Jueves, 31 de diciembre de 2009

Flight 253 Eyewitness: Authorities Are Lying About Terror Attack

Posted on December 31st, 2009 by David-Crockett

There is a reason we have only heard of the video and not seen it. dutch authorities, “RELEASE THE VIDEO!” This is the most important video in 8 years and may be all of two minutes long. Show the entire video and “DO NOT EDIT IT”! The American public deserves its own chance to attempt to identify the “sharp dressed man”. I have no doubt that if the video indicated that my account was wrong, that the video would have already swept over the entire world wide web.

To the Dutch Authorities. Just don’t dare telling us that the video got lost, dropped in a pond, mysteriously got erased or was take by some folk from Mars cause we are not going to believe you in particular not as it would have become too much of a pattern.

Also read/view:

- David Crockett

Prison Planet

Aaron Foley
Thursday, Dec 31st, 2009

Following up on a visit from FBI officials about an eyewitness account first described to MLive.com, Michigan attorney Kurt Haskell described the visit in comment sections across MLive on Wednesday.

Haskell and his wife, Lori, were aboard Flight 253 when Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab allegedly tried to destroy the plane. They say another man tried to help Abdulmutallab board the plane in Amsterdam.

Haskell had two detailed posts in two different stories. Here is Part One, originally posted here:

“Today is the second worst day of my life after 12-25-09. Today is the day that I realized that my own country is lying to me and all of my fellow Americans. Let me explain.

Ever since I got off of Flight 253 I have been repeating what I saw in US Customs. Specifically, 1 hour after we left the plane, bomb sniffing dogs arrived. Up to this point, all of the passengers on Flight 253 stood in a small area in an evacuated luggage claim area of an airport terminal. During this time period, all of the passengers had their carry on bags with them. When the bomb sniffing dogs arrived, 1 dog found something in a carry on bag of a 30 ish Indian man. This is not the so called “Sharp Dressed” man. I will refer to this man as “The man in orange”. The man in orange, who stood some 20ft away from me the entire time until he was taken away, was immediately taken away to be searched and interrogated in a nearby room. At this time he was not handcuffed. When he emerged from the room, he was then handcuffed and taken away. At this time an FBI agent came up to the rest of the passengers and said the following (approximate quote) “You all are being moved to another area because this area is not safe. I am sure many of you saw what just happened (Referring to the man in orange) and are smart enough to read between the lines and figure it out.” We were then marched out of the baggage claim area and into a long hallway. This entire time period and until we left customs, no person that wasn’t a law enforcement personnel or a passenger on our flight was allowed anywhere on our floor of the terminal (or possibly the entire terminal) The FBI was so concerned during this time, that we were not allowed to use the bathroom unless we went alone with an FBI agent, we were not allowed to eat or drink, or text or call anyone. I have been repeating this same story over the last 5 days. The FBI has, since we landed, insisted that only one man was arrested for the airliner attack (contradicting my account). However, several of my fellow passengers have come over the past few days, backed up my claim, and put pressure on FBI/Customs to tell the truth. Early today, I heard from two different reporters that a federal agency (FBI or Customs) was now admitting that another man has been held (and will be held indefinitely) since our flight landed for “immigration reasons.” Notice that this man was “being held” and not “arrested”, which was a cute semantic ploy by the FBI to stretch the truth and not lie.

Just a question, could that mean that the man in orange had no passport?

However, a few hours later, Customs changed its story again. This time, Mr. Ron Smith of Customs, says the man that was detained “had been taken into custody, but today tells the news the person was a passenger on a different flight.” Mr. Ron Smith, you are playing the American public for a fool. Lets take a look at how plausible this story is (After you’ve already changed it twice). For the story to be true, you have to believe, that:

1. FBI/Customs let passengers from another flight co-mingle with the passengers of flight 253 while the most important investigation in 8 years was pending. I have already stated that not one person who wasn’t a passenger or law enforcement personnal was in our area the entire time we were detained by Customs.
2. FBI/Customs while detaining the flight 253 passengers in perhaps the most important investigation since the last terrorist attack, and despite not letting any flight 253 passenger drink, eat, make a call, or use the bathroom, let those of other flights trample through the area and possibly contaminate evidence.
3. You have to believe the above (1 and 2) despite the fact that no flights during this time allowed passengers to exit off of the planes at all and were detained on the runway during at least the first hour of our detention period.
4. You have to believe that the man that stood 20 feet from me since we entered customs came from a mysterious plane that never landed, let its passengers off the plane and let this man sneak into our passenger group despite having extremely tight security at this time (i.e. no drinking even).
5. FBI/Customs was hauling mysterious passengers from other flights through the area we were being held to possibly comtaminate evidence and allow discussions with suspects on Flight 253 or to possibly allow the exchange of bombs, weapons or other devices between the mysterious passengers from other flights and those on flight 253.

Seriously Mr. Ron Smith, how stupid do you think the American public is?

Mr. Ron Smith’s third version of the story is an absolute inplausible joke. I encourage you, Mr. Ron Smith, to debate me anytime, anywhere, and anyplace in public to let the American people see who is credible and who is not.

I ask, isn’t this the more plausible story:

1. Customs/FBI realized that they screwed up and don’t want to admit that they left flight 253 passengers on a flight with a live bomb on the runway for 20 minutes.
2. Customs/FBI realized that they screwed up and don’t want to admit that they left flight 253 passengers in customs for 1 hour with a live bomb in a carry on bag.
3. Customs/FBI realize that the man in orange points to a greater involvement then the lone wolf theory that they have been promoting.

Mr. Ron Smith I encourage you to come out of your cubicle and come up with a more plausible version number 4 of your story.”

Haskell continued his comment in a different post on MLive.

“For the last five days I have been reporting my story of the so called “sharp dressed man.” For those of you who haven’t read my account, it involves a sharp dressed “Indian man” attempting to talk a ticket agent into letting a supposed “Sudanese refugee” (The terrorist) onto flight 253 without a passport. I have never had any idea how it played out except to note that the so called “Sudanese reefugee” later boarded my flight and attempted to blow it up and kill me. At no time did my story involve, or even find important whether the terrorist actually had a passport. The importance of my story was and always will be, the attempt with an accomplice (apparently succesful) of a terrorist with all sorts of prior terrorist warning signs to skirt the normal passport boarding procedures in Amsterdam. By the way, Amsterdam security did come out the other day and admit that the terrorist did not have to “Go through normal passport checking procedures”.

Amsterdam security, please define to the American public “Normal passport boarding procedures”.

You see the FBI would have the American public believe that what was important was whether the terrorist in fact had a passport.

Seriously think about this people. You have a suicide bomber who had recently been to Yemen to but a bomb, whose father had reported him as a terrorist, who supposedly was on some kind of U.S. terror watchlist, and most likely knew the U.S. was aware of these red flags. Yet, he didn’t go through “Normal passport checking procedures.” What does that mean? Maybe that he flashed a passport to some sort of sympathetic security manager in a backroom to avoid a closer look at the terrorist’s “red flags”? What is important is that the terrorist avoided using normal passport checking procedures (apparently successfully) in order to avoid a closer look into his red flags. Who cares if he had a passport. The important thing is that he didn’t want to show it and somehow avoided a closer inspection and “normal passport checking procedures.” Each passport comes with a bar code on it that can be scanned to provide a wealth of information about the individual. I would bet that the passport checking procedures for the terrorist did not include a bar code scan of his passport (which could have revealed damning information about the terrorist).

Please note that there is a very easy way to verify the veracity of my prior “sharp dressed man” account. Dutch police have admitted that they have reviewed the video of the “sharp dressed man” that I referenced. Note that it has not been released anywhere, You see, if my eye witness account is false, it could easily be proven by releasing the video. However, the proof of my eyewitness account would also be verified if I am telling the truth and I am. There is a reason we have only heard of the video and not seen it. dutch authorities, “RELEASE THE VIDEO!” This is the most important video in 8 years and may be all of two minutes long. Show the entire video and “DO NOT EDIT IT”! The American public deserves its own chance to attempt to identify the “sharp dressed man”. I have no doubt that if the video indicated that my account was wrong, that the video would have already swept over the entire world wide web.

Instead of the video, we get a statement that the video has been viewed and that the terrorist had a passport. Each of these statements made by the FBI is a self serving play on semantics and each misses the importance of my prior “sharp dressed man” account. The importance being that the man “Tried to board the plane with an accomplice and without a passort”. The other significance is that only the airport security video can verify my eyewitness account and that it is not being released.

Who has the agenda here and who doesn’t? Think about that for a minute.”

Tags: Flight 253

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 15:03
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Mi?rcoles, 23 de diciembre de 2009


From: Michael Connelly - Retired attorney,
Constitutional Law Instructor,

Carrollton, Texas

Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.

To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.

The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled.

However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.

The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn't have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.

This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide.

If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed "acceptable" to the "Health Choices Administrator" appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a "tax" instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn't work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the "due process of law.

So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn't stop there though. The 9th Amendment that provides: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;" The 10th Amendment states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.

I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to "be bound by oath or affirmation" to support the Constitution. If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.

For th
e who might doubt the nature of this threat I suggest they consult the source. Here is a link to the Constitution:


And another to the Bill of Rights:


There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us.




Publicado por Corazon7 @ 21:48
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
By Bob Unruh                                                                                  DeMint

Senate changes 'rules' to protect 'death panels'

Fine print would require 67 votes to consider amendments

Posted: December 22, 2009
10:41 pm Eastern

© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Sen. Jim DeMint

Majority Democrats in the U.S. Senate pushing for President Obama's vision of agovernment takeover of health care have inserted in the fine print of the 2,000-plus page legislation a provision that it would take a supermajority of 67 votes in the Senate for future legislative bodies to even consider amendments to its provisions for "death panels."

The revelation comes from the RedState.com blog, which analyzed the provisions and cited a challenge to the plan from Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C.

After being told by Democrats that the provision changing a standing Senate rule didn't actually change the rule but was just a change in the procedure of the rule, DeMint was frustrated:

DeMint: "And so the language you see in this bill that specifically refers to a change in a rule is not a rule change, it's a procedure change?"

Presiding officer: "That is correct."

DeMint: "Then I guess our rules mean nothing, do they, if they can redefine them."

RedState's blogger wrote, "If ever the people of the United States rise up and fight over passage of Obamacare, Harry Reid must be remembered as the man who sacrificed the dignity of his office for a few pieces of silver. The rules of fair play that have kept the basic integrity of the Republic alive have died."

Specifically, the provision in the legislation forbids considering amendments or changes to the regulations that would be imposed on Americans by the bill's Medical Advisory Boards, panels set up to make decisions about provisions for medicalcare.

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin at one point famously called them "death panels" because among the decisions they could make would be to withhold life-saving treatments from patients.

The provision comes in Section 3403 of Reid's "manager's amendment" to the health care takeover plan that is facing yet another vote in the Senate this week. The bill that would mandate abortion funding nationwide.

The bill states, "It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution,amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection."

That subsection addresses rules and regulations that doctors would be ordered to follow by the "Independent Medicare Advisory Boards a/k/a the Death Panels," RedState reported.

The section also orders, "Notwithstanding rule XV of the Standing Rules of the Senate, a committee amendment described in subparagraph (a) may include matter not within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Finance if that matter is relevant to a proposal contained in the bill submitted under subsection (c)(3)."

"In short, it sets up a rule to ignore another Senate rule," RedState's analysis by Erick Erickson said.

DeMint jumped into action, questioning whether the current vote should require a two-thirds supermajority because it changes rules.

"I know that there have been amendments to bills that we required two-thirds because they include rule changes," he said.

Democrats, however, said the rule change wasn't really a "rule change."

DeMint argued his point.

"As the chair has confirmed, rule 22, paragraph 2, of the standing rules of the Senate, the necessary affirmative vote shall be two-thirds of the senators present and voting. Let me go to the bill before us, because buried deep within the over 2,000 pages of this bill, we find a rather substantial change to the standing rules of the Senate… Clearly a rule change.

"This is not legislation. It's not law. This is a rule change. It's a pretty big deal. We will be passing a new law and at the same time creating a Senate rule that makes it out of order to amend or even repeal the law. I'm not even sure that it's constitutional," he continued.

According to the transcript, the "rule change," however, was determined by majority Democrats to be a "procedural" change instead.

"We have included rules changes in this legislation yet we're ignoring a rule that requires a two-thirds cloture vote to pass it. I believe that it's unconstitutional. It subverts the princples that … we've operated under and it's very obvious to everyone that it does change a rule," DeMint continued. "It's clear that our rules mean nothing if we can redefine the words that we use in them."

On the blog's forum, one participant said, "Power may shift back to the right in 2010 and 2012. But Fedzilla and its appetite for power grows none-the-less. It is not by accident."

Added another, "Aren't they saying that the words mean whatever they say they mean?"

One even asked for an exemption to the "no profanity" rule on the blog.

"We're being steamrolled by this Congress. The worst part about this story is that the average voter will pay no attention to any story about Senate rules and procedures and the media won't cover it because, well, they're the media."

DeMint, in an earlier commentary, raised even more fundamental questions about the health care socialization plans.

"There's not a word in the Constitution about the government deciding what medical tests private health insurers should pay for. Nothing about the government deciding how much executives on Wall Street should earn, or what kind of light bulbs and cars we should buy. … There's nothing about these or many other things in the Constitution because they have nothing to do with the proper role of a federal government in a free society," he said.




Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:32
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Martes, 22 de diciembre de 2009

Nebraskans on Sen. Ben Nelson’s Healthcare sellout: “Sue us!”

 By Judi McLeod

image “Equality before the law” may be the state motto for Nebraska, but some Nebraskans are asking for sister states to sue the Cornhusker state.

  “Is there anyone out there that will sue the State of Nebraska and/or Senators Ben Nelson and Harry Reid?” asks Patricia Rief-Heskett of Omaha.


Obama’s Boss Gets Permanent Death Panels

 By Joy Tiz

As republican senators at last get a chance to read the health crimes bill being rammed through by the politburo, Obama’s boss, unrepentant Nazi collaborator, George Soros is poised to celebrate a major triumph in the advancement of his euthanasia agenda.


Senate Marxist Reid To make it almost Impossible to Repeal ObamaCare

 By Sher Zieve

Every day the news coming out of Washington D.C. just gets worse and worse. Just when I thought I could no longer be shocked by the totalitarian Senate and Executive branch, I was…and am. On Monday, the Marxist-run Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid decided that he would make it virtually impossible for the American people to overcome Congress’ Machiavellian ObamaCare Death Plan. Betrayal is now the operating agenda of both the US Congress and Executive branch.




Publicado por Corazon7 @ 22:16
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Obamacare sparking 10th Amendment rebellion, action in seven states

By: Mark Tapscott
Editorial Page Editor
12/22/09 6:01 PM EST

Looks like the steadily growing list of constitutional, ethical and political outrages that constitute the Harry Reid version of Obamacare is sparking a rebellion in the states, as AP reports South Carolina's attorney general plans to investigate the vote-buying that surrounded the proposal in the Senate majority leader's office.

According to AP, South Carolina's Henry McMaster is being joined by the attorneys general of Michigan and Washington state in a suit to determine the constitutionality of the Obamacare proposal. Their initiative was prompted by a request from South Carolina's two senators, Lindsay Graham and Jim DeMint, both Republicans.

Attorneys-general in at least four other states are also considering joining McMasters, according to AP.

Graham has been all over cable news today visibly angry about the vote-buying by Reid that secured the votes of Senators Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, and Bernie Sanders of Vermont, as well as possibly other senators as yet unknown.

DeMint has also been active, especially on the issue of the Reid amendment's provision seeking to bar future congresses from changing even a single word of Section 3403 on the Independent Medicare Advisory Board (IMAB).

The IMAB will become the federal health care ground zero under Obamacare if it becomes law. Ed Morrissey at Hot Air has a link to DeMint's floor speech on the issue and additional information, analyses, and links.

Nelson's deal with Reid has attracted the most attention because it exempts Nebraska from paying its share of Medicaid expenses in perpetuity. Medicaid expenditures are among the most expensive federal mandates on state governments, and the Obamacare bill will significantly increase costs for all other states that don't somehow wangle a similar deal.

It also raises a constitutional issue, which McMasters explained in a statement issued earlier today:

"The Nelson provision is unusual in that there is not cut off date or phase out. Many provisions in federal law have a sunset date -- say 2, 5, 10, or even 20 years-- but this provision will continue in perpetuity. Quite obviously, this issue raises very serious concerns about equity, tax fairness as well as the constitutionality of having federal tax levies and mandates that treat one state differently from all the others.

"If the Nelson provision is not unprecedented, I feel comfortable in saying it is an exceptionally rare occurrence. States generally are treated in a similar manner. In this case, Nebraska will be treated in a widely divergent manner than any other state.

"Beginning today, I have instructed my attorneys to begin looking into the constitutionality of this provision and exploring the options that may be available to South Carolina and other states to defend taxpayers should this provision ultimately become law."

My colleague David Freddoso wonders what might happen if the governors of states bordering Nebraska - Kansas, Colorado, Wyoming, Iowa, and Missouri - announce that they are no longer funding their Medicaid programs and encourage those needing Medicaid services to visit the Cornhusker state. 

Tags: Obamacare10th Amendment

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 21:26
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Parker Griffith announcement, Switches parties, Griffith Republican, Griffith leaves Democrat party, Health care bill bad for doctors

December 22, 2009 · 2 Comments

Representative Parker Griffith of Alabama announces his switch from the Democrat to Republican party.

Parker Griffith did not just vote against the Health care bill and other harmful legislation, he sent a strong signal that the Democrat party is not good for this country.

From CBS News blog, December 22, 2009.

“Parker Griffith, Democratic Representative, Switches Parties to GOP”

“Rep. Parker Griffith, a freshman Democrat from Alabama, announced Tuesday that he is switching parties to become a Republican.

“I believe our nation is at a crossroads and I can no longer align myself with a party that continues to pursue legislation that is bad for our country, hurts our economy, and drives us further and further into debt,” Griffith, 67, said at a press conference at his home, according to the Associated Press.

Some aren’t surprised by Griffith’s switch. He has voted against all major Democratic initiatives this year, including the stimulus, cap and trade and health care bills.

He’s also spoken out against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, saying that he would not vote for her to be speaker again.”

“A radiation oncologist, Griffith cited the Democrats’ health care plans as a reason for his switch. He was one of 39 Democrats to vote against the bill in the House last month.

“I want to make it perfectly clear that this bill is bad for our doctors,” he said at the press conference, according to the AP. “It’s bad for our patients. It’s bad for the young men and women who are considering going into the health care field.”

“The success of Republicans in the off-year elections last month also appears to be a reason for his decision to switch parties. Griffith told Politico then that he wanted to be called an independent Blue Dog, not a Democrat. “I should be nervous,” he added.”

“When a Member of Congress decides to leave a 258 seat majority to join a deep minority, it is a sure sign that the majority party has become completely disconnected from seniors, young workers, and families in America,” Cantor said in a statement. “We welcome Parker Griffith to the Republican Conference, and will continue to stand and fight against the damaging agenda of this Administration working in tandem with the Pelosi/Reid run Congress.”

“Parker Griffith is a dedicated public servant who has consistently put the best interests of his constituents first, and it is in that spirit that Republicans welcome him,” Boehner added. “With today’s decision, Congressman Griffith has added his voice to the growing chorus of Americans who have had it with Democrats’ wrong-headed policies and lack of leadership.”"


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 18:03
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar


Sticking Up For Our Constitution

GOP senators to force vote on constitutionality of health care reform bill

I just received a release from someone in South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint's office. Apparently, he and Nevada Sen. John Ensign plan to force a Senate vote on the constitutionality of the Democrats' health care reform legislation.

You know me -- I'm a big fan of DeMint, and of any lawmaker who looks at a piece of legislation regardless of where it originates and asks, before anything else: "Where, exactly, in the Constitution does the federal government have the authority to do this?" It's a responsible and patriotic mentality we need more and more right now, and it's an attitude we'll need just the same--if not more so--once the GOP has retaken the majority.

It came as no surprise to see DeMint's name attached to this effort. That, in my opinion, says more about Jim DeMint than any single vote or speech or interview or appearance. Anyway, I've said enough -- here's the press release:

December 22, 2009 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, U.S. Senators Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) and John Ensign (R-Nevada), raised a Constitutional Point of Order on the Senate floor against the Democrat health care takeover bill on behalf of the Steering Committee, a caucus of conservative senators. The Senate will vote tomorrow on the bill’s constitutionality.

“I am incredibly concerned that the Democrats’ proposed individual mandate provision takes away too much freedom and choice from Americans across the country,” said Senator Ensign. “As an American, I felt the obligation to stand up for the individual freedom of every citizen to make their own decision on this issue. I don’t believe Congress has the legal authority to force this mandate on its citizens.”

“Forcing every American to purchase a product is absolutely inconsistent with our Constitution and the freedoms our Founding Fathers hoped to protect,” said Senator DeMint. “This is not at all like car insurance, you can choose not to drive but Americans will have no choice whether to buy government-approved insurance. This is nothing more than a bailout and takeover of insurance companies. We’re forcing Americans to buy insurance under penalty of law and then Washington bureaucrats will then dictate what these companies can sell to Americans. This is not liberty, it is tyranny of good intentions by elites in Washington who think they can plan our lives better than we can.”

Americans who fail to buy health insurance, according to the Democrats’ bill, would be subject to financial penalties. The senators believe the bill is unconstitutional because the insurance mandate is not authorized by any of the limited enumerated powers granted to the federal government. The individual mandate also likely violates the “takings” clause of the 5th Amendment.

The Democrats’ healthcare reform bill requires Americans to buy health insurance “whether or not they ever visit a doctor, get a prescription or have an operation.” If an American chooses not to buy health insurance coverage, they will face rapidly increasing taxes that will rise to $750 or 2% of their taxable income, whichever is greater.

The Congressional Budget Office once stated “A mandate requiring all individuals to purchase health insurance would be an unprecedented form of federal action. The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States.”

A legal study by scholars at the nonpartisan Heritage Foundation concluded: “An individual mandate to enter into a contract with or buy a particular product from a private party, with tax penalties to enforce it, is unprecedented-- not just in scope but in kind--and unconstitutional as a matter of first principles and under any reasonable reading of judicial precedents.”

Obviously, it's not going to pass. But this is exactly what I was talking about when I came up with the Doctrine of Constructive Obstructionism. It's one thing to say "no" and maintain that stance, but it's more effective to say "no," to offer alternatives, to maintain that position of "no," and consequently to force the opposition to own whatever it is they're selling.

In this case, Jim DeMint and John Ensign are putting the Democrats in the place where they will directly countermand the very same United States Constitution which they have sworn to uphold. They will either have to argue that forcing Americans to carry health insurance or face fines and imprisonment is somehow constitutional--good luck--or they will have to agree that the measure runs afoul of the Constitution, and yet support it anyway.

This is exactly the kind of thing we need to see from the Republican Party. On one side, it's a great political move, as it goes a long way to show that the GOP can be a political vehicle for constitutional conservatives. More importantly, however, it's the right thing to do -- and that's something we don't see a whole lot of on Capitol Hill. 

As you call your own senators about health care reform, put a call in or send an e-mail to the offices of Jim DeMint and John Ensign. Sticking up for the Constitution is more than deserving of a "thank you."


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 17:25
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

LETTER TO THE EDITOR:  Obama is a fraud, a traitor and a criminal deviant!

Obama must be arrested!

In response to the guest editorial, on Dec. 19th, by Neil Sankey, entitled:  And they always told us to Question Authority!

December 21, 2009

Dear Editor,

Thank you Mr. Sankey!

With news that Obama and his "Democratic Party" adherents will push through Deathcare, against the will of 61% of the American people, the rage on the streets against Obama is palpable. (Poster carried at the 9-12 Tea Party Protest, in Washington. D.C.).

You have proven yourself a patriot. We must be “ever vigilant.”  After 13 months of daily blogging, research and observations, I am convinced that Barack Hussein Obama is a fraud, a traitor and a criminal deviant.

He is a radical Muslim supremacist who has associated with and continues to associate with some of the world’s worse criminals. Obama is the “Don” of the “Muslim Mafia”. All world despots have a point at which their respective reigns of terror starts. Obama is overtly anti-American. He supports communistic, socialists, islamo-nazi attempts to undermine democracy.  Obama should have been arrested many months ago.

I, myself, do not mince words.I have spoken my mind about Obama, holding nothing back, filing various charges against him, participating in citizen’s grand juries.I have written hundreds of thousands of words on Topix, Newsvine, Fox Nation, Buffalo News and any other blog or news media commentary that I could get involved in. I have written online at Australia TO and Pravda. Obama is disqualified to be the President of the United States.

