Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Obama brought up the topic of his legitimacy to be president. Great opportunity to get people talking about his birth records!
Email and post this video where ever and whenever you can. Add info about the lawsuits and all his undisclosed records. I can’t believe he opened the door to controversy about his birth certificate and eligibility. Run with it!
Obama Says Tea Party Is Built Around Core Group of Birthers (Video)
Spread the word but don’t be surprised when you meet some resistance.
From one of CitizenWells’ readers:
Prairie // March 30, 2010 at 9:18 pm
Interesting FR post regarding the Lt. Col.
I posted this over at Sean Hannity Forums and it got up to ten pages real quick and over 140 posts and now they have deleted it saying it is a non issue.
This would indicate to me, it scare the chit out of them and is for real
The media chased down every Bush doc, and when they couldn't find dirt, they advanced fake docs. That was only the preview. Their masterstroke was creating and advancing a fake president.
This is beyond media corruption; it is criminal.
Big media has a garbage detail to sift through Sarah Palin's garbage. Why has there been no investigative journalism on this impostor?
The Blogging Professor has the whole dirty, hot mess here:
Chicago Law School faculty hated Obama "because he was lazy, unqualified, never attended any of the faculty meetings, and it was clear that the position was nothing more than a political stepping stool"
The smartest genius President evah is nothing more than a carboard cutout. A fraud. Doesn't exist. We don't even know how he did in school because to this day his transcripts are sealed. Turns out now that when he was an instructor at the Chicago, his colleagues who were actual Professors didn't like him and didn't want him. Obama's position was obtained through political channels. From Doug Ross: To be (a lawyer) or not to be...
Is the President's resume accurate when it comes to his career and qualifications? I can corroborate that Obama's "teaching career" at Chicago was, to put it kindly, a sham.Here was that video that I posted back in January: Video: Former Constitutional Law Professor Obama makes up quotes in SOTU not found in the Constitution:
I spent some time with the highest tenured faculty member at Chicago Law a few months back, and he did not have many nice things to say about "Barry." Obama applied for a position as an adjunct and wasn't even considered. A few weeks later the law school got a phone call from the Board of Trustees telling them to find him an office, put him on the payroll, and give him a class to teach. The Board told him he didn't have to be a member of the faculty, but they needed to give him a temporary position. He was never a professor and was hardly an adjunct.
The other professors hated him because he was lazy, unqualified, never attended any of the faculty meetings, and it was clear that the position was nothing more than a political stepping stool. According to my professor friend, he had the lowest intellectual capacity in the building. He also doubted whether he was legitimately an editor on the Harvard Law Review, because if he was, he would be the first and only editor of an Ivy League law review to never be published while in school (publication is or was a requirement).
Consider this: 1. President Barack Obama, former editor of the Harvard Law Review, is no longer a "lawyer". He surrendered his license back in 2008 possibly to escape charges that he "fibbed" on his bar application. ...
Chicago Sun-Times, "Obama did NOT 'hold the title' of a University of Chicago law school professor". Barack Obama was NOT a Constitutional Law professor at the University of Chicago.
5. The University of Chicago released a statement in March, 2008 saying Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) "served as a professor" in the law school, but that is a title Obama, who taught courses there part-time, never held, a spokesman for the school confirmed in 2008.
6. "He did not hold the title of professor of law," said Marsha Ferziger Nagorsky, an Assistant Dean for Communications and Lecturer in Law at the University of Chicago School of Law.
7. The former Constitutional senior lecturer cited the U.S. Constitution recently during his State of the Union Address. Unfortunately, the quote he cited was from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.
For a constitutional senior lecturer, it's also noteworthy that Obama doesn't know what car insurance covers.
10. By the way, the promises are not a notion, our founders named them unalienable rights. The document is our Declaration of Independence and it reads: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
11. And this is the same guy who lectured the Supreme Court moments later in the same speech?
When you are a phony it's hard to keep facts straight.
UPDATE: Doug Ross updates with this: Most Transparent President Ever Has Bar Records Redacted This Week, Leaving Only Traces of His Existence Some Betamax Videos and a Fraternity Pin
President Obama's Occidental College transcripts have never been released. His Columbia transcripts are, likewise, AWOL. And his Harvard Law transcripts also haven't been made public. Finally, it's reported, he never published any articles while at Harvard, yet somehow served as Editor of Law Review. That would make him unique among editors, according to insiders.There's more.
Even John "D Student" Kerry was guilt-tripped into releasing his transcripts.
Curiously, since I relayed a report of Obama's "teaching career" at Chicago (he was apparently never a law professor, as some have claimed), the Illinois Bar has decided to partially redact what little public information it had available on its website related to the President's legal status.
A compassionate, responsible, and patriotic commander-in-chief would NEVER allow the military to function in harm's way or for that matter in any service to this great country with any existing doubt in their mind as to the legality of ANY ORDERS they might receive from the White House. A legitimate commander-in-chief would immediately put that issue to rest! That is the honorable thing to do. It is the right thing to do. It is common sense.
Furthermore, a true AMERICAN president would not allow these incredibly brave and patriotic soldiers to be tormented with doubt as to the eligibility of their commander-in-chief.
Anything less is a direct insult to the brave men and women who defend our freedoms and AKA Obama's disdain and arrogance is in essence, an attack on the security of America and her citizens. AKA Obama's failure to prove his eligibility divides and weakens America.
I think the evidence becomes more compelling with each passing day that we have a usurper in the White House and a true an enemy of America in our midst.
AKA Obama is illegitimate. That is obvious.
In fact AKA Obama has perpetrated the greatest crime ever against the American people and yet he has the audacity to tell us how to live our lives as he goes about trashing our Constitution and depriving us our freedoms, liberty and our right to pursue happiness.
All Americans should, like Lt. Col. Terry Lakin, be clamoring for AKAObama to release his records and demanding that the media stop covering for this pathetic excuse of a U.S. President.
The safety and security of the American people are at stake. Lt. Col. Lakin is a patriot and is doing the right thing by trying to force AKAObama's hand. It's obvious that AKAObama is hiding something and we all have a right to know!
