an old common-law “extraordinary writ”: It asks a court to ORDER a lower court or other public official to something which it is its duty to do. In Kerr v. US District Court for Northern District of California (1976), the Supreme Court said, respecting the propriety of issuing writs of mandamus:

....the fact still remains that “only exceptional circumstances amounting to a judicial ‘usurpation of power’ will justify the invocation of this extraordinary remedy.”...(para 13)

When a federal district court judge presides over a case which the Constitution specifically prohibits her from hearing, and even issues a ruling enjoining the enforcement of a State Law, then that federal district court judge usurps power. She is specifically stripped - by Art. III, Sec. 2, clause 2 - of jurisdiction to preside over the case against the STATE of Arizona and against THE GOVERNOR of the STATE of Arizona.

For procedures for filing the Petition for Writ of Mandamus, see Supreme Court Rule 20.

Article IV, Sec. 4, requires the federal government to protect each of the States against invasion.Not only is the Obama regime refusing to perform this specific Constitutional duty - it seeks to prohibit the Sovereign STATE of Arizona from defending itself! This lawlessness on the part of the Obama regime is unmatched in the history of Our Country.

OK, counselors - Go for it! PH

For live links in the article, visit:

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/25983

OBAMBI PLOTTING HIS RE-ELECTION (But....Hillary Wild Card)

2010-07-27T23:28:00.000-07:00

The reasons Obambi could well be re-elected are as follows:

Number 1 is he has the census being completed and will have the reapportionment numbers by mid December. Those numbers will show an overwhelming population shift to blue states with millions of before uncounted people such as the dead and millions of illegals.

Remember that the census is being run out of the white house and these guys are Chavistas.

Number 2. These numbers will mean new congressional seats for democrats by 2012.

Remember you only need a few people voting in each district to win a seat.

They will easily take back the house in 2012 with hard core cadres at their disposal.

Number 3. This reapportionment will mean that the blue states will also control the electoral college because it is reflective of the number of congressional seats.

You don’t need to win the popular vote to be president, it’s the electoral college that elects presidents and with winner take all resolutions in many states being pushed this will be an easy win for the democrats.

Number 4. There will be that smattering of RINO republicans who will continue to sabotage our side and with their help and the veto power Obama has he can obfuscate anything we try to do.

POSTING COMMENTS

2010-07-26T08:42:00.001-07:00

We have started moderating (reviewing) comments at this site and deleting any that are not in English, French or German and in a FONT or alphabet we cannot read.

We have nothing against the Asian fonts but cannot understand them and what they are saying. Just putting a title in English does not help us as these can be misleading so we need to be able to read the whole text.

Best wishes to the posters who have been coming here but please use a language we can read. You may find they get posted once we know what they are, even if they are off-subject.

THREE CHEERS FOR OBAMA!

2010-06-21T23:22:00.000-07:00

BEFORE YOU THINK I'VE FLIPPED MY LID, READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE

Three cheers for Obama!

That's right.... I will say it again.... THANK GOD FOR OBAMA!

He destroyed the Clinton Political Machine - driving a stake through the heart of Hillary's Presidential aspirations - something no Republican was ever able to do. Remember when a Hillary Presidency scared the daylights out of you?

He killed off the Kennedy dynasty - no more Kennedy trolling Washington, looking for booze and women who need a ride home. American women and freedom are safer tonight.

He is destroying the Democratic Party before our very eyes!

Dennis Moore had never lost a race - quit

Evan Bayh had never lost a race - quit

Byron Dorgan had never lost a race - quit

Harry Reid's bid for re-election - does NOT look good.

These are just a few of the Democrats whose political careers Obama has destroyed. By the end of 2010 dozens more will be.

In December 2008, the Democrats were on the rise.

In the last two election cycles they had picked up 14 Senate seats and 52 House seats.

The LameStream Media was touting the death of Conservatism and the Republican Party.

In one year, Obama put a stop to all this and will probably give up the House and perhaps the Senate back to the Republicans.

Obama was named Gun salesman of the Decade. He also helped the ammunition industry so much that factories are running 24/7 trying to keep up with demand.

He has exposed Liberals and Progressives for what they are.