There must be a very large cabal of co-conspirators protecting him from arrest or from facing the music. This is a conspiracy of epic proportions. The United States has been usurped. I was “Conceived in liberty.” I want the blessings of liberty for our posterity as did our founders. The founding brothers wanted something special.  One nation under God. Every generation is obligated to and entrusted with doing their part to defend, even to death, what many have already done over the last 233 years, sacrificed their lives and blood and “Sacred duty.”

Obama may be popular but so was Hitler. Obama, at this time is being restricted a bit by the intense public scrutiny that is being placed on him by people like Mr. Sankey. Obama continues to have his anti-American agenda, however, it is being somewhat stifled and controlled by public scrutiny and pressure.  As time passes and Obama becomes more insulated, by his “in his pocket” media and hired criminal “czars,” his actions will become more flagrant and offensive.

The key to stop this is to nip it in the bud. Eric Holder MUST appoint a special prosecutor to try Obama upon the charges already filed against him.  Namely, treason and federal election fraud. Along with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and others, Obama MUST be arrested and tried. He is a usurper. He is a criminal deviant miscreant traitor to all we hold dear as Americans. I am sure that the race card will be played. That is a gimmick, a political correctness ploy. The fact remains that, regardless of whether Obama is Black, White (or Green, for that matter), he is a criminal fraud and traitor.

Here , at this point in history, December 21, 2009, those of us who live now MUST take our responsibilities to preserve the republic, very seriously. I will continue to fight Obama in everything he does. Whether what he does is positive (actually improving our lot in life) or negative, Obama is NOT qualified or authorized to sign any bills or “do” anything in the capacity of President of the United States.

Action MUST be taken. Obama is a Machiavellian prevaricator. He is a facade behind which his cabalist puppeteers control him. We are at a turning point. We will NOT have a New World Order or a giving up of sovereignty, as Obama leads us to, IF we fight back. We must get off our collective arses and we must give up any apathetic desires to live and let live or to see what happens if we do nothing. “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”  I have collected close to ten thousand links and articles regarding Obama. The majority of them point to the fact that Obama is NOT who he claims he is.  And, he certainly is NOT the President of the United States.


Robert C. Laity
Founder and President

Society for the Preservation of Democracy and Human Rights
43 Mosher Drive
Tonawanda, NY 14150-5217
(716) 693-1630

Tags: Obama arrested

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 11:53
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar


, December 22, 2009

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 25% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-six percent (46%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -21 That’s the lowest Approval Index rating yet recorded for this President (see trends).

Fifty-three percent (53%) of men Strongly Disapprove along with 39% of women. Most African-American voters (58%) Strongly Approve while most white voters (53%) Strongly Disapprove.

Seventy-four percent (74%) of Republicans Strongly Disapprove as do 52% of unaffiliated voters. Forty-seven percent (47%) of Democrats Strongly Approve.

For the second straight day, the update shows the highest level of Strong Disapproval yet recorded for this President. That negative rating had never topped 42% before yesterday. However, it has risen dramatically since the Senate found 60 votes to move forward with the proposed health care reform legislation. Most voters (55%) oppose the health care legislation and senior citizens are even more likely than younger voters to dislike the plan.

One bright spot in the numbers for the President is that 51% of voters still say former President George W. Bush is more to blame for the nation’s economic woes. Just 41% point the finger of blame at the current President.

The Presidential Approval Index is calculated by subtracting the number who Strongly Disapprove from the number who Strongly Approve. It is updated daily at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update). Updates are also available on Twitter and Facebook.

Overall, 44% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance. Fifty-six percent (56%) now disapprove.

Seventy-seven percent (77%) of Democrats approve while 88% of Republicans and 62% of unaffiliated voters disapprove. See recent demographic highlights from the tracking poll.




Publicado por Corazon7 @ 11:41
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
This is a SPECIAL ALERT email from our advertising partner, RightMarch.com PAC. Please take action right away.


ObamaCare Can STILL Be Stopped -- Click Below to Tell the Senate to VOTE NO on the Next Cloture Vote:

ALERT: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid won his first cloture votes on the ObamaCare bill, the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" -- but the bill can STILL BE STOPPED!

You read that right: the liberal Democrats snuck through the first votes on their socialist health care bill -- IN THE EARLY MORNING HOURS!

That means that TODAY, it's up to YOU AND ME to STOP the government takeover of health care in America -- before the next vote!


For the past two weeks, we’ve been leading the efforts of our members to contact every single Senator, to DEMAND that they reject Harry Reid’s socialistic ObamaCare bill -- and as a result, over THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND faxes have FLOODED those Senate offices ALL DAY AND NIGHT!

We’ve been able to keep the pressure on both Democrats and Republicans, letting them know that WE ARE WATCHING THEM and that we DEMAND they put a STOP to this radical monstrosity of a bill. And despite the fact that we lost the first votes, the good news is… we ARE having an effect on them, and WE CAN STILL DEFEAT THIS BILL

The bill passed through so far STILL has to clear more hurdles -- and despite the fact that all 60 Democrats and Republicans voted for the first clotures, all 60 of them have NOT committed to voting for the next cloture vote!

This means that we can STILL defeat it in the Senate -- IF we can overwhelm every Senator with our demands to STOP it!

With these early-morning votes, Harry Reid successfully moved the Obamacare bill forward. But now, he has to survive another cloture vote to end the GOP filibuster on this bill -- and again, he’s going to need all 60 votes to save the bill!

Remember, this "new" bill is the result of the "secret deal" that substituted for the decoy that was the 2,074-page bill the Senate has been debating for the past three weeks. So is this bill any better?


  • The bill slashes hundreds of billions from Medicare to fund a new government program - cuts to hospitals, nursing homes, and hospices that care for our seniors – cuts that a pair of Senate Democrats voted repeatedly to reject.
  • The bill includes massive tax increases on American families and businesses at a time of double digit unemployment.
  • The bill breaks the President’s pledge that no American earning under $250,000 would see their taxes increase under this plan….a pledge that five Democrats voted to uphold just last Tuesday.
  • The bill allows for the funding of abortions, violating the longstanding policy of the Hyde amendment. The language is significantly weaker than Nelson-Stupak amendment which seven Senate Democrats and 64 House Democrats supported.
  • The bill includes a massive new entitlement -the CLASS Act - which the Democrat chairman of the Budget Committee described as a Ponzi scheme. A bipartisan majority (including 11 Democrats) voted to strike the CLASS Act -- and they should withhold their support.
  • The bill will impose massive burdens to many states at a time when states are already struggling. At the same time, it gives special treatment to a select few states, so that taxpayers in Virginia, Arkansas, and Ohio, will pay higher taxes to subsidize the Medicaid programs of favored few (Nebraska Massachusetts, and Vermont).

We MUST NOT lose this fight. Harry Reid DOES NOT have a guarantee of all 60 votes he needs to enact cloture and force a vote on his bill -- but you can BET he’s doing everything he can to GET those final one or two! If we can STOP him from getting them -- that means THE BILL WOULD DIE!


TAKE ACTION: Here is the "Countdown To America’s Doom" that we MUST STOP:

--WEDNESDAY, DEC 23rd -- 1 pm -- Cloture vote on overall bill -- WE CAN STOP THE BILL DEAD ON THIS VOTE!

--THURSDAY, CHRISTMAS EVE -- 7 pm -- Final passage vote on health care reform -- THEY ONLY NEED 51 VOTES TO PASS IT THEN!

DO NOT GET DISCOURAGED -- there are still several Democrats that we know of, who STILL might not vote for cloture. At the same time, there are a few liberal GOP RINOs who might "jump ship" and vote Yes. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESE SENATORS NEED TO KEEP HEARING FROM US TO BE CONVINCED!

We CANNOT let the radical liberals in Congress -- and the White House -- force this plan for socialized health care on the American people! That’s why we’ve set up our website to enable you to send a strong message to every single member of the U.S. Senate, OPPOSING this outrageous plan.

For about what it would cost you in time and telephone charges, you can send Blast Faxes to Democrats, Republicans, Independents -- EVERYONE in the U.S. Senate, DEMANDING that they REJECT this socialized health care plan NOW!


This fight CAN BE WON! Please, take action right away to STOP this bill in the U.S. Senate!


William Greene, President
RightMarch.com PAC

WE ARE IN THE FINAL COUNTDOWN HOURS! This is it -- if we can stop Harry Reid from getting those 60 votes on this next cloture vote, we can defeat ObamaCare...


Send your faxes right away to make sure these Senators get a STRONG message, to REJECT the socialized plan of "Obamacare" NOW -- Thank you!


As always, you can also send a FREE message directly to your Senators by clicking here. Thank you.

The work of RightMarch.com PAC is funded entirely by voluntary contributions.
Help us spread the word with a donation to RightMarch.com PAC!

If you prefer to donate by check, please send to:
RightMarch.com PAC
Dept. Code 3466
PO Box 96503 #33585
Washington DC 20090-6503

Paid for by RightMarch.com Political Action Committee.
Contributions are not tax deductible for federal income tax purposes.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 11:07
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

This morning at around 8 AM, the Senate passed, again on a straight party-line vote, Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) manager’s amendment to the Senate’s version of Obamacare. This keeps the Senate on pace to pass the bill at 9 PM on Christmas Eve despite the fact that Americans overwhelmingly opposed the legislation. But even after the Senate gives President Barack Obama his $2.5 trillion Christmas present, the bill, assuming it is to be considered in regular order, still must go through a House and Senate conference.

President Barack Obama attempted to downplay differences between the House and Senate bills telling American Urban Radio Networks yesterday: “The Senate and the House bills are 95 percent identical. There’s five percent differences, and one of those differences is the public option. This is an area that has just become symbolic of a lot of ideological fights. As a practical matter, this is not the most important aspect to this bill.” We’ll let President Obama fight with his base abut how important a strong public option is to health reform, but a government run plan is just one of six key differences between the House and Senate bills:

Soak the Rich or Tax Everybody: The Senate bill relies heavily on a new excise tax on high cost health plans: a 40 percent tax on plan exceeding $8,500 for an individual and $23,000 for a family. The AFL-CIO and SEIU both call this a tax on working families. The Senate bill also includes a new premium tax on all insurers and the CBO confirms that the cost of this tax will be passed on to all Americans with private insurance. The House bill depends on a heavy new income tax targeted at top-earning taxpayers and small businesses. The 5.4 percent tax on individuals with incomes above $500,000, and on families with incomes above $1 million, is structured in a way that over time more and more Americans will be hit by this tax and small business owners would be particularly affected.

Employer Mandate Penalties: The Senate bill imposes a $750 penalty per worker on employers of 50 or more who are not covered by the federally approved package of health benefits. The Senate mandate has other strange consequences. If an employer offers coverage, but an employee is eligible by virtue of income to qualify for taxpayer subsidies and entry into the state-based health insurance exchange, the employer is also penalized. In other words, employers are penalized for hiring people at the poverty level, even if they offer health insurance. The House bill imposes a direct requirement on employers to offer federally-qualified health care coverage to their employees or pay a payroll tax on a sliding scale up to 8 percent. Both the US Chamber of Commerce and the National Federation of Independent Businesses have come out against the bills.

Individual Mandate Penalties: The Senate bill requires individuals to purchase a government approved plan or pay a $750 penalty, beginning in 2014. The tax penalty, indexed for inflation, would increase over time. The House bill requires individuals to pay a penalty of 2.5 percent of their income, depending on the size of their income, for not obtaining federally-approved health care coverage.

Weak or Strong Public Plan: The Senate bill establishes a new set of “multi-state” private health plans sponsored by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) — the agency that administers the federal civil service — that would compete against private health plans in the state based exchanges that are mandated by the provision of the Senate bill. In contrast, the House bill includes an explicit public plan.

Medicaid Expansion: The left may complain that there is no government-run option in either bill, but both the House and Senate bill accomplish over half their additional health insurance coverage through Medicaid expansion. The Senate bill would require states to expand their Medicaid programs to cover all Americans up to 133 percent Federal Poverty Level. The House bill would require states to expand their Medicaid programs to 150 percent FPL, the same level suggested in earlier versions of the Senate HELP Committee bill. Both Democrat and Republican Governors are against this state budget-busting welfare expansion.

Taxpayer Funded Abortion: The President promised that there would be no federal funding for abortion. In the House bill, by virtue of the Stupak-Pitts amendment, there is a genuine firewall between federal funding and abortion coverage. In the Senate bill, by virtue of the agreement between Senate Majority leader Harry Reid and Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE), there is no such firewall. For the “pro-life” forces on both sides of the aisle, the Nelson language appears to fall short of the House language.

These are all major policy differences that go to the core of the Obama health care plan. For each option, choosing one version over the other will have huge consequences for the American people. But since Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Ben Nelson (D-NE) have threatened to veto the bill if any significant changes are made by the House in conference, it is most likely the Senate will prevail on every issue. Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) might even just save herself and the leftist majority in the House the embarrassment and pass the Senate bill as is. After all, the Obama administration wants a bill, any bill, and doesn’t really care what is actually in it.

How would you rate Obama's handling of health care?
Strongly disapprove 78%
Strongly approve 8%
Somewhat approve 8%
Somewhat disapprove 6%
Total Votes: 249,604
How would you rate his handling of the economy?
Strongly disapprove 75%
Strongly approve 9%
Somewhat disapprove 8%
Somewhat approve 8%
Total Votes: 279,722



Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:44
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Lunes, 21 de diciembre de 2009

What's Happened?




By Ben Stein on 7/24/09 @ 9:45AM


Why is President Barack Obama in such a hurry to get his socialized medicine bill passed?


Because he and his cunning circle realize some basic truths:


The American people in their unimaginable kindness and trust voted for a pig in a poke in 2008. They wanted so much to believe Barack Obama was somehow better and different from other ultra-leftists that they simply took him on faith.


They ignored his anti-white writings in his books. They ignored his quiet acceptance of hysterical anti-American diatribes by his minister Jeremiah Wright.


They ignored his refusal to explain years at a time of his life as a student. They ignored his ultra-left record as a "community organizer" Illinois state legislator and Senator.


The American people ignored his total zero of an academic record as a student and teacher his complete lack of scholarship when he was being touted as a scholar.


Now the American people are starting to wake up to the truth. Barack Obama is a super likeable super leftist not a fan of this country way way too cozy with the terrorist leaders in the Middle East way beyond naivete, all the way into active destruction of our interests and our allies and our future.


The American people have already awakened to the truth that the stimulus bill -- a great idea in theory -- was really an immense bribe to Democrat interest groups and in no way an effort to help all Americans.


NowAmericans are waking up to the truth that ObamaCare basically means that every time you are sick or injured you will have a clerk from the Department of Motor Vehicles telling your doctor what he can and cannot do.


The American people already know that Mr. Obama's plan to lower health costs while expanding coverage and bureaucracy is a myth, a promise of something that never was and never will be -- a bureaucracy lowering costs in a free society. Either the costs go up or the free society goes away.


These are perilous times. Mrs. Hillary Clinton our Secretary of State has given Iran the go-ahead to have nuclear weapons an unqualified betrayal of the nation. Now we face a devastating loss of freedom at home in health care. It will be joined by controls on our lives to "protect us" from global warming itself largely a fraud if believed to be caused by man.


Mr. Obama knows Americans are getting wise and will stop him if he delays at all in taking away our freedoms.


There is his urgency and our opportunity. Once freedom is lost America is lost. Wake up beloved America.


Letter to the Editor

Ben Stein is a writer, actor, economist, and lawyer living in Beverly Hills and Malibu. He writes "Ben Stein's Diary" for every issue of The American Spectator.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 15:05
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

The American Thinker
by James Simpson

Yesterday morning, while Washington, DC was getting blanketed with a record snowfall, Senate Democrats treated the entire United States to what may be the greatest snow job of all time. Biggoverment.com calls it “the most corrupt piece of legislation in our nation’s history,” and indeed it is.

Senator Ben Nelson agreed to support this massive healthcare restructuring plan which no one besides a few Democrat senators has even seen. The price for his support was 100 percent coverage of increases in Medicaid costs for his home state resulting from the legislation — now and forevermore. It amounts to a flagrantly unconstitutional subsidy to Nebraska with taxpayer dollars from the other 49 states.

We should have seen this coming. When Senator Max Baucus revealed the Senate Finance Committee’s version of the bill this summer, many of his fellow Senators balked. The upshot was that he took the eye-popping, unprecedented step of offering exclusions to the bill’s provisions to these Senators’ states!

This latest development demonstrates once again that, when it’s a choice between principles and dollars, Democratic politicians reliably choose the latter. Nelson, who adamantly insisted he would not support any legislation allowing for federal funding of abortion in the healthcare bill, stoically holding out until the last minute, changed his mind pronto after accepting the Medicaid bribe.

With Nelson’s agreement, the Senate has the 60 votes it needs to pass this monstrosity. And despite Senate Republicans’ claims of having “a strategy” to stop the bill, they appear to have gone out with a whimper. This is simply disgraceful. Not only was their “strategy” a loser, when Senator DeMint finally did come up with a real strategy, only one Senator, Tom Coburn tried one of its tactics. When he did, the Democrats emasculated it by violating parliamentary rules.

As if to cap this moment of bottomless sleaze and corruption, Senate Majority Leader Reid scheduled the vote on this despicable travesty for 1 am, Monday morning. Either the Democrats are completely out of their minds in defying the will of the American people to pass this overwhelmingly unpopular, inarguably destructive legislation, or they know something we don’t.

The Obama administration has saddled us with trillions in new debt to fund the “bailout,” the “stimulus,” and massive increases in federal spending. Not entirely unnoticed, but largely overlooked anyway, is the fact that much of this taxpayer funded spending paloosa is going to support Democrat constituents in both Democrat and Republican states. That money will very likely return to Democrat coffers later this year. Look for widespread reporting of sudden economic booms in selected sectors of the economy and/or selected geographic areas, providing the illusion of late-breaking resurgence to our economy… just in time for the election.

Now all eyes will move to House Democrat Bart Stupak, who, according to the Politico, is already working behind the scenes to scuttle Nelson’s compromise. We’ll see. But since no sitting Democrat Congressman or Senator has yet defied the Party leadership when the results turn on their individual decisions, it is doubtful the “pro-life” Stupak will either.

After all, like everything else accomplished by this corrupt fraud of a President and his institutionally corrupt fellow Democrats, this legislation is “historic.”

Comment by American Grand Jury:

Next to Obama and Pelosi, Harry Reid is the most corrupt and disliked politician in office today. Nevada, are you listening? PLEASE if you don’t get of this jerk voted out of office I may have to bite the bullet and never visit Las Vegas again. Tell all your friends! Las Vegas is a beautiful city, but I think the State of Nevada owes it to the people of our Great Nation to dump this piece of human garbage when election time comes in November. If it makes you feel any better most of the folks I know in Arizona will work right along side their brothers and sisters in Nevada to dump Senator McCain — another perfect example of a politician that literally stinks up the place.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 14:42
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Is This For Real?

It's 11:15 p.m. on a Sunday night. I'm in a king-size hotel room bed in Athens, GA with a snoozing wife and a three-year-old who is still singing "he sees you when you're sleeping, he knows when you're awake" despite the long, fun-filled day she had. It's late. And, yet, on one side of my sister-in-law's fancy MacBook Pro is a live stream from the floor of the United States Senate.

It's 11:15 p.m. on a Sunday night. And Florida Sen. Bill Nelson is speaking, right now, on the floor about the Senate's health care reform bill, which will be voted on in a little less than two hours from now. He's talking about how private insurance companies will be forced to spend 85 cents out of every dollar on patient health care costs. Where, may I ask, does our federal government have the authority to mandate the capital structure of private companies? Where?

Why else would the lights even be on in the Capitol building unless our government is up to no good? This is legislation which will not even come into effect until 2014, two years after the next presidential election, and yet the Democrats feel it so essential to work through the night as the last weekend before Christmas comes to a close?

Most of America is fast asleep. Most of the people whom these senators represent, even if they wanted to pay attention, are sawing logs (probably not literally, though I'm sure there are a strange few) and catching winks in advance of a working Monday tomorrow. These people have no business whatsoever working right now. It might be different if they were burning the midnight oil in an attempt to save the nation with legislation that would have an immediate impact, but they are not -- instead, they're planning the destruction of our economy and health care system through legislation which will not take effect (other than the spending aspect of it) for another four years. If this is a great bill, if it is so necessary, and if the 60 percent or so of Americans who vigorously oppose it just don't have their facts straight, then they should be debating it during the day, when most of America is awake and attentive.

12:06 a.m.

Tennessee Sen. Lamar Alexander made an excellent point -- the reason they're working now is because Harry Reid dropped a 400-page amendment on Friday, something that has been written and kept under the cover of darkness, and that they want to have it passed as part of the bill before Americans can figure out what's in it.

I can count on the fingers of one hand when I've read 400 pages of anything in one day. One was Michael Crichton's Jurassic Park, which I read in the course of one night as a kid. Another was Bernie Goldberg's Bias, which may not be 400 pages long, but was finished in the course of a single afternoon. Reading, digesting and researching 400 pages of legislative language in one day is nearly impossible.

Other things Alexander noted:

  • $470 billion over the next ten years will be cut out of Medicare, and about $1 trillion in total.
  • $548 billion in new taxes starting next year. So much for reducing joblessness. And the taxes on medical devices will be passed along to consumers, as will the increased regulation on private insurers, which will be passed along in the form of increased premiums. So much for reducing health care costs.
  • The CBO said that 9 million will lose employer-based insurance. So much for insuring everyone.
  • Changes the bi-partisan agreement not to federally fund abortion.
A political kamikaze mission toward an unfortunate mistake. Damaging to the Democrats, but worse for our country. Nicely put.

12:14 a.m.

John McCain. Joking about last year's campaign. If he needs a campaign-related joke, somebody hand him a mirror. I'm convinced this is probably the latest he's been awake in at least a decade.

Granted, he's using Obama's own words during the campaign against him. And I do love it when McCain gets feisty, so long as he's sitting on the right side of the debate (and the aisle) for a change.

Talking about special interests, and taking care of "special senators." The Louisiana Purchase. The Cornhusker Kickback. The Florida Flim-Flam.

"60 votes represents 60 percent of the Senate, but it doesn't represent 60 percent of the people. 61 percent, according to a CNN poll, oppose it." He's right, but the Democrats don't care. And, you know what, once the GOP gets back into power, they'd better remember what they said here, and actually listen to the people.

Now, he's talking about an early sea battle in the American Revolution. John Paul Jones not yet beginning to fight. Gosh, McCain is showing more fire right now than he did throughout all of last year.

12:22 a.m.

Who's next? It's Tom Harkin, the Democrat from Iowa. Talking about attacks and obstructionism from the Republicans. Talking about a lack of bipartisanship. Talking about a lack of ideas from the GOP.

The Republicans haven't offered a bill, he says. Well, Tom, actually they have. If you want to see the House GOP bill, look
. The CBO scored its counterpart from the Democrats at $1.055 trillion, and admitted that it would actually increase health care costs for Americans -- the GOP bill was scored at $61 billion over ten years, and the CBO said it would decrease costs.

This is a battle of "yes" versus "no." I say no to the expansion of government. I say no to saddling my grandchildren with the cost of the liberal agenda gone wild. I say no to political expediency. And I say no to lies which will destroy our health care system.

Everything you hear from the other side is "be afraid," Harkin says. And the Republicans are right. We should be afraid. We should be afraid of rationing. We should be afraid of the economic impact of increased taxes. We should be afraid of the single-biggest entitlement program since the New Deal. We should be afraid. We should be very, very afraid.

He talks about classifying Americans as "children" up until the age of 26. He talks about eliminating pre-existing condition clauses. And this won't come with increased costs? Please. When has increased government ever reduced costs?

A moral disgrace? What is a true moral disgrace is that these people don Christmas-y sweatervests and put debt in my child's stocking. Harkin is right -- this is one of the most significant days in the Senate's history. It's a day where those of us who don't buy into revisionist history will be able to point to and say: "Golly, that's the day that started the decline of the United States of America. That's the day which began our slide into becoming France."

Health care isn't a right, no matter what Ted Kennedy said. It is a privilege. And gosh darn it, Ted Kennedy had privilege, and he lived extra long because of that privilege. You want to know what is a natural right? Life. And Ted Kennedy snuffed one of those out. And the Democrats will be snuffing out plenty once this bill manifests itself.

Healthcare is NOT an inalienable right. IT IS NOT. I'm not perfect, but I've never, ever, ever seen it in the Constitution which people like Tom Harkin have sworn to uphold. The Democrats felt as though homeownership was a right, too. That feeling manifested itself into the forced relaxation of lending practices, and was hailed as a victory of the Clinton administration. It also served as the root cause of our current economic crisis. This, I'm afraid, is going to be a lot worse.