Lakin should be applauded and supported by all of us! We have had it with this fraud in the White House. The truth must be told. Do something today to keep up the pressure. This issue WILL NOT go away!
YOU WATCH! The Defense Dept. (at Barry Soetoro's orders) will cancel Lt. Col Lakin's orders to deploy rather than have to cough up all the fraudulent documents that would expose AKA Obama or perhaps they will even go so far as to dishonorably discharge him. What sense does that make?
Where's the birth certificate Barry? Fraud!
AKA Obama (Barry Soetoro) must go! It's time to speak out! What do you think?
By Klaus Rohrich
Following the Democrats’ undemocratic passage of Obamacare, a number of Americans decided to take their anger and disappointment to the next level. Members of Congress, both Democrats and Republican, received threats, had office windows broken and one Republican even had a bullet fired through his window.
Never failing to grasp an opportunity for political gain, no matter how tenuous, Democrat functionaries blamed Republicans and their “shadowy right wing supporters” for all the violence, despite the fact that members of both sides were on the receiving end. And like a trained poodle, House Minority Leader John Boehner condemned the violence.More...
Resign! Repeal! Renew!
By Alan Caruba
The salvation of America now depends on forcing President Barack Obama to resign, repealing the appalling healthcare bill that is now the law of the land, and renewing a full measure of financial prudence to the conduct of the nation’s public affairs and obligations.More...
Texas Organizing Project Is Newest ACORN Spinoff Group
By Matthew Vadum
An inside ACORN source has just confirmed this to me: the Texas chapter of ACORN has pretended to break off from the national group and has incorporated itself under the name Texas Organizing Project.
You read it here first.
Here’s a helpful chart I made:More...
‘Lights of Perverted Science:’ Positioning Israel as the Nazi of Nations
By Dr. Richard L. Cravatts
Jews have been accused of harming and murdering of non-Jews since the twelfth century in England, when Jewish convert to Catholicism, Theobald of Cambridge, perjuriously proclaimed that European Jews ritually slaughtered Christian children each year and drank their blood during Passover season.More...
Major Cook is the valiant officer who defied Obama June 2009, one of the first in our military to speak out.
Subject : RE: LTC Terry Lakin
Date : Wed, Mar 31, 2010 01:05 PM
Not at all!
Terry Lakin is the real deal.
He deserves our complete support
I know Terry and he's a true patriot and a stand up guy.
A superb officer who also takes his oath seriously
I was remiss.
This article is dedicated to Major Stefan F. Cook, one among the bravest of the brave. He spoke out in June 2009, one of the first.
The officer questioning Obama's status is Lt Col T. Lakin, Flight Surgeon. He is on the staff of 4 star General Geo. W. Casey, the Army's Chief of Staff. I believe that is the second highest job in the U.S. Army. Gen. Casey is stationed at the Pentagon in Washington D.C. For a Pentagon Officer such as Lakin, on the staff of such a prestigious General as Gen Casey, to speak out against Obama is quite remarkable.
It's akin to treason within the highest echelons of the Palace Guard.
Perhaps this act which occurred today was the reason for Obama's earlier message this morning, about not questioning his eligibility. Obama must have heard it was coming and is trying to do damage control. It also explains Fox's Gretta Van Sustrand doing a piece with Newt Gingrich, in which she called the birther's
Well add one more, a highly decorated Pentagon staff officer in top standing with the Army, who happens to be a very skilled Doctor. How do I know this? They don't let dum dums handle gold plated 4 star Generals, second in line for overall command of the Army.
Welcome Aboard the Space Ship Doctor, glad to have a Flight Surgeon with us. BTW we refer to ourselves Constitutionalists, it's derived from the document we revere and cherish.
Army Officer Seeks Truth About Obama’s Eligibility to Serve in Oval Office, Invites Own Court-Martial
March 30th, 2010 ·
In a news release today, Army Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin said he is wiling to risk a court-martial in order if that’s what it takes to determine whether or not President Barack Obama is eligible to serve as president of the United States. Not your average officer, Colonel Lakin is the lead flight surgeon charged with caring for Army Chief of Staff General George W. Casey’s pilots and air crew.
The video above provides an overview of his argument.
“I am today compelled to make the distasteful choice to invite my own court martial, in pursuit of the truth about the president’s eligibility under the constitution to hold office”, said Colonel Lakin.
The news release cited (1) Article II, Sec. 1 of the U. S. Constitution which explicitly provides that only “natural born” citizens can serve as president and commander-in-chief and (2) Mr. Obama’s continued refusal to release his original 1961 birth certificate as reasons behind Colonel Lakin reaching the conclusion that his orders are unlawful, and thus MUST be disobeyed.
Today, according to the news release, Colonel Lakin said he had informed his superiors that he cannot understand how his oath of office to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution” does not permit him, as a military officer, to pursue proof of eligibility from his commander-in-chief. In addition, he noted that his efforts have been rebuffed with legal evasions. Given the Obama Administration’s “transparency” initiative, the colonel believes many U.S. citizens are also demanding release of the original birth certificate.
Colonel Lakin’s numerous awards and decorations include the Army Flight Surgeon’s Badge, Combat Medical Badge, the Bronze Service Medal, the Meritorious Service Medal, the Army Commendation Medal with three Oak Leaf Clusters, the Army Achievement Medal with two Oak Leaf Clusters, the National Defense Service Medal with Bronze Service Star, the Armed Forced Expedition Medal, the Army Reserve Component Achievement Medal, the Army Service Ribbon, the Overseas Service Ribbon and the NATO service medal.
By STEPHEN POWER And IAN TALLEY
Wall Street Journal
It another shell game Obama is trying to pull off another con job on the voting public. Great headline above, but like health care it’s all about the details. This is nothing but the typical shell game used by this administration.
If he were serious he would allow drilling to begin immediately instead having a commission to “study” how much oil exists off the Atlantic coasts. Let the law suits and environmental studies begin. Random thoughts while watching a conman manipulate the media and the minds of the voter, J.C.
WASHINGTON—The Obama administration will propose allowing offshore oil and natural-gas exploration and development in a large swath of the eastern Gulf of Mexico, after months of criticism from Republicans who have made expanded offshore drilling a political rallying cry.