Every generation appears to need to relearn the lesson of wy they should never actually put liberals in charge.

He is bringing home the lesson very well!

Liberals tax, borrow and spend (your money) - check

Liberals won't bring themselves to protect America - check

Liberals want to take over the economy - check

Liberals think they know what is best for everyone - check

Liberals are not happy until they are running YOUR life - check

He brought back more Americans to conservatism than anyone since Reagan.

In one year he rejuvenated the conservative movement and brought millions of freedom loving Americans out to the streets.

Name one other time in your life you saw your friends and neighbors this interested in taking back America.

In all honesty, one year ago I was more afraid than ever before in my life.Not of the economy but of the direction the country was going. I thought Americans had forgotten what this country was all about.

My neighbors, friends and even strangers, proved to me my lack of confidence in the greatness of the American people was flat out wrong.

When the American People wake up, no smooth talking, teleprompter reader can fool them.

Obama woke up thees great Americans. And again, I want to thank him for that. Thank you Obama!

So let's Recap "2009" - what a year! Wow!

1. The American people inaugurate a half-Arab president with a total of 142 days experience as an US Senator from the most politically corrupt State & City in America, whose governors have been ousted from office.

The President's first official act is to order the closure of Gitmo and makes sure terrorists' civil rights are not violated (an honest mistake?)

2. The US Congress rushes to confirm a black Attorney General, Eric Holder, whose law firm, we find out later, represents seventeen Gitmo Terrorists. (An honest mistake?)

3. The CIA Boss appointee, Leon Paneta, has absolutely NO experience.

4. We got the second most corrupt American woman (Pelosi is #1) as Secretary of State; bought and paid for (perhaps his choice for VP IN 2012)

5. We got a Tax Cheater (Geitner) for Treasury Secretary, who failed to properly file his taxes for 12-years!

6. A Commerce Secretary nominee, who withdrew due to corruption charges.

7. A Tax Cheat for Chief Performance Officer who withdrew under charges.

8. A Labor Secretary nominee who withdrew under charges of unethical conduct.

9. An HHS Secretary nominee (Daschle) who withdrew under charges of cheating on his taxes.

10. Multiple appointments of former lobbyists after an absolute campaign statement that no lobbyist would be appointed.

All this occurred just during the first THREE WEEKS, but who is counting.

America is being run by modern-day Three Stooges: Barry, Nancy and Harry and they're still trying to define 'stimulus' .... it's spending!

Congress passes the $800, 000, 000, 000 (that's 800 billion) pork loaded spending bill where your government gives you a smidgeon of your tax dollars ($13 per week), making you feel so good about yourself (stimulated) that you want to run out to Wal-mart and buy yourself a Chinese made HDTV!

Only Liberals can do this!

Pray for our country.

Here's some "good" news. Obama took Air Force One to Denver to sign the stimulus package, wasting as much as 10,000 gallons of fuel OR 24 JOBS for one year!

Obama went to Copenhagen to persuade the International Olympic Committee to choose Chicago as the host city - FAILED

Obama went to Copenhagen to support Global Warming - FAILED

Obama went to New Jersey to promote the Democratic candidate for governor - FAILED

Obama went to Virginia to promote the Democratic candidate for governor - FAILED

Obama went to Massachusetts to promote the democratic candidate for senator - FAILED* the Sestak/Romanoff scandal

AND FAILED WITH THESE
* the handling of the BP Oil Spill
* the recent creepy Oval Office speech
* Blowing off the Wreath Ceremony at Arlington on Memorial Day
Speaking of prayers:

Obama has been president for more than a full year, yet he and his wife Michelle, the "Christian" family they claim to be, have not attended church since inauguration - possibly except for one brief, protocol visit on a holiday(?)

Obama is the FIRST president in history who did not attend any Christmas religious observance!

And finally he is the first president to remain on vacation after a terrorist attack!

In these times I'll keep my God, my freedom, my gun and my money!

Anyone who supports this insanity can keep the CHANGE!

THAT "DARN GEORGE BUSH"

2010-06-14T15:02:00.000-07:00

Here's an opinion piece by Chuck Green who writes "Greener Pastures" for the Denver Post Aurora Sentinel...one of the more liberal papers in the country.