12:32 a.m.

Chris Dodd is up. I can't even look at him, nonetheless listen to him, without getting irreversibly angry. The only time I want to see Christopher Dodd at 12:32 a.m., or frankly at any time of day, is if he's wearing handcuffs. And not in a Barney Frank kind-of-way, either -- I want to see Dodd being led into prison like Bernie Madoff.

More Ted Kennedy stuff. Good grief. If Ted Kennedy were a normal, everyday American in the aftermath of this legislation, he would have been cold and dead long before he passed with the benefit of the best health care that money can buy, the same health care innovation and ingenuity that the Democrats are poised to stifle, discourage and destroy.

12:40 a.m.

I keep wanting to write "p.m." and every time I go back and change it, I shake my head.

Mitch McConnell is up. Orrin Hatch is seated behind him, looking tired. McConnell is pointing out that this is being done in the dead of night, and pointing out why. He noted that $100 million is included in the bill for an unnamed health care facility at an unnamed university somewhere in the United States. The bill doesn't even say where, and no one will step forward to claim it. He noted that one state out of fifty gets to expand Medicaid at no cost to itself, while the rest of America foots the bill. That, of course, is Ben Nelson's state of Nebraska, and that was his price.

The final product is a mess, McConnell says, and so is the process that brought us here to vote on a bill that the American people overwhelmingly oppose. He points out that other vital pieces of legislation are truly bipartisan. The Social Security Act. Medicare. The Americans With Disabilities Act. Americans believe that in issues of such importance, one party should not be able to force its will on the other; one party here thought differently.

The goal here was only a blind call to make history, he says, even if it is a historical mistake. And that's exactly what this $2.3 trillion, 2733-page health care reform plan will do. And he's right. It's absolutely unconscionable.

"Can all of these Americans be wrong?" Brilliant question.

"All it takes is one," McConnell says. "One can stop it, or everyone will own it. One can stop it, or every single one will own it. My colleagues, it is not too late."

My God, I hope someone steps up. Somebody left a comment here noting that nothing good happens in Washington, D.C. after midnight; I'd posit that nothing good happens in Washington, D.C. at all.

12:54 a.m.

And, as if to show evidence of nothing good happening in Washington, D.C. at all, Harry Reid is up.

Every ten minutes, he says, another American dies because they don't have health insurance. Oh, please. We have emergency rooms ready and able to care for illegal immigrants who have no identification, nonetheless insurance. What's going to happen is that Americans are going to die because Democrats destroyed the American health care system. What's going to happen is that Americans are going to die while waiting for six months for a biopsy.

I will dance a jig in my new living room next November when Fox News Channel calls the Nevada election for whomever is running against Reid. And then I'll switch over to MSNBC--just for a moment--to watch them call it. In fact, I will keep champagne on ice to enjoy during his concession speech.

And, gosh darn it, health care is NOT a fundamental right. Freedom is a fundamental right, and what they are doing right now is destroying freedom in the name of the perpetuation of power.

"For the Republicans to say that we're here [at 1:00 a.m.] because of us," Reid says, with a smirk on his face, "is without foundation." Really? REALLY? By all means, delay it. By all means, leave your lovely not-so-little bill on the Internet for a month for us to pick apart. Please, please do.

What a penis.

Now he's telling stories about imaginary constituents. It reminds me of the immigration debate, when Reid was ad-libbing about a kid in his state named "Timmy." Reid wasn't going to mention his last name, he said, because, uh, uh, uh, we might go look him up. "Timmy" wasn't real. Neither are these people.

If there are faces to place with the decline of our republic, Reid's should be among them. Two Americans, he said, have died from lack of health coverage during this very speech! And Republicans are the ones using scare tactics.

I can't listen to him any more.

1:08 a.m.

Here goes. Cloture on Reid's amendment, and the vote which sets up a Christmas Eve vote on the destruction of American freedom and prosperity. I mean, seriously? They need to tear these people away from their families, just so Americans from coast to coast will be too busy eating dinner and enjoying their own families to notice?

Bayh is an "aye." Burris is an "aye." Byrd has been dusted off and wheeled in; he's an "aye." Bob Casey, supposedly a pro-life Democrat, is an "aye" to a bill which federally funds abortions. Susan Collins votes "no."

Lieberman? Aye.

Lincoln? Aye.

Landrieu? Aye.

Nelson? Aye. Unreal.

Cloture passes by a vote of 60 to 40. At 1:18 a.m. Procedural votes will come at 7:00 a.m. Tuesday and 1:00 p.m. on Wednesday. The vote for final passage will come at 7:00 p.m. on Thursday night. That's Christmas Eve. It seems America will be getting a lump of coal in her stocking this year, and from this year on.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 11:35
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
    DATE:  DECEMBER 21, 2009
Page 30 Sec 123 of HC bill:   THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get.
Page 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill: YOUR HEALTH CARE IS RATIONED!!!
Page 42 of HC Bill:  The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC benefits for you. You have no choice!
Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill: Specifications of Benefit Levels for Plans. (AARP members - your health care WILL be rationed!)
Page 272 SEC. 1145: TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS - Cancer patients - welcome to rationing!
Page 280 Sec 1151: The Govt will penalize hospitals for whatever the Govt deems preventable (i.e...re-admissions).

Page 298 Lines 9-11: Doctors: If you treat a patient during initial admission that results in a re-admission -- the Govt will penalize you.
Page 317 L 13-20: PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. (The Govt tells doctors what and how much they can own!)
Page 317-318 lines 21-25, 1-3: PROHIBITION on expansion.  (The Govt is mandating that hospitals cannot expand.)
Page 321 2-13: Hospitals have the opportunity to apply for exception BUT community input is required.  (Can you say ACORN?)
Page 425 Lines 4-12: The Govt mandates "Advance-Care Planning Consult."  (Think senior citizens end-of-life patients.)
Page 425 Lines 17-19: The Govt will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc.  (And it's mandatory!)
Page 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3: The Govt provides an "approved" list of end-of-life resources; guiding you in death. (Also called 'assisted suicide.')
Page 427 Lines 15-24: The Govt mandates a program for orders on "end-of-life."  (The Govt has a say in how your life ends!)
Page 429 Lines 1-9: An "advanced-care planning consultant" will be used frequently as a patient's health deteriorates.
Page 429 Lines 10-12: An "advanced care consultation" may include an ORDER for end-of-life plans..  (AN ORDER TO DIE FROM THE GOVERNMENT?!?)

Page 429 Lines 13-25: The GOVT will specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order..  (I wouldn't want to stand before God after getting paid for THAT job!)   

Page 430 Lines 11-15: The Govt will decide what level of treatment you will have at end-of-life!  (Again -- no choice!)


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:52
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar


 - December 21, 2009

Health Care Bill Passes Critical Senate Test

Legislation backed by President Obama passed its sternest Senate test in the pre-dawn hours early Monday.

WASHINGTON -- Senate Democrats won a crucial test vote on President Barack Obama's health care overhaul, putting them on track for passage before Christmas of the historic legislation to remake the nation's medical system and cover 30 million uninsured.

All 58 Democrats and the Senate's two independents held together early Monday against unanimous Republican opposition, providing the exact 60-40 margin needed to shut down a threatened GOP filibuster.

The vote came shortly after 1 a.m. with the nation's capital blanketed in snow, the unusual timing made necessary in order to get to a final vote by Christmas Eve presuming Republicans stretch out the debate as much as the rules allow. Despite the late hour and a harshly partisan atmosphere, Democrats' spirits were high.

"Today we are closer than we've ever been to making Sen. Ted Kennedy's dream of universal health insurance coverage a reality," Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said ahead of the vote, alluding to the late Massachusetts senator who died of brain cancer in August.

"Vote your hopes, not your fears. Seize the moment," Harkin urged colleagues.

Kennedy's widow, Vicki, watched the vote from the visitor's gallery along with administration officials who have worked intensely on the issue. Senators cast their votes from their desks, a practice reserved for issues of particular importance.

The outcome was preordained after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., wrangled his fractious caucus into line over the course of the past several months, culminating in a frenzy of last-minute deals and concessions to win over the final holdouts, independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and conservative Democrat Ben Nelson of Nebraska.

Obama's oft-stated goal of a bipartisan health bill was not met, despite the president's extensive courtship of moderate Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, the only Republican to support the bill in committee. Obama called Snowe to the White House for lengthy in-person meetings both before he left for climate talks in Copenhagen and after his return on Saturday. In the end Snowe said she was "extremely disappointed" in what she called a rushed process that left scant time for her to review, much less amend, the bill.

Even so, the vote represented a major victory for Democrats and Obama, who's now clearly in reach of passing legislation extending health coverage to nearly all Americans, a goal that's eluded a succession of past presidents. The legislation would make health insurance mandatory for the first time for nearly everyone, provide subsidies to help lower-income people buy it, and induce employers to provide it with tax breaks for small businesses and penalties for larger ones.

Two more procedural votes await the Senate, each requiring 60 votes, the first of these set for Tuesday morning. Final passage of the bill requires a simple majority, and that vote could come as late as 7 p.m. on Thursday, Christmas Eve, or the day before if Republicans agree.

Although Democrats are expected to prevail in the votes over the next several days, the final outcome remains unpredictable, because the Senate measure must be harmonized with the health care bill passed by the House in November before final legislation can be sent to Obama's desk.

There are significant differences between the two measures, including stricter abortion language in the House bill, a new government-run insurance plan in the House bill that's missing from the Senate version, and a tax on high-value insurance plans embraced by the Senate but strongly opposed by many House Democrats.

After Monday's vote a number of Senate Democrats warned that the legislation could not change much and expect to maintain support from 60 senators. House Democrats are sure to want to alter it but may have to swallow it mostly whole.

"It took a lot of work to bring this 60 together and this 60 is delicately balanced," Lieberman said.

Republicans are determined to give Democrats no help, eager to deny Obama a political victory and speculating openly that the health care issue will hurt Democrats in the 2010 midterm elections.

"There will be a day of accounting," warned John Cornyn, R-Texas, accusing Democrats of pushing a health overhaul opposed by the public. "Perhaps the first day of accounting will be Election Day 2010."

At their core the bills passed by the House and pending in the Senate are similar. Each costs around $1 trillion over 10 years and is paid for by a combination of tax and fee increases and cuts in projected Medicare spending. Each sets up new insurance marketplaces called exchanges where uninsured or self-employed people and small businesses can compare prices and plans designed to meet some basic requirements. Unpopular insurance practices such as denying people coverage based on pre-existing conditions would be banned, and young adults could retain coverage longer under their parents' insurance plans -- through age 25 in the Senate bill and through age 26 in the House version.

Reid cut numerous last-minute deals to get the votes he needed and powerful Democrats also inserted home-state provisions in a 383-page package of amendments Reid filed this weekend to the 2,074-page bill.

Among other items, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., included a provision allowing residents of the town of Libby, Mont., who are suffering asbestos-related illnesses from a mining operation to get Medicare benefits. Nelson won a list of benefits for Nebraska including a commitment for the federal government to pick up the full tab of an expansion of Medicaid. And Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., who faces a difficult re-election, inserted a $100 million item for construction of a university hospital that his spokesman said he hopes to claim for the University of Connecticut.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 9:41
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Domingo, 20 de diciembre de 2009

The United States has finally reached a pinnacle where the radical-left are cheering. With the complete domination of main-stream media, education, welfare, the unions and the Democratic Party we now have a group of liberal socialists that have moved from subliminal attack against humanity to full frontal assault against all people who stand in their way. Their final conquest was the United States government with its ability to tax, control, ruin and, in general, subvert the Constitution. Did the people in this country see it coming? Apparently not soon enough!

Are these radicals destined for immortality? Absolutely NOT! Socialism never works. The reason it doesn’t work is it attacks God, freedom, life and productivity. Radical socialism is economically unstable. It relies on others to pay for their chosen menu of goods and services. Those that pay for “promised” services rarely see the fruits of their investment. If you pay for health care and die without treatment, what good is the service? If we pay for services that are freely distributed to those that don’t earn or have the right to such services, what incentive is left for the working class to continue to finance the freeloaders?

One of my favorite sayings is, “give a man a fish and he eats for a day.. teach him how to fish and he eats for a lifetime.” In the United States today we are giving people the “fish” so government can eat for a lifetime. Government buys protection, power, votes and control by handing out the goodies. The problem with the radical-left is they are greedy. The minute they see free money they often decide to keep it. How much TARP money actually went to the health, welfare and support of the people? Not much! Yet big government-controlled corporations, unions, organizations and politicians saw plenty. How many more TARP programs will be needed to redistribute the wealth to these communistic groups and organizations? Let’s see, we have Obamacare, Cap and Trade, Global Warming, Amnesty and whatever else these hedonists can think of.

When will radical socialism finally die in the Unites States? When we get back to the basics where man places God, family and freedom first! Remember, it took us 60 to 70 years to reach the state we are in. It may take many years to rid ourselves of the evil that is now part of our daily lives. History does repeat itself. What goes up, must come down. Men that plot against humanity for their own personal gain never survive. Evil is evil, pure and simple. In the long run, evil will fail.

In the mean time we cannot rest on our laurels and continue to go along with the status quo.

There are many things we can do to combat evil people and corrupt government.

    1) Find God. He has the answers. God can and will crush evil. Don’t believe me? Look around! Those that have turned away from God are lost souls. Now, many of you might say that is an arrogant statement. As a man who personally knows God, I can tell you there is nothing arrogant about it. When you get to the point where you have no where else to turn, turn to God, he can and will help those that believe and seek the truth.


    2) Respect and support your family. Quit making excuses and running from your reponsiblities as a head of the household. When the family fails, evil prevails.

    3) Quit supporting with money those that seek to harm you or your family. If you know of a corporation, union, politician or organization that openly supports corruption, stop sending them money. Stop buying their goods and services. Stop working for companies that support a corrupt society. The radical-left is afraid of one thing, failing. Without money or support, they will fail.

    4) Get involved with church, civic, patriotic, business or community groups that openly and willingly speak out against radicals. Don’t join groups that are afraid to speak out or take action. Being politically correct these days means nothing. Evil will never be defeated by those that continue to “sit on the sidelines.”

    5) Get behind and support the military, oath keepers and law enforcement officials in your community. Contrary to popular belief, we still have a “all-volunteer” army, many retired military people and “elected” peace officers in this country who will fight for us. Most military employees, soldiers and families don’t like what is happening to our country — they deserve every ounce of support you can give them.

    6) Don’t trade security for freedom. I know this sounds easy to say but difficult to follow. When the “nanny” arrives and promises you health and welfare, remember what you are really getting in return. If you are no longer free, security soon becomes meaningless.

Look at the positives. Communism has reared its ugly head in America but is fast approaching a meltdown. Obama has become the most unpopular president in the shortest time possible. Nobody but the hard-left will continue to follow this man. Government leaders, politicians, judges, administrators and media who support hard-left policies are now thought of as people who openly subvert the Constitution, freedom and our American way of life. The Democrats, unions and community organizers are now fighting amongst themselves for power and control. The money machine that finances all of this corruption is now insolvent. How many more months or years do you think this government can survive if productivity and earnings continue to fall? An economic depression sounds like a terrible thing but such a happening will be the death blow to radical government. When the promises run out and the realities set in, government can only feed off of itself for so long. Once the taxpayer can no longer afford to feed the beast, it will die.

Many say that depression, anguish, failure and strife is just what the communists want? The supporters of communism say that once we reach a state where socialism is more attractive than starvation they will win. I say that is total propaganda. Make no doubt about it, the government as we know it today is at war with is own people. Fortunately, that war will fail when the people finally wake up and realize that the radical-left cannot deliver on its promises of glory. The hard-left lives in a dream world of utopia and fantasy, a place where evil and sin thrive. The majority of us live in a world of reality.

Keep the faith and continue to believe that good will prevail. As long as we have hope we will survive as a people and a Nation. The enemy may try everything in their power to silence us but they cannot take our souls unless we allow them to. Think about everything America has accomplished in the past 250 years that is good, honorable and loved. America is truly the “beacon of freedom” that is known the world over. The radical-left hates America for that reason. We, on the other hand, love freedom and all it stands for. Remember, love defeats hate every time. The next time some radical-left liberal laughs about winning a battle know in your heart he can never win the war. There are too many of us and not enough of him to ever defeat freedom.

God Bless America. God Bless our people!

Thanks for stopping by,

Bob Campbell
American Grand Jury


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 11:40
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

SOLD: Sen. Nelson’s Bribe

by Publius

We’ll be blunt. The ‘health care reform’ legislation under consideration in the Senate is the most corrupt piece of legislation in our nation’s history. Yes, we understand that is a strong statement and there have been other abominations throughout our nation’s life. But never before did corrupt legislation threaten to radically and forever change the live’s of every American.


Exhibit A is the outright bribe extracted by Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Corn Huckster State) from Sen. Harry Reid. As a result of Nelson’s performance in his role of Hamlet in the health care deliberations, we will have two health care systems in this country; one for Nebraska and one for the other 49 states.

In its quixotic attempt to ensure everyone has health insurance, the Reid legislation greatly expands Medicaid eligibility. Because Medicaid is a program whose costs are split between the federal and state governments, this expansion in eligibility raise costs dramatically for states. States will be forced to either raise taxes or cut other services to accommodate the forced increase in Medicaid spending.

Unless that state is Nebraska.

Below is the text for Nelson’s bribe. Under this language the federal government will forever cover the costs of Medicaid expansion in Nebraska. Taxpayers in every other state will forever be responsible for the expanded Medicaid program in Nebraska.

image001Outrageous doesn’t do justice to describe this situation. Sen. Nelson also secured an exemptionfrom a new insurance tax for non-profit companies in his state. Mutual of Omaha and Nebraska’s Blue Cross/Blue Shield won’t have to pay a tax other companies will be required to pay.

There is next to nothing honest about the entire health care debate anymore. The current legislative text was released just hours ago. The first votes are expected within hours. The health care sector accounts for 1/7th of our economy. And the “World’s Greatest Deliberative Body” will have just hours to consider its radical transformation. However much they say the legislation will cost, don’t believe it. Rarely has a bill been so manipulated to hide its true cost.

Consider this from the most recent CBO estimate of the cost of the legislation:

These longer-term calculations assume that the provisions are enacted and remain unchanged throughout the next two decades, which is often not the case for major legislation. For example, the sustainable growth rate (SGR) mechanism governing Medicare’s payments to physicians has frequently been modified (either through legislation or administrative action) to avoid reductions in those payments, and legislation to do so again is currently under consideration in the Congress.

And this,

The legislation would maintain and put into effect a number of procedures that might be difficult to sustain over a long period of time. Under current law and under the proposal, payment rates for physicians’ services in Medicare would be reduced by about 21 percent in 2010 and then decline further in subsequent years.

(Hey, American Medical Association, how’s that endorsement of this bill working for you?)

And, this gem:

It is unclear whether such a reduction in the growth rate could be achieved, and if so, whether it would be accomplished through greater efficiencies in the delivery of health care or would reduce access to care or diminish the quality of care.

Soon, 60 Senators will vote for this.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 11:02
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Obama And His Appointees Dismantling US

By HERB DENENBERG, For The Bulletin
President Barack Hussein Obama is proceeding to destroy America and has opened up a six-front war to do so:

1. He has a Democratic controlled Congress that is willing to rubber-stamp his wildest schemes, without even reading them…as we’ve already seen. The Democratic Party is now aiding and abetting the demeaning and destruction of America and has become the voice of leftist extremism. The moderates have disappeared or been transformed, issuing only occasional squeaking and whining before following the liberal party line drawn by Mr. Obama. Where have all the Democratic moderates gone?

2. Mr. Obama has immense executive authority, which he has already used to damage the country. One notable example is his decision to try terrorists in New York City, thereby giving the terrorists the premier platform to broadcast their propaganda and recruit Islamic radicals to their cause. Another example is cap and trade by fiat of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), rather than Congressional action.

3. He is filling the White House, the executive branch and the court system with an army of radicals, socialists, Communists, Marxists, Maoists, and America-haters. The most outrageous example was Van Jones, the avowed Communist and believer that 9/11 was an American plot fashioned by President George W. Bush. Van Jones wasn’t too much of an extremist for the White House; in fact, he was loved and respected as a key White House adviser, Valerie Jarrett publicly proclaimed at the time of his appointment. But, he was too extreme even for the mainstream media to cover-up and swallow. But, don’t kid yourself – extremists like that are the rule, not the exception in Mr. Obama’s world.

4. He stands ready to commit the U.S. to radical international treaties that will bleed away American sovereignty and commit the nation to destructive policies. Watch what happens in Copenhagen, and watch the directions of Mr. Obama in matters of international laws and treaties. He has made it obvious he is more interested in pleasing the international community than in protecting the citizens of America. Couple that with his penchant for bootlicking our enemies, apologizing for America, and kicking around and betraying our allies and you have a prescription for international disaster. Note the betrayal of Poland and Czechoslovakia by his withdrawal of missile defense from those two important allies. He did so to appease Russia, again bootlicking enemies while betraying allies.

5. Mr. Obama seems ready to do anything to achieve his ends, a la the formula of Saul Alinsky and his book Rules for Radicals. Alinsky believed the ends justify the means, and that means anything goes. Mr. Obama has demonstrated he is willing to lie, use fascist-style tactics to silent critics, and do what it takes to achieve his agenda. He has even expressed his disdain for the U.S. Constitution in his now infamous quote that civil rights litigation and adjudication went off track because it did not focus on redistribution. His comments, record, and policies show he believes in redistribution of wealth, and views capitalism, free markets and profit as all part of a tainted system that is unjust. One of his major priorities is “spreading the wealth around,” as he admitted to Joe the Plumber.

6. Finally, the mainstream media is sanitizing and covering up Mr. Obama’s worst excesses, as we’ve witnessed with major stories   either ignored or almost totally neglected. In recent months, the dishonest, fraudulent, and biased mainstream media virtually ignored Climategate, one of the great scientific scandals of history; the Acorn undercover scandal; and the Van Jones appointment, as well as a long list of other far-out radicals. The mainstream media has become an adjunct of the Obama plan to destroy America, as we know it.

 This column will focus on the wild leftist radicals that he is packing into the federal agencies and the unconstitutional czars he is filling up the White House with. I question, when America elects a president who spends over 20 years hanging around with terrorists, racists, bigots, anti-Semites, Communists, Marxists, and socialists, what kind of appointments do you think he’ll be making? And, when he packs the White House with such crazies, what kind of policies do you expect to be forthcoming?

For openers consider his latest appointment to the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC), the agency that adjudicates discrimination claims. Her name is Chai Feldblum, she is a professor at Georgetown University and is a most radical homosexual activist. She has advocated polygamy and has said that “sexual liberty” trumps the Constitutional right to “religious liberty.” Of course, she underwent what is called a confirmation conversation – trying unsuccessfully to lie out of previous positions. However, Bill Donohue of the Catholic League found her newfound moderation a total “farce.”

She is the primary author of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) now before both houses of Congress. The bill has been described by J. Matt Barber on the Renew America Web site as follows: “ENDA would force – under penalty of law – Christian, Jewish or Muslim business owners to hire people who unrepentantly choose to engage in homosexual or cross-dressing behaviors, despite the fact that these volitional behaviors are in direct conflict with every major world religion, thousands of years of history and uncompromising human biology. … It’s a direct assault on the inalienable rights of people of faith. It pits the government directly against the free exercise of religion and is, therefore, unconstitutional on its face.” Recall, this president has announced this is not a Christian nation, contrary to American history, a history he more often deplores than proclaims.

The Feldblum appointment is part of a larger effort to force the homosexual agenda on the American people, from the youngest school children on up. For the perfect example, take the safe-schools czar, Kevin Jennings. Here’s the way the Web site 
www.wordpress.com summarized his qualifications:

· A former schoolteacher

· A gay

· An advocate of promoting homosexuality in schools

· A former drug user

· Dislikes religion

· Failed to report an underage student who told him he had sex with an older man.

The views of Mr. Obama’s science and technology czar, Dr. John Holdren, are also bizarre. In the 1980s, in discussing population controls, he advocated compulsory abortion and sterilization as constitutional. No proposal is too extreme for the Obama team.