In addition, the administration plans to announce new steps to determine how much oil and natural gas is buried off the coasts of Middle and Southern Atlantic states, where oil-reserve estimates are decades out of date.
At the same time, Mr. Obama’s plan wouldn’t allow new oil and gas development off the coasts of Northern Atlantic states or California, whose political leaders have long opposed offshore drilling. The administration will call off a plan drafted by the administration of former President George W. Bush that would have given oil companies access to Alaska’s Bristol Bay, an area teeming with wild sockeye salmon and many commercial fishing interests concerned about the impact of drilling on their livelihoods. Complete Story
Like a bolt out of the blue, Obama announces Virginia waters will be opened for drilling. It is a step in the right direction, but the chosen path is the narrowest possible. Does he really want to do something that will substantially benefit, or does he just want to give that appearance to the gullible masses?
The chances of striking an oil pocket are much more likely in Alaska, off Florida in the oil rich Gulf of Mexico. There is 3.5 Billion barrels waiting in North Dakota. Arco was hitting well after well along the California coast before the tree huggers shut that down.It's a true pity, especially when Caly has such high unemployment, gas currently at $3.60 a gallon, and no tax base. Those oil royalties sure would be nice to have for them. A revitalized oil industry wouldn't hurt the state's jobs outlook either. I guess $3.60 gas would have to fall as well.
Obama approves Virginia. Makes sense to me. If you want to do something without doing anything. Just like his Nuclear Power plant permit approvals in January '10 that won't see the first cubic yard of cement poured in the next 15 years.
Interesting don't you think, 15 months after the fact, Obama gets the epiphany to do some sniffing for oil. Must have bumped his head and suddenly remembered there was an energy crisis going on the summer of '08. Or was that Soros and gang manipulating the market?
Sell that Health Care Bill Obowma, Sell it baby! If he can get a majority behind him, the Supreme Court may take that into account on how they interpret the Commerce Act.
Make this a talking point, Obama is only doing the bare minimum, and it's for his ratings/agenda not America.
Attention to all bloggers, if you have a blog or you are thinking of blogging, no matter how small the effort or how great, this is our time to speak the TRUTH to raw power which is now out in the open.
“If you bloggers self-organize and attach yourselves like leeches to specific issues, corporations, organizations, challenges, you will be the intelligence minutemen of this century. The power is in your hands. There aren't enough guns to kill us all, and Haliburton can't build the jails fast enough to keep us down.”
By: Timothy P. Carney
March 31, 2010
President Obama used his recess-appointment power to place four former federal lobbyists — representing defense contractors and the agri-chemical industry among others — in top policy jobs. Obama’s maneuver dodges a Senate floor debate and sweeps under the rug an inauspicious milestone: The appointment of the 50th lobbyist to a policymaking job by a president who claims he’s “excluded” them.
As a matter of principle I normally will not advertise anything on this blog but this time around I make an exception as:
- I want to see every American wearing this T-Shirt as it makes a real impact if millions and millions of patriots wear it wherever they go. You will get questions which in turn allows you to inform others about the usurpers true name.
- It is a perfect way to support the tremendous work Alex Jones is doing.
- David Crockett
Alex show us his new barry soetoro t-shirt on the alex jones show.
Give Us Liberty published:
The officer questioning Obama’s status is Lt Col T. Lakin, Flight Surgeon. He is on the staff of 4 star General Geo. W. Casey, the Army’s Chief of Staff. I believe that is the second highest job in the U.S. Army. Gen. Casey is stationed at the Pentagon in Washington D.C. For a Pentagon Officer such as Lakin, on the staff of such a prestigious General as Gen Casey, to speak out against Obama is quite remarkable.
It’s akin to treason within the highest echelons of the Palace Guard.
below is a link to the second video. This is a video where Fox's Gretta Van Sestren sells us out as a lunatic fringe for questioning Obama's eligibility.
Rick Santelli a securities trader on the floor of the CBO, was doing a live televised interview with MSNBC Business on February 18, 2009. Santelli went into a rant about the unfairness of Government bailouts of residential mortgages. That rant spawned a movement. About 50 people who heard Santelli, although located in different parts of the country, connected via the internet and decided to do something about an out of control Government. They formed the Tea Party
February 27,2009 was the first Tea Party protest, it was widely but sparsely attended. Not to be deterred, another nation wide event was planned for April 15, 2009. Some 1.9 million patriots in about 2000 locations across the country turned out to protest, most of them protesting for the first time in their lives.
The rest is history.
Obama may have some other hair brained concept in mind, but as far as the Tea Party you and I are familiar with, these above are the historical facts of the birth of the Tea Party. Not some time prior to the election of November 4, 2008 .
And yes barackie you still are a usurper
A Natural Born US Citizen, Constitutionally eligible to be the POTUS, but does not aspire to.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Orly Taitz Files Motion to Have her Quo Warranto Lawsuit Consolidated with Multi-State Health Care Bill Lawsuit
Monday, March 29, 2010
Note the price tag. This Commmunist Wannabe needs to get his priorities and his ideologies straight.
2 hours ago
Not many politicians or their wives would even bother to reply to the little people.
It speaks well of the DiSimone's. America is desparate for leaders such as these.
Compare and Contrast-Two Rallies Held A Week Apart, One In LA, The Other In Searchlight (click to enlarge)
Given the fact that the Medical Marxists in charge of America have succeeded in passing a bill that allows the government to force private citizens to purchase health insurance, and levy fines, and or jail, to those who fail to comply, just how far can the nanny fascists go in deciding how you live your life?
How about a government mandate to outlaw behavior which leads to obesity and related diseases such as diabetes and heart disease?
If government can force me to buy health insurance, against my will, in the name of advancing the greater good, can those same imbeciles tell me that my weight must not exceed those absurd height-weight charts found in doctors’ offices from coast to coast?
What about a required weigh-in at the local IRS office every year in early April, say a couple of weeks before April 15?
Exceed the prescribed weight for your body frame, sex, and age, and IRS automatically adds $100 to your tab bill—for every pound of excess flab. So the guy or gal with 50 extra lbs to their name would have to cough up an extra $5,000.