Additionally, Mr. Green is a life long Democrat...so this is rather a stunning piece...
Obama is victim of Bush's failed promises

Barack Obama is setting a record-setting number of records during his first year in office.

Largest budget ever.
Largest deficit ever.
Largest number of broken promises ever.
Most self-serving speeches ever.
Largest number of agenda-setting failures ever.
Fastest dive in popularity ever.

Wow! Talk about change!

Just one year ago. fresh from his inauguration celebrations. President Obama was flying high. After one of the nation's most inspiring political campaigns, the election of America 's first black president had captured the hopes and dreams of millions. To his devout followers, it was inconceivable that a year later his administration would be gripped in self-imposed crisis.

Of course, they don't see it as self-imposed. It's all George Bush's fault.

George Bush, who doesn't have a vote in congress and who no longer occupies the White House, is to blame for it all.

He broke Obama's promise to put all bills on the White House web site for five days before signing them.

He broke Obama's promise to have the congressional health care negotiations broadcast live on C-SPAN.

He broke Obama's promise to end earmarks.

He broke Obama's promise to keep unemployment from rising above 8 percent.

He broke Obama's promise to close the detention center at Guantanamo in the first year.

He broke Obama's promise to make peace with direct, no precondition talks with America 's most hate-filled enemies during his first year in office, ushering in a new era of global cooperation.

He broke Obama's promise to end the hiring of former lobbyists into high White House jobs.

He broke Obama's promise to end no-compete contracts with the government.

He broke Obama's promise to disclose the names of all attendees at closed White House meetings.

He broke Obama's promise for a new era of bipartisan cooperation in all matters.

He broke Obama's promise to have chosen a home church to attend Sunday services with his family by Easter of last year.

Yes. it's all George Bush's fault. President Obama is nothing more than a puppet in the never-ending, failed Bush administration.

(Actually a puppet of Soros, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Palestinians and his radical czars playing on his narcissistic and Marxist-Islamic penchants/strings)

If only George Bush wasn't still in charge, all of President Obama's problems would be solved.

His promises would have been kept, the economy would be back on track, Iran would have stopped its work on developing a nuclear bomb and would be negotiating a peace treaty with Israel . North Korea would have ended its tyrannical regime, and integrity would have been restored to the federal government.

Oh, and did I mention what it would be like if the Democrats, under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, didn't have the heavy yoke of George Bush around their necks?

There would be no ear marks, no closed-door drafting of bills, no increase in deficit spending, no special-interest influence (unions), no vote buying (Nebraska, Louisiana).
If only George Bush wasn't still in charge, we'd have real change by now.

All the broken promises, all the failed legislation and delay (health care reform, immigration reform) is not President Obama's fault or the fault of the Democrat-controlled Congress. It's all George Bush's fault.

Take for example the decision of Eric Holder, the president's attorney general, to hold terrorists' trials in New York City . Or his decision to try the Christmas Day underpants bomber as a civilian.

Two disastrous decisions.

Certainly those were bad judgments based on poor advice from George Bush.

Need more proof?

You might recall that when Scott Brown won last month's election to the U.S. Senate from Massachusetts , capturing "the Ted Kennedy seat" .

President Obama said that Brown's victory was the result of the same voter anger that propelled Obama into office in 2008. People were still angry about George Bush and the policies of the past 10 years. and they wanted change.
Yes, according to the president, the voter rebellion in Massachusetts last month was George Bush's fault.

Therefore, in retaliation, they elected a Republican to the Ted Kennedy seat, ending a half-century of domination by Democrats.

It is all George Bush's fault.

Will the failed administration of George Bush ever end, and the time for hope and change ever arrive?
Will President Obama ever accept responsibility for something... anything?

(Chuck Green is a veteran Colorado journalist and former editor-in-chief of The Denver Post.)

ALSO: Obama refused to talk with BP executives because of the bad experience he had with top executives who met with him to explain how his health care bill would cost their companies BILLIONS of Dollars! And why by law they had to implement write-offs for those billions immediately!

Reports from those present indicate that Obama did not understand a word, never had a clue of what they said and having to face the truth they had to repeatedly show him, finally accused them of lying to him!