This radicalism pervades every corner of the White House and Mr. Obama’s appointments. Take Craig Becker, an Obama appointee to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). He was a union lawyer, who was associate general counsel of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). The SEIU is the union with close connections to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), the corrupt group of community organizers best known for voter fraud and extortion and intimidation of lenders. Mr. Becker helped lay the groundwork for the Employee Fair Choice Act (EFCA). That is the proposed law that would do away with the secret ballot in union elections and would permit federally designated bureaucrats to determine employment terms if a union and employer did not reach a prompt agreement. This act is so blatantly anti-democratic that it is even opposed by a far-left liberal, George McGovern, former U.S. Senator and Democratic Party nominee for president.

Even if Congress won’t pass the EFCA, Mr. Becker believes he can get the wildly leftist Obama agenda established by rule making by the NLRB, thus eliminating the need for Congressional action. This is characteristic of the Obama administration – willing to implement the most radical measures without Congressional approval and rule by administrative diktat.

And Mr. Becker will have plenty of support from other top Obama appointees in the federal bureaucracy. There is Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, who was first elected to Congress in 2000, as the union candidate. For about 10 years in Congress, she had a perfect record of support for union proposals. And, she is likely to coddle unions and persecute employers as Secretary of Labor.

Secretary Solis has already announced her plan to give unions more power over employers and the economy. And, she has already started taking all controls off of union abuses. For example, her predecessor, Elaine Chao, took the responsibility of policing unions seriously. During her tenure, Ms. Chao obtained 929 convictions for corrupt union practices and recovered more than $93 million on behalf of union members (as reported in The American Spectator. The U.S. Labor Department unit that polices unions is the Office of Labor Management Standards (OLMS). Shortly after the union lapdog, Ms. Solis, took office, the Obama administration reported it was cutting OLMS’s budget by more than 9 percent. The American Spectator writes, “As a result, corrupt union bosses will have a much freer hand with which to bilk their members.”

That’s just a taste of what Mr. Obama is doing to the Department of Labor to make it an instrument of unionization and the union agenda. Two other appointments to The Department of Labor are Patricia Smith and Lorelei Boylan. Both have close ties to unions and while working for the New York State Department of Labor, they were in charge of a program in which New York state partners with unions and other liberal groups to police workplaces. The American Spectator writes, “But in practice empowering ‘regular people’ actually means that the government is deputizing unions to help police workplaces.” This is just another example of how the Obama administration seeks to control every aspect of the American economy and do so to favor their political supporters, in this case the unions. Given their way, American business will be run by union bosses and union thugs.

Another area where Mr. Obama seeks to impose government control is talk radio. There is Mark Lloyd, who was appointed to be associate general counsel and chief diversity officer of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). He is on record of favoring all kinds of regulation of talk radio, which would be designed to muzzle conservative talk radio. To show how extreme these Obama appointees are, consider Mr. Lloyd’s comments about the tyrant of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez. Mr. Lloyd went on record in support of Mr. Chavez who, among other things, is a sworn enemy of America: “In Venezuela, with Chavez, is really an incredible revolution – a democratic revolution.” There is a deadly Orwellian flavor to Mr. Obama and his appointees – a vicious tyrant is transformed into an instrument of “democratic revolution.”

The “Czars” are even more radical and even more out of control than members of the cabinet, who are subject to Senate confirmation. They can escape any Senate confirmation and, consequently, are viewed by some legal authorities as end-runs around the U.S. Constitution. Carol Browner, global warming (energy) czar, is typical. She is one of the leaders of the Socialist International and, as such, advocates “global governance” and maintains that developed nations must shrink their economy to help alleviate global warming. The czars and their threat to U.S. constitutional government are covered in detail in an article in Newsmax entitled “Czars: Never Elected. Never Confirmed. Too Powerful?”

Thomas Sowell, the brilliant conservative pundit, makes an important point for those who think these radical extremists somehow got into the White House because of a failure to properly vet them. Mr. Sowell writes, “Why should we assume Obama didn’t know what such people were like; he’s been associating with these kinds of people for decades. Nothing is more consistent with his pattern than putting such people in government – people who reject American values, and resent Americans and America’s influence in the world.”

Wake up America. We elected one of the most dangerous enemies of America and he now sits in the White House, filled with other enemies of America, relentlessly going about his task of destroying the country as we know it and as the Founding Fathers intended it. You better join the forces in opposition to Mr. Obama’s vision for America because if he continues unobstructed for three more years, it may then be too late to save it.

It’s later than you think. Mr. Obama can kill the economy and America with his version of ObamaCare standing by itself (See The Bulletin, “ObamaCare Spells Doom for America,” Dec. 6-12, and “Wake Up Before Obama Destroys America,” Dec. 13-19). And, he seems to be firing shots with machine-gun rapidity that have the potential to destroy our economy and our country. There’s some element of truth in talk show host Michael Savage’s assertion that we now have a dictatorship. With supermajorities in both houses of Congress and with seemingly inept Republican leadership, with free use of extra-Constitutional methods, i.e. czars, there seems to be no real checks and balances that should keep an out-of-control radical runaway president in check.

Even our Founders, political geniuses, still could not foresee and plan for the election to the White House of an America-hating radical, backed by supermajorities of the Democratic Party willing to follow him over the cliff to the destruction of America.

Herb Denenberg can be reached at [email protected]

Copyright © 2009 - The Bulletin


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:58
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Government Health Care: The Next Step On the Road to Tyranny and Slavery

Posted on December 20th, 2009 by David-Crockett

Prison Planet

Kurt Nimmo
December 19, 2009

Democrats deceptively argue that health care is legal under the commerce clause of the Constitution. The commerce clause relates to business, not individuals, but the Democrats have skewed the original purpose and intent of the Constitution.

When asked to point out where in the Constitution authority is granted to force an individual — ultimately at gunpoint — to buy government health care, Speaker of the House Pelosi said: “Are you serious?”

It is said Obama was a constitutional professor at the University of Chicago Law School (even this is a lie — he was in fact “a senior lecturer,” not a professor), so we should assume he has at least some knowledge of the principles of the Constitution. Obama likely knows that the Constitution does not mandate Americans be forced into a contractual agreement with a private party for health insurance.

Apparently, like his predecessor, Obama regards the Constitution as little more than a goddamn piece of paper.

“Nowhere in the Constitution is Congress given the power to mandate that an individual enter into a contract with a private party or purchase a good or service,” explains the Heritage Foundation. No decision or present doctrine of the Supreme Court justifies such a claim of power.

Is it possible Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have not read Article I of the Constitution? It states that the government’s rights are limited. Article 1, Section 8 reads, “The Congress shall have Power … To regulate Commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian Tribes.” It does not say a word about health care. The federal government only has the power to regulate trade between itself, foreign governments, and the states. Period.

But then the government — including the Supreme Court — has chipped away at the Constitution for decades. Many of the most serious violations of the Constitution came under the reign of a supposed conservative Republican, George W. Bush.

The Democrat health care bill is merely the most recent and most egregious of those constitutional violations. Both parties – essentially the same party – excel at destroying our constitutional rights.

As recently as last week, there was hope this monstrosity in the Senate would die a natural death and hand a defeat to Obama and his big government statists in the House and Senate.

Now that senator Ben Nelson has sold his consent — for Medicaid money to Nebraska — it appears this bill will soon be a done deal.

In a few weeks, the federal government may be making your most important and private medical decisions. Get ready for health care on par with Cash for Clunkers.

Get ready to take the next step on the road toward government tyranny and slavery.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:52
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
S?bado, 19 de diciembre de 2009

White House won't provide  witnesses for Fort Hood hearing

By Ben Pershing

The first public congressional hearing on the Fort Hood attack will not include testimony from any current federal law enforcement, military or intelligence officials because the Obama administration "declined to provide any" such witnesses, according to a Senate committee source.

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committeehas released the witness list for its hearing "The Fort Hood Attack: A Preliminary Assessment," scheduled for Thursday at 10 a.m. ET. The list includes four experts on terrorism and intelligence issues: retired Gen. Jack Keane, the former U.S. Army vice chief of staff; Brian Jenkins, a senior advisor at the Rand Corp.; Mitchell Silber, the director of analysis for the New York City Police Department's Intelligence Division; and Juan Zarate, a senior advisor for the Transnational Threats Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

But the list does not include anyone actively involved in investigating the Fort Hood attack, or anyone who might have been responsible for decisions made by various government agencies before the attack about whether to investigate the shooting suspect, Nidal Hasan. The Senate committee source said HSGAC Chairman Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) had hoped to have witnesses from the FBI and the U.S. Army, but was rebuffed in his requests.

Asked for comment Monday, White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said: "Tomorrow morning, an inter-agency briefing team will go to the Hill to brief House and Senate leaders and committee chairs and ranking members. This is the latest in a series of engagements with the Hill since the horrific events at Fort Hood, and further evidence of the Administration's commitment to appropriately inform Congress without interfering in the prosecution of this case."

Vietor did not address the specific question of why witnesses would not be provided for Thursday's hearing.

President Obama has already ordered a federal review of the circumstances that led up to the Fort Hood attack, and how government agencies handled intelligence related to Hasan. But in his weekly radio and Internet address Saturday, Obama urged caution on Capitol Hill.

"I know there will also be inquiries by Congress, and there should," Obama said. "But all of us should resist the temptation to turn this tragic event into the political theater that sometimes dominates the discussion here in Washington. The stakes are far too high."

While most lawmakers have said they will wait for the results of the Fort Hood criminal investigation and Obama's announced review before rendering judgment, some have already been critical of the Obama administration's handling of both the prelude to the attack and its aftermath. Rep. Peter Hoekstra (Mich.), the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, has been particularly sharp in his criticism.

Lieberman, for his part, has said the Fort Hood attack appeared to be the work of a "self-radicalized, home-grown terrorist," and he and Sen. Susan Collins (Maine), the panel's top Republican, have vowed to cooperate with the administration if it returns the favor.

"To carry out our investigation, Congress will require the prompt and full cooperation of the Executive Branch -- cooperation that must start as soon as possible," Lieberman and Collins said Saturday. "We totally agree with the President that this inquiry must not turn into 'political theater' and it will not."

Separately, a closed-door Senate Armed Services Committee briefing on the status of the Fort Hood investigation has been postponed, after initially being scheduled for Monday afternoon. That session was scheduled to feature top officials, including Army Secretary John McHugh and Arrny Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey. Committee aides aid the session was postponed only to assure that everyone Senators wanted to hear from could attend, and would likely be rescheduled for later this week.

By Ben Pershing  |  November 16, 2009; 6:03 PM ET


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 9:24
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Viernes, 18 de diciembre de 2009


Political Analysis by Harry Hunter

A politics in which what is said, is not what is meant.

Barack Obama, Senator Harry Reid, and Speaker of the House, Nancy Peolosi: A politics in which what is said, is not what is meant.

(Dec. 18, 2009) —Math was never my favovite subject, so let me borrow from someone who has figured out how Democrat mathematics works. Mendy Palumbo explains this in his blog post: “The Real Reason Dems Put Healthcare First.”

Mendy sees the Democrats’ top three priorities as socialist healthcare, amnesty for illegal immigrants, and Cap and Trade, and he detects a method in the madness of pushing healthcare through first, against the wishes of a majority of (legal) Americans. Knowing that the cost of their radical healthcare makeover already spells economic death for America, Democrats want to get it shoved down the nation’s throat before any further discussion arises about healthcare costs for illegal immigrants. But the groundwork for a foundation of healthcare benefits to illegals must be done before the Democrat edifice to a permanent majority can be built on the votes of those who will soon be granted amnesty.

According to Mendy’s calculus, “By passing the amnesty bill which would legitimize all illegal aliens, Democrats are hoping to add another 14 million to 24 million (depending on whose numbers you believe) to the current roll of Democratic voters.” But to make doubly sure the amnesty recipients feel forever beholden to the Democrat Party, the Democrats first want to hold out low-or-no-cost healthcare benefits as a receipt for south-of-border votes that will then be fully bought and paid for.

Oh, what a web the progressives/socialists/communists weave, once they have all three branches of government in their clutches!

Today Barack  Hussein Obama — Obe Wan Soetero Himself — is over in Copenhagen holding Red China’s hand and asking the big Red to please let someone see something that will supposedly document China’s fake future hypothetical effort to limit its carbon emissions, so that a fraud-based “climate treaty”—what a farce this is!—can be hurriedly agreed to. Do you notice a deadline-pressure pattern here?

This morning Obama, the King of Lies, announced to the world from Denmark that “of the reality of climate change, there can be no doubt.” Therefore let the world get cracking, and here is $100 billion for the “undeveloped nations” to get us started down the road to decapitating capitalism. Following in the footsteps of Hitler and Stalin, Obama obviously thinks that telling a Big Lie often enough will fool most of the people.

And so far Obe has achieved remarkable success. At least he won the presidency and still holds it based on the biggest lie of his tawdry, Alinsky-driven career: “I am a natural born citizen of the United States.” (From the Arizona Candidate Nomination Paper Obama signed on November 30, 2007.)


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 14:01
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Infowars Reader Receives Threatening Letter from Census Bureau

Kurt Nimmo
December 17, 2009

The United States Department of Commerce will send out a threateningletter if a subject refuses to submit to the American Community Survey(ACS). The ACS is a project of the U.S. Census Bureau that replaces thelong form in the decennial census. A census is required by theConstitution.

census letter

Click the image above toread the letter in PDF.

An Infowars reader has sent us a copy of this threatening letter.The anonymous recipient received the letter after he refused to fillout and send in the ACS form. “The Census people have been by my houseover a handful of times. They have called my house several times. Theyeven went to my neighbors house and asked when I’m home and what time Igo to work,” he writes. “I told her that she was not welcome on myproperty and I received a threatening letter from census (attached) tothis e-mail.”

“The primary goal of this survey,” writes Dennis R. Johnson,regional director of the Census Bureau, “is to provide currentinformation on subjects like the current social, economic, and housingsituation in the United States. Your efforts help provide theinformation needed by your community, county, and state, as well as theNation, to plan programs at all levels.”

Johnson then threatens the letter recipient with a federal law undertitle 13 of the United States Code.

The primary goal of a national census, according to the Constitution(under Article 1, Section 3) is to provide “actual enumeration” of thepopulation so that the proper number of congressional representativescan be elected from each state.

TheConstitution says nothing about government efforts to collect social,economic, and housing data in the United States so local and nationalgovernment can determine how to tax and spend the money of Americans.Mr. Johnson’s letter is unconstitutional and a color of law effort toshakedown a citizen who understands he is not obliged to provideanything beyond a head count as mandated by the Constitution.

As Ron Paulcorrectly notes, the Founding Fathers “never authorized the federalgovernment to continuously survey the American people. Moreimportantly, they never envisioned a nation where the people would rollover and submit to every government demand.”

“Keep in mind the survey is not voluntary, nor is the Census Bureauasking politely. Americans are legally obligated to answer, and can befined up to $1,000 per question if they refuse!” Paul wrote on July 13,2004. “The American Community Survey is patently offensive to allAmericans who still embody that fundamental American virtue, namely ahealthy mistrust of government. The information demanded in the newsurvey is none of the government’s business, and the American peopleshould insist that Congress reject it now before it becomes entrenched.”


In response to the above post, anInfowars reader sent a scan of a letter regarding ACS sent to him byJames Sensenbrenner, a member of the Republican Party in the UnitedStates House of Representatives, on November 26, 2006.

Contrary to the letter sent by Dennis R.Johnson, Mr. Sensenbrenner indicates there is no legal obligation tocomplete the ACS form, although he adds that the “Department viewscompliance with the survey as a citizen’s civic duty.”

featured stories Infowars Reader Receives Threatening Letter from Census Bureau


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 11:24
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar


Congressman:Why is Obama stifling Hasan investigation?

Memberof House intelligence committeee wants reports to prevent another attack

Posted: December 18, 2009
12:40 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh

© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan

A member of the House PermanentSelect Committee on Intelligence is wondering why President Obamaapparently is suppressing information assembled by an investigationinto the Nov. 5 attack at Fort Hood by Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, an Armypsychiatrist who reportedly shouted "Allahu akbar," or "Allah isgreatest," while killing more than a dozen soldiers and civilians.

Rep.Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., expressedhis concern in a recent commentary, saying, "There has been a troublingrefusal by Obama officials to acknowledge that the shooting likely wasan act of homegrown terrorism."

"How can it be that the HouseCommittee on Homeland Security has launched an investigation and calledhearings within a week to look into the couple who crashed a recentWhite House state dinner, yet a month after Fort Hood there has yet tobe a single congressional hearing into the Fort Hood attack?" Hoekstrasaid. "I fear that our nation is returning to the naive securityoutlook of Sept. 10, 2001, when radical Islamic terrorist attacks wereconsidered law enforcement and criminal problems and not threats to ournational security."

Hasan, a Muslim of Palestiniandescent, allegedly entered the Soldier Readiness Center at Fort Hoodabout 1:30 p.m. Nov. 5 and, according to witnesses, took a seat at atable, bowed his head for a few seconds, then stood up and startedshooting.

He later was shot by a civilianpolice officer and remains hospitalized under guard, reportedlyparalyzed from his shooting injuries. Thirteen adults and an unbornchild were shot and killed, and nearly three dozen others wounded inthe attack for which Hasan has been charged.

Hoekstra said that in just the pastyear, there have been arrests of suspects in alleged "homegrownterrorist attacks" in New York, Chicago, North Carolina and Atlanta.

"Russia recently has seen severalalleged homegrown terrorism attacks, including a train bombing and anattack against a gas storage facility. There were horrific homegrownterrorist attacks in Madrid in 2004 and London in 2005. In 2006, 18homegrown terrorists were arrested in Toronto. It has happened here andwill happen again if we don't act. We cannot wish it away," he warned.

"We need to understand how homegrownterrorism works if we are to identify and stop homegrown terroristsbefore they carry out acts of violence. How are al-Qaida leaders andother radical jihadists recruiting and radicalizing homegrownterrorists? A principle route seems to be the Internet. We know thatMaj. Hasan was in contact via the Internet with radical Islamic clericAnwar al-Awlaki and that Mr. al-Awlaki's sermons have influencedwould-be homegrown terrorists in the United States and the terroristswho launched the deadly 2005 London subway bombings," Hoekstra said.

Get "Muslim Mafia: Inside the SecretUnderworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America," autographed, fromWND's Superstore.

But Jamal Ware, a spokesman for theGOP members of the intelligence committee, told WND that the problem iswhile the investigation apparently has produced a report about Hasan,it's being suppressed by the White House.

Hoekstra "had issued a call for theintelligence community to preserve all records relevant to looking atwhat happened at Fort Hood," Ware said, so that the committee couldreview and determine what changes should be made to prevent arecurrence.

"Several days after [that], PresidentObama issued an order to all in the intelligence community, asking themto bring together all of their records and produce a report related toFort Hood," he said.

The report apparently was completedby Nov. 30, but as of today, committee members still have been given noinformation to review, he said.

Ware confirmed administrationofficials have referenced the report in conversations, "but it is theWhite House who is determining who will have access to that particularinformation."

"At the end of the day, Hoekstra [andother GOP members of the committee] have wanted access to this tounderstand what happened, and hopefully look at what tools, changes areneeded," Ware said. "It's of critical concern to Congress that we lookat that and understand what happened."

The committee, he noted, "hasresponsibility for conducting this type of oversight."

"They are baffled by the resistancefrom the administration and from Democrats to doing any type ofoversight," he said.

At the Collins Report, a commentary by KevinCollins offered an explanation of the situation.

"Hoekstra suspects Obama ispurposefully dragging out the release of any information on Maj. NidalMalik Hasan into next February, and he considers this stall anunconstitutional trampling of his committee's responsibility to thenation," he wrote. "Federal law requires the White House to brief Houseand Senate members on this investigation and 'ensure that thecongressional intelligence committees are kept fully and currentlyinformed of the intelligence activities of the United States.'"

"What is being covered up?" Collinswondered. "Whatever's in the report must be even worse than thepublicly available facts."

In Hoekstra's commentary, he saidonly a thorough review will uncover "the intelligence failures thatprevented it from being detected."

"Americans underestimate the threatfrom homegrown terrorism," he said. "The president said it isinconceivable that this would happen in America. Wrong. It is notinconceivable and is a growing global problem that needs to beaddressed."

The investigation also might revealinformation beyond the Hasan case, he suggested.

"We also need to understand howradical jihadist groups are being financed. It has been reported thatMaj. Hasan sent money abroad to Islamic charities that reportedlysupport terrorism. How much funding are these so-called charitiesreceiving from the U.S.? How much U.S. government funding is indirectlygoing to these groups? I don't know whether suspect Islamic charitiesare supporting radical jihadists such as Mr. al-Awlaki, but this ispossibility that should be looked into," he said.

"The serious national securityimplications of the Fort Hood shooting concern both a possiblehomegrown terrorist attack and a likely failure of U.S. intelligenceagencies to cooperate, yet Congress has done nothing to investigate andthe Obama administration has stonewalled requests by individual membersof Congress for information," Hoekstra explained.

"The Obama administration seems toforget that it is a requirement, not an option, for the executivebranch to keep Congress fully and currently informed. Instead of ahealthy discussion with Congress on why this horrible event occurred,we have something akin to pulling teeth to get even basic information.This is wrong and it makes me wonder what Congress will find when thelayers are pulled back," he said.

The White House did not respond to aWND request for comment or explanation.

But others besides Hoekstra also arestarting to wonder.

The Associated Press reported Sen.Joe Lieberman, chairman of the Senate oversight committee, has chidedObama officials for failing to provide the information. The report saidLieberman's Homeland Security panel hasn't even yet received thepersonnel file for Hasan.

And the Dallas Morning News said someof the key evidence about Hasan's case may not have been forwarded toHasan's personnel files anyway. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said someinformation that investigators may want actually stayed in militaryeducation or training files and never was included in personnel files.

Reports are that coworkers of Hasan,as well as his superiors, several times had expressed concern about hisIslamic beliefs and religious proselytizing as well as his mentalstability.

"It doesn't appear that the militaryhas updated its personnel policies to reflect the threat of Islamicextremism," Collins told the paper. "There appears to be a real gap inthe protocols in the personnel procedures."

What is known is that an FBI taskforce was intercepting e-mails between Hasan and radical Muslim imamAnwar al-Awlaki as long ago as last December. Al-Awlaki has been thesubject of FBI concern since the 1990s

In a commentary on the terror attack, WND founder Joseph Farahcited a few of the questions that need to be addressed:

"How did Nidal Malik Hasan rise tothe rank of major in the U.S. Army with his background? I'm not talkingabout his Muslim faith. I'm talking about his troubled history – thedisciplinary record of inappropriate proselytizing, the extremistInternet postings, the statements to comrades about American foreignpolicy, the mandatory counseling he had to receive because of hisbehavior. How could he ever have been placed in such a position ofauthority?

"How is it possible that an officerwho had expressed such grave misgivings about a deployment toAfghanistan or Iraq had been assigned to such a mission without carefulscrutiny?

"What kind of screening goes on inthe military for security safety risks?

"Why was this man chosen toparticipate in transition plans for the new administration less than ayear ago by a major university – particularly on an issue involvinghomeland security?

"Why are soldiers on U.S. militarybases strictly forbidden to carry firearms – weapons that could haveprevented this travesty? If they are to be trusted with firearms tocarry out their foreign missions, why not at home to defend themselveslike other Americans? Why have military bases, of all places, beenturned into virtual gun-free zones?

"And how is it possible after so manyincidents like this in America are the U.S. media still so obsessedwith withholding information and denying terrorism as even a possiblemotivation? 



Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:33
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar


Friday, December 18, 2009

Wolf presses for new Black Panther probe

Jerry Seper

A senior House Republican on Thursday introduced a "resolution of inquiry" that would require the House Judiciary Committee to seek answers on why the Justice Department dismissed a civil complaint against members of the New Black Panther Party who disrupted a Philadelphia polling place in last year's elections.

Rep. Frank R. Wolf of Virginia also said he had language inserted in the Justice Department's annual spending bill requiring that its Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) provide to the House Appropriations Committee the results of OPR's investigation surrounding the dismissal of the case.

Mr. Wolf, a senior member of the Appropriations Committee's commerce, justice and science subcommittee, and Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, requested an investigation into the case earlier this year.

Under House rules, committees must take action on resolutions of inquiry within 14 legislative days. Mr. Wolfs resolution directs Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to provide Congress with "all information" relating to the decision to dismiss the case. The committee must hold a straight yea-or-nay vote on the resolution.

Mr. Wolf said he has written the attorney general six times seeking answers concerning the handling of the New Black Panther case and has yet to receive an answer.

"I regret that Congress must resort to oversight resolutions as a means to receive information about the dismissal of this case, but the Congress and the American people have a right to know why this case was not prosecuted," he said.

In August, Mary Patrice Brown, acting OPR counsel, said she had "initiated an inquiry into the matter."