Add that to the $5,000 penalty for not having insurance, and you have Ten Grand staring back at you, just for being a slobaholic.
Continue down that slippery slope for another year, and you might find yourself incarcerated and forced to unwillingly lose those 50 pounds before being allowed to live free.
Or with dim-bulbs like Nancy Pelosi in charge, the insanity might even go further: Given the chance, Nanny Nancy would outlaw Twinkies, mashed potatoes and gravy, real ice cream, Reese buttercups, sour cream, spaghetti and meatballs, beer, French bread and butter, popcorn, Frito chips, hot dogs, and any and all foods and drinks found at a typical American 4th of July celebration, Christmas and Thanksgiving dinner, and most birthday parties, where Anglo-Saxon culture and food are allowed.
In contrast, some of the most fatty, high-calorie and carbohydrate-laced foods like Tacos, Tamales, Burritos, and Enchiladas would be exempt from Nancy’s law, owing to the sensitive nature of Hispanic voters and-- their voting numbers.
What about exercise? Getting enough—at least one hour a day?
Damn your hide! You are a national security risk and a threat to the success of ObamaCare and medical fascism. This must not stand!
You will, therefore, be required by law to exercise daily according to a regime devised by a panel of health experts like Charles Rangel, Barney Frank, and Louise Slaughter.
The law will be enforced by IRS agents who will be authorized to demand proof of your compliance before allowing you to withdraw funds from your government- insured bank account.
Stop bitching, Pilgrims! This is Progress, remember?
Say what? What about a law making it a felony to smoke, chew, or sniff any tobacco product? (except marijuana,GBH,Xtasy,or CRACK of course)
Sorry, mate, but that sort of intrusive interference is above the pay grade of our nicotine-addicted Commander-in-chief at this time!
The Rasmussen Reports Media Meter shows that Republican candidate Meg Whitman is getting more favorable press coverage these days than former Democratic Governor Jerry Brown.
For the week ending Sunday, March 28, 2010, 58% of the media mentions for Whitman were positive. while 42% were negative.
For Brown, during the same time frame, the results were the mirror opposite, 42% positive and 58% negative.
The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely voters in the state shows the two candidates tied at 40% each in the governor's race.
While the coverage of Whitman has been more positive than Brown’s coverage, the Democrat has had far more coverage with nearly twice as many mentions as Whitman.
She has yet to accompany him to any Arab country. Think about it. The pieces of the puzzle just keep on coming together!
I was at a Blockbusters renting videos, and as I was going along the wall, there was a video called "Obama". There were two ARAB men next to me. We talked about Obama. I asked them why they thought Michele Obama headed home following her visit in France instead of traveling on to
They told me she couldn't go to Saudi Arabia , Turkey or Iraq .
I said "Laura Bush went to Saudi Arabia , Turkey and Dubai ." They said that Obama is a Muslim, and by Muslim law he would not be allowed to bring his wife into countries that accept Sharia Law.
I just thought it was interesting that two Arabs at Blockbusters accept the idea that we're being led by a Muslim who follows the .
They also said that's the reason he bowed to the .. It was a signal to the Muslim world.
When I received this it made sense to me, but there were also a couple blank spots.
and Turkey with her husband...
Thus, I sent it to a friend who is a Middle Eastern Scholar and expert, Dr. Jim Murk.
Here is his explanation that states a little clearer what the Arabs at Blockbuster were saying.
"An orthodox Muslim man would never take his wife on a politically oriented trip to any nation which practices shari'ah law, which includes Saudi Arabia .
It is why Obama left Michelle in Europe , or at home, when he went to Arab countries. He knows Muslim protocol; this included his bowing to the Saudi king.
Obama is regarded as a Muslim in these countries simply because he was born to a Muslim father. Note that he (has not attended church since becoming President.)
He also played down the fact that the USA was a Christian country and said, unbelievably, that it was one of the largest Muslim nations in the world, (which is not true).
He has also publicly taken the part of the Palestinians in the conflict with Israel. Finally, he ignored the National Day of Prayer.
He is bad news. He is God's judgment on America ." Jim Murk
Thus, once again, ACTIONS speak louder than words. Check out Obama's (actions). Do they appear treasonous to you, or is it just millions of us who think so?
By Dave Macy
The headlines reflect the awful truth real Christians always expected. President Barack Obama is not who he says he is. And he probably isn’t who many Americans say he is—namely the anti-Christ. However, his actions, tactics, and values are absolutely anti-Christ!More...
A common man, was more than happy to accept such an invitation from the wife of another common man.
Patriots are rising people. Join us.
Information regarding the Power Of Ten Project can be had by emailing us at email@example.com
EDITORIAL: Obama's white-flight problem
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Desperate Democrats and their co-conspirators in the media are busy trying to whip up a race war.
"The health care bill is not the main source of this anger and never has been. It's merely a handy excuse," Frank Rich wrote in a recent New York Times column. Their line is that all those opposed to the president's radical agenda are racists who resent having a black man as president. It is a moldy, old smear, but as approval ratings for Mr. Obama sink below 50 percent, it is being revisited with increasing fervor.
According to the latest Gallup weekly data, only 38 percent of whites approve of Mr. Obama's performance, down from 63 percent when he took office. Of course, if these people were racists, they never would have given Mr. Obama their support to begin with, but the liberal howls of "white flight" are resistant to elementary logic.
Critics focus on racial data because they want to make race the center of the argument. This is a way to avoid the inconvenient truth that vast segments of the electorate are becoming disenchanted with Mr. Obama's broken promises. The American middle class is deserting him in droves.
According to Gallup, Mr. Obama is losing ground among people earning between $24,000 and $60,000 per year (currently at 50 percent approval - even lower at higher income levels); college graduates (48 percent approval); political independents (43 percent approval); older Americans, especially senior citizens (40 percent approval); and married couples (40 percent approval). These are the bedrock middle-class demographics, and represent people who increasingly recognize the existential threat Mr. Obama poses to their pocketbooks and to American core values.