NATION OF ISLAM BLOCKS WHITE HOUSE PRESS FROM OBAMBI

2010-05-31T12:48:00.000-07:00

Sent: Sat May 29 21:08:47 2010
Subject: White House Pool Report

At 7:20 local time the pool was holding at Woodlawn and 49th, next to a large sandstone mansion that the Chicago reporters say is the home of one Louis Farrakhan. Our Secret Service agent allowed us off the bus (Air!) and as a dozen of us congregated on the sidewalk, inevitably some shoes touched grass. Immediately a polite man in jeans and Tshirt emerged to ask us to stay off the grass. Though this grass was the curbside city property, we obliged.

Soon, however, he was pacing and talking on a cell phone. He went inside the mansion's black wrought iron fence, crossed the well-landscaped yard, lifted a water bucket behind rose bushes and, voila!, a walkie-talkie. He was heard to refer to "the CIA" once he began speaking into it. Soon he approached our agent, asking him to move the van and its occupants, though your pooler could not hear much else he said. But the agent said, "How is this a security breach?" And he asked if the house was a government property.

The man said something else and at that point the agent stuck out his hand to shake hands and introduced himself as a Secret Service agent. He added, "Sir, I can assure you that we will do nothing to interfere with whatever is going on in there."

The man is back to pacing and talking on his cell, walkie-talkie in hand.

A co-pooler searched the Internet for the address and found it listed on a Web site called NotForTourists and another called Taxexemptworld.com. Indeed, another pooler found a county Web site that confirmed this property is tax exempt for being a religious institution.

Reinforcements arrived--three men in Tshirts reading "Wide or Die!" One surly man has been staring daggers at us. Asked if this is Minister Farrakhan's house, he just stared at your pooler. Asked again, he said, "I don't have no comment."

You should have the WH statement on top kill's failure. At nearly 8 pm local time we are still holding while POTUS and family remain at the Nesbitts.

Sent: Sat May 29 22:07:24 2010
Subject: Pool Report

It's 8:45 and nearly dark; your pool has retreated back inside the van. We're outnumbered now by roughly a dozen Fruit of Islam agents for the Nation of Islam. As each casually dressed man arrives, he exchanges elaborate handshake/hug/double air-kisses with others. Two walked by your pooler chanting "Islam."

Several have filmed and photographed your poolers, the van and its license plates with their cell phones.

One came and stood close to a couple poolers and OUR agent. He asked if he could help. No answer. He asked again. The man said no. The agent said, "Secret Service -- Please move away from this group of people."

He did.

Soon the agent asked us to go in the bus.

We did.

But several poolers, hearing the call of nature, are asking whether they might ask the Fruit about using their bathroom.

Sent: Sat May 29 22:31:56 2010
Subject: Pool Report

9:20 local time and our agent got reinforcements from three Secret Service agents. One shook hands with one of the 22 Fruit members we now can count from the van. After a short discussion the three Secret Service agents walked away again.

No word on when we get to leave. We're guessing POTUS is watching the Blackhawks game at the Nesbitts' home.

Sent: Sat May 29 23:45:48 2010
Subject: Pool Report 5c

The power of pool reportage! Standoff ends, apparently with help of intermediary in Detroit:

Your pooler got a call at about 10:15 local time from a pool report reader who identified himself as the Rev. Gary Hunter, a Baptist minister in Motown who writes and blogs for the Detroit Times. He said he had called Minister Farrakhan and his son and asked them to have the Fruit stand down.

"I told him you were good people," Rev. Hunter said. "He said he didn't know you all were just waiting for the president."

As it happens, the FOI indeed had mostly gone by then. The Rev Hunter apparently is remembered by Ms. Tubman, and he said he knows our frequent press rustler Ben Finkenbinder from past travels with Obama, and -- sorry, Ben -- could he make that name up?

Anyway, at 10:33 we pulled away and we are at the Obama residence. Never saw Potus et al. WE HAVE A FULL LID.

CURIOSER AND CURIOSER

2010-05-11T20:59:00.000-07:00

Investigators: Obama using Connecticut Soc. Sec. Number

3 experts insist White House answer new questions about documentation

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted: May 11, 2010

9:57 pm Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi

© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Two private investigators working independently are asking why President Obama is using a Social Security number set aside for applicants in Connecticut while there is no record he ever had a mailing address in the state.

In addition, the records indicate the number was issued between 1977 and 1979, yet Obama's earliest employment reportedly was in 1975 at a Baskin & Robbins ice cream shop in Oahu, Hawaii.

WND has copies of affidavits filed separately in a presidential eligibility lawsuit in the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia by Ohio licensed private investigator Susan Daniels and Colorado private investigator John N. Sampson.

The investigators believe Obama needs to explain why he is using a Social Security number reserved for Connecticut applicants that was issued at a date later than he is known to have held employment.

See the movie Obama does not want you to see: Own the DVD that probes this unprecedented presidential eligibility mystery!

The Social Security website confirms the first three numbers in his ID are reserved for applicants with Connecticut addresses, 040-049.

"Since 1973, Social Security numbers have been issued by our central office," the Social Security website explains. "The first three (3) digits of a person's social security number are determined by the ZIP code of the mailing address shown on the application for a social security number."

The question is being raised amid speculation about the president's history fueled by an extraordinary lack of public documentation. Along with his original birth certificate, Obama also has not released educational records, scholarly articles, passport documents, medical records, papers from his service in the Illinois state Senate, Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records and adoption papers.

Robert Siciliano, president and CEO of IDTheftSecurity.com and a nationally recognized expert on identity theft, agrees the Social Security number should be questioned.

"I know Social Security numbers have been issued to people in states where they don't live, but there's usually a good reason the person applied for a Social Security number in a different state," Siciliano told WND.

WND asked Siciliano whether he thought the question was one the White House should answer.

"Yes," he replied. "In the case of President Obama, I really don't know what the good reason would be that he has a Social Security number issued in Connecticut when we know he was a resident of Hawaii."

Siciliano is a frequent expert guest on identify theft on cable television networks, including CNN, CNBC and the Fox News Channel. \
Daniels and Sampson each used a different database showing Obama is using a Social Security number beginning with 042.

WND has further confirmed that the Social Security number in question links to Obama in the online records maintained by the Selective Service System. Inserting the Social Security number, his birth date and his last name produces a valid Selective Service number.

To verify that the number was issued by the Social Security Administration for applicants in Connecticut, Daniels used a Social Security number verification database. She found that the numbers immediately before and immediately after Obama's were issued to Connecticut applicants between the years 1977 and 1979.

"There is obviously a case of fraud going on here," Daniels maintained. "In 15 years of having a private investigator's license in Ohio, I've never seen the Social Security Administration make a mistake of issuing a Connecticut Social Security number to a person who lived in Hawaii. There is no family connection that would appear to explain the anomaly."

The hottest book in America is the one that exposes the real Obama and all his men (and women)! Get your autographed copy only from WND!

Does the Social Security Administration ever re-issue Social Security numbers?

"Never," Daniels said. "It's against the law for a person to have a re-issued or second Social Security number issued."

Daniels said she is "staking my reputation on a conclusion that Obama's use of this Social Security number is fraudulent."

There is no indication in the limited background documentation released by the Obama 2008 presidential campaign or by the White House to establish that Obama ever lived in Connecticut.

Nor is there any suggestion in Obama's autobiography, "Dreams from My Father," that he ever had a Connecticut address.

Also, nothing can be found in the public record that indicates Obama visited Connecticut during his high school years.

Sampson's affidavit specifies that as a result of his formal training as an immigration officer and his 27-year career in professional law enforcement, "it is my knowledge and belief that Social Security numbers can only be applied for in the state in which the applicant habitually resides and has their official residence."

Daniels told WND she believes Obama had a different Social Security number when he worked as a teenager in Hawaii prior to 1977.

"I doubt this is President Obama's originally issued Social Security number," she told WND. "Obama has a work history in Hawaii before he left the islands to attend college at Occidental College in California, so he must have originally been issued a Social Security number in Hawaii."

The published record available about Obama indicates his first job as a teenager in Hawaii was at a Baskin-Robbins in the Makiki neighborhood on Oahu. USA Today reported the ice cream shop still was in operation one year after Obama's inauguration.

Politifact.com, a website typically supportive of Obama, claims he worked at the Baskin-Robbins in 1975 or 1976, prior to the issuance of the number in question.

"It is a crime to use more than one Social Security number, and Barack Obama had to have a previous Social Security number to have worked at Baskin Robbins," she insisted. "Under current law, a person is not permitted to use more than one Social Security number in a lifetime."

Another anomaly in the law enforcement databases searched by Daniels and Sampson is that the date 1890 shows up in the field indicating the birth of the number holder, along with Obama's birth date of 08/04/1962. A third date listed is 04/08/1962, which appears to be a transposition of Obama's birth date in an international format, with the day before the month.

Daniels disclosed to WND the name of the database she searched and produced a computer screen copy of the page that listed 1890 as a date associated with the 042 Social Security number.

Daniels said she can't be sure if the 1890 figure has any significance. But she said it appears that the number Obama is using was previously issued by the Social Security Administration.

After an extensive check of the proprietary databases she uses as a licensed private investigator, Daniels determined that the first occurrence of Obama's association with the number was in 1986 in Chicago.

Daniels assumes, but cannot prove, that Obama took on a previously issued Social Security number that had gone dormant due to the death of the original holder.

Daniels has been a licensed private investigator in Ohio since 1995. Sampson formed his private investigations firm, CSI Consulting and Investigations, in 2008. He previously worked as a deportations law enforcement officer with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

The Daniels and Sampson affidavits were originally recorded by attorney Orly Taitz in an eligibility case against Obama last year.

MOVING TO MEXICO

2010-05-08T20:56:00.000-07:00

Dear President Obama:

I'm planning to move my family and extended family into Mexico for my health, and I would like to ask you to assist me.

We're planning to simply walk across the border from the US. into Mexico , and we'll need your help to make a few arrangements.

We plan to skip all the legal stuff like visas, passports, immigration quotas and laws.

I'm sure they handle those things the same way you do here. So, would you mind telling your buddy, President Calderon, that I'm on my way over?

Please let him know that I will be expecting the following:

1. Free medical care for my entire family.

2. English-speaking government bureaucrats for all services I might need, whether I use them or not.

3. Please print all Mexican Government forms in English.

4. I want my grandkids to be taught Spanish by English-speaking (bi-lingual) teachers.

5. Tell their schools they need to include classes on American culture and history.

6. I want my grandkids to see the American flag on one of the flag poles at their school.

7. Please plan to feed my grandkids at school for both breakfast and lunch.

8. I will need a local Mexican driver's license so I can get easy access to government services.

9. I do plan to get a car and drive in Mexico , but I don't plan to purchase car insurance, and I probably won't make any special effort to learn local traffic laws.

10. In case one of the Mexican police officers does not get the memo from their president to leave me alone, please be sure that every patrol car has at least one English-speaking officer.

11. I plan to fly the US. flag from my housetop, put U S. flag decals on my car, and have a gigantic celebration on July 4th. I do not want any complaints or negative comments from the locals.

12. I would also like to have a nice job without paying any taxes, or have any labor or tax laws enforced on any business I may start.

13. Please have the president tell all the Mexican people to be extremely nice and never say critical things about me or my family, or about the strain we might place on their economy.

14. I want to receive free food stamps.

15. Naturally, I'll expect free rent subsidies.

16. I'll need income tax credits so that although I don't pay Mexican taxes, I'll receive money from the government.

17. Please arrange it so that the Mexican Government pays $4,500.00 to help me buy a new car.

18. Oh yes, I almost forgot, please enroll me free into the Mexican Social Security program so that I'll get a monthly income in retirement.

I know this is an easy request because you already do all these things for all his people who walk over to the US. from Mexico I am sure that President Calderon won't mind returning the favor if you ask him nicely.

Thank you so much for your kind help.

You're the man!!!

P.S. I hear that otherwise, they are not as kind as you with illegals who enter Mexico and throw them in jail for two years the first time and then for 10-years if they dare re-enter. For starters. So your letter would really be appreciated.