The office, which investigates accusations of wrongdoing involving Justice Department attorneys, has said it would share the results of its inquiry with the lawmakers when it is completed.

Career lawyers in the Justice Department's Voting Section filed the civil complaint in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia in January, accusing two New Black Panther members who were dressed in black berets, black combat boots, black shirts and black jackets with military insignias of intimidating voters with racial insults, slurs and a nightstick.

A third party member was accused of directing and endorsing their behavior. The incident was captured on videotape and gained national attention after it was shown on YouTube.com

Along with the party, also named were Chairman Malik Zulu Shabazz, a D.C. lawyer; Minister King Samir Shabazz, head of the Philadelphia chapter who was accused of wielding the nightstick; and Jerry Jackson, a Philadelphia party member.

Justice later sought an injunction against Mr. Samir Shabazz, who carried the nightstick, barring him from displaying weapons at polling places until 2012.

In a statement introducing the resolution of inquiry, Mr. Wolf said the case had been "inexplicably dismissed" over the ardent objections of the career attorneys who oversaw it as well as the Justice Departments own appeals office.

"Time and again over the last year, the department has stonewalled any effort to learn about the decision to dismiss this case," he said, noting that not only had Congress been unsuccessful in getting any information but the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights had repeatedly failed in its attempt to seek testimony and documents.

"I urge the House Judiciary Committee to report this resolution out favorably and to demand that the attorney general answer the questions surrounding this case," he said. "It is imperative that we protect the right of all Americans to vote - the sacrosanct and inalienable right of any democracy."

Tags: Holder black panther

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:06
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Jueves, 17 de diciembre de 2009


by John Charlton

Obama's  psychological stability will being to crumble more and more, as fewer and fewer continue to listen to him.

Obama's psychological stability will being to crumble more and more, as fewer and fewer continue to listen to him.

(Dec. 17, 2009) — The Post & Email featured an exposé on Obama’s politics of fraud today, wherein he claims one thing and works for the opposite agenda.

Last night during his interview on ABC with Gibson, Obama was up to his old tricks.  Desperate that his Health Care Bill might die in the Senate, he threw a childish tantrum, threatening the nation that if the Health Care Bill is not passed the Federal Government would “go  bankrupt”!

Not a word that the massive spending increases he has pushed through in 2009 would nearly double the national debt; the Health Care Bill included.

Obama is desperate.  The Health Care Bill has nothing to do with preventing the increase of the Federal debt.  It has everything to do with causing it.

It likewise has nothing to do with solving the health care problem, it has everything to do with imposing his power upon every individual and creating a pretext to deny care and thus murder anyone in the country.

Noted doctors have come forward and said that with Obama Care life expentency will fall for all Americans.  Rationed health care means death.  I can testify to it personally, since I had a good friend, who is a M.D., but who lives in Europe where medicine is rationed, die this year, because they scheduled his heart check up 3 days too late!

Socialized medicine is nothing but state control over life and death, and it results in the deaths of 10’s of thousands annually in each country where it is imposed, out of sheer bureaucratic negligence.

Eric Zimmermin of TheHill.com reported Obama fraudulent politiking, yesterday afternoon:

“[I]f we don’t do this, nobody argues with the fact that health care costs are going to consume the entire federal budget,” Obama told ABC’s Charlie Gibson in an interview airing tonight.

Healthcare costs are growing so rapidly that “the federal government will go bankrupt” is drastic steps aren’t taken, he added.

“[Healthcare reform] actually provides us the best chance of starting to bend the cost curve on the government expenditures in Medicare and Medicaid,” Obama said.

The Truth behind Obama’s threat

The truth behind Obama’s infantile threat is that his regime is ready to go bankrupt, and if the Health Care Bill dies in the Senate, the powers that be will see to his immediate removal.

That Obama can be immediately removed is obvious to all who admit the truth of his ineligiblity to be president.  Those backing Obama to push thru a socialisit or marxist revolution (George Soros) won’t stand it for a moment if Obama politics of fraud looses its luster.

Unfortunately for Obama, he has no spine; since liars are by their very nature impatient folk.  His nerver broke, and the entire nation knows today that he is just a street-corner huckster, who’s been outed for what he is.

No one is listening anymore to his bull, therefore he has to shout and scream and threaten to get attention.

The Post & Email surmises that Obama’s desperation comes from the fact that Congressman Nathan Deal and his colleagues wrote him a letter asking for his original vital records, and that leading supporters who once believed all his lies, now realize that he is in an untenable position if he fails to disclose them.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 16:38
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
  • The Wall Street Journal
  • DECEMBER 16, 2009, 8:55 P.M. ET

The Health Bill Is Scary

Government guidelines would likely have forbidden the test I used to discover Sheila's cancer.


I recently suggested that seniors will die sooner if Congress actually implements the Medicare cuts in the health-care bill put forward by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. My colleagues who defend the bill—none of whom have practiced medicine—predictably dismissed my concern as a scare tactic. They are wrong. Every American, not just seniors, should know that the rationing provisions in the Reid bill will not only reduce their quality of life, but their life spans as well.

My 25 years as a practicing physician have shown me what happens when government attempts to practice medicine: Doctors respond to government coercion instead of patient cues, and patients die prematurely. Even if the public option is eliminated from the bill, these onerous rationing provisions will remain intact.

For instance, the Reid bill (in sections 3403 and 2021) explicitly empowers Medicare to deny treatment based on cost. An Independent Medicare Advisory Board created by the bill—composed of permanent, unelected and, therefore, unaccountable members—will greatly expand the rationing practices that already occur in the program. Medicare, for example, has limited cancer patients' access to Epogen, a costly but vital drug that stimulates red blood cell production. It has limited the use of virtual, and safer, colonoscopies due to cost concerns. And Medicare refuses medical claims at twice the rate of the largest private insurers.

Section 6301 of the Reid bill creates new comparative effectiveness research (CER) programs. CER panels have been used as rationing commissions in other countries such as the U.K., where 15,000 cancer patients die prematurely every year according to the National Cancer Intelligence Network. CER panels here could effectively dictate coverage options and ration care for plans that participate in the state insurance exchanges created by the bill.

Additionally, the Reid bill depends on the recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force in no fewer than 14 places. This task force was responsible for advising women under 50 to not undergo annual mammograms. The administration claims the task force recommendations do not carry the force of law, but the Reid bill itself contradicts them in section 2713. The bill explicitly states, on page 17, that health insurance plans "shall provide coverage for" services approved by the task force. This chilling provision represents the government stepping between doctors and patients. When the government asserts the power to provide care, it also asserts the power to deny care.

If the bill expands Medicaid eligibility to 133% of the poverty level, that too will lead to rationing. Because Washington bureaucrats have created a system that underpays doctors, 40% of doctors already restrict access to Medicaid patients, and therefore ration care.

Medicaid demonstrates, tragically in some cases, that access to a government program does not guarantee access to health care. In Maryland, 17,000 Medicaid patients are currently on a waiting list for medical services, and as many as 250 may have died while awaiting care, according to state auditors. Kansas, the home state of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, faces a Medicaid backlog of more than 15,000 applicants.

Other unintended consequences of the Reid bill could wreak havoc on patients' lives. What happens, for instance, when savvy consumers commanded to buy insurance realize the penalty is the de facto premium? It won't take long for younger, healthier Americans to realize it's cheaper to pay a $750 tax for coverage instead of, say, $5,000 in annual premiums when coverage can't be denied if you get sick.

OMB Budget Director Peter Orzsag's belief that mandatory health insurance will become a "cultural norm" is bureaucratic naivete that will produce skyrocketing premiums and reduced care for everyone. My state's own insurance commissioner, a Democrat, recently confirmed this concern to me in a letter noting that "the result will be higher insurance rates due to a higher percentage of insured being higher risk/expense individuals."

But the most fundamental flaw of the Reid bill is best captured by the story of one my patients I'll call Sheila. When Sheila came to me at the age of 33 with a lump in her breast, traditional tests like a mammogram under the standard of care indicated she had a cyst and nothing more. Because I knew her medical history, I wasn't convinced. I aspirated the cyst and discovered she had a highly malignant form of breast cancer. Sheila fought a heroic battle against breast cancer and enjoyed 12 good years with her family before succumbing to the disease.

If I had been practicing under the Reid bill, the government would have likely told me I couldn't have done the test that discovered Sheila's cancer because it wasn't approved under CER. Under the Reid bill, Sheila may have lived another year instead of 12, and her daughters would have missed a decade with their mom.

The bottom line is that under the Reid bill the majority of America's patients might be fine. But some will be like Sheila—patients whose lives hang in the balance and require the care of a doctor who understands the science and art of medicine, and can make decisions without government interference.

The American people are opposing this bill in greater numbers every day because the facts of the bill—not any tactic—are cause for serious concern.

Dr. Coburn, a physician, is a Republican senator from Oklahoma.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 12:15
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Mi?rcoles, 16 de diciembre de 2009
Less Health Care for More Money
Posted 12/16/2009 ET
Updated 12/16/2009 ET

The New York Times' Nicholas Kristof recently wrote a column about John Brodniak of Oregon, who developed a cavernous hemangioma, causing him great pain as blood leaks into his brain.

According to Kristof, Brodniak can't get medical help because we don't have universal health care. Senators who vote against ObamaCare, Kristof said, are morally equivalent to someone who would walk past a man "writhing in pain on the sidewalk."

In another article in the Times, William Yardley wrote about Melvin Tsosies -- also of Oregon -- who ended up with $200,000 in medical bills after having a heart attack.

As of March 2008, Yardley reported, Tsosies was waiting to find out if he would win the Oregon lottery for health insurance. But with 600,000 uninsured state residents and a "universal" health care program with only enough money to pay for about 24,000 of them, Tsosies is more likely to win a Powerball lottery.

How can this be happening? Oregon already has "universal health care"! (Probably just a coincidence, but isn't Oregon also the only state with physician-assisted suicide?)

Once again forgetting about the existence of the Internet, the Times neglects to mention its own erstwhile enthusiasm for Oregon's universal health care plan, introduced back in 1990.

Back then, the Times published an editorial titled "Oregon's Brave Medical Experiment," hailing this technocratic monstrosity as an example of "hardheaded compassion" designed to make "health coverage available to many more families."

Ron Wyden -- then a congressman from Oregon, now a U.S. senator at the forefront of pushing "universal health care" onto the nation -- said: "This is a strong dramatic step toward universal access of health care." He predicted, "[T]his is going to be copied everywhere."

No wonder Wyden is such an ardent proponent of national health care -- it will force states that didn't adopt these idiotic universal health care schemes to bail out the ones that did.

Liberals cite medical horror stories from the very states they once cheered for enacting universal health care in order to argue for a national health care plan that will wreck the entire nation's medical care the same way liberal states already wrecked their own medical care.

Only Democrats could propose fixing one Bernie Madoff-style scam with an even bigger Bernie Madoff-style scam.

Maybe when national universal health care fails, we'll be able to go international. Then interplanetary -- then interstellar! Why should I pay for my gall bladder surgery when some Venusian could?

Eighty-five percent of Americans are happy with their health care, but Democrats have a plan to make it worse for more money. As a bonus, national health care will add trillions of dollars to the national debt, and your insurance rates will skyrocket.

Democrats are being utterly disingenuous to say that you won't have to leave your current plan under national health care. Maybe, but it won't be your choice: Your employer will be making that decision for you.

Recall that one of the big selling points of national health care is that it is supposed to reduce costs for American businesses. The only way national health care will make American companies "more competitive" is if they dump their employees into the public health care system.

It's so weird! We expected X number of people to show up for health care and instead 75X showed up! Yeah, just like every other government program in the history of the world.

Ten years from now, we'll be talking about cost overruns of $6 trillion -- but by then, national health care will be an untouchable "third rail" of politics, just as Medicare is now. (Ironically, injuries sustained from actually touching the third rail won't be covered under ObamaCare.)

As with Medicare, voters will be terrified to go back to even the wisp of a free market system we have now, afraid that they'll never be able to get health insurance without the government providing it. Having been dragged unwillingly into the government plan, how will a 58-year-old be able to leave the public system and get insurance on the free market?

Speaking of which, how many of you are planning to retire on your Social Security benefits? Just you there, with the shopping cart full of cans?

The only solution will be for the government to keep running up gigantic deficits and raising taxes on "the rich," which, in turn, will stifle job creation and economic growth in a phenomenon known to economists as "the Carter years."

In addition to forcing Americans into dealing with surly government workers in order to obtain medical care, sooner or later, there's no free lunch. (And if government X-rays are anything like the photos the DMV takes for your license, count me out. I don't want my lungs looking like they had a bad hair day.)

Even if national health care puts the screws to doctors and pharmaceutical companies by reimbursing them below cost -- so all future doctors will soon resemble DMV employees and no new drugs will ever be invented -- the government is still going to have to cut services and pay for the system with massive tax hikes.

Which is exactly what happened with Oregon's "Brave Medical Experiment."

Ann Coulter is Legal Affairs Correspondent for HUMAN EVENTS and author of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors," "Slander," ""How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)," "Godless," "If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans" and most recently, Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and their Assault on America.



Publicado por Corazon7 @ 20:03
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Obama eligibility lawyers represent Chrysler dealers

By Linda Bentley | December 16, 2009
| More

WASHINGTON – James Anderer, who owned a Chrysler dealership in Lindenhurst, N.Y. was a speaker at the 9/12 March on Washington.

Anderer considers himself a patriotic citizen who believes in the Constitution, freedom of speech, the right to bear arms and told the sea of people in attendance, “I believe in the Fifth Amendment; that we the people will not be deprived of life liberty or property without due process. What happens when due process becomes corrupted? That’s what happened to me. I stand before you an angry man … I’m living proof of a government out of control. My business was seized – stolen from me – under the watchful eye and complete approval of President Barack Obama.”

Anderer’s dealership was taken away as the result of the federal government’s intervention and takeover of Chrysler with the use of TARP funds.

After someone 
referred Anderer to New Jersey Attorney Leo Donofrio’s “Natural Born Citizen” blog, where Donofrio has presented a phenomenal amount of legal research and analysis on the question of Obama’s constitutional eligibility as a natural born citizen to hold the office of president, he contacted Donofrio.

Donofrio reviewed the entire Chrysler bankruptcy file and said he found strong grounds to appeal. After lengthy discussions with other dealers and a various attorneys, Anderer indicated everyone was impressed with the concepts raised. Donofrio suggested bringing in an experienced litigator and has since teamed up with Washington Attorney Stephen Pidgeon, who filed an eligibility lawsuit last year against Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed on behalf of James Broe and 11 other defendants.

Donofrio and Pidgeon formed a law office and have been retained to file the Chrysler bankruptcy appeal as well as a quo warranto (under what authority) action on behalf of lead plaintiff Anderer and multiple car dealers.

One of the issues to be brought up under quo warranto is the use of TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) funds for bailing out the auto industry. TARP, passed by Congress in 2008, allows the U.S. Department of the Treasury to purchase or insure up to $700 billion of troubled assets, defined as mortgages and any securities, obligations, or other instruments that are based on or related to such mortgages and any other financial instrument.”
Donofrio said they expect to file the bankruptcy appeal this week and the quo warranto action the following week.

On Monday, Attorney Orly Taitz sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder demanding that he institute quo warranto proceedings against Barack Hussein Obama in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

The District of Columbia Code provides that a third party may institute a quo warranto action if the U.S. Attorney General fails to respond or initiate action within three months of a request being made.

Taitz sent a letter to Holder on March 1, 2009, requesting he initiate quo warranto proceedings against Obama, claiming evidence provided by a number of licensed private investigators has revealed Obama has used as many as 39 different Social Security numbers, with the one he has used most often assigned to an individual born in 1890 in the state of Connecticut, where Taitz says Obama has never resided.


Tags: Obama eligibility

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 18:04
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar


Tea Partiers rally: 'Kill the bill'


The Politico 44 / Click Story Widget Requires Adobe Flash Player.

Clad in red and armed with Grinch dolls, grim reaper scarecrows, posters and their loud voices, several thousand tea party protesters rallied near the Capitol Tuesday to send a single message: "Kill the Bill."

The crowd's message and energy was only intensified by the encouragement of some of the nation’s best known conservatives, including Sens. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), Richard Burr (R-N.C.), Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-Texas) and radio personality Laura Ingraham.

"I've never seen so many attractive domestic terrorists in all my life!" Armey yelled at the adoring crowd. "It's so nice to be here again together, isn't it?...You mean you actually came to town on your own terms? To say what you wanted to say? And to be heard? Sounds pretty much like terrorists to me."

The crowd was most excited, however, by an unscheduled appearance by Bachmann, who organized the most recent major tea party protest, a "House Call" on Washington Nov. 6.

"You came before, you came again, I guess they must be deaf. They can't hear you!" Bachmann screamed over the cheers. "We're not leaving until you understand that no means no. What part of no don't you people understand?"

The congresswoman, who has emerged as a conservative icon, led the crowd in chants of "Kill the Bill," before suggesting President Barack Obama, Senate Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on their lack of knowledge of the U.S. Constitution.

"Maybe they need a course in remedial reading to find out what's in our Constitution," Bachmann said, suggesting the tea party movement could teach them.

As the rally broke, the protesters were encouraged to visit their senators’ offices, even though Senate Democrats were caucusing with the president at the White House. And, in short order, there were lines to get into several Senate office buildings.

Among the protesters’ signs: "HOCUS POTUS," "Sarah, Help!" and "Obamacare: Dial1-800-You-Dead."

"To paraphrase Franklin Delano Roosevelt," Burr said over boos FDR's name evoked, "The only thing we have to fear is... Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid."


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 11:31
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar


A New Low

White House threatens Nebraska senator with closure of a crucial Air Force base in an attempt to obtain his critical vote on health care reform

First, they gave Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu $300 million in exchange for her vote in favor of Harry Reid's health care reform bill. That was bad enough. Now, the White House is playing games with our national security and using 10,000 military families as political pawns in an attempt to garner the vote of Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson, who has had very public misgivings about voting for the legislation because it holds provisions which would allocate federal funds to fund abortions.

According to the 
Weekly Standard, the White House is threatening to place Nebraska's Offutt Air Force Base, home to U.S. Strategic Command and 10,000 military families, on the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission List. From Michael Goldfarb's piece:

Offutt Air Force Base employs some 10,000 military and federal employees in Southeastern Nebraska. As our source put it, this is a "naked effort by Rahm Emanuel and the White House to extort Nelson's vote." They are "threatening to close a base vital to national security for what?" asked the Senate staffer.

Indeed, Offutt is the headquarters for US Strategic Command, the successor to Strategic Air Command, and not by accident. STRATCOM was located in the middle of the country for strategic reasons. Its closure would be a massive blow to the economy of the state of Nebraska, but it would also be another example of this administration playing politics with our national security.

This isn't the same as playing to the economic dire straits in Landrieu's Louisiana. This has gone from bribery to blackmail. It is outright dangerous, and downright treasonous. Already today, the White House provided aid and comfort to our enemies by revealing the plan to close the terrorist detainee facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba and house nearly 100 foreign terrorists in northwestern Illinois for the sake of political expediency, now they're playing games with American national security for the sake of forcing the passage of health care reform.

What gets lost in all of the left-right shuffle and the ongoing debate on the cable news networks is that the Democrats have the seats to pass anything they want. That they have not, that they have to resort to bribery and blackmail and--in the case of 
Sen. Joe Lieberman and his wife--the politics of personal destruction shows that this legislation is poisonous. And, as the pressure mounts, we're seeing that this administration is all too happy to administer the dose.



Publicado por Corazon7 @ 11:20
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

To ensure email delivery directly to your inbox, please add
[email protected] to your address book now.

If you're having trouble viewing this message, please
view it online.

The Morning Bell

WEDNESDAY, DEC. 16, 2009


Howard Dean Is Right, This Is Not Health Care Reform

President Barack Obama yesterday hosted yet another health care pep rally to shore up liberal support for his health care bill. Obama’s “rally” followed Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) latest capitulation to Sen. Joe Lieberman’s (I-CT) health care demands, whereby Reid removed a Medicare expansion that Lieberman had initially supported. From the Roosevelt Room, Obama claimed Democrats were “on the precipice of an achievement that’s eluded congresses and presidents for generations.” But hours later, former Governor and Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean told Vermont National Public Radio:

Recent Entries

Guest Blogger: Rep. Capito Says We Need to Put a Personal Face on Copenhagen
Live From Copenhagen: The Full Story Behind the G-77 Walk-Out
Gitmo 2.0: Obama Skips a Step
Obamacare Is The Public Option
The Three Senators Who Could Save You From Government-Run Health Care

This is essentially the collapse of health care reform in the United States Senate. And, honestly, the best thing to do right now is kill the Senate bill and go back to the House … You have the vast majority of Americans want the choices, they want real choices. They don’t have them in this bill. This is not health care reform and it’s not close to health care reform.

Later on MSNBC’s Countdown, Dean further responded to President Obama’s claims that “You talk to every healthcare economist out there and they will tell you that whatever ideas are — whatever ideas exist in terms of bending the cost curve and starting to reduce costs for families, businesses and government, those elements are in this bill.” Dean told guest host Lawrence O’Donnell: “There is no cost control of any substance. … You’re going to be forced to buy health insurance from a company that is going to take on average of 27% of your money … and there is no choice about that. If you don’t buy that insurance you are going to get a fine.”

The President’s own Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMMS) agrees with Dean and contradicts Obama. CMMS
found that the Senate bill, instead of bending the cost curve down, actually drives health care costs up, adding $234 billion to national health expenditures. But the President’s fantastic claims did not end there. Obama then asserted: “And in terms of deficits — because we keep on hearing these ads about how this is going to add to the deficit — the CBO has said that this is a deficit reduction, not a deficit increase. So all the scare tactics out there, all the ads that are out there are simply inaccurate.”

But the President leaves out this
all important caveat in the CBO’s report: “In the subsequent decade, the collective effect of its provisions would probably be small reductions in federal budget deficits if all of the provisions continued to be fully implemented.” But nobody believes that all of the provisions in the bill will be fully implemented. For example, the Senate bill includes a 20% cut in the payments Medicare sets for doctors. Nobody believes these cuts will be allowed to happen. By changing just that provision, Obamacare ends up adding $196 billion to the deficit in the first 10 years and $765 billion in the second decade.

The American people already do not trust President Obama’s health care claims. Just today, the Washington Post released a poll finding that 51% of adults oppose Obamacare, with 40% in strong opposition. Meanwhile only 44% support the bill with only 25% feeling strongly about it. Digging deeper we find that 66% of Americans believe Obamacare will increase the federal budget deficit, 53% believe it will cause their own health care to cost more, 55% believe it will increase the country’s health care costs overall, and 50% believe it will not improve their quality of care. These findings echo an earlier CNN poll which found that 61% of Americans opposed Obamacare, with 79% believing it would add to the deficit and 85% believing it would raise their taxes.

It has become obvious to any American following the debate that President Obama has adopted a
get-a-deal-at-any-cost mentality that puts a higher priority on the political victory of passing any bill over the policy substance of what is actually in the bill and how it would effect the American people. As Dean told O’Donnell last night: “You can’t vote for a bill like this in good conscience. … It costs too much money. It isn’t health care reform. It isn’t even insurance reform.”


Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) told Politico yesterday, “I’m not on the bill. I have spoken with the president and he knows they are not wrapped up today. I think everybody understands they are not wrapped up today and that impression will not be given.”
Iran announced today that it has successfully test fired an upgraded version of its Sajjil-2 two-stage missile which has a range of about 1,200 miles and can reach Israel and southeastern Europe.
The Obama administration has agreed to let Citigroup and other companies large banks forgo billions of dollars in tax payments in exchange for paying back taxpayer bailout money.
Despite the current recession and record deficits, taxpayer funded travel by Congress has jumped 70% from 2005.
Liberals in Congress introduced legislation that would provide amnesty to all illegal immigrants in the United States as of December 15th, 2009, yesterday.


comment print forward


There is a lot to understand about Congress raising the debt limit. What does it mean? What is the current debt limit? What will it be raised to?
Our new video makes it simple.

Know anyone who shares your conservative values and principles and may want to receive The Heritage Foundation newsletters?  Please refer them to Heritage today!
Facebook Twitter YouTube

The Heritage Foundation - 214 Massachusetts Ave. NE, Washington, DC 20002
Call us at 202-546-4400


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:49
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Lieberman goes over to the Dark Side


by John Charlton

Lieberman has chosen his tyranny and its tyrant-king.

Lieberman has chosen his tyranny and its tyrant-king.

(Dec. 16, 2009) — Senator Joe Lieberman was always known for his liberal politics.  He was, after all, Al Gore’s running mate in their failed 2000 bid for the White House.  He kept silent then, when Gore attempted to steal the election through litigation.