Among people who attend church weekly, Mr. Obama's support has dropped from a high of 60 percent in January 2009 to 41 percent, and affinity for Mr. Obama has fallen in double digits among religious denominations across the board. An exception is the "None/Atheist/Agnostic" category, in which Mr. Obama enjoys 67 percent support. He is also highly supported by those with graduate degrees, young people, single people, poor people and blacks.
Perhaps Mr. Obama's defenders believe, as many liberals do, that the United States is a fundamentally racist nation. As Mr. Obama said during the 2008 campaign trail, "It's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." This contemptuous assessment of the American middle class accurately reflects the liberal worldview. When they say "red state," they mean "redneck."
Race plays a much stronger role in the liberal mindset than for most of America. Mr. Obama and many liberals of his generation grew up being taught that America is at root a deeply flawed country, and it is their mission to "fix" it. Those pushing the "racism" argument to explain the strong opposition to Mr. Obama's policies do so because they can't escape looking at issues through a racial prism. As America has become post-racial, they are intellectually and emotionally stuck in the 1960s. So they recycle images half-a-century old and wait, forlornly, for a random lynching to justify their worldview.
There is much to dislike about Mr. Obama's America: high unemployment, monstrous record debt, economic sluggishness, a terrible health care law, higher taxes, a rigged census, fast-tracking illegal aliens to the franchise, growing government at home and increasing weakness abroad. It is not mean-spirited racism to take a stand against the daily destruction of the American dream; it is simple common sense.
Monday, March 29, 2010
FNC's Hume: Value-Added Tax Passage During Congressional Lame-Duck Session a Possibility
So we have a health care reform entitlement now, along with various unfunded liabilities, courtesy of the federal government. The next question is - how are we going to pay for all of it?
Last week following the passage of health care legislation, syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer predicted a value-added tax (or VAT) could be in the works, which is a consumption tax that is placed on a product whenever value is added at a stage of production and at final sale.
However, former Fox News "Special Report" anchor Brit Hume, now a senior political analyst for network, said there was a possibility the VAT could be pushed into law during a lame-duck session of Congress, if loss for the Democratic Party are steep enough to force them to relinquish their control following the 2008 cycle.
"I think the projected savings, if they actually came to pass, would be in the order of 140 some billion dollars," Hume said. "That is a drop in the bucket against these levels of debt and particularly against the levels of entitlement debt, which is why I think after the news on social security and after the difficulty selling government bonds last week with lifted interest rates - you may start, as Charles Krauthammer fears, to hear about a value-added tax, a form of sales tax. You could hardly get it through the Congress right now, but you might be able to slip it through after the election, with the old Congress still seated, the new Congress not yet here during the so-called lame duck session. I don't think it is yet likely but I wouldn't rule it out."
A VAT could be detrimental for the U.S. economy and it wouldn't be a cure-all for government debt, as Chris Edwards pointed out for Cato @ Liberty last year. Instead, this would encourage more spending and higher tax rates, causing an impediment to U.S. economic growth."In sum, a VAT would not solve our deficit problems because Congress would simply boost its spending even higher, as happened in Europe as VAT rates increased over time," Edwards wrote. "Also, a VAT is not needed to cut the corporate income tax rate because a corporate rate cut would be self-financing over the long-term as tax avoidance fell and economic growth increased
America, if you love your freedom, thank a vet! And if you’re looking for leaders who believe in integrity, service, and country first, look to our veterans.
Last week I campaigned for a true American hero, John McCain, and this week I’d ask you to join me in supporting a new generation of heroes who are heeding their country’s call for leadership in Washington.
There are a number of great veteran candidates running for office this year, and there are some excellent organizations dedicated to helping them, including: Iraq Vets for Congress and Combat Veterans for Congress (please click on the links to visit their websites).
There are three veterans in particular I’ll be supporting this week.
The first is Major Vaughn Ward, a fourth-generation Idaho native who grew up on his family’s farm in Shoshone and is running in Idaho’s 1st Congressional District. Coming from a family with a proud military tradition, Vaughn joined the Marine Corps after college and was finishing up his service when the September 11th attacks occurred. He put his life on hold and heeded his country’s call – serving first as a CIA Operations Officer and later volunteering with the Marine Corps for a combat tour in Iraq, during which he was awarded the Bronze Star with Combat V. After returning from Iraq, Vaughn went to work for the McCain/Palin campaign. I was grateful for his support then, and I’m happy to support him now because I know that he believes in the same commonsense conservative ideals that we cherish. Vaughn knows that real job growth comes from the private sector, not government. He believes in free market reforms, tax relief for families and small businesses, and a return to a constitutionally limited government that lives within its means. He’ll carry the conservative banner to Washington and will rein in the reckless growth of government to get it back on our side. And remember, a vote for Vaughn is a vote to remove the gavel from Nancy Pelosi’s grip. Please visit Vaughn’s website here to make a donation to his campaign, and follow him on Facebook and Twitter.
The second veteran is Captain Adam Kinzinger, a decorated special-operations pilot who flew combat missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. Adam is running for Illinois’ 11th Congressional District against a freshman incumbent congresswoman who seemed to pull a bait and switch on voters to get elected. She sounded like a blue dog on the campaign trail, but didn’t vote like one in Washington. Instead, she voted in lockstep with the Pelosi agenda – on Obamacare, the stimulus, cap-and-tax – and the list goes on. She’s part of the reason for Congress’ 11% approval rating. Adam is a strong fiscal conservative with a proven track record as a reformer from his years serving on his local county board. Adam started out in local office, and, like many of us, believes in making government more accountable to the people. When you serve in local office, your constituents truly are your neighbors. Adam understands this, and I know that he will listen to his constituents and work for us, not against us, in Washington. Please visit Adam’s website here to make a donation to his campaign, and follow him on Facebook and Twitter.
The third veteran is Lieutenant Colonel Allen West, a decorated war hero who’s served with distinction in combat zones in Iraq and Afghanistan. Many of you may have heard of Allen from a speech he gave last year that became a viral video on YouTube with over 2 million viewers. Allen’s personal story is a testament to the commonsense conservative belief that our nation’s greatness is rooted in freedom, because with freedom comes equal opportunity, and that, coupled with hard work, leads to success. Allen is a small government fiscal conservative running against a leftwing ideologue who’s marched to the beat of Nancy Pelosi on every issue from cap-and-tax to the stimulus, TARP, and, of course, Obamacare. It’s time to send Allen to Washington in his place. Please visit Allen’s website here to donate to his campaign, and follow him on Facebook and Twitter.
I believe that these great veterans will fight for us in D.C. to uphold and defend our constitution as courageously in the halls of Congress as they did on the field of battle. I’m so honored to offer my support to these American heroes, and I hope you’ll join me in helping them so that they can serve us all in Washington.
- Sarah Palin
How thorough do you expect the AG's of these states to be,considering they are paid a very nice salary, by the taxpayers.
Do you expect them to show up in court with the 10th Amendment of the Constitution highlighted in yellow as Exhibit 1, and that's about it.?
Or do you expect them, to weigh the very paper the Bill is written on, check the thickness, make sure the chain of custody, went from Speaker to Oval Office, with an unbroken and secure transfer of this document. Ensure it was secured in a vault overnight while awaiting signature. Ascertain who had the combination to the vault, if there wsas a witness when it was taken out of the vault, and who that person was? Etc.etc.,etc.
Seems like a meaningless line of questions. I agree to an extent, but how do they secure the document to avoid post passage tampering? For one-sixth of the economy I expect a to get my monies worth regarding questions to be asked by these gents.
One in particular, the signature signing the Bill into law. Is it Obama's, and by what right does he sign. Prove it. A video of the Inauguration as proof won't suffice in this instance. Not thorough enough. We're still talking 1/6th of the economy, states rights, survival of the republic, the future of our posterity.
Orly Taitz has filed a motion to join these 13 AG's to ask just such a question. Quo Warranto Obama, By What Right Do You Affix Your Signature. Show Your Documentation.
I've said here many times before, in our federal legal code the only exception to placing the burden of proof on the accused, not the accuser, is under Quo Warranto. Quo Warranto even exceeds the 5th Amendment because we are talking about protection against an illegal elected representative from ascending to power by deception. It is up to Obama to provide as proof, to a diligent courts satisfaction, any relevant documentation demanded by a plaintiff. If he can, he can. If he can't, he can't be president anymore. Simple as that. We know Obama can't or else he would have done so long ago.
If the AG's get desperate enough in their case, if it looks like they could somehow lose, I hope they remember the Quo Warranto Ace in the Hole. How fitting if they would allow Orly Taitz to present the Writ to the court.
If they wanted to do it the easy way, they would already be asking for his proof. Case Closed. As a usurper, Obama's signature would make the Health Care law and all others he has signed NULL and VOID.
"Take Him Away Baliff." What a sweet sound that would be. A sound in this instance, as sweet as "Liberty".
As one of three co-equal branches of our republic, in a day of mass media opportunities to educate the populous, why hasn't the Supreme Court spoken out on this issue.
I'm not talking specifically Obama's water leaking eligibility issue. I'm talking about the concept in general, Article II, as outlined by the Constitution. Our Justices need to get off their elderly asses, and get in front of a video camera and start talking about the Constitution. What it means, what is intended, how it has evolved, why an American citizen has no standing in the Federal court system. What judicial devices have been abusively devised to circumvent the Law of the Land. You know that sort of stuff.
“EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW”—These words, written above the main entrance to the Constitution or the laws of the United States .Building, express the ultimate responsibility of the Supreme Court of the United States . The Court is the highest tribunal in the Nation for all cases and controversies arising under the
The Supreme Court is “distinctly American in concept and function,” as Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes observed. Few other courts in the world have the same authority of constitutional interpretation and none have exercised it for as long or with as much influence. A century and a half ago, the French political observer noted the unique position of the Supreme Court in the history of nations and of jurisprudence. “The representative system of government has been adopted in several states of Europe ,” he remarked, “but I am unaware that any nation of the globe has hitherto organized a judicial power in the same manner as the Americans. . . . A more imposing judicial power was never constituted by any people.” The unique position of the Supreme Court stems, in large part, from the deep commitment of the American people to the and to constitutional government.
Theis a carefully balanced document. It is designed to provide for a national government sufficiently strong and flexible to meet the needs of the republic, yet sufficiently limited and just to protect the guaranteed rights of citizens; it permits a balance between society’s need for order and the individual’s right to freedom.
To assure these ends, the Framers of the Constitution created three independent and coequal branches of government. That this Constitution has provided continuous through the periodic stresses of more than two centuries illustrates the genius of the American system of government.
individual rights, as well as in maintaining a “living Constitution” whose broad provisions are continually applied to complicated new situations. While the function of judicial review is not explicitly provided in the Constitution, it had been anticipated before the adoption of that document. Prior to 1789, state courts had already overturned legislative acts which conflicted with . Moreover, many of the Founding Fathers expected the Supreme Court to assume this role in regardThis power of “ ” has given the Court a crucial responsibility in assuring
to the Constitution; Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, for example, had underlined the importance of judicial review in the Federalist Papers, which urged adoption of the Constitution.
whose statutes might express only the temporary will of part of the people. And Madison had written that constitutional interpretation must be left to the reasoned judgment of independent judges, rather than to the tumult and conflict of the political process. If every constitutional question were to be decided by public political bargaining, Madison argued, the Constitution would be reduced to a battleground of competing factions, political passion and partisan spirit.
Despite this background the Court’s power of judicial review was not confirmed until 1803, when it was invoked by Chief Justice John Marshall in . In this decision, the Chief Justice asserted that the That oath could not be fulfilled any other way. “It is emphatically the province of the judicial department to say what the law is,” he declared.
In retrospect, it is evident that constitutional interpretation and application were made necessary by the very nature of the Constitution. The Founding Fathers had wisely worded that document in rather general terms leaving it open to future elaboration to meet changing conditions. As Chief Justice Marshall noted in McCulloch v. Maryland , a constitution that attempted to detail every aspect of its own application “would partake of the prolixity of a legal code, and could scarcely be embraced by the human mind. . . . Its nature, therefore, requires that only its great outlines should be marked, its important objects designated, and the minor ingredients which compose those objects be deduced from the nature of the objects themselves.”