Though in recent years there was hope that he’d move more the center, after the Democratic Party of CT ostracized him, and he broke with the DNC over his desire to have tougher standards against pornography in video games.

Recently his hold-out against certain provisions of the Health Care Bill made him a national hero.

But all that has changed recently.  Lieberman has now signed on to the bill, after the provision for expanding coverage was eliminated.

And his decision to join with the regime of tyranny, election fraud, and dictatorship has taken on a new dark side today, when, according to ParcBench Blog members of his staff threatened peaceful, well dressed voters with arrest for the “crime” of waiting in his Senatorial office to speak with him.  Parcbench writes:

All across the country, Senators refuse our calls, ignore our emails, throw away our letters and refuse to meet with us.. Today — in the Senate office building — Senate staff literally threatened to arrest three members of the Tea Party Patriots, including two National Coordinators. When one of the most “moderate” Senators threatens to have well groomed, quiet, cooperative tea partiers arrested simply for sitting in the office waiting to meet with a Senator, it is clear that representative democracy is on its death bed in this country.

As RightWing News reports, Mark Meckler, a teaparty organizer was one of those threatened.  (Their report republishes the video of ParcBench on the incident, and also carries numerous photos of the Tea Party protest, yesterday.)

Rush Limbaugh spoke on Obama’s strategy to play ball with Lieberman and how it worked.

Now, I also think that this Medicare expansion was a ruse from the start.  In negotiations, if you’ve ever been in any involving, say, your compensation or representing a company or something, you always, in preparing for negotiations, you put in what are called throwaways, things that you demand be included in the deal that you secretly will throw away or give away in order to get a final deal, and both sides do this.  Except our side.  We don’t do anything but accept the premise and needle with it around the margins.

And I think that this Medicare expansion was a throwaway from the get-go.  I don’t think they were ever serious about this, and I’ll tell you why.  Simple logic.  There’s no way in a bill that cuts Medicare $500 billion you can expand it to cover people down to 55 years of age.  The two just don’t go together.  So what they do, they raise the Medicare expansion as an issue at the last minute when Dingy Harry is having problems, and then they kill it a few days later on the desires of Lieberman.

This gives them cover to get Lieberman on their side, and then others say it’s now okay to vote for this, since they got rid of the Medicare expansion.  As I say I think it was a ruse from day one, it was a strategy.  You put out a false option, you have a Senator object to it, a Senator who is thought to be a moderate — Lieberman — with an independent party label instead of Democrat, and he says, “I can’t vote for this.  Why, there’s no way I’m going to vote for that.  I’m not going to vote for this with the public option in it, either.”  So you give in, you give in to Lieberman, you give in to the so-called moderates, you claim there’s no Medicare expansion and no public option and you get your 60 votes, and you look like you’re compromising, when you’re not compromising at all because you never intended the Medicare expansion to be real in the first place.  It was just designed to get Lieberman in there and it looks like it works.

The Post & Email predicted such a maneuver in November, but we regret having been prescient on this score.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 9:23
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Exposing more Lies and Deceit by Jim Mc

The Bear on Dec 16 2009 at 9:28 am | Filed under: Culture of CorruptionHealth Care

Dear Sen. Lieberman,

Maybe I’m wrong, but your “courageous”, and “independent” stand on the healthcare Bill, doesn’t look like either from here. First of all, with or without a “public option” or the like; we will still have a 2000 page monstrosity, which will crush what’s good in healthcare, in favor of what’s bad. What’s “‘bad’ will include inflicting 118 new bureaucratic entities on medical care. Don’t know about you, but this doesn’t look like much of a “reform” prescription from here.

So now poor ol’ Harry will need to pass his 2000 page Bill without the “public option”, short-cut to “Stalinized” healthcare. Hurray!!! Joey L and the Nelson boys have saved the day. Right? Wrong.

It’s all a con job. Reid’s Bill may leave the Senate with no “public option” or equal, but then it goes to a conference with the Bolshevik House. After they reconcile their differences, it comes back to the Senate for a final vote. And guess what? Suddenly the “public option” is right back in the Bill.

But now you see, Dirty Harry only needs 50 votes to pass it. So your, the Nelson boys, and maybe Mary and Blanche too, can stamp your feet and vote against it. But so what? It passes easily, over your “objections”, and the real objections of 60% of the American people.

So we’ll find out that you guys were just running a con. You have a messiah and a Party to serve, and we can just “pound salt” as they say.

What a civics lesson! It’s just great how our Government works for you guys,,,,, at least for a while. That is till enough people realize this really isn’t “our Government” any more. It’s yours and those thugs from Chicago.

Bet you’re real proud of this one.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 9:07
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Martes, 15 de diciembre de 2009

America gives Obama an F and he gives himself a B+ on Presidency

by DefendUSx December 14, 2009 15:50

Obama has the lowest approval rating of any President at this stage. 

37% of Whites approve and 90% of Blacks making his average at around 46% approval.

Yet, in spite of these numbers .. he gives himself a B+

Is Obama basing his grade on a different agenda than what American's want or stand for?

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 11:45
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar



Mortgage, Unemployment Crisis

Who is to blame?


The lying, SOB, usurper, Barack Obama is meeting with bankers today. Obama is attempting, once again, to coerce banks to lend money to people who cannot afford the loans. Consistent with his trend of lying, he blames the bankers for the mortgage and unemployment crisis.

However, facts and reality are not on Obama’s side.

The Citizen Wells has provided numerous articles on ACORN corruption, ACORN’s involvement in pressuring banks to make risky loans and Barack Obama’s long time ties to ACORN.

An article dated September 15, 2009 is loaded with facts that indict Obama and ACORN.

October 8, 2008 – Straight from the horse’s mouth

“ACORN Report
The ACORN Report is published by ACORN’s National Office and contains up-to-date information. We have ACORN Reports indexed by date and topic available.”

“City Limits February 1999
During its 15 years in New York City, ACORN has helped squatters claim derelict city-owned property, forced bankers to invest in low-income communities, and organized a war against the city’s workfare program.

It’s also developed a reputation for no-holds-barred tactics—getting results through adversarial campaigns against bankers, politicians and bureaucrats using confrontation and concession rather than consensus. ACORN, unlike most social service non-profits, scorns charity. Their goal is to help poor people seize power.”

This comes straight from the Acorn national office.
Note the following:

“Their goal is to help poor people seize power”

October 13, 2008 – Acorn contribution to mortgage crisis

“FOR years, ACORN had combined manipulation of the CRA with intimidation-protest tactics to force banks to lower credit standards. Its crusade, with help from Democrats in Congress, to push these high-risk “subprime” loans on banks is at the root of today’s economic meltdown.””

““Instead, Democrats like Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Reps. Kennedy and Waters allied with the Clinton administration to broaden the acceptability of risky subprime loans throughout the financial system, thus precipitating our current crisis.

ACORN had come to Congress not only to protect the CRA from GOP reforms but also to expand the reach of quota-based lending to Fannie, Freddie and beyond. By steamrolling the GOP that March, it had crushed the last potential barrier to “change.”””

““ACORN’s alliance with the Democratic Party is at the root of the current financial meltdown. And Barack Obama has stayed true to ACORN’s ways.””

The Truth about Obama and ACORN

September 28, 2009 – Bank of America and other banks ignored warnings

“Do any Catholics work for Bank of America?
From Catholic News Service October 16, 2008.

“Bank of America takes recent allegations made against Acorn and Acorn Housing Corporation employees very seriously,”
What planet has Bank of America been on the past year?

Is this indicative of the power of the mainstream media?

Was Bank of America controlled by the Democrats or Obama camp?

No wonder Bank of America had financial problems.”

Bank of America ignored warnings

Fox News reports on Obama meeting with bankers, December 14, 2009

“White House Tells Bankers to Boost Lending After Bailout Successes”

“President Obama is calling on the financial industry to help dig the economy out of the pit the White House says it helped create, as the president and bank executives headed into a potentially tense meeting Monday morning.”

“The president set the tone for the meeting in an interview broadcast the night before in which he called Wall Street bankers “fat cats” whom he has little obligation to help. In response, the bankers plan to tell the president to stop oversimplifying their concerns.”

“”What the president’s going to say to the bankers is, you guys were part of the problem, you helped create an economic crisis here that cost 7 million Americans their jobs and now you have to be part of the solution,” White House senior adviser David Axelrod said on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

Axelrod said the industry has to “accelerate lending to credible small businesses” and suggested Congress would take harsh action against the sector if it does not.

“People are not going to tolerate a situation where the bankers have a party, they pick up the tab and then the bankers pay themselves huge bonuses and they’re not lending,” Axelrod said, adding that bankers should be awarded with long-term stock as opposed to up-front cash bonuses.

The White House also wants Wall Street to fall in line with Obama and back a proposal for a consumer protection agency that cleared the House last week.”

“”He can say what he wants, but we’re not going to go back to the kind of lending that put us in this mess,” said a person who is helping prepare executives for the meeting but spoke anonymously because of lack of authorization to discuss the plans.”

Read more:


I, for one, am fed up with the lies and manipulation coming from the lying SOB Obama and cronies such as David Axelrod. I am asking you to spread this information far and wide. The American people must know the truth.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:21
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

The Audacity Of Chutzpah


In Hebrew, "chutzpah" is used indignantly, to describe someone who has over-stepped the boundaries of accepted behavior with no shame.   There's an old anecdote that is used to illustrate chutzpah -- it's about a man who murdered his father and mother, and then throws himself on the mercy of the court on the grounds that he’s an orphan -- that's chutzpah.

Well, Obama displayed chutzpah, and in spades, Sunday night during his "60 Minutes" interview by Steve Kroft when he said, "I did not run for office to help a bunch of fat cat bankers," blaming them for the financial crisis, saying  "You guys caused the problem" -- video

Obama was simply applying Alinsky's rule # 12, "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."  This tactic attempts to cut off the support network (the public) and isolate the target (bankers) from sympathy.  Obama was going after people and not the institutions -- people hurt faster than institutions.

But behind that attack was chutzpah, because Obama knows that he, Barack Hussein Obama, is singularly responsible for much of the financial crisis.

In a 1995 case known as Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank, Obama and his fellow attorneys charged that Citibank was making too few loans to black applicants and won the case.  As one commentator noted in May 2008, legal "successes" such as this were responsible for the sub-prime mortgage crisis of 2007 AND 2008.  That is, banks were not loaning to minorities whose credit was poor.  When the law forced them to lend money anyway, the inevitable collapse occurred."
Obama played a large part in the lawsuit that started the government on a course of forcing lenders to give more loans to those who had poor credit.  Lending companies were forced to come up with imaginative ways of fulfilling the quota that was required.  Sub-prime lending was born as a result.  Obama's pal and his campaign's finance chair, Penny Pritzker, was an early promoter of what would become known as "predatory lending" -- and now, according to Obama, its the bankers' fault -- that's chutzpah.

The mortgage crises was forecast by many who were able to look beyond the quotas.  
This August, 2008, New York Times article(.pdf) clearly forecast the mortgage meltdown:

In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation -- protected by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd -- is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders, ... under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration.

"Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 19902 by reducing down payment requirements," said Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer.  "Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market."

Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy.  But at least one study indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went to black borrowers, compared to 5 percent of loans in the conventional loan market.

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times.  But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry of the 1980s.

"From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us," said Peter Wallison, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.  "If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out, the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry."


And at the same time as Obama berates bankers, he wants them to make more bad loans -- that's chutzpah.


This "Audacity of Chutzpah" is classic Obama.  He creates a disaster, and then blames somebody, or something else for the fallout.  He's been doing it his entire political career.  Since he's occupied the Oval Office, he's been blaming George Bush for his own failures, caused by his own lack of judgment.  That's not the behavior of a man.


Obama is not a leader.  He doesn't have a clue about leadership or governing, so he falls back on the only thing he knows -- Alinsky's community organizing techniques -- bringing folks to the "realization" that they are miserable;  blaming their misery on the greedy bankers; demanding the bankers cave to their demands; and to make such an almighty stink that the dastardly bankers will see imminent "self-interest" in granting whatever it is that will cause the harassment to cease.




Tags: OBAMA Chutzpah

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 9:58
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Lunes, 14 de diciembre de 2009

Posted on | December 14, 2009 | 6 Comments

Law Offices of Dr. Orly Taitz ESQ

29839 Santa Margarita parkway ste 100

Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688

Phone 949-683-5411 Fax 949-766-7603


Via Certified Mail

Attn Mr. Eric Holder

United States Attorney General

950 Pennsylvania Ave NW

Washington DC 20530-0001 USA

Dear Mr. Holder,

On March 1st on behalf of my clients I have submitted to you a request to file Quo Warranto against Mr. Barack Hussein Obama. The request was filed due to following troubling facts:

  1. According to a number of licensed investigators National Databases show Mr. Obama using as many as 39 different Social Security numbers, which included the numbers of deceased individuals and numbers never assigned.
  2. Number 042-68-4425 that Mr. Obama used for most of his life and is currently using while residing in the White House, is a number assigned to an individual born in 1890, who resided in the state of Connecticut and this Social Security number was issued in the state of Connecticut where Mr. Obama never resided.
  3. One of the leading forensic experts in the country Ms. Sandra Ramsey Lines has prepared an affidavit, stating that Mr. Obama’s short version Certification of Life Birth cannot be treated as genuine without seeing the original on file in the Health Department in HI.
  4. The state of Hawaii since 1911 had in its statutes a provision allowing Foreign born children of Hawaiian residents of get Hawaiian Birth Certificates(currently statute 338-17) and currently statute 338-5 allows one to get a birth certificate based on a statement of one relative only without any corroborating evidence from the hospital.
  5.  In spite of over 100 law suits filed around the country and 12 Citizen Grand Jury indictments Mr. Obama refused to sign a consent to unseal his original birth certificate currently sealed in the Health Department of the state of  Hawaii and all the other vital records.
  6. Ms. Chiuomi Fukino, Director of the Health Department of the State of Hawaii has provided a statement that there is a document on file in Hawaii, however she refused to provide any information, as to what document is on file: whether it is a Birth Certificate given to a foreign born child of Hawaiian resident, whether it is an amended Birth certificate, obtained when Mr. Obama was adopted by his Indonesian stepfather. She refused to answer any questions as to whether his birth certificate was obtained based on a proper hospital birth certificate or based on a statement of one of his relatives only, which needs to be corroborated.   
  7. Regardless of place of birth of Mr. Obama, since birth and until now Mr. Obama had a split allegiance. He had British citizenship at birth, Kenyan since age 2 and Indonesian since age 5. Allegiance to other Nations goes as a clear violation of the Natural citizenship clause of the article 2 section 1 of the Constitution.
  8. Under the Freedom of Information act 5 US 552, since no response was provided to numerous certified mail letters received by your office nine months ago, I demand a written response or Administrative hearing on the matter within 30 days. On behalf of my clients I demand an answer, as to when the Quo Warranto against Mr. Obama will be filed by the US Attorney General office, or in the alternative if the Attorney General office refuses to file Quo Warranto, I demand an ex-relator status for my clients to proceed with the Quo Warranto action against Mr. Obama in the DC court or the Supreme Court of the United States.


Dr. Orly Taitz ESQ

Counsel to the plaintiffs-ex relators.   


Quo Warranto request, Dossiers


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 16:49
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

To ensure email delivery directly to your inbox, please add
[email protected] to your address book now.

If you're having trouble viewing this message, please
view it online.

The Morning Bell

MONDAY, DEC. 14, 2009


The Battle Over Obamacare’s Obituary Has Begun

Last month, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) rammed through her version of Obamacare almost a week before the agency in charge of running Medicare and Medicaid, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMMS), could issue its non-partisan and independent analysis of the legislation. And for supporters of the President’s plan, it’s a good thing she did. The CMMS report eviscerated almost every single promise the President has made about his health care plan.

Recent Entries

Guest Blogger: Rep. Lamborn on Copenhagen’s Threat to US Sovereignty
House Leaders Vote to End D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program
The Cost of Our National Debt in Pictures
Congress Stuffs Its Own Stocking
Video: Barney Frank’s Permanent TARP

According to that report, Obamacare: 1) raises health care costs; 2) causes millions of Americans to lose their current health care coverage; 3) forces millions of Americans to pay fines and still receive no health insurance; 4) causes millions of seniors to lose their Medicare Advantage plans; 4) places millions of Americans on welfare; 5) jeopardizes Medicare access for all seniors; 6) worsens health care access for the poor.

This past Friday, CMMS issued
another report, this time on Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) version of Obamacare and the verdict was in many ways worse: 1) health care costs would rise by $234 billion; 2) 17 million Americans would be forced out of their existing health insurance; 3) 19 million Americans would pay $29 billion in taxes/fines and receive no health care in return; 4) 33% of all Medicare Advantage customers would lose their health care plan; 5) 18 million Americans would be put on welfare; 6) the $493 billion in Medicare cuts would force 20% of Medicare providers to become unprofitable thus jeopardizing access to care for all seniors; and 7) the explosion in Medicaid recipients would exacerbate existing health care access problems for the poor.

The week before the Senate began debating Obamacare,
CNN conducted a poll and found that Americans narrowly opposed the plan, 49% to 46%. Now that the Senate has been debating the plan for two weeks, and CMMS has issued two devastating reports on what the impacts of Obamacare would be, opposition to the plan has skyrocketed. This Friday’s latest CNN poll showed 61% of Americans now oppose Obamacare compared to just 36% who support it.

Liberals are is beginning to see the writing on the wall. They know that if Obamacare fails to pass the Senate this year, the battle will be on to explain its failure. For them, the story can not be that President Barack Obama tried to push too ambitious a government health plan. It must be that
the President and Congress did not go far enough to the left to satisfy the supposedly government-hungry American people. Hence the left is now attacking the White House and Reid over the public option, the employer mandate, drug reimportation, abortion, and health insurance spending caps.

Obamacare is not dead yet. Speaker Pelosi has signaled that she will quickly pass
anything that comes out of the Senate, so Reid could still cave on almost everything and get a terrible bill from everybody’s prospective on the President’s desk by New Years. But Senators thinking about moving quickly should remember that the public strongly opposes this bill, and that opposition is only rising.


The Senate passed the $450 billion minibus spending bill Sunday, approving 12% spending increases for many domestic programs when the deficit is already $1.4 trillion and growing.
The minibus did not save the successful D.C. Opportunity Scholarship program, closing off opportunity for future students and subjecting existing participants to onerous requirements and site visits.
Before his meeting with top banking CEOs today, President Barack Obama called Wall Street bankers “fat cats” on 60 Minutes and is demanding bankers tell their loan officers they will not be rewarded for turning down loans.
Copenhagen negotiations are far apart as poorer countries are demanding billions in financial payments before they agree to reduce emissions.
Iran’s latest comments on their uranium enrichment intentions fall well short of what they agreed to with the Obama administration, French, Russian and International Atomic Energy Agency negotiators this October.


comment print forward



Rediscover the 10 core principles that define us as a nation and why they are so important for us to reclaim our future.
Click here to buy the book.

Know anyone who shares your conservative values and principles and may want to receive The Heritage Foundation newsletters?  Please refer them to Heritage today!
Facebook Twitter YouTube

The Heritage Foundation - 214 Massachusetts Ave. NE, Washington, DC 20002
Call us at 202-546-4400

Tags: Obamacare Socialism

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:31
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Domingo, 13 de diciembre de 2009
Viernes, 11 de diciembre de 2009
Thursday, December 10, 2009

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. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." ~~~George Washington
Answer to Question of the Day: IS it time for an actual Revolution??

Oh, I most definitely agree, that:

1) government has become soo far out of control, that the only reasonable solution is to nearly wipe it and start over...

2) however, an armed or similar disruptive conflict would only further deplete the finances and resources of America, again/more, i.e., really only hurt the American people, the Citizens, themselves, in the end, just like government "settlements" for its own court liabilities in constant screwups, high taxes in general, other financial wastes, and their general daily practices do already...

3) instead, a 'revolution' should take place now, by a majority of the adult American population, but done lawfully and peacefully, by doing it all on paper... "merely" on legal paper, under lawful authority, but massively done... everywhere, all at once.

Might sound audacious or crazy, but I believe it is maybe the only reasonable solution at the moment, actually, because most people are NOT ready to pick up weapons and have bloodshed yet (besides, that can be messy and somewhat unpredictable, with random collateral damages inflicted..), but MANY ARE ready to do something as relatively "peaceful" as "sue" the Federal Government, especially when every fact, common sense, law, truth, and etc. is on our side.

In fact, that's exactly what I propose, and have been rather quietly working on, in the background -- a fairly simple and easy to understand massaction/classaction, by any/all taxpayers/voters/citizens/landowners, with two or three simple adder forms filed "pro se" in any U.S. District Court across the country (representing their legal standing(s), their vote, and their say in agreement with We The People), wherever they may residing at currently, to just up and declare that all three branches of the current and recent federal government are in soooo many overwhelming *breaches of contract* (against the contractual guarantees of the Founding Documents, made between We The People and the new entity of self-representative government formed, i.e., the new Federal Government, to always form a more perfect Union, to guarantee Life, Liberty, and etc., especially to have proper management of our nation's finances and currency, to not routinely violate even our most basic due process rights, etc...), that the entire expressed purposes of the Founding Documents have been utterly neglected and mismanaged, therefore finally terminating the contract's terms of effect, and immediately (but only temporarily) ending the services of almost all federal officials and etc., as further detailed below.

To have a Paper Revolution. We The People simply DECLARE and notice, on paper, filed en masse, flooding the Fed's own courts, everywhere by the population's citizens, themselves, all stating that the current Federal Government is in such total catastrophic meltdown of all major tenets of the original contract and express/implied goals formed by the Founding Documents, in gross mismanagement thereof, in gross dereliction of duties thereof, in reckless abandonment thereof, etc., and We The People, therefore, now and hereby do declare and notice that the entirety of the current civilian Federal Government, and all powers, rights, officials, employees, finances, assets, and so forth, be immediately all deemed as under the sole authority of the 50 sovereign States, on a temporary basis, with exceptions of the regular federal military armed forces deployed, and such other "absolutely essential" services, which shall remain functioning in place and also under the temporary direction of the civil authority of the 50 sovereign States (maybe all done through the National Governors Association, see
http://www.nga.org), until such time as a new federal Congress, a new federal Supreme Court, and a new White House Administration, all sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution, and/but also under some sort of increased potential penalties for unconstitutional behavior, etc., are elected, installed, or otherwise put into place as the new replacements.

There would be notable exceptions, of course, to simply wiping out the entire Senate and House, like allowing 'immunity' points for each strictly pro-Constitution bill -- like the Parental Rights Amendment bill, the End The Fed bill, and etc., that a given particular Member had co-sponsored or officially supported, etc., and with enough "good guy" or "good gal" points, that particular Member of Congress gets to stay, instead of having their services immediately terminated...

Remember -- We The People have the express, written lawful -- and legally *superior* -- authority, contained right in the Founding Documents, themselves, to "alter or abolish" the government as we see fit to do, whenever we see fit to do it, as long as we do it in a reasonably peaceful manner, but even the authority to "throw off" bad government by any means necessary. Indeed, under the written language of the Founding Documents, it is actually our legal duty to do so...

Too bold? To simply DECLARE the current Federal Government "null and void" and to simply DECLARE that all civilian authority is now re-vested, but just temporarily, back with the STATES??

Too bold? To simply DECLARE that every Member of Congress who doesn't have enough "stay" points, gets immediately replaced by his or her last political election challenger, and together these 180-degree replacements, along with the Members who had enough "stay" points - and with any remaining rare exceptions decided by that corresponding State's Governor - to now and immediately constitute both houses of the brand new total federal Congress???

Too bold? To simply DECLARE, en masse, everywhere, that these jokers are soo obviously far out of whack, that they are all now FIRED and replaced by NEW MANAGEMENT, effective immediately???

Too bold? To simply declare and define the new re-Constitutionalized nature and appropriate staffings of our three branches of federal Government, and to literally call it forth into existence, by allowing a way for every adult American to agree in writing??

Actually, I think not. I think that a well-prepared transition of all federal power, back into a reasonable pre-defined reality, totally designed and implemented on a purely-peaceful legal paperwork basis, might well garner quick support from every Patriot circle across the entire country. It's fairly quick and easy, it's simple to understand, it's legal and peaceful, and it carries the commanding and legally-superior power for American Citizens to literally bring their country back into reasonable existence, pretty damn fast, and without bloodshed even contemplated or necessary.. Then again, when this thing takes off fast enough, it might scare the powers-that-be into shutting down the Internet, and/or declaring martial law, or something like that. But, are they REALLY ready to take such bold and obviously-wrong, overwhelming, tyrannical steps? I don't really think so, because they care more about greed/money -- about maintaining their flow of money -- which same flow is going to plummet like rocks in the pond, if the country actually goes into chaos -- but even if it does happen, then there ya go - you got your real reasons, finally exposed, for a normal revolution, and all the reasons of righteousness for Liberty and Freedom that you will ever need.

Heck, I am actually so serious about this (and have been contacting other high leaders in the full-blown Patriot Movement out there), that I've also already got a brand new entire replacement Presidential Cabinet all researched, cross-referenced for various balances, checked for relevant skills sets, political issues and relative political power, religious idealogies, ages, gender, race, and etc., all carefully hand picked out, and lined up, right now:

Indeed, when I got tired of waiting on all those incompetent "Obama eligibility" or "birther" attorneys out there to EVER get around to actually using the commanding law of statutory mandates under United States Code, instead of constantly allowing judicial "discretion" to again dismiss and dismiss their cases, over and over, I spent just one entire long day going through the entire US Code recently, and provided almost ALL of these many, many attorneys, plaintiffs, "NObama" website owners, other supporters, most of the States' Governors, most of the States' Secretaries of State, and a whole bunch of media, with the most powerful legal ammunition against Obama that they never dreamed of existing (nor bothered to ever look up.. sigh..):
and one of the many intelligent responses, in addition to notes of appreciation from some of the direct eligibility plaintiffs, and others out there, was from none other than Mr. Karl Rove, and we ended up trading a half dozen sets of email discussions about new proposed Cabinet positions/people, all fairly in agreement with my choices, including Palin as new AG (yes, don't gimme any lip, as she does *not* have to be a licensed attorney to be AG - it is an administrative position by design, guess what: she's an excellent administrator, she gets to set scope and direction of all DOJ efforts, her various licensed U.S. Attys do the actual litigation/prosecution, and Sarah also is against government corruption and bleeding the people dry. Get it?), but, in the end, sigh, Karl still decided to take a "wait and see" attitude, until we actually throw the fraud and impostor Obama out, first... trust me, he's worried about job security, enough as it is, being a Republican TV political commentator/pundit, and on Obama's shitlist FOX News channel, at that...

I also have three (3) current federal trial judges identified and confirmed as three of the replacements for the new U.S. Supreme Court. No, I am not joking. If you know of a really good judge out there, and I mean *really* good, especially in regards to upholding the original Constitution as it is written, then please let me know of your top-flight nominee. I plan to increase the current number of SCOTUS Justices from the present nine (9) persons (still only 9 of them since clear back in 1846, I believe it was..), now up to thirteen (13), for a larger odd number, and purposefully to provide for more natural advancement coverage, more diversity, more knowledge in play in each case, etc., and also due to the federal court system having that many different Circuits to represent at the highest level. Yea, I will be proposing that each vacancy upon the new, larger Supreme Court, whenever it happens, gets filled by a nominee that comes from the same respective Circuit of the vacancy, so that all the federal Circuits have and maintain balanced representation at the highest level, together. For the People.

As to the implementation strategy, I plan to enter simultaneously into a selection of several key types of existing/pending federal court cases, see the linked uscode-v-Obama page above for more details, and turn the entire thing into a massaction by and for the general public, and all that moved into and under MDL procedures, using those same key cases' merits and issues as the base for obvious governmental breaches of contract fundamental duties, as to that respective subject matter. It sounds more complicated than it really is, promise. For example, to cover fundamental gross breaches of contract with respect to the lack of a gold standard and the unlawful usage of the Federal Reserve, one of the key case types is monetary system issues, while economics is a generally applicable key case type for multiple breach of contract issues. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission is a big pending case over election fraud, etc., and so that is a perfect example of a good and important case found for one of the key case types needed to be entered into, i.e., fair and honest elections of our representatives in government.

You may or may not think me far too bold, crazy, or whatever, but this is my direction and resolve. Committed. Patriot. I have now achieved success in fatally wounding the Obama "Presidency", by providing such many mandatory legal hammers, of immediate and extremely powerful use, by any and all "birther" and "eligibility" lawsuit plaintiffs out there... everywhere found... I already have heard back that some are implementing this new ammunition soon. Word is spreading quickly enough. Obama's days in office are now more limited in lesser number, as I have successfully robbed the courts -- entirely -- of any and every matter of "discretion" involved, and turned every legal aspect of those cases into an expressly mandatory matter under the United States Code (i.e., for statutory production of documents, statutory citizenship standing to sue Obama et al, statutory "eligibility" procedures, statutory "loyalty" procedures, statutory "citizenship" procedures, and etc.). I have also successfully and completely deprived the U.S. AG and his DOJ attorneys from having any more involvement, whatsoever, in any defense of Obama -- all as expressly mandated by multiple federal statutes. I have also successfully and completely deprived them from providing any representation of any Senator, or of the Senate, or of any of the Senatorial bodies -- again, mandatory federal statutes.

In other words, Obama is done. Stick a fork in him. It's only a matter of short time, now. I cut off *all* of his legal defenses, to *all* of his issues, with mandatory federal statutes that expressly say otherwise ("SHALL", "SHALL NOT"), and freely gave out all that massive raw legal power to the entire world, many of whom desperately needed such power to revive their OWN legal cases against Obama, all over the country... His faux "Presidency" is soon over, I dare say it is now inevitable that he will be finally ousted by law, and I could be possibly considered actually grossly negligent, if I knowingly and successfully caused the end of a United States President-Elect found to be a fake and impostor, but didn't have a reasonable plan already defined for a fairly smooth transition of American political power, in the reasonably expected wake of such a highly unusual and important American historical event, literally come to pass..

And, how will history remember the downfall of Obama? Answer: because family and liberty patriots finally stood up. Everything is about family stability - the economics, the morals, the ethics, the freedoms, the liberties, the legal rights - everything is directly tied to whether or not "the stable family unit" is either protected, or harassed, by our own government, whatever form that is...

Sure, there's some loose ends yet to be planned out. That's why I have previously also built, in addition to the much larger public side of UCRCoA (everybody listed online, etc.), a smaller and more private side of UCRCoA, the legal side, including a private online network of various "federal Circuit" groups to manage all federal legal aspects at the high end, which has some 75-80 legal scholars on it, as of today, and I am getting ready to do another blast invite shortly to all kinds of pro-liberty legal scholars out there, some 300 individual scholar emails that I personally have identified, plus who knows how many legal groups out there I will blast to, etc. Together, those loose legal ends will soon be figured out, and implemented as needed. If you happen to already be a pro-freedom and pro-liberty legal scholar/student of any skill level, even decent beginner, with at least the general knowledge on how to file papers in a court, then you might consider being part of the national legal team:

Meanwhile, that's why the couple/few recent blasts for inviting family rights type people to be leaders have gone out, kinda as a last-ditch effort, truthfully. One dozen years of daily fighting in the trenches, and personal experiences of the past year-plus, have finally convinced me that the overall family rights movement will *never* successfully self-organize itself into an effective voice, ever, due to inordinate amounts of dishonesty and infighting, and also due to the paradoxical natural characteristics of the same movement, i.e., the vast majority all basically living in fear over a false but desperate hope that things will somehow maybe go easier on them in their own personal custody court cases if they just "stay quiet", which, of course, is self-defeating, from the very beginning... The simple truth, however, is that there is strength in numbers. Period. End of story. To be proudly displayed as part of a larger organization of people, i.e., with obvious resources standing behind you, *especially* when your personal trouble issue is the *same* issue of the organization that you represent, and that represents you in return, is to now have more equal political power defending against THEIR political power, and you therefore turn the tables back on them, fundamentally speaking, in most every way. There is strength in numbers. Period. End of story. BE a listed leader for the largest online network of family rights, soon to encompass even more, and find new increased personal strength:

But, I don't believe enough family rights people will get beyond their self-induced fears to rise up, at least not enough of them to get the job done. That's why I am just giving one or two weeks worth of initial alert and placement preferences to the last of the family rights patriots that WILL stand up, finally, and then I am moving on to the full-blown Freedom and Liberty movements, to get the rest of the UCRCoA leadership all filled up, and kick-start this baby into full gear, asap.

Revolution? Sure, since the very moment that my own government screwed me and robbed me of my children, without any valid or common sense reason, almost a dozen years ago now, I knew I was going to create a revolution, if I had to, because nobody on earth has the right to literally steal flesh and blood relationships, and to even think to do so is abhorrent to nature and all things of goodness and righteousness. Sure, I am *deadly* serious about revolution, but done on paper, so even better - offering easy, speedy, complete and utter, total victory, over every offending aspect of our current rogue government, and with hopefully not even a drop of bloodshed. And, it's all perfectly and completely legal, and lawfully authorized by the Founding Documents, themselves. An efficient win, with good profit and security.

For another example, I will be demanding that the Federal Government, by sheer manpower and annual expenditures, be trimmed back down to roughly 1/3 of the current size, achieved by steady reductions of either 25% per year over each of four (4) years, or 20% per each of five (5) years. Uhm, in case you didn't know it, all of the financial charts and graphs of the United States, as an entity with debts and assets, are all shown, by the Fed's own OMB (Office of Management and Budget), to be
exploding totally OFF THE CHARTS within the next few to several years - total financial meltdown of the entire United States, inevitably coming now at the current, and even insanely increasing, rates of taxation and spending. We simply cannot physically afford such a large and vast government, spending/wasting some 28% of everything of value that is generated in America annually... It's all mostly overhead expenses, simply to do our thinking and spending for us, being mostly all wasted on vast bureacracies of administration - producing no new value or worth, of any kind, whatsoever, in return for those huge expenditures. We simply can NOT afford such big government, regardless of every single other issue, bar none. It's simply far too expensive for what it produces in return, if it was even doing its job, properly, in the first place.. I will also declare that the gold standard, but a modern version, be phased back in over one calendar year's time, for various indisputable economic reasons of powerful natural advantage, and because of the government's fiduciary duties to the people (to reasonably protect the value of your amassed wealth) by law and natural right.

So, IS it time for an actual Revolution? Well, I fully intend to pick an enormous fight on paper with the *entire* Federal Government, conclusively list and detail various overwhelming and indisputable, practically insane breaches of fundamental contract, simply declare -- with proper authority -- that they are all fired, unless steps/issues A-Z are successfully completed within X number of days, etc., lay down the gauntlet of proper sovereign authority of free people commanding in a true Republic, and just see what the frack happens...

I say they WILL back down and relinquish SOME power back to the States and to the People, instead of losing ALL of it, just like the skilled tradesmen "revolution" that happened in England some 400+ years ago accomplished, without any war. The first successful civilized taxation revolution by the oppressed population. Here's how that happened, if you want better understanding:

Are you with me? Every true-blooded Patriot has a unquenchable beating heart for Freedom, Liberty, and Justice.

Sincerest Regards, ------------------------------------------ Mr. Torm Howse Co-Founder, National Board Director, Instructor,United Civil Rights Councils of America


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 9:13
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Live Free or Die Fighting by Jerry Wilson

The Bear 

We lived in California during the winters of 2007 and 2008. We became addicted to Fox News and watched O’Reilly and Hannity and Colmes every night. When we got back home, we upgraded our cable to get Fox. I watched the Presidential campaign very closely. Initially because I thought the Democrats would nominate Hillary Clinton and then in astonishment when they chose an even more hard-left candidate. All of last year I told everyone I could that Obama was not a Democrat, he was a Marxist. He is far to the left of any European leader and even our far left party, the NDP.

I read Saul Alinsky when I was in University. I studied him and his writing carefully. When Bill Ayers and his idiot wife were bombing and killing people at random in the Weather Underground. Weather Underground and the Black Panthers were closely allied. I read David Horowitz’s account of changing from a Marxist to a conservative after seeing that the government was afraid to prosecute members of the Panthers for murdering his personal assistant. He suddenly understood the evil that Marxism really was.

After the student radicals failed in creating a Marxist revolution in the United States by violent means, they embraced Alinsky. You would be wise to read “Rules for Radicals” because it outlines how Hillary and Obama planned to get into power, and what they intended to do when they got it.

Socialism is not the correct descriptor for what Obama and the Democrats are doing. They are going to be much more far reaching than anything Sweden has ever been able to do. Obama is following Alinsky’s plans, those set out in “Rules for Radicals” and his other writing. The Democrats are attempting to create one party rule in the U.S. and in achieving that, will create crisis after crisis by their own actions and use those crisis to nationalize the means of production in the U.S. You are in the middle of a communist revolution and few in the U.S. can actually see it for what it truly is.

The U.S. . is now on the path of financial destruction. The Constitution has been shredded and individual human rights are being trampled. In less than 8 months. Obama has used a recession to take over the two largest industries in the U.S. He will debase the Dollar and is on the road to creating an incredible energy shortage that will allow him and Congress to take over the energy industry.

But by and large I think that by the 2010 elections, the Democrats will have gerrymandered electoral districts to the point that it will be impossible for them to lose control of both houses of Congress. The incredible increase in the money supply is going to create Zimbabwe and Venezuela style inflation, and with it, controls on the currency and the amount of money that can be taken out of the country.

I love America , I cannot believe how the ignorance of the American public has created a situation whereby they are going to lose their Republic and slip into an age of repression and tyranny.

I may be nuts, but so far I have been 100% in my predictions of what Obama was going to do, because I merely had to look at “Rules for Radicals” to see what was coming next.

I read Glenn Beck’s book, “Common Sense” and in it re-read Thomas Paines pamphlet with the same name. I recommend the book.

When the storm finally hits (and it will), those of you who supported the Obama administration will be affected as well. It won’t just be us gun owners or Flat-Taxers, or Pro-Lifers that get hit. You’ll be right there next to us.

You all thought the Conservatives were nut cases. You know, all of us who believe in God, small government, the Second Amendment, etc. You thought you could just go back to sleep after the election was over. In your world, America will continue as before. You’ll still have the same rights, the same nice house, the same big screen television. After all, your high school football team won and the other team lost – go team! Even if you have bothered to look up from the daily grind since Nov 4th, you dismissed everything that has occurred as “politics as usual-the same old stuff”.

In the end, it’ll all be OK won’t it? Not this time.

There are a growing number of citizens in the US that are ready to fight to shut down the government’s grab of personal freedom, it’s blatant abuse of the constitution, and it’s attempt to replace the American way of life with socialism. You have to listen carefully to hear them, but they are there. I won’t start that fight, but when it goes down I will join it.

As for you, why, you’ll be shocked because you didn’t see it coming. And eventually you’ll be saddened when you see that we have truly lost the way of life with which you grew up. You’ll be saddened that your children and grandchildren live in a socialist, government-controlled gulag where their every movement from cradle to grave is tracked by the government. But most of all, you’ll be saddened by the death of friends and relatives who are brave enough to fight and die for something they believe in.

You know, McCain wasn’t much of a candidate. I’ll give you that. He was the lesser of two evils for most of us. I don’t blame you for not voting for him since, at the time, you didn’t know what we all know now. But at least John McCain was an American. He was a supporter of the American way of life and he understood that you can’t negotiate with terrorists. He understood and appreciated the sacrifice made by my father and other members of the Greatest Generation.

Mark my words friends. All across America groups are forming. They are forming out of anger and out of desperation at the thought of losing America . They’re not militia groups, terrorists as the Department of Homeland security would have you believe; they are Americans, loyal to the constitution. They are mothers and fathers and grandparents. They belong to groups like the Minutemen Civil Defense Corps, the Peaceful Resistance, the Constitution Party, the Young Conservatives, the 9/12 Project, and Grassfire. Right now they are fragmented, each focused on their own cause. But sometime in the next two years, our government is going to do something really stupid and these groups will come together. Watch for it, wait for it-get ready. It will happen.

When that event happens, whatever “it” is, our great country is going to plunge into chaos for a while. I pray to God that we make it through that time and emerge a stronger, smarter country.


Naval Aviator, Commander Jerry Wilson, [email protected]

Live Free or Die Fighting


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 8:41
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Martes, 08 de diciembre de 2009

Donofrio confirms Chrysler-Dealers’ lawsuit


by John Charlton

chrysler-logo(Dec. 7, 2009) — The Post & Email can confirm this afternoon, that Attorneys Leo Donofrio and Steven Pidgeon are representing a group of Chrysler Automotive dealers in seeking legal redress to their loss of their franchises following the direct and unconstitutional involvement of Barack Hussein Obama in the Chrysler reorganization.

It is speculated that the action will involve a writ of quo warranto, where by Obama will be legally forced to prove that he legitimately holds office as President of the United States in accord with the requirements of Article II, section 1, paragraph 5 of the United States Constitution.

That paragraph reads,

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

The Supreme Court of the United States has on several occasions confirmed that the phrase “natural born citizen” indicates a U.S. citizen, who was born in the U.S.A. of two U.S. citizen parents.  Obama, on account of having a father who was a British subject at the time of his own birth, was not, is not, and can never be a natural born citizen.  He is thus unqualified to hold the office of president.

Regarding the pending action in the courts of the District of Columbia, Donofrio says that the goal of Steve Pidgeon and himself is to see the owners of the dealerships, whom they represent, “reinstated to their businesses.”

The District of Columbia is unique in the nation, for having a section of its legal code devoted to the writ of quo warranto, when employed against federal office-holders who exercise their office within the District.

Attorney Donofrio is famous for his advocacy of the use of the quo warranto provisions of the D.C. Code and holds that the D.C. courts are the only proper venue for such actions against federal officers.

For more information about the issues raised in this report, click on the tags at the bottom of this article.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 9:41
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Lunes, 07 de diciembre de 2009
Sunday, December 6, 2009

We have seen that Obama cannot be an Article II “natural born Citizen” because when he was born, regardless of what place that may be, he was not born to a United States citizen father and mother. The "natural born Citizen" clause of our U.S. Constitution requires that both of the child’s parents be U.S. Citizens at the time of birth. Rather, if Obama was born in Hawaii as he claims, then under the liberalized and questionable meaning of “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” he can be a born Fourteenth Amendment “citizen of the United States” and a “citizen of the United States at birth” under 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1401 (a). Again, that citizenship status does not make him an Article II “natural born Citizen.” But what would Obama's citizenship status be if he was not born in the United States? First, let us examine why there is still existing doubts as to whether Obama was born in Hawaii. Second, let us examine what law would apply to determine Obama’s citizenship status should he not be born in Hawaii or any other part of the United States and what his citizenship status would be under that law. These are the reasons for the existing doubts regarding Obama's place of birth:

1. What Obama or some other unknown person posted on the internet is not a birth certificate (BC). Rather, he/she posted a digital image and picture of a questionable "certification of live birth" (COLB) which at best is only prima facie evidence of the place of his birth. The prima facie value of this document fails in light of numerous existing factual circumstances which contradict the COLB's validity and which have not been adequately explained by Obama.

2. According to Obama and his Press Secretary, Mr. Gibbs, this digital document alone is supposed to allow Obama to qualify to be President of the United States and Commander in Chief of the Military. According to them, this electronic image alone is sufficient to prove that Obama is a U.S. citizen and therefore qualified to have the full power of the executive vested in him. It is unbelievable that Obama would expect the American people to grant him such license over their lives based simply upon an electronic image on a computer screen. It is even more unbelievable that the Electoral College, our Congress, political institutions, security forces, and media would allow him to get away with it. This document, which in its paper form is undoubtedly a legal document, has no probative value given that it was posted by some unknown person on the internet as a digital image without following any prescribed electronic media security protocols. We know that digital images can be easily manipulated through computer technology. See
http://technology.findlaw.com/articles/01102/010555.html for an explanation of the need to follow defined federal and state standards when it comes to electronic/digital information transmittal of legal documents. If Obama expects this digital image of a COLB to have such unprecedented value which allows him to be President of the United States, then he should at least show that the electronic image he posted meets electronic/digital security standards.

3. While not officially confirmed, the authenticity of the COLB computer image has been questioned by at least two digital image experts who have concluded that the COLB image is a forgery.

4. Obama says he was born in a hospital. A birth certificate provides the name of the hospital where the birth occurred and the name of the doctor delivering the baby. The COLB does not have this vital corroborating information.

5. The key point that Obama supporters are redirecting attention away from is that the underlying foundational information supporting his Certification of Live Birth is unknown. This unknown information may not matter much when it comes to an ordinary person. But for someone running for President of the United States and currently sitting in that Office it is of crucial importance.

6. When Obama was born in 1961, Hawaii had in effect the Certificate of Hawaiian Birth Program which it established in 1911 and which it terminated in 1972. Someone could under Act 96 get a certificate claiming a Hawaiian birth even if he was physically born in a foreign country by an adult or parent falsely claiming to the director of health that he was born in Hawaii when in fact he was born abroad. Hence, because of the contradictory evidence that exists such as statements made by relatives and newspaper reporters in Kenya and elsewhere regarding where he was born, plaintiffs are entitled to pierce the alleged COLB and examine the file that is in the possession of the Hawaiian Secretary of State which may contain a sworn application/petition in which some party set forth circumstantially all the facts upon which the application rested and supporting sworn affidavits of witnesses. The file could also contain the results of the Secretary or his designee examinations under oath of the applicant or other person who may have been cognizant of the alleged facts regarding the application/petition along with other documentary evidence that they may have obtained as a result of issuing subpoenas for books and other papers.

7. The DoD 5220.22-M, "National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual," 2/28/2006 (NISPOM) provides baseline standards for the protection of classified information released or disclosed to industry in connection with classified contracts under the “National Industrial Security Program (NISP). It prescribes the requirements, restrictions, and other safeguards to prevent unauthorized disclosure of classified information. It also states at 2-209 that only U.S. citizens are eligible to receive a security clearance. The Manual requires a contractor to show proof of U.S. citizenship. It states at 2-208: “For individuals born in the United States, a birth certificate is the primary and preferred means of citizenship verification.”
http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/522022mchaps.pdf. Surely, we should require such documentation of someone seeking to occupy the Office of President of the United States.

8. At the time that Obama was sworn in as President, not even the Hawaii Department of Home Lands accepted a certification of live birth (COLB) as conclusive evidence of being a native of Hawaii for its Homeland program. From its web site: "In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL."

9. Since the controversy over Obama’s alleged birth certificate, Hawaii has changed its web page to read as follows:
"Birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth and Certifications of Live Birth) and Certificates of Hawaiian Birth are the primary documents used to determine native Hawaiian qualification.The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands accepts both Certificates of Live Birth (original birth certificate) and Certifications of Live Birth because they are official government records documenting an individual’s birth. The Certificate of Live Birth generally has more information which is useful for genealogical purposes as compared to the Certification of Live Birth which is a computer-generated printout that provides specific details of a person’s birth. Although original birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth) are preferred for their greater detail, the State Department of Health (DOH) no longer issues Certificates of Live Birth. When a request is made for a copy of a birth certificate, the DOH issues a Certification of Live Birth."

10. Despite the numerous law suits that have been filed against Obama, he continues to refuse to release his original birth certificate and has opted rather to spend large sums of money using lawyers to defend himself and to cause the courts and litigants to expend large amounts of time and resources pursuing litigation against him and other third parties. He relies on procedural and other threshold arguments such as jurisdiction, justiciability, standing, political question, separation of powers, mootness, and ripeness rather than simply produce his original birth certificate and make a motion for summary judgment with prejudice as to the merits so that no other future cases can be brought against him and others which would then put an end not only to the ongoing drain of money, time, and other resources but also to the great public outrage that continues to increase over time regarding his constitutional eligibility.

11. For some unknown reason and relying on federal and state privacy laws, Obama has refused to publicly release his original Certificate of Live Birth (BC) even though in his book, Dreams from My Father, he stated that he had it.

12. Obama and his half-sister, Maya, have each stated that he was born in different hospitals in Hawaii. In November 2004, in an interview with the Rainbow Newsletter, Maya told reporters her half-brother, Sen. Barack Obama, was born on August 4, 1961, at Queens Medical Center in Honolulu. But Obama has said he was born at Kapi'olani Medical Center for Women & Children, also in Honolulu. Changing her story, in February 2008 Maya then told reporters for the Honolulu Star-Bulletin that Obama was born at the Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women and Children.

13. On February 5, 2008, Madelyn Dunham was still alive, but the Obama campaign did not make her available for interviews with the media. Obama's maternal grandmother surely would have known where her grandson was born but Obama refused the media access to her.