The Constitution limits the Court to dealing with “Cases” and “Controversies.” John Jay, the first Chief Justice, clarified this restraint early in the Court’s history by declining to advise The Court does not give advisory opinions; rather, its function is limited only to deciding specific cases.on the constitutional implications of a proposed .
The Justices must exercise considerable discretion in deciding which cases to hear, since more than 10,000 civil and criminal cases are filed in the Supreme Court each year from the various state and federal courts. The Supreme Court also has “ ” in a very small number of cases arising out of disputes between States or between a State and the Federal Government.
When the constitutional amendment or by a new ruling of the Court. However, when the Court interprets a statute, new legislative action can be taken.on a constitutional issue, that judgment is virtually final; its decisions can be altered only by the rarely used procedure of
Chief Justice Marshall expressed the challenge which the Supreme Court faces in maintaining free government by noting: “We must never forget that it is a constitution we are expounding . . . intended to endure for ages to come, and consequently, to be adapted to the various crises of human affairs.”
[The foregoing was taken from a booklet prepared by the, and published with funding from the .]
Monday, March 29, 2010
A Long Post: The Complete List of Obama Statement Expiration Dates
By popular demand, a comprehensive list of expired Obama statements...
HEALTH CARE MANDATES
STATEMENT: “We've got a philosophical difference, which we've debated repeatedly, and that is that Senator Clinton believes the only way to achieve universal health care is to force everybody to purchase it. And my belief is, the reason that people don't have it is not because they don't want it but because they can't afford it.” Barack Obama, speaking at a Democratic presidential debate, February 21, 2008.
EXPIRATION DATE: On March 23, 2010, Obama signed the individual mandate into law.
HEALTH CARE NEGOTIATIONS ON C-SPAN
STATEMENT: “These negotiations will be on C-SPAN, and so the public will be part of the conversation and will see the decisions that are being made.” January 20, 2008, and seven other times.
EXPIRATION DATE: Throughout the summer, fall, and winter of 2009 and 2010; when John McCain asked about it during the health care summit February 26, Obama dismissed the issue by declaring, “the campaign is over, John.”
STATEMENT: “No family making less than $250,000 will see any form of tax increase.” (multiple times on the campaign trail)
EXPIRATION DATE: Broken multiple times, including the raised taxes on tobacco, a new tax on indoor tanning salons, but most prominently on February 11, 2010: “President Barack Obama said he is “agnostic” about raising taxes on households making less than $250,000 as part of a broad effort to rein in the budget deficit.”
STATEMENT: Then-Senator Obama declared that a recess appointment is “damaged goods” and has “less credibility” than a normal appointment. August 25, 2005.
EXPIRATION DATE: March 27, 2010: “If, in the interest of scoring political points, Republicans in the Senate refuse to exercise that responsibility, I must act in the interest of the American people and exercise my authority to fill these positions on an interim basis.”
STATEMENT: “We need tougher border security, and a renewed focus on busting up gangs and traffickers crossing our border. . . . That begins at home, with comprehensive immigration reform. That means securing our border and passing tough employer enforcement laws.” then-candidate Obama, discussing the need for border security, speaking in Miami on May 23, 2008:
EXPIRATION DATE: March 17, 2010: The Obama administration halted new work on a "virtual fence" on the U.S.-Mexican border, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced Tuesday, diverting $50 million in planned economic stimulus funds for the project to other purposes.
STATEMENT: Executive Order stating, "The detention facilities at Guantánamo for individuals covered by this order shall be closed as soon as practicable, and no later than one year from the date of this order." January 22, 2009.
EXPIRATION DATE: November 19, 2009: "Guantánamo, we had a specific deadline that was missed."
STATEMENT: “Somebody like Khalid Sheik Mohammad is gonna get basically, a full military trial with all the bells and whistles.” September 27, 2006
EXPIRATION DATE: Ongoing. “President Obama is planning to insert himself into the debate about where to try the accused mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, three administration officials said Thursday, signaling a recognition that the administration had mishandled the process and triggered a political backlash. Obama initially had asked Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to choose the site of the trial in an effort to maintain an independent Justice Department. But the White House has been taken aback by the intense criticism from political opponents and local officials of Holder's decision to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed in a civilian courtroom in New York.”
STATEMENT: “We will launch a sweeping effort to root out waste, inefficiency, and unnecessary spending in our government, and every American will be able to see how and where we spend taxpayer dollars by going to a new website called recovery.gov.” – President Obama, January 28, 2009
EXPIRATION DATE: “More than two months after some of the funds were released, [Recovery.gov] offers little detail on where the money is going… The government [spent] $84 million on a website that doesn't have a search function, when its purpose is to ‘root out waste, inefficiency, and unnecessary spending in our government.’” April 2, 2009
Eighteen from his first 100 days:
3. Opposed a Colombian Free Trade Agreement because advocates ignore that "labor leaders have been targeted for assassination on a fairly consistent basis."
17. "Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days." Obama is 1-for-11 on this promise so far.
18. A special one on the 100th day, "the first thing I'd do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That's the first thing I'd do."
And a list from of promises that expired during the campaign:
Monday, November 03, 2008
STATEMENT: “Based on the conversations we’ve had internally as well as external reports, we believe that you can get one to two brigades out a month. At that pace, the forces would be out in approximately 16 months from the time that we began. That would be the time frame that I would be setting up,” Obama to the New York Times, November 1, 2007
EXPIRATION DATE: March 7, 2008: Obama foreign policy adviser Samantha Power, to the BBC: “You can’t make a commitment in whatever month we’re in now, in March of 2008 about what circumstances are gonna be like in Jan. 2009. We can’t even tell what Bush is up to in terms of troop pauses and so forth. He will of course not rely upon some plan that he’s crafted as a presidential candidate or as a US senator.”
Also: July 3, 2008: "My 16-month timeline, if you examine everything I've said, was always premised on making sure our troops were safe," Obama told reporters as his campaign plane landed in North Dakota. "And my guiding approach continues to be that we've got to make sure that our troops are safe, and that Iraq is stable. And I'm going to continue to gather information to find out whether those conditions still hold."
STATEMENT: On June 14, Obama foreign policy adviser Susan Rice called the RNC’s argument that Obama needed to go to Iraq to get a firsthand look "complete garbage."
EXPIRATION DATE: On June 16, Obama announced he would go to Iraq and Afghanistan “so he can see first hand the progress of the wars he would inherit if he's elected president.”
STATEMENT: May 16, 2008: "If John McCain wants to meet me, anywhere, anytime to have a debate about our respective policies in Iraq, Iran, the Middle East or around the world that is a conversation I’m happy to have."
EXPIRATION DATE: June 13, 2008: Obama campaign manager David Plouffe: “Barack Obama offered to meet John McCain at five joint appearances between now and Election Day—the three traditional debates plus a joint town hall on the economy in July [on the Fourth of July] and an in-depth debate on foreign policy in August.”
STATEMENT: “We can, then, more effectively deal with what I consider to be one of the greatest threats to the United States, to Israel, and world peace, and that is Iran,” Obama speaking to American Israel Public Affairs Committee in Chicago, March 5, 2007
EXPIRATION DATE: “Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, these countries are tiny...They don’t pose a serious threat to us the way the Soviet Union posed a threat to us.” – May 20, 2008
STATEMENT: Question at the YouTube debate, as the video depicted leaders of the countries, including Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: "Would you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea?....."
"I would," Obama answered. July 27, 2007
EXPIRATION DATE: May 10, 2008: Susan E. Rice, a former State Department and National Security Council official who is a foreign policy adviser to the Democratic candidate: “But nobody said he would initiate contacts at the presidential level; that requires due preparation and advance work.”
JEREMIAH WRIGHT/TRINITY UNITED
STATEMENT: "I could no more disown Jeremiah Wright than I could disown my own grandmother."
—Barack Obama, March 18, 2008
EXPIRATION DATE: on April 28, 2008, cut all ties to Wright, declaring, “based on his remarks yesterday, well, I may not know him as well as I thought.”
STATEMENT: Obama said that his church, “Trinity United "embodies the black community in its entirety" and that his church was being caricatured on March 18, 2008.
EXPIRATION DATE: On May 31, 2008, Obama resigned his membership at Trinity United Church.
STATEMENT: Criticism of running mate vetter Jim Johnson loan from Countrywide was "a game" and that his vice-presidential vetting team “aren’t folks who are working for me.” June 10, 2008
EXPIRATION DATE: June 11, 2008, when Obama accepted Johnson's resignation.
STATEMENT: Obama spokesman Bill Burton on October 24, 2007: “To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies.”
EXPIRATION DATE: June 20, 2008: “Given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as president, I will carefully monitor the program.”
STATEMENT: “I am not a nuclear energy proponent.” Barack Obama, December 30, 2007
EXPIRATION DATE: The above statement actually was the expiration date for his previous position, “I actually think we should explore nuclear power as part of the energy mix,” expressed on July 23, 2007; the above statement expired when he told Democratic governors he thought it is “worth investigating its further development” on June 20, 2008.
STATEMENT: Tim Russert:: Senator Obama . . . Simple question: Will you, as president, say to Canada and Mexico, "This has not worked for us; we are out"?
Obama: “I will make sure that we renegotiate, in the same way that Senator Clinton talked about. And I think actually Senator Clinton's answer on this one is right. I think we should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced. And that is not what has been happening so far.” February 23, 2008
EXPIRATION DATE: June 18, 2008, Fortune magazine: “Sometimes during campaigns the rhetoric gets overheated and amplified,” he conceded, after I reminded him that he had called NAFTA "devastating" and "a big mistake," despite nonpartisan studies concluding that the trade zone has had a mild, positive effect on the U.S. economy.
Does that mean his rhetoric was overheated and amplified? "Politicians are always guilty of that, and I don't exempt myself," he answered.
"I'm not a big believer in doing things unilaterally," Obama said. "I'm a big believer in opening up a dialogue and figuring out how we can make this work for all people."
STATEMENT: “If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.” Also, a Common Cause questionnaire dated November 27, 2007, asked “If you are nominated for President in 2008 and your major opponents agree to forgo private funding in the general election campaign, will you participate in the presidential public financing system?”, Obama checked, “Yes.”
EXPIRATION DATE: June 19, 2008: Obama announced he would not participate in the presidential public financing system.
WORKING OUT A DEAL ON PUBLIC FINANCING
STATEMENT: “What I’ve said is, at the point where I'm the nominee, at the point where it's appropriate, I will sit down with John McCain and make sure that we have a system that works for everybody.”Obama to Tim Russert, Febuary 27.
EXPIRATION DATE: When Obama announced his decision to break his public financing pledge June 19, no meeting between the Democratic nominee and McCain had occurred.
STATEMENT: “I probably would not have supported the federal legislation [to overhaul welfare], because I think it had some problems." Obama on the floor of the Illinois Senate, May 31, 1997
EXPIRATION DATE: April 11, 2008: Asked if he would have vetoed the 1996 law, Mr. Obama said, “I won’t second guess President Clinton for signing” it. Obama to the New York Times.
STATEMENT: "Barack Obama has always believed that same-sex couples should enjoy equal rights under the law, and he will continue to fight for civil unions as president. He respects the decision of the California Supreme Court, and continues to believe that states should make their own decisions when it comes to the issue of marriage.” – campaign spokesman, May 5, 2008
EXPIRATION DATE: June 29, 2008: “I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states… Finally, I want to congratulate all of you who have shown your love for each other by getting married these last few weeks.” — letter to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club
STATEMENT: "Now, I don't think that 'mental distress' qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term." – Interview with Relevant magazine, July 1, 2008
EXPIRATION DATE: July 5, 2008: “My only point is that in an area like partial-birth abortion having a mental, having a health exception can be defined rigorously. It can be defined through physical health, It can be defined by serious clinical mental-health diseases.” statement to reporters.
DIVISION OF JERUSALEM
STATEMENT: "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." — speech before AIPAC, June 4, 2008
EXPIRATION DATE: June 6, 2008: "Jerusalem is a final status issue, which means it has to be negotiated between the two parties" as part of "an agreement that they both can live with." – an Obama adviser clarifying his remarks to the Jerusalem Post.