14. Neither of the two or any other hospital in Hawaii or anywhere in the world has been willing to come forward and claim its place in history as being the hospital where the first African-American U.S. President was born. There is no Hawaiian hospital that has confirmed that Obama and/or his mother were present in any such hospital at the time of Obama's alleged birth in Honolulu. Not a single person has come forward, not a doctor, nurse, hospital administrator, nor any one else to confirm Obama's birth in Hawaii. "We don't have plans to do anything," said Kapi’olani Medical Center spokeswoman, Claire Tong, when asked how the center plans to commemorate the soon-to-be 44th U.S. president, who, according to Obama's family and other sources, was born at that hospital on Aug. 4, 1961. "We can't confirm or deny it — even though all the information out there says he was born at Kapiolani Hospital. And that's because of the HIPA law." Tong acknowledged that the center has received daily inquiries from news agencies far and wide asking for confirmation of Obama's birthplace. Despite her wanting to do so, Tong said it is not possible. "Our hands are tied," she said.
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081109/NEWS01/811090361/-1/specialobama08. I wonder why Tong said that “even though all the information out there says he was born at Kapiolani Hospital.” He surely did not even slightly hint that any information in the hospital supported such a claim. One would think that Obama would do a simple thing and give the hospital permission to release the information to the news-thirsty public. After all, what harm to his privacy would he suffer from authorizing the hospital to simply confirm that the President of the United States was born there?

15. Attorney Philip Berg has served subpoenas on the hospitals mentioned by Obama and his half sister as the place where Obama was born to obtain the medical records which would show the fact of Obama being born in either one of them but Obama has refused to sign the consent that the hospitals need to release the documents.

16. “Birthplaces and boyhood homes of U.S. presidents have been duly noted and honored for nearly as long as America has been a nation. In the case of such towering figures as Thomas Jefferson, Abe Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt, those early locations have been deemed national treasures and historic sites, visited annually by the multitudes.”
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081109/NEWS01/811090361/-1/specialobama08. But we have not seen any movement by any public charity or foundation, non-profit organization, or government agency to commemorate Obama's place of birth in Hawaii.

17. We have not seen any media events or news conferences at the hospital where Obama was born which I am sure is a place the location of which is highly news worthy not only to the American people but to the whole world. Hence, we do not even know in which hospital Obama was born.

18. Other than the COLB and the two newspaper announcements whose basis for information is the same single source, there does not exist one known corroborating medical or other document of any kind which shows that Obama was born in Hawaii. The Honolulu Advertiser, on Sunday, August 13, 1961 contained the following short announcement: "Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama, 6085 Kalanianaole Highway, son, Aug. 4." The Honolulu Star-Bulletin, an unaffiliated, competing publication, carried the exact same notice the following day. The numerous birth announcements above and below the Obama listing also were identical in both papers. Advertiser columnist and former Star-Bulletin managing editor, Dave Shapiro, was not at either paper in 1961, but he remembers how the birth notices process worked years later when both papers were jointly operated by the Hawaii Newspaper Agency, which no longer exists. He states: "Those were listings that came over from the state Department of Health . . . . They would send the same thing to both papers."
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081109/NEWS01/811090361/-1/specialobama08. Hence, we can see that the information for those birth notices comes straight from the state Health Department’s Vital Records Division. Hence, the birth announcements, not having their source of information in some other place, do not add any corroboration to the COLB. Other secondary evidence may include baptismal or circumcision certificates, hospital birth records, or affidavits of persons having personal knowledge about the facts of birth. Other documentary evidence can be early census, school, or family bible records, newspaper files, or insurance papers. No such documents have been produced for the American public. Furthermore, no one has been able to confirm that Obama’s mother and father in fact ever lived at 6085 Kalaniana’ole Highway, Honolulu.

19. Although Obama has had a first-class education that spanned 25 years, there is only a single document that has ever been released, the application for entrance to the Franciscus Assisi Primary School in Indonesia. That document was discovered by independent investigators. That documents shows that Obama was an Indonesian citizen. It is also reported that his Kindergarten records are missing. Needless to say how probative these kindergarten records would be since they would contain his legal name, parents’ names, date of birth, place of birth, and vaccination records.

20. No public official in Hawaii has publicly confirmed with any conclusive and credible evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii. Whatever statements Director of Hawaiian Department of Heath, Fukino, has made are not conclusive on the question of whether Obama was born in Hawaii. What is lacking is what information the Department is relying upon to make its statements. Just from her statement alone, we also do not know what evidence exists in the Department of Health file to corroborate what is stated in the “original birth certificate.”

21. We have not heard from one international, federal, state, or local police or security agency that Obama's birth place has been officially confirmed.

22. On June 27, 2004, the East African Newspaper, The Sunday Standard, in its article entitled, Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate, declared in its newspaper that Obama is Kenyan-Born. This long pre-dates Obama's decision to run for President when the truth about his birth location was not being hidden. This is not the only African paper that made such statements during a time that Obama’s birth place was not an issue.

23. An Investigator working for Philip Berg, Esq. learned the following which is contained in the investigator's affidavit dated October 30, 2008, that was filed with a Federal District Court in the case of Berg v. Obama, 08-cv-04083: Obama's step-grandmother, Sarah Obama, told Bishop McRae, who was in the United States, during a telephonic interview on October 12, 2008, while she was in her home located in Alego-Kogello, Kenya, that was full of security police and people and family who were celebrating then-Senator Obama's success story, that she witnessed Obama's birth in Kenya, not the United States (the English and Swahili conversation is recorded and available for listening). She was adamant about this fact not once but twice. The conversation which was placed on speaker phone was translated into English by "Kweli Shuhubia" and one of the grandmother's grandsons who were present with the grandmother in the house. After the grandmother made the same statement twice, her grandson intervened, saying "No, No, No, He [sic] was born in the United States." During the interview, the grandmother never changed her reply that she was present when Obama was born in Kenya. The fact that later in the same interview she change her statement to say that Obama was born in Hawaii does not change the fact that she at first stated twice that she was present when Obama was born in Kenya. I cannot imagine a grandmother not knowing whether she was present or not at the birth of her American Senator and U.S. Presidential candidate grandson.

24. The investigator then personally went to the hospital in Mombasa, Kenya. He spoke with the Provincial Civil Registrar and he learned that there were records of Ann Dunham giving birth to "Barack Hussein Obama, III" in Mombassa, Kenya on August 4, 1961. The investigator then "spoke directly with an Official, the Principal Registrar, who openly confirmed the birthing records of Senator Barack H. Obama, Jr. and his mother were present, however, the file on Barack H. Obama, Jr. was classified and profiled. The Official explained Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. [sic] birth in Kenya is top secret. [H]e was further instructed to go to the Attorney General's Office and to the Minister in Charge of Immigration if [he] wanted further information."

25. The Kenyan Ambassador to the United States, Peter N.R.O. Ogego, confirmed on November 6, 2008, during a radio interview with Detroit radio talk-show hosts Mike Clark, Trudi Daniels, and Marc Fellhauer on WRIF's "Mike In the Morning," that "President-Elect Obama" was born in Kenya and that his birth place was already a "well-known" attraction. The radio interview went as follows:
Clark: “We want to congratulate you on Barack Obama, our new president, and you must be very proud.”
Ogego: “We are. We are. We are also proud of the U.S. for having made history as well.”
Fellhauer: “One more quick question, President-elect Obama’s birthplace over in Kenya, is that going to be a national spot to go visit, where he was born?”
Ogego: “It’s already an attraction. His paternal grandmother is still alive.”
Fellhauer: “His birthplace, they’ll put up a marker there?”
Ogego: “It would depend on the government. It’s already well known.”
Later on, Ogego’s assistant, denying that Obama was born in Kenya, insisted Ogego was speaking about Barack Obama Sr., and not President-elect Obama.She said she could not say why Ogego responded the way he did. Listening to the radio interview in its entirety, it is very obvious the interviewers were all talking about President-elect Barack Obama and not his father. We would also expect that Ogego would have said that Obama was not born in Kenya, but there is an attraction there to honor his father. If it were true that Ogego was referring to Obama’s Sr. and not Obama Jr., we should have heard about and received credible evidence as to what preparatory steps had already been taken in Kenya to honor the birth place of Obama Sr. In evaluating Ogego’s statement, we have to also remember that Obama’s grandmother also said that Obama Jr. was born in Kenya. Hence, Ogego’s assistant’s claim that Ogego thought they were talking about Obama’s father does not appear credible.

26. It is alleged that the Kenyan government authorities have refused to cooperate and have thwarted all efforts by anyone to obtain any documents concerning Obama.

27. Obama has refused all effort to have him release the following documents, relying on sealing of records and/or privacy laws: Punahou High School records, Occidental College records, Columbia College records, Columbia Thesis paper, Harvard College records, Selective Service Registration, medical records, Illinois State Senate records, Illinois State Senate schedule, Law practice client list, Certified Copy of original Birth Certificate, Harvard Law Review articles that were published, University of Chicago scholarly articles, exit and entry immigration records covering all of Obama's travels out of the United States; passports; and record of baptism, if any.

28. Fightthesmears.com and factcheck.org have since maintained silence on the birth place issue after the questionable COLB was posted on the internet.

29. Other than a digital composite image representation on the internet of a questionable letter dated January 24, 2009 that he allegedly wrote to Kapi’olani Medical Center congratulating the hospital on its centennial celebration (it is reported that he refused to confirm that the letter was genuine, http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=103503), Obama has remained silent and has not declared publicly after his COLB and place of birth were questioned that he was born in Hawaii.

30. No member of the media, any political party, the Executive Branch of Government, Congress, any political institution, the Judiciary, or any law enforcement entity, has publicly stated that he or she has independently confirmed that Obama was born in Hawaii. Nor has House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, the Chair of the Democratic National Convention, publicly announced that she confirmed that Obama was born in Hawaii.

Given all this evidence, Obama should come forward with competent evidence to conclusively prove that he was born in Hawaii. To date, he has failed to produce such evidence. Hence, under these circumstances, how can the American people in good faith conclude that Obama was born in Hawaii? How did Obama in good conscious twice take the oath to be President on January 20th when so many Americans have put forward all this contradictory evidence regarding where he was born and he refuses to come forward with any other convincing evidence (like a certified copy of his original birth certificate) showing that he was born in Hawaii?

If Obama was not born in the United States, then a completely different legal scenario would apply regarding his current citizenship status. There is much confusion regarding what role Obama’s mother plays in giving him United States citizenship. With his father not being a U.S. citizen, Obama would need his mother to make him a citizen only if he was not born in the U.S. If he was not born in the United States, his mother would, however, for the following reasons not be able to transmit United States citizenship to him because she was too young at the time Obama was born.

The law governing the citizenship of children born outside the U.S. to one or more Unites States-citizen parents may be found at 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1401 to Sec. 1409. What could apply to Obama are Sec. 1401 (Nationals and citizens of United States at birth), 1405 (Persons Born in Hawaii), 1409 (Children born out of wedlock). Sec. 1405 would apply to make him a “
citizen of the United States at birth” only if he was born in Hawaii in 1961. With proof of the place of his birth lacking, we cannot now say that this statute would be applicable. Obama has maintained that his parents were married when he was born. They even obtained a divorce. Hence, it does not appear that Sec. 1409 would apply to him. So the only statute which would apply to him to make his a “citizen of the United States at birth” would be Section 1401. But Obama, if not born in the United States, also cannot satisfy any part of Section 1401.

The only part of Sec. 1401 that could apply to Obama is subsection (g). A child born in wedlock and abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 1401(g) (Section 301(g) INA), provided the citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child). http://travel.state.gov/law/info/info_609.html. Hence, the Immigration and Nationality Act 1952, 8 U.S.C. 1401(g), Sec. 301 (g) [Effective November 14, 1986] does not apply to Obama because he was born in 1961. What does apply to Obama is the Nationality Act of 1940, as Revised June 1952, which was in effect when he was born. But under this older version of the statute, for birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. for the United States citizen parent to transmit United States citizenship to the child. United States of America v. Cervantes-Nava, 281 F.3d 501 (2002) and Drozd v. INS, 155F.3d 81, 85-88 (2d Circuit 1998).

Hence, this is the scenario that would apply if Obama was not born in the United States. Obama’s father was not a United States citizen. Obama can therefore only rely on his United States citizen mother to make him a “
citizen of the United States at birth.” But as we can see from 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1401(g) (the only applicable statute), a mother had to be at least 19 years old when she gave birth to the child born abroad in order to transmit her United States citizenship to him. Obama’s mother, born on November 29, 1942, was 18 years old when she gave birth to Obama on August 4, 1961. She was 117 days short from being 19 years old. But she had to be at least 19 years old (14 years old plus 5 years of U.S. physical presence) to satisfy the legal requirement of Sec. 1401(g) (INA Section 301(g)). Therefore, Obama cannot benefit from Sec. 1401(g).

Hence, if Obama was not born in the United States, under the Fourteenth Amendment he is neither a United States citizen by birth on United States soil nor one by naturalization. (There is no existing evidence that Obama was ever naturalized.) Nor would he qualify to be a United States citizen by any act of Congress by being born abroad to a United States citizen parent. If this scenario were proven to be true (being neither a born nor a naturalized citizen), it can be reasonably argued that Obama is an undocumented alien. Obama has refused to release his identify documents to the public which causes such theories to exist. It is this reason which shows the importance of the American people being able to access Obama’s records (birth certificate, travel, education, and employment records) to intelligently learn his exact citizenship status. Surely, the United States cannot have a possible undocumented alien be its President. People must keep pressing Obama that he releases his personal documents so that they may at least learn that the President is at least a “citizen of the United States” which again still does not make him an Article II “
natural born Citizen.”

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
185 Gatzmer Avenue
Jamesburg, New Jersey 08831


December 6, 2009


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 15:56
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Domingo, 06 de diciembre de 2009


Congressional candidate Lieutenant Colonel West speaking at the American Freedom tour in Fort Lauderdale Florida at the Revolution Nightclub.
For more information about the West for Congress campaign or to become involved please follow this link



Publicado por Corazon7 @ 17:30
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar



Does this Barack Obama birth certificate issue bug you because, it's possible that he's not a natural born citizen, isn't eligible to be President under the Constitution, and this issue could be bigger than Watergate -- or any other "gate" in history? Does this Barack Obama birth certificate issue bug you because, it's possible that he's not a natural born citizen, isn't eligible to be President under the Constitution, and this issue could be bigger than Watergate -- or any other "gate" in history?


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 15:23
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Obama birth certificate, Records, One simple question, No conspiracy theory, Sarah Palin fair question, Obama ineligible, Barack Obama not natural born citizen, US Constitution, Father Kenyan British, No birth certificate, Obama spends millions to avoid

December 6, 2009 · 19 Comments

Article II, Sec. 1, cl. 5 of the US Constitution

“No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President. . .”

From the 20th Amendment to the US Constitution.

“or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until
a President shall have qualified;”

Barack Obama


Your children’s future

There is only one question you need to ask.


This is not a conspiracy theory.



1. Barack Obama has employed a legion of private and government attorneys to prevent revealing his country of birth. Innocent and eligible persons seeking the office of president do not do that.

Sarah Palin believes that this is a fair question. So does any rational person who cares about this country.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 15:11
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Obama’s Sealed Background Documentation

This data originally garnered from TheObamaFile.com.

Updated: 07/07/09

WorldNetDaily’s “Where have all his records gone?” posting further elaborates on the following:

  • Original, vault copy birth certificate — Not released — Lawyers fees — greater than $1,000,000 — birth certificate — $15.
  • Certification of Live Birth — Released – Counterfeit — Case and Affidavits
  • Admitted British citizenship at birth — Confirmed via FactCheck.org/FightTheSmears.com
  • Birth Announcement — Alleged to be a forgery
  • Hospital of birth — Kapi’olani Medical Center won’t confirm Obama’s birth assertion; sister claims a different hospital
  • Obama/Dunham marriage license — Not released
  • Obama/Dunham divorce – Released (by independent investigators)
  • Kindergarten records – Records lost (this is a big one — see here — 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 records — Not released
  • Soetoro/Dunham divorce – Released (by independent investigators)
  • Selective Service Registration — Released – Counterfeit — Document Locator Number update — another FOIA request
  • Occidental College 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
  • Illinois State Senate records — None
  • Illinois State Senate schedule — Lost
  • Law practice client list — Not released
  • University of Chicago scholarly articles — None


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 11:13
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
S?bado, 05 de diciembre de 2009

Obama birthplace reconsideration dismissed

December 4th, 2009, 6:14 pm · 57 Comments Martin Wisckol, Politics reporter

U.S. District Judge David O. Carter just issued an order dismissing Laguna Niguel attorney Orly Taitz’s attempt to revive her lawsuit alleging that Barack Obama cannot be president because he was born in Kenya.

Carter dismissed her case in October without going to trial. Taitz then filed a motion with the Santa Ana-based judge to reconsider his decision. Carter said in his order this afternoon that there was no legal ground for reconsidering.

“Counsel (Taitz) largely repeats the same arguments made in her briefing and oral argument on the Motion to Dismiss, which is prohibited<” Carter wrote. “To the extent that she does present new argument, it is without merit and does not meet the standard for reconsideration.”

Another lawyer, Gary Kreep, has already filed an appeal Carter’s dismissal of the case, hoping an appellate court will take it up.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 19:00
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Jueves, 03 de diciembre de 2009

Support Lloyd Marcus by:

Download @ iTunes


Purchase "American Tea Party"


Show up & Take Back America at a Tea Party.


Lloyd Marcus tours w/ http://TeaPartyExpress.com &

http://AmericanLibertyTour.com .

Feel free to post everywhere, let's take this viral!

For the rest of Lloyd's conservative songs & videos visit his channel:

Lloyd is the singer/composer of the national American Tea Party Anthem featured on many youtube videos and travels performing & speaking. http://www.LloydMarcus.com

Lloyd Marcus NEW cd album, "American Tea Party: 12 great songs to Take America Back" http://bit.ly/GJbk4

He is columnist at AmericanThinker.com
His Black Conservative Online TV Show:

NewYork,NewYork composer: Kander & Ebb, 1977
Licensing through HFA. All Rights Reserved


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 9:06
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
From: David Glover Family [email protected]

Subject: What Doctors think about OBAMA Care

Date: Monday, November 30, 2009, 12:12 PM

What Doctors think about OBAMA Care.

July 23, 2009
Senator Bayh,
As a practicing physician I have major concerns with the health care bill before Congress. I actually have read the bill and am shocked by the brazenness of the government's proposed involvement in the patient-physician relationship. The very idea that the government will dictate and ration patient care is dangerous and certainly not helpful in designing a health care system that works for all. Every physician I work with agrees that we need to fix our health care system, but the proposed bills currently making their way through congress will be a disaster if passed.
I ask you respectfully and as a patriotic American to look at the following troubling lines that I have read in the bill. You cannot possibly believe that these proposals are in the best interests of the country and our fellow citizens.
Page 22 of the HC Bill:  Mandates that the Govt will audit books of all employers that self-insure!!
Page 30 Sec 123 of HC bill:   THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get.
Page 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill: YOUR HEALTH CARE IS RATIONED!!!
Page 42 of HC Bill:  The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC benefits for you. You have no choice!
Page 50 Section 152 in HC bill: HC will be provided to ALL non-US citizens, illegal or otherwise.
Page 58 HC Bill:  Govt will have real-time access to individuals' finances & a 'National ID Health card' will be issued!
Page 59 HC Bill lines 21-24:  Govt will have direct access to your bank accounts for elective funds transfer.
Page 65 Sec 164: Is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in unions & community organizations: (ACORN).
Page 84 Sec 203 HC bill: Govt mandates ALL benefit packages for private HC plans in the 'Exchange.'
Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill:  Specifications of Benefit Levels for Plans -- The Govt will ration your health care!
Page 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill: Govt mandates linguistic appropriate services.  (Translation: illegal aliens.)
Page 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18: The Govt will use groups (i.e. ACORN & Americorps to sign up individuals for Govt HC plan.
Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill: Specifications of Benefit Levels for Plans. (AARP members - your health care WILL be rationed!)

Page 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill:  Medicaid eligible individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid. (No choice.)
Page 12 4 lines 24-25 HC: No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Govt monopoly.
Page 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill: Doctors/ American Medical Association - The Govt will tell YOU what salary you can make.
Page 145 Line 15-17: An Employer MUST auto-enroll employees into public option plan. (NO choice!)
Page 126 Lines 22-25: Employers MUST pay for HC for part-time employees AND their families.  (Employees shouldn't get excited about this as employers will be forced to reduce its work force, benefits, and wages/salaries to cover such a huge expense.)
Page 149 Lines 16-24: ANY Employer with payroll 401k & above who does not provide public option will pay 8% tax on all payroll!  (See the last comment in parenthesis.)

Page 150 Lines 9-13: A business with payroll between $251K & $401K who doesn't provide public option will pay 2-6% tax on all payroll.
Page 167 Lines 18-23: ANY individual who doesn't have acceptable HC according to Govt will be taxed 2.5% of income.
Page 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill: Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (Americans will pay.)
Page 195 HC Bill: Officers & employees of the GOVT HC Admin..  will have access to ALL Americans' finances and personal records.
Page 203 Line 14-15 HC: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax."  (Yes, it really says that!)

Page 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill: Govt will reduce physician services for Medicaid Seniors.  (Low-income and the poor are affected.)

Page 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill: Doctors: It doesn't matter what specialty you have trained yourself in -- you will all be paid the same! (Just TRY to tell me that's not Socialism!)
Page 253 Line 10-18: The Govt sets the value of a doctor's time, profession, judgment, etc.  (Literally-- the value of humans.)
Page 265 Sec 1131: The Govt mandates and controls productivity for "private" HC industries.
Page 268 Sec 1141: The federal Govt regulates the rental and purchase of power driven wheelchairs.
Page 272 SEC. 1145: TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS - Cancer patients - welcome to rationing!
Page 280 Sec 1151: The Govt will penalize hospitals for whatever the Govt deems preventable (i.e...re-admissions).

Page 298 Lines 9-11: Doctors: If you treat a patient during initial admission that results in a re-admission -- the Govt will penalize you.
Page 317 L 13-20: PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. (The Govt tells doctors what and how much they can own!)
Page 317-318 lines 21-25, 1-3: PROHIBITION on expansion.  (The Govt is mandating that hospitals cannot expand.)
Page 321 2-13: Hospitals have the opportunity to apply for exception BUT community input is required.  (Can you say ACORN?)
Page 335 L 16-25 Pg 336-339: The Govt mandates establishment of=2 outcome-based measures. (HC the way they want -- rationing.)

Page 341 Lines 3-9: The Govt has authority to disqualify Medicare Advance Plans, HMOs, etc.  (Forcing people into the Govt plan)
Page 354 Sec 1177: The Govt will RESTRICT enrollment of 'special needs people!'   Unbelievable!
Page 379 Sec 1191: The Govt creates more bureaucracy via a "Tele-Health Advisory Committee."  (Can you say HC by phone?)
Page 425 Lines 4-12: The Govt mandates "Advance-Care Planning Consult."  (Think senior citizens end-of-life patients.)
Page 425 Lines 17-19: The Govt will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc.  (And it's mandatory!)
Page 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3: The Govt provides an "approved" list of end-of-life resources; guiding you in death. (Also called 'assisted suicide.')
Page 427 Lines 15-24: The Govt mandates a program for orders on "end-of-life."  (The Govt has a say in how your life ends!)
Page 429 Lines 1-9: An "advanced-care planning consultant" will be used frequently as a patient's health deteriorates.
Page 429 Lines 10-12: An "advanced care consultation" may include an ORDER for end-of-life plans..  (AN ORDER TO DIE FROM THE GOVERNMENT?!?)

Page 429 Lines 13-25: The GOVT will specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order..  (I wouldn't want to stand before God after getting paid for THAT job!)   

Page 430 Lines 11-15: The Govt will decide what level of treatment you will have at end-of-life!  (Again -- no choice!)
Page 469: Community-Based Home Medical Services = Non-Profit Organizations.  (Hello?  ACORN Medical Services here!?!)
Page 489 Sec 1308: The Govt will cover marriage and family therapy.  (Which means Govt will insert itself into your marriage even.)

Page 494-498: Govt will cover Mental Health Services including defining, creating, and rationing those services.
Senator, I guarantee that I personally will do everything possible to inform patients and my fellow physicians about the dangers of the proposed bills you and your colleagues are debating.
Furthermore, if you vote for a bill that enforces socialized medicine on the country and destroys the doctor-patient relationship, I will do everything in my power to make sure you lose your job in the next election.
Stephen E. Fraser, MD

Dear Reader,
    I urge you to use the power that you were born with (and the power that may soon be taken away) and circulate this email to as many people as you can reach...  The Power of the People can stop this from happening to us, our parents, our grandparents, our children, and to following generations.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 8:30
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar