Thursday, December 31, 2009
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Top 10 Corrupt Politicans for 2009
Here is the list from Judicial Watch...
Contact Information:
Press Office 202-646-5172, ext 305
Washington, DC
Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today released its 2009 list of Washington's "Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians." The list, in alphabetical order, includes:
1.Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT): This marks two years in a row for Senator Dodd, who made the 2008 "Ten Most Corrupt" list for his corrupt relationship with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and for accepting preferential treatment and loan terms from Countrywide Financial, a scandal which still dogs him. In 2009, the scandals kept coming for the Connecticut Democrat. In 2009, Judicial Watch filed a Senate ethics complaint against Dodd for undervaluing a property he owns in Ireland on his Senate Financial Disclosure forms. Judicial Watch's complaint forced Dodd to amend the forms. However, press reports suggest the property to this day remains undervalued. Judicial Watch also alleges in the complaint that Dodd obtained a sweetheart deal for the property in exchange for his assistance in obtaining a presidential pardon (during the Clinton administration) and other favors for a long-time friend and business associate. The false financial disclosure forms were part of the cover-up. Dodd remains the head the Senate Banking Committee.
2.Senator John Ensign (R-NV): A number of scandals popped up in 2009 involving public officials who conducted illicit affairs, and then attempted to cover them up with hush payments and favors, an obvious abuse of power. The year's worst offender might just be Nevada Republican Senator John Ensign. Ensign admitted in June to an extramarital affair with the wife of one of his staff members, who then allegedly obtained special favors from the Nevada Republican in exchange for his silence. According to The New York Times: "The Justice Department and the Senate Ethics Committee are expected to conduct preliminary inquiries into whether Senator John Ensign violated federal law or ethics rules as part of an effort to conceal an affair with the wife of an aide…" The former staffer, Douglas Hampton, began to lobby Mr. Ensign's office immediately upon leaving his congressional job, despite the fact that he was subject to a one-year lobbying ban. Ensign seems to have ignored the law and allowed Hampton lobbying access to his office as a payment for his silence about the affair. (These are potentially criminal offenses.) It looks as if Ensign misused his public office (and taxpayer resources) to cover up his sexual shenanigans.
3.Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA): Judicial Watch is investigating a $12 million TARP cash injection provided to the Boston-based OneUnited Bank at the urging of Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank. As reported in the January 22, 2009, edition of the Wall Street Journal, the Treasury Department indicated it would only provide funds to healthy banks to jump-start lending. Not only was OneUnited Bank in massive financial turmoil, but it was also "under attack from its regulators for allegations of poor lending practices and executive-pay abuses, including owning a Porsche for its executives' use." Rep. Frank admitted he spoke to a "federal regulator," and Treasury granted the funds. (The bank continues to flounder despite Frank's intervention for federal dollars.) Moreover, Judicial Watch uncovered documents in 2009 that showed that members of Congress for years were aware that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were playing fast and loose with accounting issues, risk assessment issues and executive compensation issues, even as liberals led by Rep. Frank continued to block attempts to rein in the two Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs). For example, during a hearing on September 10, 2003, before the House Committee on Financial Services considering a Bush administration proposal to further regulate Fannie and Freddie, Rep. Frank stated: "I want to begin by saying that I am glad to consider the legislation, but I do not think we are facing any kind of a crisis. That is, in my view, the two Government Sponsored Enterprises we are talking about here, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not in a crisis. We have recently had an accounting problem with Freddie Mac that has led to people being dismissed, as appears to be appropriate. I do not think at this point there is a problem with a threat to the Treasury." Frank received $42,350 in campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac between 1989 and 2008. Frank also engaged in a relationship with a Fannie Mae Executive while serving on the House Banking Committee, which has jurisdiction over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
4.Secretary of Treasury Timothy Geithner: In 2009, Obama Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner admitted that he failed to pay $34,000 in Social Security and Medicare taxes from 2001-2004 on his lucrative salary at the International Monetary Fund (IMF), an organization with 185 member countries that oversees the global financial system. (Did we mention Geithner now runs the IRS?) It wasn't until President Obama tapped Geithner to head the Treasury Department that he paid back most of the money, although the IRS kindly waived the hefty penalties. In March 2009, Geithner also came under fire for his handling of the AIG bonus scandal, where the company used $165 million of its bailout funds to pay out executive bonuses, resulting in a massive public backlash. Of course as head of the New York Federal Reserve, Geithner helped craft the AIG deal in September 2008. However, when the AIG scandal broke, Geithner claimed he knew nothing of the bonuses until March 10, 2009. The timing is important. According to CNN: "Although Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told congressional leaders on Tuesday that he learned of AIG's impending $160 million bonus payments to members of its troubled financial-products unit on March 10, sources tell TIME that the New York Federal Reserve informed Treasury staff that the payments were imminent on Feb. 28. That is ten days before Treasury staffers say they first learned 'full details' of the bonus plan, and three days before the [Obama] Administration launched a new $30 billion infusion of cash for AIG." Throw in another embarrassing disclosure in 2009 that Geithner employed "household help" ineligible to work in the United States, and it becomes clear why the Treasury Secretary has earned a spot on the "Ten Most Corrupt Politicians in Washington" list.
5.Attorney General Eric Holder: Tim Geithner can be sure he won't be hounded about his tax-dodging by his colleague Eric Holder, US Attorney General. Judicial Watch strongly opposed Holder because of his terrible ethics record, which includes: obstructing an FBI investigation of the theft of nuclear secrets from Los Alamos Nuclear Laboratory; rejecting multiple requests for an independent counsel to investigate alleged fundraising abuses by then-Vice President Al Gore in the Clinton White House; undermining the criminal investigation of President Clinton by Kenneth Starr in the midst of the Lewinsky investigation; and planning the violent raid to seize then-six-year-old Elian Gonzalez at gunpoint in order to return him to Castro's Cuba. Moreover, there is his soft record on terrorism. Holder bypassed Justice Department procedures to push through Bill Clinton's scandalous presidential pardons and commutations, including for 16 members of FALN, a violent Puerto Rican terrorist group that orchestrated approximately 120 bombings in the United States, killing at least six people and permanently maiming dozens of others, including law enforcement officers. His record in the current administration is no better. As he did during the Clinton administration, Holder continues to ignore serious incidents of corruption that could impact his political bosses at the White House. For example, Holder has refused to investigate charges that the Obama political machine traded VIP access to the White House in exchange for campaign contributions – a scheme eerily similar to one hatched by Holder's former boss, Bill Clinton in the 1990s. The Holder Justice Department also came under fire for dropping a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party. On Election Day 2008, Black Panthers dressed in paramilitary garb threatened voters as they approached polling stations. Holder has also failed to initiate a comprehensive Justice investigation of the notorious organization ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), which is closely tied to President Obama. There were allegedly more than 400,000 fraudulent ACORN voter registrations in the 2008 campaign. And then there were the journalist videos catching ACORN Housing workers advising undercover reporters on how to evade tax, immigration, and child prostitution laws. Holder's controversial decisions on new rights for terrorists and his attacks on previous efforts to combat terrorism remind many of the fact that his former law firm has provided and continues to provide pro bono representation to terrorists at Guantanamo Bay. Holder's politicization of the Justice Department makes one long for the days of Alberto Gonzales.
6.Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL)/ Senator Roland Burris (D-IL): One of the most serious scandals of 2009 involved a scheme by former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich to sell President Obama's then-vacant Senate seat to the highest bidder. Two men caught smack dab in the middle of the scandal: Senator Roland Burris, who ultimately got the job, and Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, emissaries for Jesse Jackson Jr., named "Senate Candidate A" in the Blagojevich indictment, reportedly offered $1.5 million to Blagojevich during a fundraiser if he named Jackson Jr. to Obama's seat. Three days later federal authorities arrested Blagojevich. Burris, for his part, apparently lied about his contacts with Blagojevich, who was arrested in December 2008 for trying to sell Obama's Senate seat. According to Reuters: "Roland Burris came under fresh scrutiny…after disclosing he tried to raise money for the disgraced former Illinois governor who named him to the U.S. Senate seat once held by President Barack Obama…In the latest of those admissions, Burris said he looked into mounting a fundraiser for Rod Blagojevich -- later charged with trying to sell Obama's Senate seat -- at the same time he was expressing interest to the then-governor's aides about his desire to be appointed." Burris changed his story five times regarding his contacts with Blagojevich prior to the Illinois governor appointing him to the U.S. Senate. Three of those changing explanations came under oath.
7.President Barack Obama: During his presidential campaign, President Obama promised to run an ethical and transparent administration. However, in his first year in office, the President has delivered corruption and secrecy, bringing Chicago-style political corruption to the White House. Consider just a few Obama administration "lowlights" from year one: Even before President Obama was sworn into office, he was interviewed by the FBI for a criminal investigation of former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich's scheme to sell the President's former Senate seat to the highest bidder. (Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and slumlord Valerie Jarrett, both from Chicago, are also tangled up in the Blagojevich scandal.) Moreover, the Obama administration made the startling claim that the Privacy Act does not apply to the White House. The Obama White House believes it can violate the privacy rights of American citizens without any legal consequences or accountability. President Obama boldly proclaimed that "transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency," but his administration is addicted to secrecy, stonewalling far too many of Judicial Watch's Freedom of Information Act requests and is refusing to make public White House visitor logs as federal law requires. The Obama administration turned the National Endowment of the Arts (as well as the agency that runs the AmeriCorps program) into propaganda machines, using tax dollars to persuade "artists" to promote the Obama agenda. According to documents uncovered by Judicial Watch, the idea emerged as a direct result of the Obama campaign and enjoyed White House approval and participation. President Obama has installed a record number of "czars" in positions of power. Too many of these individuals are leftist radicals who answer to no one but the president. And too many of the czars are not subject to Senate confirmation (which raises serious constitutional questions). Under the President's bailout schemes, the federal government continues to appropriate or control -- through fiat and threats -- large sectors of the private economy, prompting conservative columnist George Will to write: "The administration's central activity -- the political allocation of wealth and opportunity -- is not merely susceptible to corruption, it is corruption." Government-run healthcare and car companies, White House coercion, uninvestigated ACORN corruption, debasing his office to help Chicago cronies, attacks on conservative media and the private sector, unprecedented and dangerous new rights for terrorists, perks for campaign donors – this is Obama's "ethics" record -- and we haven't even gotten through the first year of his presidency.
8.Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): At the heart of the corruption problem in Washington is a sense of entitlement. Politicians believe laws and rules (even the U.S. Constitution) apply to the rest of us but not to them. Case in point: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her excessive and boorish demands for military travel. Judicial Watch obtained documents from the Pentagon in 2008 that suggest Pelosi has been treating the Air Force like her own personal airline. These documents, obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, include internal Pentagon email correspondence detailing attempts by Pentagon staff to accommodate Pelosi's numerous requests for military escorts and military aircraft as well as the speaker's 11th hour cancellations and changes. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also came under fire in April 2009, when she claimed she was never briefed about the CIA's use of the waterboarding technique during terrorism investigations. The CIA produced a report documenting a briefing with Pelosi on September 4, 2002, that suggests otherwise. Judicial Watch also obtained documents, including a CIA Inspector General report, which further confirmed that Congress was fully briefed on the enhanced interrogation techniques. Aside from her own personal transgressions, Nancy Pelosi has ignored serious incidents of corruption within her own party, including many of the individuals on this list. (See Rangel, Murtha, Jesse Jackson, Jr., etc.)
9.Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) and the rest of the PMA Seven: Rep. John Murtha made headlines in 2009 for all the wrong reasons. The Pennsylvania congressman is under federal investigation for his corrupt relationship with the now-defunct defense lobbyist PMA Group. PMA, founded by a former Murtha associate, has been the congressman's largest campaign contributor. Since 2002, Murtha has raised $1.7 million from PMA and its clients. And what did PMA and its clients receive from Murtha in return for their generosity? Earmarks -- tens of millions of dollars in earmarks. In fact, even with all of the attention surrounding his alleged influence peddling, Murtha kept at it. Following an FBI raid of PMA's offices earlier in 2009, Murtha continued to seek congressional earmarks for PMA clients, while also hitting them up for campaign contributions. According to The Hill, in April, "Murtha reported receiving contributions from three former PMA clients for whom he requested earmarks in the pending appropriations bills." When it comes to the PMA scandal, Murtha is not alone. As many as six other Members of Congress are currently under scrutiny according to The Washington Post. They include: Peter J. Visclosky (D-IN.), James P. Moran Jr. (D-VA), Norm Dicks (D-WA.), Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), C.W. Bill Young (R-FL.) and Todd Tiahrt (R-KS.). Of course rather than investigate this serious scandal, according to Roll Call House Democrats circled the wagons, "cobbling together a defense to offer political cover to their rank and file." The Washington Post also reported in 2009 that Murtha's nephew received $4 million in Defense Department no-bid contracts: "Newly obtained documents…show Robert Murtha mentioning his influential family connection as leverage in his business dealings and holding unusual power with the military."
10.Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY): Rangel, the man in charge of writing tax policy for the entire country, has yet to adequately explain how he could possibly "forget" to pay taxes on $75,000 in rental income he earned from his off-shore rental property. He also faces allegations that he improperly used his influence to maintain ownership of highly coveted rent-controlled apartments in Harlem, and misused his congressional office to fundraise for his private Rangel Center by preserving a tax loophole for an oil drilling company in exchange for funding. On top of all that, Rangel recently amended his financial disclosure reports, which doubled his reported wealth. (He somehow "forgot" about $1 million in assets.) And what did he do when the House Ethics Committee started looking into all of this? He apparently resorted to making "campaign contributions" to dig his way out of trouble. According to WCBS TV, a New York CBS affiliate: "The reigning member of Congress' top tax committee is apparently 'wrangling' other politicos to get him out of his own financial and tax troubles...Since ethics probes began last year the 79-year-old congressman has given campaign donations to 119 members of Congress, including three of the five Democrats on the House Ethics Committee who are charged with investigating him." Charlie Rangel should not be allowed to remain in Congress, let alone serve as Chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, and he knows it. That's why he felt the need to disburse campaign contributions to Ethics Committee members and other congressional colleagues.
Contact Information:
Press Office 202-646-5172, ext 305
Washington, DC
Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today released its 2009 list of Washington's "Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians." The list, in alphabetical order, includes:
1.Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT): This marks two years in a row for Senator Dodd, who made the 2008 "Ten Most Corrupt" list for his corrupt relationship with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and for accepting preferential treatment and loan terms from Countrywide Financial, a scandal which still dogs him. In 2009, the scandals kept coming for the Connecticut Democrat. In 2009, Judicial Watch filed a Senate ethics complaint against Dodd for undervaluing a property he owns in Ireland on his Senate Financial Disclosure forms. Judicial Watch's complaint forced Dodd to amend the forms. However, press reports suggest the property to this day remains undervalued. Judicial Watch also alleges in the complaint that Dodd obtained a sweetheart deal for the property in exchange for his assistance in obtaining a presidential pardon (during the Clinton administration) and other favors for a long-time friend and business associate. The false financial disclosure forms were part of the cover-up. Dodd remains the head the Senate Banking Committee.
2.Senator John Ensign (R-NV): A number of scandals popped up in 2009 involving public officials who conducted illicit affairs, and then attempted to cover them up with hush payments and favors, an obvious abuse of power. The year's worst offender might just be Nevada Republican Senator John Ensign. Ensign admitted in June to an extramarital affair with the wife of one of his staff members, who then allegedly obtained special favors from the Nevada Republican in exchange for his silence. According to The New York Times: "The Justice Department and the Senate Ethics Committee are expected to conduct preliminary inquiries into whether Senator John Ensign violated federal law or ethics rules as part of an effort to conceal an affair with the wife of an aide…" The former staffer, Douglas Hampton, began to lobby Mr. Ensign's office immediately upon leaving his congressional job, despite the fact that he was subject to a one-year lobbying ban. Ensign seems to have ignored the law and allowed Hampton lobbying access to his office as a payment for his silence about the affair. (These are potentially criminal offenses.) It looks as if Ensign misused his public office (and taxpayer resources) to cover up his sexual shenanigans.
3.Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA): Judicial Watch is investigating a $12 million TARP cash injection provided to the Boston-based OneUnited Bank at the urging of Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank. As reported in the January 22, 2009, edition of the Wall Street Journal, the Treasury Department indicated it would only provide funds to healthy banks to jump-start lending. Not only was OneUnited Bank in massive financial turmoil, but it was also "under attack from its regulators for allegations of poor lending practices and executive-pay abuses, including owning a Porsche for its executives' use." Rep. Frank admitted he spoke to a "federal regulator," and Treasury granted the funds. (The bank continues to flounder despite Frank's intervention for federal dollars.) Moreover, Judicial Watch uncovered documents in 2009 that showed that members of Congress for years were aware that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were playing fast and loose with accounting issues, risk assessment issues and executive compensation issues, even as liberals led by Rep. Frank continued to block attempts to rein in the two Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs). For example, during a hearing on September 10, 2003, before the House Committee on Financial Services considering a Bush administration proposal to further regulate Fannie and Freddie, Rep. Frank stated: "I want to begin by saying that I am glad to consider the legislation, but I do not think we are facing any kind of a crisis. That is, in my view, the two Government Sponsored Enterprises we are talking about here, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not in a crisis. We have recently had an accounting problem with Freddie Mac that has led to people being dismissed, as appears to be appropriate. I do not think at this point there is a problem with a threat to the Treasury." Frank received $42,350 in campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac between 1989 and 2008. Frank also engaged in a relationship with a Fannie Mae Executive while serving on the House Banking Committee, which has jurisdiction over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
4.Secretary of Treasury Timothy Geithner: In 2009, Obama Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner admitted that he failed to pay $34,000 in Social Security and Medicare taxes from 2001-2004 on his lucrative salary at the International Monetary Fund (IMF), an organization with 185 member countries that oversees the global financial system. (Did we mention Geithner now runs the IRS?) It wasn't until President Obama tapped Geithner to head the Treasury Department that he paid back most of the money, although the IRS kindly waived the hefty penalties. In March 2009, Geithner also came under fire for his handling of the AIG bonus scandal, where the company used $165 million of its bailout funds to pay out executive bonuses, resulting in a massive public backlash. Of course as head of the New York Federal Reserve, Geithner helped craft the AIG deal in September 2008. However, when the AIG scandal broke, Geithner claimed he knew nothing of the bonuses until March 10, 2009. The timing is important. According to CNN: "Although Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told congressional leaders on Tuesday that he learned of AIG's impending $160 million bonus payments to members of its troubled financial-products unit on March 10, sources tell TIME that the New York Federal Reserve informed Treasury staff that the payments were imminent on Feb. 28. That is ten days before Treasury staffers say they first learned 'full details' of the bonus plan, and three days before the [Obama] Administration launched a new $30 billion infusion of cash for AIG." Throw in another embarrassing disclosure in 2009 that Geithner employed "household help" ineligible to work in the United States, and it becomes clear why the Treasury Secretary has earned a spot on the "Ten Most Corrupt Politicians in Washington" list.
5.Attorney General Eric Holder: Tim Geithner can be sure he won't be hounded about his tax-dodging by his colleague Eric Holder, US Attorney General. Judicial Watch strongly opposed Holder because of his terrible ethics record, which includes: obstructing an FBI investigation of the theft of nuclear secrets from Los Alamos Nuclear Laboratory; rejecting multiple requests for an independent counsel to investigate alleged fundraising abuses by then-Vice President Al Gore in the Clinton White House; undermining the criminal investigation of President Clinton by Kenneth Starr in the midst of the Lewinsky investigation; and planning the violent raid to seize then-six-year-old Elian Gonzalez at gunpoint in order to return him to Castro's Cuba. Moreover, there is his soft record on terrorism. Holder bypassed Justice Department procedures to push through Bill Clinton's scandalous presidential pardons and commutations, including for 16 members of FALN, a violent Puerto Rican terrorist group that orchestrated approximately 120 bombings in the United States, killing at least six people and permanently maiming dozens of others, including law enforcement officers. His record in the current administration is no better. As he did during the Clinton administration, Holder continues to ignore serious incidents of corruption that could impact his political bosses at the White House. For example, Holder has refused to investigate charges that the Obama political machine traded VIP access to the White House in exchange for campaign contributions – a scheme eerily similar to one hatched by Holder's former boss, Bill Clinton in the 1990s. The Holder Justice Department also came under fire for dropping a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party. On Election Day 2008, Black Panthers dressed in paramilitary garb threatened voters as they approached polling stations. Holder has also failed to initiate a comprehensive Justice investigation of the notorious organization ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), which is closely tied to President Obama. There were allegedly more than 400,000 fraudulent ACORN voter registrations in the 2008 campaign. And then there were the journalist videos catching ACORN Housing workers advising undercover reporters on how to evade tax, immigration, and child prostitution laws. Holder's controversial decisions on new rights for terrorists and his attacks on previous efforts to combat terrorism remind many of the fact that his former law firm has provided and continues to provide pro bono representation to terrorists at Guantanamo Bay. Holder's politicization of the Justice Department makes one long for the days of Alberto Gonzales.
6.Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL)/ Senator Roland Burris (D-IL): One of the most serious scandals of 2009 involved a scheme by former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich to sell President Obama's then-vacant Senate seat to the highest bidder. Two men caught smack dab in the middle of the scandal: Senator Roland Burris, who ultimately got the job, and Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, emissaries for Jesse Jackson Jr., named "Senate Candidate A" in the Blagojevich indictment, reportedly offered $1.5 million to Blagojevich during a fundraiser if he named Jackson Jr. to Obama's seat. Three days later federal authorities arrested Blagojevich. Burris, for his part, apparently lied about his contacts with Blagojevich, who was arrested in December 2008 for trying to sell Obama's Senate seat. According to Reuters: "Roland Burris came under fresh scrutiny…after disclosing he tried to raise money for the disgraced former Illinois governor who named him to the U.S. Senate seat once held by President Barack Obama…In the latest of those admissions, Burris said he looked into mounting a fundraiser for Rod Blagojevich -- later charged with trying to sell Obama's Senate seat -- at the same time he was expressing interest to the then-governor's aides about his desire to be appointed." Burris changed his story five times regarding his contacts with Blagojevich prior to the Illinois governor appointing him to the U.S. Senate. Three of those changing explanations came under oath.
7.President Barack Obama: During his presidential campaign, President Obama promised to run an ethical and transparent administration. However, in his first year in office, the President has delivered corruption and secrecy, bringing Chicago-style political corruption to the White House. Consider just a few Obama administration "lowlights" from year one: Even before President Obama was sworn into office, he was interviewed by the FBI for a criminal investigation of former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich's scheme to sell the President's former Senate seat to the highest bidder. (Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and slumlord Valerie Jarrett, both from Chicago, are also tangled up in the Blagojevich scandal.) Moreover, the Obama administration made the startling claim that the Privacy Act does not apply to the White House. The Obama White House believes it can violate the privacy rights of American citizens without any legal consequences or accountability. President Obama boldly proclaimed that "transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency," but his administration is addicted to secrecy, stonewalling far too many of Judicial Watch's Freedom of Information Act requests and is refusing to make public White House visitor logs as federal law requires. The Obama administration turned the National Endowment of the Arts (as well as the agency that runs the AmeriCorps program) into propaganda machines, using tax dollars to persuade "artists" to promote the Obama agenda. According to documents uncovered by Judicial Watch, the idea emerged as a direct result of the Obama campaign and enjoyed White House approval and participation. President Obama has installed a record number of "czars" in positions of power. Too many of these individuals are leftist radicals who answer to no one but the president. And too many of the czars are not subject to Senate confirmation (which raises serious constitutional questions). Under the President's bailout schemes, the federal government continues to appropriate or control -- through fiat and threats -- large sectors of the private economy, prompting conservative columnist George Will to write: "The administration's central activity -- the political allocation of wealth and opportunity -- is not merely susceptible to corruption, it is corruption." Government-run healthcare and car companies, White House coercion, uninvestigated ACORN corruption, debasing his office to help Chicago cronies, attacks on conservative media and the private sector, unprecedented and dangerous new rights for terrorists, perks for campaign donors – this is Obama's "ethics" record -- and we haven't even gotten through the first year of his presidency.
8.Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): At the heart of the corruption problem in Washington is a sense of entitlement. Politicians believe laws and rules (even the U.S. Constitution) apply to the rest of us but not to them. Case in point: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her excessive and boorish demands for military travel. Judicial Watch obtained documents from the Pentagon in 2008 that suggest Pelosi has been treating the Air Force like her own personal airline. These documents, obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, include internal Pentagon email correspondence detailing attempts by Pentagon staff to accommodate Pelosi's numerous requests for military escorts and military aircraft as well as the speaker's 11th hour cancellations and changes. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also came under fire in April 2009, when she claimed she was never briefed about the CIA's use of the waterboarding technique during terrorism investigations. The CIA produced a report documenting a briefing with Pelosi on September 4, 2002, that suggests otherwise. Judicial Watch also obtained documents, including a CIA Inspector General report, which further confirmed that Congress was fully briefed on the enhanced interrogation techniques. Aside from her own personal transgressions, Nancy Pelosi has ignored serious incidents of corruption within her own party, including many of the individuals on this list. (See Rangel, Murtha, Jesse Jackson, Jr., etc.)
9.Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) and the rest of the PMA Seven: Rep. John Murtha made headlines in 2009 for all the wrong reasons. The Pennsylvania congressman is under federal investigation for his corrupt relationship with the now-defunct defense lobbyist PMA Group. PMA, founded by a former Murtha associate, has been the congressman's largest campaign contributor. Since 2002, Murtha has raised $1.7 million from PMA and its clients. And what did PMA and its clients receive from Murtha in return for their generosity? Earmarks -- tens of millions of dollars in earmarks. In fact, even with all of the attention surrounding his alleged influence peddling, Murtha kept at it. Following an FBI raid of PMA's offices earlier in 2009, Murtha continued to seek congressional earmarks for PMA clients, while also hitting them up for campaign contributions. According to The Hill, in April, "Murtha reported receiving contributions from three former PMA clients for whom he requested earmarks in the pending appropriations bills." When it comes to the PMA scandal, Murtha is not alone. As many as six other Members of Congress are currently under scrutiny according to The Washington Post. They include: Peter J. Visclosky (D-IN.), James P. Moran Jr. (D-VA), Norm Dicks (D-WA.), Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), C.W. Bill Young (R-FL.) and Todd Tiahrt (R-KS.). Of course rather than investigate this serious scandal, according to Roll Call House Democrats circled the wagons, "cobbling together a defense to offer political cover to their rank and file." The Washington Post also reported in 2009 that Murtha's nephew received $4 million in Defense Department no-bid contracts: "Newly obtained documents…show Robert Murtha mentioning his influential family connection as leverage in his business dealings and holding unusual power with the military."
10.Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY): Rangel, the man in charge of writing tax policy for the entire country, has yet to adequately explain how he could possibly "forget" to pay taxes on $75,000 in rental income he earned from his off-shore rental property. He also faces allegations that he improperly used his influence to maintain ownership of highly coveted rent-controlled apartments in Harlem, and misused his congressional office to fundraise for his private Rangel Center by preserving a tax loophole for an oil drilling company in exchange for funding. On top of all that, Rangel recently amended his financial disclosure reports, which doubled his reported wealth. (He somehow "forgot" about $1 million in assets.) And what did he do when the House Ethics Committee started looking into all of this? He apparently resorted to making "campaign contributions" to dig his way out of trouble. According to WCBS TV, a New York CBS affiliate: "The reigning member of Congress' top tax committee is apparently 'wrangling' other politicos to get him out of his own financial and tax troubles...Since ethics probes began last year the 79-year-old congressman has given campaign donations to 119 members of Congress, including three of the five Democrats on the House Ethics Committee who are charged with investigating him." Charlie Rangel should not be allowed to remain in Congress, let alone serve as Chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, and he knows it. That's why he felt the need to disburse campaign contributions to Ethics Committee members and other congressional colleagues.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Fanny and Freddie....
Just in case you did not hear.
From the Wall Street Journal:
The Obama administration's decision to cover an unlimited amount of losses at the mortgage-finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over the next three years stirred controversy over the holiday.
The Treasury announced Thursday it was removing the caps that limited the amount of available capital to the companies to $200 billion each.
Unlimited access to bailout funds through 2012 was "necessary for preserving the continued strength and stability of the mortgage market," the Treasury said. Fannie and Freddie purchase or guarantee most U.S. home mortgages and have run up huge losses stemming from the worst wave of defaults since the 1930s.
"The timing of this executive order giving Fannie and Freddie a blank check is no coincidence," said Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama, the ranking Republican on the House Financial Services Committee. He said the Christmas Eve announcement was designed "to prevent the general public from taking note."
In exchange for the funding, the Treasury has received preferred stock in the companies paying 10% dividends. The Treasury also has warrants to acquire nearly 80% of the common shares in each firm.
The companies on Thursday disclosed new packages that will pay Fannie Chief Executive Officer Michael Williams and Freddie CEO Charles Haldeman Jr. as much as $6 million a year, including bonuses. The packages were approved by the Treasury and the Federal Housing Finance Agency, or FHFA, which regulates the companies.
At Freddie, annual compensation will total as much as $4.5 million for Bruce Witherell, chief operating officer; $3.5 million for Ross Kari, chief financial officer; $2.8 million for Robert Bostrom, general counsel; and $2.7 million for Paul George, head of human resources.
From the Wall Street Journal:
The Obama administration's decision to cover an unlimited amount of losses at the mortgage-finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over the next three years stirred controversy over the holiday.
The Treasury announced Thursday it was removing the caps that limited the amount of available capital to the companies to $200 billion each.
Unlimited access to bailout funds through 2012 was "necessary for preserving the continued strength and stability of the mortgage market," the Treasury said. Fannie and Freddie purchase or guarantee most U.S. home mortgages and have run up huge losses stemming from the worst wave of defaults since the 1930s.
"The timing of this executive order giving Fannie and Freddie a blank check is no coincidence," said Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama, the ranking Republican on the House Financial Services Committee. He said the Christmas Eve announcement was designed "to prevent the general public from taking note."
In exchange for the funding, the Treasury has received preferred stock in the companies paying 10% dividends. The Treasury also has warrants to acquire nearly 80% of the common shares in each firm.
The companies on Thursday disclosed new packages that will pay Fannie Chief Executive Officer Michael Williams and Freddie CEO Charles Haldeman Jr. as much as $6 million a year, including bonuses. The packages were approved by the Treasury and the Federal Housing Finance Agency, or FHFA, which regulates the companies.
At Freddie, annual compensation will total as much as $4.5 million for Bruce Witherell, chief operating officer; $3.5 million for Ross Kari, chief financial officer; $2.8 million for Robert Bostrom, general counsel; and $2.7 million for Paul George, head of human resources.
Monday, December 28, 2009
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Reid Substitute - Obamacare Bill
Well, since the 60 Traitors voted to send it on, you can now get a copy... I would suggest that you do so, and IMMEDIATELY get on the phone and go and visit your Senator.
Just for a place to start... This is the end of pages 1019 to 1022:
21 ‘‘(3) LIMITATION ON CHANGES TO THE BOARD
22 RECOMMENDATIONS.—
23 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—It shall not be in
24 order in the Senate or the House of Represent
25 atives to consider any bill, resolution, or amend
1020
O:\MAL\MAL09863.xml [file 3 of 9] S.L.C.
1 ment, pursuant to this subsection or conference
2 report thereon, that fails to satisfy the require
3 ments of subparagraphs (A)(i) and (C) of sub
4 section (c)(2).
5 ‘‘(B) LIMITATION ON CHANGES TO THE
6 BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS IN OTHER LEGISLA
7 TION.—It shall not be in order in the Senate or
8 the House of Representatives to consider any
9 bill, resolution, amendment, or conference re
10 port (other than pursuant to this section) that
11 would repeal or otherwise change the rec
12 ommendations of the Board if that change
13 would fail to satisfy the requirements of sub
14 paragraphs (A)(i) and (C) of subsection (c)(2).
15 ‘‘(C) LIMITATION ON CHANGES TO THIS
16 SUBSECTION.—It shall not be in order in the
17 Senate or the House of Representatives to con
18 sider any bill, resolution, amendment, or con
19 ference report that would repeal or otherwise
20 change this subsection.
21 ‘‘(D) WAIVER.—This paragraph may be
22 waived or suspended in the Senate only by the
23 affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members,
24 duly chosen and sworn.1021
O:\MAL\MAL09863.xml [file 3 of 9] S.L.C.
1 ‘‘(E) APPEALS.—An affirmative vote of
2 three-fifths of the Members of the Senate, duly
3 chosen and sworn, shall be required in the Sen
4 ate to sustain an appeal of the ruling of the
5 Chair on a point of order raised under this
6 paragraph.
7 ‘‘(4) EXPEDITED PROCEDURE.—
8 ‘‘(A) CONSIDERATION.—A motion to pro
9 ceed to the consideration of the bill in the Sen
10 ate is not debatable.
11 ‘‘(B) AMENDMENT.—
12 ‘‘(i) TIME LIMITATION.—Debate in
13 the Senate on any amendment to a bill
14 under this section shall be limited to 1
15 hour, to be equally divided between, and
16 controlled by, the mover and the manager
17 of the bill, and debate on any amendment
18 to an amendment, debatable motion, or ap
19 peal shall be limited to 30 minutes, to be
20 equally divided between, and controlled by,
21 the mover and the manager of the bill, ex
22 cept that in the event the manager of the
23 bill is in favor of any such amendment,
24 motion, or appeal, the time in opposition
1022
O:\MAL\MAL09863.xml [file 3 of 9] S.L.C.
1 thereto shall be controlled by the minority
2 leader or such leader’s designee.
OK... For people who don't read legal language all the time, the bold parts say that once this goes forward IT CAN NOT BE CHANGED. Future Congress' are limited they can not change anything about this unless they have a 3/5 majority. Unlike the "normal" 2/3 or even simple majority that is required for everything else.
IF this was legal, if this was consitiutional at all, then why would this not be a normal thing done in EVERY bill? You LIKE your legislation that you put forward, and you want to make sure that it stays in place because you think that it is a good thing... So to keep anyone else from making any changes to it, you put this sort of language in it... It hasn't been done before so far as I could find...
I mean, let's be real... Why wouldn't something like this have been done with the 13th Amendment (abolition of slavery), 15th Amendment (prohibition of exclusion from voting based on race), 16th Amendment (federal taxes on income), 18th Amendment (Prohibition - repealed by the 21st Amendment, which only required a 2/3 majority by the way...). Maybe the 19th? Women's Sufferage? No... Not there either. 22nd - Limiting the President to 2 terms? No... Not there either.
Well... Basically that shows that the "big time" legislation where you would expect to see something done that would limit the ability to change it, it isn't there. The "regular" stuff that is passed by congress has not had anything like that in it either... I have a good idea... How about we all get together and get the sponsors of House Resolution 226 and Senate Bill 388 to add this same language to them and see how loudly the left starts to scream. I personally think that is a good thing, and I'll try to recommend it to them.
Just for a place to start... This is the end of pages 1019 to 1022:
21 ‘‘(3) LIMITATION ON CHANGES TO THE BOARD
22 RECOMMENDATIONS.—
23 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—It shall not be in
24 order in the Senate or the House of Represent
25 atives to consider any bill, resolution, or amend
1020
O:\MAL\MAL09863.xml [file 3 of 9] S.L.C.
1 ment, pursuant to this subsection or conference
2 report thereon, that fails to satisfy the require
3 ments of subparagraphs (A)(i) and (C) of sub
4 section (c)(2).
5 ‘‘(B) LIMITATION ON CHANGES TO THE
6 BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS IN OTHER LEGISLA
7 TION.—It shall not be in order in the Senate or
8 the House of Representatives to consider any
9 bill, resolution, amendment, or conference re
10 port (other than pursuant to this section) that
11 would repeal or otherwise change the rec
12 ommendations of the Board if that change
13 would fail to satisfy the requirements of sub
14 paragraphs (A)(i) and (C) of subsection (c)(2).
15 ‘‘(C) LIMITATION ON CHANGES TO THIS
16 SUBSECTION.—It shall not be in order in the
17 Senate or the House of Representatives to con
18 sider any bill, resolution, amendment, or con
19 ference report that would repeal or otherwise
20 change this subsection.
21 ‘‘(D) WAIVER.—This paragraph may be
22 waived or suspended in the Senate only by the
23 affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members,
24 duly chosen and sworn.1021
O:\MAL\MAL09863.xml [file 3 of 9] S.L.C.
1 ‘‘(E) APPEALS.—An affirmative vote of
2 three-fifths of the Members of the Senate, duly
3 chosen and sworn, shall be required in the Sen
4 ate to sustain an appeal of the ruling of the
5 Chair on a point of order raised under this
6 paragraph.
7 ‘‘(4) EXPEDITED PROCEDURE.—
8 ‘‘(A) CONSIDERATION.—A motion to pro
9 ceed to the consideration of the bill in the Sen
10 ate is not debatable.
11 ‘‘(B) AMENDMENT.—
12 ‘‘(i) TIME LIMITATION.—Debate in
13 the Senate on any amendment to a bill
14 under this section shall be limited to 1
15 hour, to be equally divided between, and
16 controlled by, the mover and the manager
17 of the bill, and debate on any amendment
18 to an amendment, debatable motion, or ap
19 peal shall be limited to 30 minutes, to be
20 equally divided between, and controlled by,
21 the mover and the manager of the bill, ex
22 cept that in the event the manager of the
23 bill is in favor of any such amendment,
24 motion, or appeal, the time in opposition
1022
O:\MAL\MAL09863.xml [file 3 of 9] S.L.C.
1 thereto shall be controlled by the minority
2 leader or such leader’s designee.
OK... For people who don't read legal language all the time, the bold parts say that once this goes forward IT CAN NOT BE CHANGED. Future Congress' are limited they can not change anything about this unless they have a 3/5 majority. Unlike the "normal" 2/3 or even simple majority that is required for everything else.
IF this was legal, if this was consitiutional at all, then why would this not be a normal thing done in EVERY bill? You LIKE your legislation that you put forward, and you want to make sure that it stays in place because you think that it is a good thing... So to keep anyone else from making any changes to it, you put this sort of language in it... It hasn't been done before so far as I could find...
I mean, let's be real... Why wouldn't something like this have been done with the 13th Amendment (abolition of slavery), 15th Amendment (prohibition of exclusion from voting based on race), 16th Amendment (federal taxes on income), 18th Amendment (Prohibition - repealed by the 21st Amendment, which only required a 2/3 majority by the way...). Maybe the 19th? Women's Sufferage? No... Not there either. 22nd - Limiting the President to 2 terms? No... Not there either.
Well... Basically that shows that the "big time" legislation where you would expect to see something done that would limit the ability to change it, it isn't there. The "regular" stuff that is passed by congress has not had anything like that in it either... I have a good idea... How about we all get together and get the sponsors of House Resolution 226 and Senate Bill 388 to add this same language to them and see how loudly the left starts to scream. I personally think that is a good thing, and I'll try to recommend it to them.
OBITUARY
Born 1776, Died 2008
It does not hurt to read this several times.
Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning last November's Presidential election:
• Number of States won by:
Obama: 19 McCain: 29
• Square miles of land won by:
Obama: 580,000 McCain: 2,427,000
• Population of counties won by:
Obama: 127 million McCain: 143 million
• Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by:
Obama: 13.2 McCain: 2.1
Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory McCain won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country.
Obama territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in low income tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."
Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.
If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegals and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years.
If you are in favor of this, then by all means, ignore this and just go on as you are, it will happen.
However...
If you are not, then pass this information along to help everyone realize just how much is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.
Monday, December 21, 2009
Ain't it amazing...
Last night, the Senate forced another key vote on health care legislation in the dead of night -- on a 383 page amendment that few were allowed to see or further amend.
The only things known about this bill, as stated in a Washington Post op-ed are: "It will not cover everyone. It will not control costs. It will worsen the budget outlook. It will lead to higher taxes. It will disrupt how, or whether, companies provide insurance for their workers."
With the final vote expected on Christmas Eve constituents need to weigh in now.
As Senator Olympia Snowe said:
"Ultimately, there is absolutely no reason to be hurtling headlong to a Christmas deadline on monumental legislation affecting every American... When 51 percent of the American people in a recent survey have said they do not approve of what we are doing, they understand what Congress does not -- and that is, that time is not our enemy, it is our friend.
The only things known about this bill, as stated in a Washington Post op-ed are: "It will not cover everyone. It will not control costs. It will worsen the budget outlook. It will lead to higher taxes. It will disrupt how, or whether, companies provide insurance for their workers."
With the final vote expected on Christmas Eve constituents need to weigh in now.
As Senator Olympia Snowe said:
"Ultimately, there is absolutely no reason to be hurtling headlong to a Christmas deadline on monumental legislation affecting every American... When 51 percent of the American people in a recent survey have said they do not approve of what we are doing, they understand what Congress does not -- and that is, that time is not our enemy, it is our friend.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
How much does a vote cost?
How much does it cost to buy a vote in Congress? Well, if you are a "swing" vote, the final vote needed to get leglislation passed that some people want, even if the majority of the people, the citizenry of the United States do not want, it can be very expensive for the rest of us. SEN Ben Nelson (Democrat - Nebraska) got one HECK of a pay off for voting for Obama Care. The price that we are going to get to pay? The state of Nebraska will NEVER have to pay it's share of Medicare costs, ever again. Yes, not a 4, 6, or even 10 year deal, but a FOREVER deal. We the other 49 States will be covering the cost of Nebraska's medical costs for the rest of the history of the United States of America.
Way to go Ben... You struck a hard bargin. Way to go Obama/Pelosi et al. You sold us all down the river, because of your greed and lust for power...
Way to go Ben... You struck a hard bargin. Way to go Obama/Pelosi et al. You sold us all down the river, because of your greed and lust for power...
Friday, December 18, 2009
Supreme Court Case
I found this interesting... I wonder if Congress is realizing that the majority of the people actually are conserative? If they truly thought that the majority was liberal, there would be no way that this many members of Congress would have signed. Unless they are just sure that the press will not report it...
SCOTUS to Determine Scope of Second Amendment
On Nov. 16, 2009, the NRA filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court as Respondent in Support of Petitioner in McDonald v. City of Chicago. The NRA brief asks the U.S. Supreme Court to hold that the Second Amendment applies to state and local governments through the Fourteenth Amendment.
The McDonald case is one of several that were filed immediately after last year's decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the Court upheld the Second Amendment as an individual right and invalidated Washington, D.C.'s ban on handgun possession, as well as the city's ban on keeping loaded, operable firearms for self-defense in the home.
In September, the Supreme Court agreed to consider the McDonald case, on appeal from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. That court incorrectly claimed that prior Supreme Court precedent prevented it from holding in favor of incorporation of the Second Amendment. As the NRA argued at the time, the Seventh Circuit should have followed the lead of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Nordyke v. King, which found that Supreme Court precedent does not prevent the Second Amendment from applying to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause.
Support for incorporation of the Second Amendment is very strong, and numerous additional briefs have recently been filed and signed by both federal and state officials.
Recently, an overwhelming, bipartisan majority of members of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate signed an amicus curiae, or "friend of the court," brief supporting the NRA's position that the Second Amendment is incorporated against the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. The amicus brief bears the signatures of a record 251 Members of Congress and 58 Senators—the most signers of a congressional amicus brief in the history of the Supreme Court.
In addition to the federal brief, a large bipartisan group of state legislators and other elected officials from all 50 states, along with more than three-fourths of state attorney generals also filed amicus curiae briefs in the McDonald case this week. They, too, are supporting the NRA's position that the Second Amendment is incorporated against the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
SCOTUS to Determine Scope of Second Amendment
On Nov. 16, 2009, the NRA filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court as Respondent in Support of Petitioner in McDonald v. City of Chicago. The NRA brief asks the U.S. Supreme Court to hold that the Second Amendment applies to state and local governments through the Fourteenth Amendment.
The McDonald case is one of several that were filed immediately after last year's decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the Court upheld the Second Amendment as an individual right and invalidated Washington, D.C.'s ban on handgun possession, as well as the city's ban on keeping loaded, operable firearms for self-defense in the home.
In September, the Supreme Court agreed to consider the McDonald case, on appeal from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. That court incorrectly claimed that prior Supreme Court precedent prevented it from holding in favor of incorporation of the Second Amendment. As the NRA argued at the time, the Seventh Circuit should have followed the lead of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Nordyke v. King, which found that Supreme Court precedent does not prevent the Second Amendment from applying to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause.
Support for incorporation of the Second Amendment is very strong, and numerous additional briefs have recently been filed and signed by both federal and state officials.
Recently, an overwhelming, bipartisan majority of members of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate signed an amicus curiae, or "friend of the court," brief supporting the NRA's position that the Second Amendment is incorporated against the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. The amicus brief bears the signatures of a record 251 Members of Congress and 58 Senators—the most signers of a congressional amicus brief in the history of the Supreme Court.
In addition to the federal brief, a large bipartisan group of state legislators and other elected officials from all 50 states, along with more than three-fourths of state attorney generals also filed amicus curiae briefs in the McDonald case this week. They, too, are supporting the NRA's position that the Second Amendment is incorporated against the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
Monday, December 14, 2009
Who Am I?
I was born in one country, raised in another.
My father was born in another country.
I was not his only child.
He fathered several children with numerous women.
I became very close to my mother, as my father showed no interest in me.
My mother died at an early age from cancer.
Although my father deserted me and my mother raised me,
I later wrote a book idolizing my father not my mother.
Later in life, questions arose over my real name.
My birth records were sketchy.
No one was able to produce a legitimate, reliable birth certificate.
I grew up practicing one faith but converted to Christianity, as it was widely accepted in my new country, but I practiced non-traditional beliefs and didn't follow Christianity, except in the public eye under scrutiny.
I worked and lived among lower-class people as a young adult, disguising myself as someone who really cared about them.
That was before I decided it was time to get serious about my life. and I embarked on a new career.
I wrote a book about my struggles growing up.
It was clear to those who read my memoirs, that I had difficulties accepting that my father abandoned me as a child.
I became active in local politics in my 30's then, with help behind the scenes,
I literally burst onto the scene as a candidate for national office in my 40s.
They said I had a golden tongue and could talk anyone into anything.
I had a virtually non-existent resume, little work history, and no experience in leading a single organization.
Yet I was a powerful speaker and citizens were drawn to me, as though I were a magnet and they were small roofing tacks.
I drew incredibly large crowds during my public appearances.
This bolstered my ego.
At first, my political campaign focused on my country's foreign policy...
I was very critical of my country in the last war, and seized every opportunity to bash my country.
But what launched my rise to national prominence were my views on the country's economy.
I pretended to have a really good plan on how we could do better, and every poor person would be fed and housed for free.
I knew which group was responsible for getting us into this mess.
It was the free market, banks and corporations.
I decided to start making citizens hate them and, if they became envious of others who did well, the plan was clinched tight.
I called mine "A People's Campaign".
That sounded good to all people.
I was the surprise candidate because I emerged from outside the traditional path of politics and was able to gain widespread popular support.
I knew that, if I merely offered the people 'hope',
together we could change our country and the world.
So, I started to make my speeches sound like they were on
behalf of the downtrodden, poor, ignorant to include "persecuted minorities".
My true views were not widely known and I kept them unknown, until after I became my nation's leader.
I had to carefully guard reality, as anybody could have easily found out what I really believed, if they had simply read my writings and examined those people I associated with.
I'm glad they didn't.
Then I became the most powerful man in the world.
And the world learned the truth.
Who am I?
ADOLF HITLER
If you were thinking BARACK OBAMA
You Should Be Scared, Very Scared!
My father was born in another country.
I was not his only child.
He fathered several children with numerous women.
I became very close to my mother, as my father showed no interest in me.
My mother died at an early age from cancer.
Although my father deserted me and my mother raised me,
I later wrote a book idolizing my father not my mother.
Later in life, questions arose over my real name.
My birth records were sketchy.
No one was able to produce a legitimate, reliable birth certificate.
I grew up practicing one faith but converted to Christianity, as it was widely accepted in my new country, but I practiced non-traditional beliefs and didn't follow Christianity, except in the public eye under scrutiny.
I worked and lived among lower-class people as a young adult, disguising myself as someone who really cared about them.
That was before I decided it was time to get serious about my life. and I embarked on a new career.
I wrote a book about my struggles growing up.
It was clear to those who read my memoirs, that I had difficulties accepting that my father abandoned me as a child.
I became active in local politics in my 30's then, with help behind the scenes,
I literally burst onto the scene as a candidate for national office in my 40s.
They said I had a golden tongue and could talk anyone into anything.
I had a virtually non-existent resume, little work history, and no experience in leading a single organization.
Yet I was a powerful speaker and citizens were drawn to me, as though I were a magnet and they were small roofing tacks.
I drew incredibly large crowds during my public appearances.
This bolstered my ego.
At first, my political campaign focused on my country's foreign policy...
I was very critical of my country in the last war, and seized every opportunity to bash my country.
But what launched my rise to national prominence were my views on the country's economy.
I pretended to have a really good plan on how we could do better, and every poor person would be fed and housed for free.
I knew which group was responsible for getting us into this mess.
It was the free market, banks and corporations.
I decided to start making citizens hate them and, if they became envious of others who did well, the plan was clinched tight.
I called mine "A People's Campaign".
That sounded good to all people.
I was the surprise candidate because I emerged from outside the traditional path of politics and was able to gain widespread popular support.
I knew that, if I merely offered the people 'hope',
together we could change our country and the world.
So, I started to make my speeches sound like they were on
behalf of the downtrodden, poor, ignorant to include "persecuted minorities".
My true views were not widely known and I kept them unknown, until after I became my nation's leader.
I had to carefully guard reality, as anybody could have easily found out what I really believed, if they had simply read my writings and examined those people I associated with.
I'm glad they didn't.
Then I became the most powerful man in the world.
And the world learned the truth.
Who am I?
ADOLF HITLER
If you were thinking BARACK OBAMA
You Should Be Scared, Very Scared!
Global Warming? Snow Falls Down Under During Australian Summer | NewsBusters.org
Paging Al Gore!
The global warming alarmists are claiming that 2010 could be the warmest year on record. Perhaps they better inform Mother Nature about this since she seems to be having other plans leading into the new year. Not only is the U.S.A. experiencing unusually cold weather but, almost unbelievably, Australia has just had some snowfall two weeks into their summer which officially began on December 1. Here is a report from the Australian Weather Zone about the summer snow:
Most people consider summer a time to wear shorts and thongs wherever one pleases, with little thought of ski jackets or snowboards. However Victoria's Mount Baw Baw saw a light dusting of snow, and it's already two weeks into summer.
Global Warming? Snow Falls Down Under During Australian Summer | NewsBusters.org
The global warming alarmists are claiming that 2010 could be the warmest year on record. Perhaps they better inform Mother Nature about this since she seems to be having other plans leading into the new year. Not only is the U.S.A. experiencing unusually cold weather but, almost unbelievably, Australia has just had some snowfall two weeks into their summer which officially began on December 1. Here is a report from the Australian Weather Zone about the summer snow:
Most people consider summer a time to wear shorts and thongs wherever one pleases, with little thought of ski jackets or snowboards. However Victoria's Mount Baw Baw saw a light dusting of snow, and it's already two weeks into summer.
Global Warming? Snow Falls Down Under During Australian Summer | NewsBusters.org
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
An Obituary That Changed Perception
Have you ever wondered what it would be like to read your own obituary? More than 100 years ago that actually happened to one of the richest men in the world. What he read changed forever how he would be remembered.
The man was Alfred B. Nobel. The source of his vast wealth was the invention of dynamite, which quickly became the most popular explosive in the world. Governments ordered it in huge quantities. Armies were able to kill and maim huge numbers of enemy combatants faster and easier than ever before.
By the late 1800s there were dynamite factories and munitions-makers the world over. Alfred Nobel was wealthy “beyond the dreams of avarice,” as the saying goes. Then fate intervened.
Alfred’s brother died. But when it was erroneously reported that it was Alfred who had left this vale of tears, he got to read the obituaries that the world’s press wrote about him.
Alfred was appalled to see that his legacy would be one of bloodshed and death, and he vowed to change it. By leaving the bulk of his vast fortune to fund something that would become known as the Nobel Prizes, he was able to do so.
Alfred Nobel died on Dec. 10, 1896. For more than a century, the Nobel Committee in Stockholm, Sweden, has honored their benefactor by awarding the Nobel Prizes on the date of his passing. Some of the recipients are actually worthy of the wealth and acclaim they receive.
The man was Alfred B. Nobel. The source of his vast wealth was the invention of dynamite, which quickly became the most popular explosive in the world. Governments ordered it in huge quantities. Armies were able to kill and maim huge numbers of enemy combatants faster and easier than ever before.
By the late 1800s there were dynamite factories and munitions-makers the world over. Alfred Nobel was wealthy “beyond the dreams of avarice,” as the saying goes. Then fate intervened.
Alfred’s brother died. But when it was erroneously reported that it was Alfred who had left this vale of tears, he got to read the obituaries that the world’s press wrote about him.
Alfred was appalled to see that his legacy would be one of bloodshed and death, and he vowed to change it. By leaving the bulk of his vast fortune to fund something that would become known as the Nobel Prizes, he was able to do so.
Alfred Nobel died on Dec. 10, 1896. For more than a century, the Nobel Committee in Stockholm, Sweden, has honored their benefactor by awarding the Nobel Prizes on the date of his passing. Some of the recipients are actually worthy of the wealth and acclaim they receive.
Friday, December 4, 2009
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
At midnight last night, the United Kingdom ceased to be a sovereign state
For anyone who believes that the goal of the progressive agenda is NOT One World Government, you need to read this carefully. This can just as easily happen here. We could go to bed one night in a sovereign nation and wake up in a subject state. How many times are treaties signed by members of our Government and we don't even know about it or what it says? We can very easily have someone who doesn't care about our country, our way of live, our about our beliefs deciding what we can do, what we can say, what we can see, what we can hear... What we can or can not own...
At midnight last night, the United Kingdom ceased to be a sovereign state
At midnight last night, the United Kingdom ceased to be a sovereign state
At midnight last night, the United Kingdom ceased to be a sovereign state
For anyone who thinks that the One World Government is not the progressive agenda, then you need to read this VERY carefully. You can very easily be saying the same thing that he is... You go to bed one night in a sovereign country, and wake up in a subject state. Someone who doesn't care about your country or your way of life, or your beliefs will be deciding what laws will be emplaced on you, and where your tax dollars will be spent, what you will be allowed to have, to see, to say...
At midnight last night, the United Kingdom ceased to be a sovereign state
At midnight last night, the United Kingdom ceased to be a sovereign state
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Terrorist Organization = Charity???
Hamas-Linked Charity Offers $1.4M for Israeli Soldier Abduction
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip —
A Gaza charity headed by the interior minister of the militant Hamas group on Wednesday offered $1.4 million to any Arab citizen of Israel who abducts a soldier.
Palestinians have frequently called on Israeli Arabs to abduct Israeli soldiers, but this is the first time that money has been offered.
The Waad group from Gaza offered the bounty for Israeli soldiers in an e-mail sent to Palestinian media. The organization, which supports Palestinian prisoners held by Israel, is headed by Hamas' Interior Minister Fathi Hamad. The minister did not return messages seeking comment.
The charity could presumably raise the cash through its connections with Hamas. The militant group is thought to have millions of dollars at its disposal, both through its tight control of Gaza and support from Iran and other allies.
Waad's director, Usama Kahlout, said the bounty was in response to an Israeli group's offer to pay Gaza residents for information on the whereabouts of Sgt. Gilad Schalit, an Israeli soldier captured more than three years ago by Hamas-allied militants.
The Born to Freedom Foundation offered $10 million for information pertaining to Israeli soldiers missing in action or held captive. Activists routinely call phone numbers in Gaza as well as in Lebanon looking for leads on missing Israeli soldiers. Israeli intelligence is also believed to call Gazans in search of information.
German mediators are currently overseeing negotiations between bitter rivals Israel and Hamas to exchange Schalit for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails.
Israel is holding some 7,500 Palestinian prisoners. Schalit is the only Israeli held by Hamas, while four Israelis who disappeared in Lebanon in the 1980s remain unaccounted for.
On Wednesday, visiting French foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, met with Schalit's parents in Jerusalem. The Schalits have French citizenship, and French President Nicolas Sarkozy has offered his support to the family.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip —
A Gaza charity headed by the interior minister of the militant Hamas group on Wednesday offered $1.4 million to any Arab citizen of Israel who abducts a soldier.
Palestinians have frequently called on Israeli Arabs to abduct Israeli soldiers, but this is the first time that money has been offered.
The Waad group from Gaza offered the bounty for Israeli soldiers in an e-mail sent to Palestinian media. The organization, which supports Palestinian prisoners held by Israel, is headed by Hamas' Interior Minister Fathi Hamad. The minister did not return messages seeking comment.
The charity could presumably raise the cash through its connections with Hamas. The militant group is thought to have millions of dollars at its disposal, both through its tight control of Gaza and support from Iran and other allies.
Waad's director, Usama Kahlout, said the bounty was in response to an Israeli group's offer to pay Gaza residents for information on the whereabouts of Sgt. Gilad Schalit, an Israeli soldier captured more than three years ago by Hamas-allied militants.
The Born to Freedom Foundation offered $10 million for information pertaining to Israeli soldiers missing in action or held captive. Activists routinely call phone numbers in Gaza as well as in Lebanon looking for leads on missing Israeli soldiers. Israeli intelligence is also believed to call Gazans in search of information.
German mediators are currently overseeing negotiations between bitter rivals Israel and Hamas to exchange Schalit for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails.
Israel is holding some 7,500 Palestinian prisoners. Schalit is the only Israeli held by Hamas, while four Israelis who disappeared in Lebanon in the 1980s remain unaccounted for.
On Wednesday, visiting French foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, met with Schalit's parents in Jerusalem. The Schalits have French citizenship, and French President Nicolas Sarkozy has offered his support to the family.
New Report from the Center for Disease Control
Well, I think that this is telling... In the new report from the CDC on Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STD's), Washington, D.C., the Nations Capitol, won the Triple Crown! They had the highest rate in the nation for Syphilis, Gonorrhea and Chlamydia.
D.C. posted a Chlamydia rate of 1,177 cases per 100,000 people, the number two rate was Mississippi at 728 per 100,000. As a comparison, D.C.'s neighbors were 405 - Virginia and 439 - Maryland.
In Gonorrhea, D.C. reported 451.5 cases per 100,000, almost twice Mississippi's rate (again they were number 2) of 256.8. Virginia (134) and Maryland (118) were a good ways down this list as well.
The third part of the Triple Crown, Syphilis, D.C.'s rate was 24.8 cases per 100,000 (primary and secondary). Louisiana had the distinction of being second on this one, with 16.5 cases per 100,000. Third place went to Alabama with 9.7. Neighbors Virginia (3.4) and Maryland (6.7) were again, a ways down the list.
I guess that maybe we should all be sure that we are using some sort of protection when we go to visit our representatives?
If you want to see the report, it is available from the CDC's web site. Just click HERE
D.C. posted a Chlamydia rate of 1,177 cases per 100,000 people, the number two rate was Mississippi at 728 per 100,000. As a comparison, D.C.'s neighbors were 405 - Virginia and 439 - Maryland.
In Gonorrhea, D.C. reported 451.5 cases per 100,000, almost twice Mississippi's rate (again they were number 2) of 256.8. Virginia (134) and Maryland (118) were a good ways down this list as well.
The third part of the Triple Crown, Syphilis, D.C.'s rate was 24.8 cases per 100,000 (primary and secondary). Louisiana had the distinction of being second on this one, with 16.5 cases per 100,000. Third place went to Alabama with 9.7. Neighbors Virginia (3.4) and Maryland (6.7) were again, a ways down the list.
I guess that maybe we should all be sure that we are using some sort of protection when we go to visit our representatives?
If you want to see the report, it is available from the CDC's web site. Just click HERE
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Health and safety snoops to enter family homes - Times Online
Everyone should read this... Yes, this is going on in Britain. Why should you care, you ask? Well... If they can do it there, they WILL do it here, if we allow. We have to fight, everything that they want to do, at every turn, in order to keep what little freedom we have.
Health and Safety inspections... Think about it for a minute. Do you have cleaning chemicals in your house? Are the stored in a locked container? Are the chemicals all separated by type so that there could not be any chemical reactions by any of them leaking? That's a hazard that you need to fix. Do you have electrical outlets that are "uncovered" where someone could put something in them? That's a hazard if you have little children who have access to your home. Do you have ANY outlets in your kitchen, laundry or bathrooms that are not GFI? That is a hazard that will have to be fixed. Do you have carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide detectors in the area around any furnaces, gas heating appliances, or garage access areas? That is a hazard that will have to be fixed. Do you have stairs? Are they gated? Need I go on?
Health and safety snoops to enter family homes - Times Online
Health and Safety inspections... Think about it for a minute. Do you have cleaning chemicals in your house? Are the stored in a locked container? Are the chemicals all separated by type so that there could not be any chemical reactions by any of them leaking? That's a hazard that you need to fix. Do you have electrical outlets that are "uncovered" where someone could put something in them? That's a hazard if you have little children who have access to your home. Do you have ANY outlets in your kitchen, laundry or bathrooms that are not GFI? That is a hazard that will have to be fixed. Do you have carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide detectors in the area around any furnaces, gas heating appliances, or garage access areas? That is a hazard that will have to be fixed. Do you have stairs? Are they gated? Need I go on?
Health and safety snoops to enter family homes - Times Online
Monday, November 16, 2009
EDITORIAL: Covering up jihad - Washington Times
This is a VERY good read, and very important for everyone to read and think about. And we all know that the Washington Times is NOT a conserative publication....
EDITORIAL: Covering up jihad - Washington Times
EDITORIAL: Covering up jihad - Washington Times
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Who's More Important?
I just don't understand it, and I am sure that the Networks are going to be of the same opinion about the way that most of us feel. They just don't get it.
The coverage Tuesday by the networks of the memorial service for the soldiers who were killed in the terrorist event there was rather telling, I think. NBC offered live coverage of the whole service. Soldiers snapping to attention and saluting as the National Anthem was played, silently mouthing the words of the Warrior Ethos along with GEN George Casey as he recited it. ABC and CBS? They were showing their "regularly scheduled" soap operas. No mention of the events going on at Ft Hood. When did they go to it? They broke in to their soaps when President Obama was stepping up to the teleprompter.
When did ABC and CBS end their coverage? CBS left as Obama stepped away from the mic, ABC held on until the start of "Amazing Grace" then they went back to the soaps. No Chaplains speaking, no prayers, no hymns, no National Anthem, no Generals speaking, no Taps. No thought or consideration given to the families across the nation who lost loved ones in that event at Ft Hood. Brothers, Sisters, Grandsons, Grand daughters, nephews and nieces, friends, loved ones from all walks of life and all stages of life. All they cared about, or so it seems anyway was the "photo op" of Pres Obama making an appearance at the memorial service. Nothing else.
Now, lets compare that to a Tuesday in July. Another memorial service. This one for the "King of Pop". According to the Nielsen ratings 30.9 million people over 3 hours watched that memorial service, because there was nothing else on the TV. As Brent Bozell said then, "On the night of July 6, ABC, CBS and NBC paid twenty times more attention to Jackson, more than a week after his death, than to the deaths of 7 brave soldiers in Afghanistan."
I know that I am biased, because I have spent most of my adult life (in fact basically HALF of my life at this point) in the Army. I know people at Ft Hood. But this is something that SHOULD have been on the top of the lists for ALL NETWORKS. NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX, MSNBC... All of them.
Well, that's my opinion...
The coverage Tuesday by the networks of the memorial service for the soldiers who were killed in the terrorist event there was rather telling, I think. NBC offered live coverage of the whole service. Soldiers snapping to attention and saluting as the National Anthem was played, silently mouthing the words of the Warrior Ethos along with GEN George Casey as he recited it. ABC and CBS? They were showing their "regularly scheduled" soap operas. No mention of the events going on at Ft Hood. When did they go to it? They broke in to their soaps when President Obama was stepping up to the teleprompter.
When did ABC and CBS end their coverage? CBS left as Obama stepped away from the mic, ABC held on until the start of "Amazing Grace" then they went back to the soaps. No Chaplains speaking, no prayers, no hymns, no National Anthem, no Generals speaking, no Taps. No thought or consideration given to the families across the nation who lost loved ones in that event at Ft Hood. Brothers, Sisters, Grandsons, Grand daughters, nephews and nieces, friends, loved ones from all walks of life and all stages of life. All they cared about, or so it seems anyway was the "photo op" of Pres Obama making an appearance at the memorial service. Nothing else.
Now, lets compare that to a Tuesday in July. Another memorial service. This one for the "King of Pop". According to the Nielsen ratings 30.9 million people over 3 hours watched that memorial service, because there was nothing else on the TV. As Brent Bozell said then, "On the night of July 6, ABC, CBS and NBC paid twenty times more attention to Jackson, more than a week after his death, than to the deaths of 7 brave soldiers in Afghanistan."
I know that I am biased, because I have spent most of my adult life (in fact basically HALF of my life at this point) in the Army. I know people at Ft Hood. But this is something that SHOULD have been on the top of the lists for ALL NETWORKS. NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX, MSNBC... All of them.
Well, that's my opinion...
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
PELOSI: Buy a $15,000 Policy or Go to Jail
I am making this post pretty much without comment, I think that it doesn't need any...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JCT Confirms Failure to Comply with Democrats’ Mandate Can Lead to 5 Years in Jail
Friday, November 06, 2009
Today, Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI) released a letter from the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) confirming that the failure to comply with the individual mandate to buy health insurance contained in the Pelosi health care bill (H.R. 3962, as amended) could land people in jail. The JCT letter makes clear that Americans who do not maintain “acceptable health insurance coverage” and who choose not to pay the bill’s new individual mandate tax (generally 2.5% of income), are subject to numerous civil and criminal penalties, including criminal fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years.
In response to the JCT letter, Camp said: “This is the ultimate example of the Democrats’ command-and-control style of governing – buy what we tell you or go to jail. It is outrageous and it should be stopped immediately.”
Key excerpts from the JCT letter appear below:
“H.R. 3962 provides that an individual (or a husband and wife in the case of a joint return) who does not, at any time during the taxable year, maintain acceptable health insurance coverage for himself or herself and each of his or her qualifying children is subject to an additional tax.” [page 1]
- - - - - - - - - -
“If the government determines that the taxpayer’s unpaid tax liability results from willful behavior, the following penalties could apply…” [page 2]
- - - - - - - - - -
“Criminal penalties
Prosecution is authorized under the Code for a variety of offenses. Depending on the level of the noncompliance, the following penalties could apply to an individual:
• Section 7203 – misdemeanor willful failure to pay is punishable by a fine of up to $25,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year.
• Section 7201 – felony willful evasion is punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.” [page 3]
When confronted with this same issue during its consideration of a similar individual mandate tax, the Senate Finance Committee worked on a bipartisan basis to include language in its bill that shielded Americans from civil and criminal penalties. The Pelosi bill, however, contains no similar language protecting American citizens from civil and criminal tax penalties that could include a $250,000 fine and five years in jail.
“The Senate Finance Committee had the good sense to eliminate the extreme penalty of incarceration. Speaker Pelosi’s decision to leave in the jail time provision is a threat to every family who cannot afford the $15,000 premium her plan creates. Fortunately, Republicans have an alternative that will lower health insurance costs without raising taxes or cutting Medicare,” said Camp.
According to the Congressional Budget Office the lowest cost family non-group plan under the Speaker’s bill would cost $15,000 in 2016.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JCT Confirms Failure to Comply with Democrats’ Mandate Can Lead to 5 Years in Jail
Friday, November 06, 2009
Today, Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI) released a letter from the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) confirming that the failure to comply with the individual mandate to buy health insurance contained in the Pelosi health care bill (H.R. 3962, as amended) could land people in jail. The JCT letter makes clear that Americans who do not maintain “acceptable health insurance coverage” and who choose not to pay the bill’s new individual mandate tax (generally 2.5% of income), are subject to numerous civil and criminal penalties, including criminal fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years.
In response to the JCT letter, Camp said: “This is the ultimate example of the Democrats’ command-and-control style of governing – buy what we tell you or go to jail. It is outrageous and it should be stopped immediately.”
Key excerpts from the JCT letter appear below:
“H.R. 3962 provides that an individual (or a husband and wife in the case of a joint return) who does not, at any time during the taxable year, maintain acceptable health insurance coverage for himself or herself and each of his or her qualifying children is subject to an additional tax.” [page 1]
- - - - - - - - - -
“If the government determines that the taxpayer’s unpaid tax liability results from willful behavior, the following penalties could apply…” [page 2]
- - - - - - - - - -
“Criminal penalties
Prosecution is authorized under the Code for a variety of offenses. Depending on the level of the noncompliance, the following penalties could apply to an individual:
• Section 7203 – misdemeanor willful failure to pay is punishable by a fine of up to $25,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year.
• Section 7201 – felony willful evasion is punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.” [page 3]
When confronted with this same issue during its consideration of a similar individual mandate tax, the Senate Finance Committee worked on a bipartisan basis to include language in its bill that shielded Americans from civil and criminal penalties. The Pelosi bill, however, contains no similar language protecting American citizens from civil and criminal tax penalties that could include a $250,000 fine and five years in jail.
“The Senate Finance Committee had the good sense to eliminate the extreme penalty of incarceration. Speaker Pelosi’s decision to leave in the jail time provision is a threat to every family who cannot afford the $15,000 premium her plan creates. Fortunately, Republicans have an alternative that will lower health insurance costs without raising taxes or cutting Medicare,” said Camp.
According to the Congressional Budget Office the lowest cost family non-group plan under the Speaker’s bill would cost $15,000 in 2016.
Monday, November 2, 2009
Sen Hatch's Statement on Healthcare
While he is NOT on the top of my Favorite People list, he is right about this...
Friday, October 30, 2009
Mapping Rabbit Feces, Studying Facebook, And Building MLB Spring Training Facilities Are All Financed By The American Taxpayer
How many of us remember the promises during the campaign to provide "the most transparent, open administration ever"? And now there are so many questons about the stimulis money and where it went... WELL...
This is from the Senate Republicans...
1. $300,000 FOR MAPPING RADIOACTIVE RABBIT FECES:
“A Week Mapping Radioactive Rabbit Feces With Detectors Mounted On A Helicopter Flying 50 Feet Over The Desert Scrub. … $300,000 In Federal Stimulus Money.” “A government contractor at Hanford, in south-central Washington State, just spent a week mapping radioactive rabbit feces with detectors mounted on a helicopter flying 50 feet over the desert scrub. … the helicopter flights, which covered 13.7 square miles and were paid for with $300,000 in federal stimulus money, took place in an area that had never been used by the bomb makers. … Marylia Kelley, the executive director of a California group called Tri-Valley Communities Against a Radioactive Environment, said the rabbit cleanup was ‘kind of funny, in a sick way.’” (“Even Rabbit Droppings Count In Nuclear Cleanup,” The New York Times, 10/14/09)
2. $4,200-$5,500 TAX CREDIT FOR PURCHASING GOLF CARTS:“President Obama’s Stimulus Plan… Is Now Paying Americans To Buy That Great Necessity Of Modern Life, The Golf Cart.” “Thanks to the federal tax credit to buy high-mileage cars that was part of President Obama's stimulus plan, Uncle Sam is now paying Americans to buy that great necessity of modern life, the golf cart. The federal credit provides from $4,200 to $5,500 for the purchase of an electric vehicle, and when it is combined with similar incentive plans in many states the tax credits can pay for nearly the entire cost of a golf cart.” (“Cash For Clubbers,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/17/09)
3. $219,000 TO STUDY THE SEX LIVES OF FEMALE COLLEGE FRESHMEN:
“Five Hundred Syracuse University Freshmen Will Divulge The Details Of Their Sex Lives … $219,000 In Stimulus Funds For The Study.” “Five hundred Syracuse University freshmen will divulge the details of their sex lives as part of a women's health study called ‘The Women's Health Project,’ being conducted by Michael Carey, SU professor of psychology and medicine. Carey has found himself the target of nationwide criticism from conservatives since he received $219,000 in stimulus funds for the study, which looks at the sex patterns of college women.” (“SU Sex Study Raises Concern,” The [Syracuse] Daily Orange, 9/8/09)
4. $1 MILLION TO RENOVATE “THE SUNSET STRIP”:
“Sunset Boulevard, Also Known As ‘The Sunset Strip’ And One Of The Most Famous Streets In The World, Will Be Getting A $7 Million Facelift After More Than 75 Years Of Use, With A Free Million Dollar Nose Job Coming From Uncle Sam. The City of West Hollywood Council received one million dollars in federal funds from the Federal American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA), (otherwise known as the $700 billion federal stimulus package), for the long-planned Sunset Strip Beautification Project, which is scheduled to break ground soon. The guaranteed funding will allow the City to increase the already nearly $7 million budgeted for this project by an additional $1,105,000, meaning enhancements to a project that already included the resurfacing of the roadway, sidewalk and improved landscaping.” (“Feds Stimulus Sunset Strip Beautification Project,” WeHoNews, 9/28/09)
5. $2.3 MILLION FOR BUG RESEARCH IN CONNECTICUT:
“$2.3 Million” “Federal Economic Stimulus Cash” For “Rearing Large Numbers Of Arthropods” Such As “Nasty Invasive Insects Like The Asian Longhorned Beetle, The Nun Moth, And The Infamous ‘Predator Of The Hemlock,’ The Woolly Adelgid.” “‘Rearing large numbers of arthropods’ probably isn't the first thing that comes to mind when you think about using Connecticut's $3 billion in federal economic stimulus cash. But the U.S. Forest Service is using part of the $2.3 million it's spending here to fix up a quarantine research facility in Ansonia. (The arthropods, by the way, are nasty invasive insects like the Asian longhorned beetle, the nun moth, and the infamous ‘predator of the hemlock,’ the woolly adelgid.)” (“Money For Nothing,” New Haven Advocate, 9/1/09)
6. $6 MILLION FOR A SNOWMAKING FACILITY IN THE 15th SNOWIEST CITY IN THE COUNTRY:
“The Other Third Of The Stimulus, Government Infrastructure Spending, Has Been The Most Controversial From The Start. Some Proposals Have Been Criticized As Wasteful, Such As A $6 Million Snowmaking Facility In Duluth, Minn.” (“The Challenge In Counting Stimulus Returns,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/27/09) (Top 101 Cities With The Highest Average Snowfall In A Year (Population 50,000+))
7. $500,000 TO STUDY “SOCIAL NETWORKS LIKE FACEBOOK”:
“A $498,000, Three-Year Grant” To Study “Social Networks Like Facebook.” “Millions of Internet users have been enjoying the fun -- and free -- services provided by advertiser-supported online social networks like Facebook. But Landon Cox, a Duke University assistant professor of computer science, worries about the possible down side -- privacy problems. … To delve deeper into these issues and begin the search for alternatives, Cox recently won a $498,000, three-year grant from the National Science Foundation. The funding is part of the federal stimulus package called the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA).” (“Seeking Privacy In The Clouds: Research Aims At Isolating Social Network Information From ‘Control Of A Central Entity,’” Science Daily, 10/15/09)
8. $380,000 TO SPAY AND NEUTER PETS IN WICHITA, KANSAS:
“The City Recently Launched A $55,000 Project To Spay And Neuter Pets Owned By Low-Income Residents. Unwanted Pets Ultimately Cost $240 Apiece To Collect, Board And Euthanize, the city estimates, so the program covering 800 animals should save taxpayers money in the long run. The stimulative effect? That is harder to gauge. With the $380,000 overall Wichita has received from its share of the stimulus, the city estimates that it is directly funding 32 jobs so far. The bigger job producers, such as construction and transit projects, are due to start in the coming months.” (“The Challenge In Counting Stimulus Returns,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/27/09)
9. $3.4 MILLION FOR A TURTLE TUNNEL IN FLORIDA:
“The Other Third Of The Stimulus, Government Infrastructure Spending, Has Been The Most Controversial From The Start. Some Proposals Have Been Criticized As Wasteful, Such As … A $3.4 Million ‘Ecopassage’ To Help Turtles Cross A Highway In Tallahassee, Fla.” (“The Challenge In Counting Stimulus Returns,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/27/09)
10. $30 MILLION FOR A SPRING TRAINING BASEBALL COMPLEX FOR THE ARIZONA DIAMONDBACKS AND COLORADO ROCKIES:
“A Big Chunk Of The Money That Will Pay For A New Spring-Training Baseball Complex On Tribal Land In The East Valley Will Be Delivered Via A Financing Program That's Part Of The Federal Economic-Stimulus Plan. The Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community says it may borrow as much as $30 million of the estimated cost of the $100 million complex near Scottsdale that will become the spring home of the Arizona Diamondbacks and the Colorado Rockies.” (“Stimulus To Help Tribe Build Baseball Complex,” The Arizona Republic, 9/17/09)
This is from the Senate Republicans...
1. $300,000 FOR MAPPING RADIOACTIVE RABBIT FECES:
“A Week Mapping Radioactive Rabbit Feces With Detectors Mounted On A Helicopter Flying 50 Feet Over The Desert Scrub. … $300,000 In Federal Stimulus Money.” “A government contractor at Hanford, in south-central Washington State, just spent a week mapping radioactive rabbit feces with detectors mounted on a helicopter flying 50 feet over the desert scrub. … the helicopter flights, which covered 13.7 square miles and were paid for with $300,000 in federal stimulus money, took place in an area that had never been used by the bomb makers. … Marylia Kelley, the executive director of a California group called Tri-Valley Communities Against a Radioactive Environment, said the rabbit cleanup was ‘kind of funny, in a sick way.’” (“Even Rabbit Droppings Count In Nuclear Cleanup,” The New York Times, 10/14/09)
2. $4,200-$5,500 TAX CREDIT FOR PURCHASING GOLF CARTS:“President Obama’s Stimulus Plan… Is Now Paying Americans To Buy That Great Necessity Of Modern Life, The Golf Cart.” “Thanks to the federal tax credit to buy high-mileage cars that was part of President Obama's stimulus plan, Uncle Sam is now paying Americans to buy that great necessity of modern life, the golf cart. The federal credit provides from $4,200 to $5,500 for the purchase of an electric vehicle, and when it is combined with similar incentive plans in many states the tax credits can pay for nearly the entire cost of a golf cart.” (“Cash For Clubbers,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/17/09)
3. $219,000 TO STUDY THE SEX LIVES OF FEMALE COLLEGE FRESHMEN:
“Five Hundred Syracuse University Freshmen Will Divulge The Details Of Their Sex Lives … $219,000 In Stimulus Funds For The Study.” “Five hundred Syracuse University freshmen will divulge the details of their sex lives as part of a women's health study called ‘The Women's Health Project,’ being conducted by Michael Carey, SU professor of psychology and medicine. Carey has found himself the target of nationwide criticism from conservatives since he received $219,000 in stimulus funds for the study, which looks at the sex patterns of college women.” (“SU Sex Study Raises Concern,” The [Syracuse] Daily Orange, 9/8/09)
4. $1 MILLION TO RENOVATE “THE SUNSET STRIP”:
“Sunset Boulevard, Also Known As ‘The Sunset Strip’ And One Of The Most Famous Streets In The World, Will Be Getting A $7 Million Facelift After More Than 75 Years Of Use, With A Free Million Dollar Nose Job Coming From Uncle Sam. The City of West Hollywood Council received one million dollars in federal funds from the Federal American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA), (otherwise known as the $700 billion federal stimulus package), for the long-planned Sunset Strip Beautification Project, which is scheduled to break ground soon. The guaranteed funding will allow the City to increase the already nearly $7 million budgeted for this project by an additional $1,105,000, meaning enhancements to a project that already included the resurfacing of the roadway, sidewalk and improved landscaping.” (“Feds Stimulus Sunset Strip Beautification Project,” WeHoNews, 9/28/09)
5. $2.3 MILLION FOR BUG RESEARCH IN CONNECTICUT:
“$2.3 Million” “Federal Economic Stimulus Cash” For “Rearing Large Numbers Of Arthropods” Such As “Nasty Invasive Insects Like The Asian Longhorned Beetle, The Nun Moth, And The Infamous ‘Predator Of The Hemlock,’ The Woolly Adelgid.” “‘Rearing large numbers of arthropods’ probably isn't the first thing that comes to mind when you think about using Connecticut's $3 billion in federal economic stimulus cash. But the U.S. Forest Service is using part of the $2.3 million it's spending here to fix up a quarantine research facility in Ansonia. (The arthropods, by the way, are nasty invasive insects like the Asian longhorned beetle, the nun moth, and the infamous ‘predator of the hemlock,’ the woolly adelgid.)” (“Money For Nothing,” New Haven Advocate, 9/1/09)
6. $6 MILLION FOR A SNOWMAKING FACILITY IN THE 15th SNOWIEST CITY IN THE COUNTRY:
“The Other Third Of The Stimulus, Government Infrastructure Spending, Has Been The Most Controversial From The Start. Some Proposals Have Been Criticized As Wasteful, Such As A $6 Million Snowmaking Facility In Duluth, Minn.” (“The Challenge In Counting Stimulus Returns,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/27/09) (Top 101 Cities With The Highest Average Snowfall In A Year (Population 50,000+))
7. $500,000 TO STUDY “SOCIAL NETWORKS LIKE FACEBOOK”:
“A $498,000, Three-Year Grant” To Study “Social Networks Like Facebook.” “Millions of Internet users have been enjoying the fun -- and free -- services provided by advertiser-supported online social networks like Facebook. But Landon Cox, a Duke University assistant professor of computer science, worries about the possible down side -- privacy problems. … To delve deeper into these issues and begin the search for alternatives, Cox recently won a $498,000, three-year grant from the National Science Foundation. The funding is part of the federal stimulus package called the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA).” (“Seeking Privacy In The Clouds: Research Aims At Isolating Social Network Information From ‘Control Of A Central Entity,’” Science Daily, 10/15/09)
8. $380,000 TO SPAY AND NEUTER PETS IN WICHITA, KANSAS:
“The City Recently Launched A $55,000 Project To Spay And Neuter Pets Owned By Low-Income Residents. Unwanted Pets Ultimately Cost $240 Apiece To Collect, Board And Euthanize, the city estimates, so the program covering 800 animals should save taxpayers money in the long run. The stimulative effect? That is harder to gauge. With the $380,000 overall Wichita has received from its share of the stimulus, the city estimates that it is directly funding 32 jobs so far. The bigger job producers, such as construction and transit projects, are due to start in the coming months.” (“The Challenge In Counting Stimulus Returns,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/27/09)
9. $3.4 MILLION FOR A TURTLE TUNNEL IN FLORIDA:
“The Other Third Of The Stimulus, Government Infrastructure Spending, Has Been The Most Controversial From The Start. Some Proposals Have Been Criticized As Wasteful, Such As … A $3.4 Million ‘Ecopassage’ To Help Turtles Cross A Highway In Tallahassee, Fla.” (“The Challenge In Counting Stimulus Returns,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/27/09)
10. $30 MILLION FOR A SPRING TRAINING BASEBALL COMPLEX FOR THE ARIZONA DIAMONDBACKS AND COLORADO ROCKIES:
“A Big Chunk Of The Money That Will Pay For A New Spring-Training Baseball Complex On Tribal Land In The East Valley Will Be Delivered Via A Financing Program That's Part Of The Federal Economic-Stimulus Plan. The Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community says it may borrow as much as $30 million of the estimated cost of the $100 million complex near Scottsdale that will become the spring home of the Arizona Diamondbacks and the Colorado Rockies.” (“Stimulus To Help Tribe Build Baseball Complex,” The Arizona Republic, 9/17/09)
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Transparency? I think so, but not in the way that they intended...
Well... This is interesting...
Pelosi Denies Public Access to Public Space for Public Plan Announcement
Pelosi Denies Public Access to Public Space for Public Plan Announcement
Friday, October 23, 2009
EXCLUSIVE: Murtha, Moran steer millions to software firm - Washington Times
By Chuck Neubauer
When software firm MobilVox wanted to break into the lucrative world of defense contracting, it pursued an unmistakable strategy: It expanded operations from its Northern Virginia base in Rep. James P. Moran's congressional district to the southwestern Pennsylvania district of Rep. John P. Murtha.
Working with two of the most powerful members of a House subcommittee that controls Pentagon spending, the company also hired lobbying firms that employed former top aides of both the Democratic lawmakers and Mr. Murtha's brother. Company executives and their lobbyists donated thousands of dollars to the two congressmen.
Soon, money flowed the other way.
read the rest:
EXCLUSIVE: Murtha, Moran steer millions to software firm - Washington Times
When software firm MobilVox wanted to break into the lucrative world of defense contracting, it pursued an unmistakable strategy: It expanded operations from its Northern Virginia base in Rep. James P. Moran's congressional district to the southwestern Pennsylvania district of Rep. John P. Murtha.
Working with two of the most powerful members of a House subcommittee that controls Pentagon spending, the company also hired lobbying firms that employed former top aides of both the Democratic lawmakers and Mr. Murtha's brother. Company executives and their lobbyists donated thousands of dollars to the two congressmen.
Soon, money flowed the other way.
read the rest:
EXCLUSIVE: Murtha, Moran steer millions to software firm - Washington Times
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Dooh!!! Obama News Control Epic FAIL!
Well... This will be interesting to see how it plays out... I have to say that I am very impressed, and actually somewhat heartened by the fact that the Liberal Left media actually stood up to the Administration. Amazing...
The Rights and Obligations of Liberty — The Patriot Post
The Rights and Obligations of Liberty — The Patriot Post
"No country upon earth ever had it more in its power to attain these blessings than United America. Wondrously strange, then, and much to be regretted indeed would it be, were we to neglect the means and to depart from the road which Providence has pointed us to so plainly; I cannot believe it will ever come to pass." --George Washington
In a recent discussion with a colleague, I lamented the fact that too few American citizens understand their obligation, before all others, to support and defend our Constitution, much less, engender the ability to do so. She responded that, though she considered herself a conservative (mostly because she identifies closely with some conservative principles), understanding our Constitution was not her "passion."
My friend holds degrees from the nation's finest academic institutions and is professional in all her endeavors. However, like most Americans under 50 years of age, she never had a basic civics course and consequently has a difficult time articulating even the most fundamental constitutional principles.
The fact is, as Americans, we not only enjoy the rights affirmed by our Constitution, we have obligations to understand the mechanics of that affirmation in order to sustain it for our generation and those to come.
No matter what our calling, our occupation or our passion, we have a debt and duty as citizens to both learn about and support our Constitution, and we are obliged to do so above and before all other pursuits, for without constitutional Rule of Law, there are no other pursuits.
Of course, because ignorance is institutionalized by most government education systems, including those of "higher learning," and because ignorance is apparently considered virtuous by some social subcultures, there is little probability that a too large portion of Americans will ever comprehend this obligation, much less honor it.
Fortunately, in the words of Samuel Adams, "It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."
But, what of those like my well-educated colleague, who is among America's "best and brightest", who are, however, uninformed about their obligations as citizens of the greatest experiment in human history? What of those who, as one consequence of enjoying the highest standard of living on the planet, tend to take our legacy of liberty for granted and have become complacent about its attendant responsibilities?
George Washington noted at the conclusion of the American Revolution, "The value of liberty was thus enhanced in our estimation by the difficulty of its attainment, and the worth of characters appreciated by the trial of adversity."
These days, most Americans believe that liberty is their birthright. They enjoy the (relative) personal freedom of our great society but forget the corresponding personal responsibility. For most of us have never had to fight for liberty and, thus, have little concept of its value or any sense of gratitude for its accumulated cost.
In his 1833 Commentaries on the Constitution, Justice Joseph Story wrote, "Let the American youth never forget, that they possess a noble inheritance, bought by the toils, and sufferings, and blood of their ancestors; and capacity, if wisely improved, and faithfully guarded, of transmitting to their latest posterity all the substantial blessings of life, the peaceful enjoyment of liberty, property, religion, and independence."
Likewise, John Adams noted, "Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people, who have a right, from the frame of their nature, to knowledge, as their great Creator, who does nothing in vain, has given them understandings, and a desire to know..." He added, "Wisdom and knowledge, as well as virtue, diffused generally among the body of the people, [are] necessary for the preservation of their rights and liberties."
To that end, James Madison wrote, "What spectacle can be more edifying or more seasonable, than that of Liberty and Learning, each leaning on the other for their mutual and surest support?"
James Wilson, a signer of the Declaration of Independence and one of George Washington's original Supreme Court justices, put it most concisely: "Law and liberty cannot rationally become the objects of our love, unless they first become the objects of our knowledge."
Unfortunately, this wisdom has fallen upon deaf ears. The popular support of the current Democrat hegemony is evidence aplenty of just how uninformed the majority of Americans are regarding their Constitution and the Rule of Law.
That most erudite of contemporary economists, Walter E. Williams, wrote this week in American Idea, "At the heart of the American idea is the deep distrust and suspicion the founders of our nation had for government, distrust and suspicion not shared as much by today's Americans. Some of the founders' distrust is seen in our Constitution's language such as Congress shall not: abridge, infringe, deny, disparage, violate and deny. ... Other founder distrust for government is found in the Constitution's separation of powers, checks and balances and the several anti-majoritarian provisions such as the Electoral College and the requirement that three-quarters of state legislatures ratify changes in the Constitution."
However, writes Williams, "The three branches of our federal government are no longer bound by the Constitution as the framers envisioned and what is worse is American ignorance and acceptance of such rogue behavior. ... The American people, along with our elected representatives, whether they're Republicans or Democrats, care less about what is and what is not permissible under our Constitution. They think Congress has the right to do anything upon which they can secure a majority vote, whether they have the constitutional or moral authority to do so or not."
Williams concludes, "We are losing what's made our country great. Instead of moving toward greater liberty, we're moving toward greater government control of our lives."
Indeed, I was speaking with another colleague recently who is a Slovak national -- he was a "Young Pioneer" raised under Communist tyranny in Czechoslovakia. He has spent five years undergoing the rigors required to become a U.S. citizen (I suggested he should have simply walked across the Mexican border instead), yet he questions his pursuit of citizenship now that the U.S. is rapidly devolving into the sort of tyrannical regime he left behind.
Natural-born Americans have never experienced such a regime, and so we proceed headlong into that authoritarian abyss like so many lemmings following the ignoble piper, Barack Hussein Obama, mmm, mmm, mmm.
Of such pipers, Alexander Hamilton wrote, "Of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people, commencing demagogues and ending tyrants."
Regarding the wayward affections for socialism of Obama's minions, Washington wrote, "[W]e ought to deprecate the hazard attending ardent and susceptible minds, from being too strongly, and too early prepossessed in favor of other political systems, before they are capable of appreciating their own."
"If a nation expects to be ignorant -- and free," wrote Thomas Jefferson, "it expects what never was and never will be."
But, ignorance is bliss -- at least until it runs head-on into reality, and reality is just around the corner.
Samuel Adams assured us that, "No people will tamely surrender their Liberties, nor can any be easily subdued, when knowledge is diffused and Virtue is preserved. On the contrary, when People are universally ignorant, and debauched in their manners, they will sink under their own weight without the Aid of foreign Invaders."
It is for this reason that The Patriot launched the Essential Liberty Project on Constitution Day last.
Essential Liberty is the most cost effective means for educating Americans of all ages and all walks of life about the proper context for understanding our Constitution and the liberty it preserves and safeguards.
We have created through Essential Liberty a foundation to accomplish the most important task we have ever undertaken. Our mission is based on the principles outlined in the Legacy of American Liberty and will utilize a whole series of educational tools to accomplish this mission.
I will continue to write concerning the Essential Liberty Project in the next couple of months, as we move to full throttle for 2010.
We must never forget our debt of obligation to those generations of American Patriots who have extended, at great cost in their fortunes and lives, the legacy of liberty to us, and we must remain steadfast and irrevocably committed with our fortunes and lives to extend that legacy to our posterity.
"No country upon earth ever had it more in its power to attain these blessings than United America. Wondrously strange, then, and much to be regretted indeed would it be, were we to neglect the means and to depart from the road which Providence has pointed us to so plainly; I cannot believe it will ever come to pass." --George Washington
In a recent discussion with a colleague, I lamented the fact that too few American citizens understand their obligation, before all others, to support and defend our Constitution, much less, engender the ability to do so. She responded that, though she considered herself a conservative (mostly because she identifies closely with some conservative principles), understanding our Constitution was not her "passion."
My friend holds degrees from the nation's finest academic institutions and is professional in all her endeavors. However, like most Americans under 50 years of age, she never had a basic civics course and consequently has a difficult time articulating even the most fundamental constitutional principles.
The fact is, as Americans, we not only enjoy the rights affirmed by our Constitution, we have obligations to understand the mechanics of that affirmation in order to sustain it for our generation and those to come.
No matter what our calling, our occupation or our passion, we have a debt and duty as citizens to both learn about and support our Constitution, and we are obliged to do so above and before all other pursuits, for without constitutional Rule of Law, there are no other pursuits.
Of course, because ignorance is institutionalized by most government education systems, including those of "higher learning," and because ignorance is apparently considered virtuous by some social subcultures, there is little probability that a too large portion of Americans will ever comprehend this obligation, much less honor it.
Fortunately, in the words of Samuel Adams, "It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."
But, what of those like my well-educated colleague, who is among America's "best and brightest", who are, however, uninformed about their obligations as citizens of the greatest experiment in human history? What of those who, as one consequence of enjoying the highest standard of living on the planet, tend to take our legacy of liberty for granted and have become complacent about its attendant responsibilities?
George Washington noted at the conclusion of the American Revolution, "The value of liberty was thus enhanced in our estimation by the difficulty of its attainment, and the worth of characters appreciated by the trial of adversity."
These days, most Americans believe that liberty is their birthright. They enjoy the (relative) personal freedom of our great society but forget the corresponding personal responsibility. For most of us have never had to fight for liberty and, thus, have little concept of its value or any sense of gratitude for its accumulated cost.
In his 1833 Commentaries on the Constitution, Justice Joseph Story wrote, "Let the American youth never forget, that they possess a noble inheritance, bought by the toils, and sufferings, and blood of their ancestors; and capacity, if wisely improved, and faithfully guarded, of transmitting to their latest posterity all the substantial blessings of life, the peaceful enjoyment of liberty, property, religion, and independence."
Likewise, John Adams noted, "Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people, who have a right, from the frame of their nature, to knowledge, as their great Creator, who does nothing in vain, has given them understandings, and a desire to know..." He added, "Wisdom and knowledge, as well as virtue, diffused generally among the body of the people, [are] necessary for the preservation of their rights and liberties."
To that end, James Madison wrote, "What spectacle can be more edifying or more seasonable, than that of Liberty and Learning, each leaning on the other for their mutual and surest support?"
James Wilson, a signer of the Declaration of Independence and one of George Washington's original Supreme Court justices, put it most concisely: "Law and liberty cannot rationally become the objects of our love, unless they first become the objects of our knowledge."
Unfortunately, this wisdom has fallen upon deaf ears. The popular support of the current Democrat hegemony is evidence aplenty of just how uninformed the majority of Americans are regarding their Constitution and the Rule of Law.
That most erudite of contemporary economists, Walter E. Williams, wrote this week in American Idea, "At the heart of the American idea is the deep distrust and suspicion the founders of our nation had for government, distrust and suspicion not shared as much by today's Americans. Some of the founders' distrust is seen in our Constitution's language such as Congress shall not: abridge, infringe, deny, disparage, violate and deny. ... Other founder distrust for government is found in the Constitution's separation of powers, checks and balances and the several anti-majoritarian provisions such as the Electoral College and the requirement that three-quarters of state legislatures ratify changes in the Constitution."
However, writes Williams, "The three branches of our federal government are no longer bound by the Constitution as the framers envisioned and what is worse is American ignorance and acceptance of such rogue behavior. ... The American people, along with our elected representatives, whether they're Republicans or Democrats, care less about what is and what is not permissible under our Constitution. They think Congress has the right to do anything upon which they can secure a majority vote, whether they have the constitutional or moral authority to do so or not."
Williams concludes, "We are losing what's made our country great. Instead of moving toward greater liberty, we're moving toward greater government control of our lives."
Indeed, I was speaking with another colleague recently who is a Slovak national -- he was a "Young Pioneer" raised under Communist tyranny in Czechoslovakia. He has spent five years undergoing the rigors required to become a U.S. citizen (I suggested he should have simply walked across the Mexican border instead), yet he questions his pursuit of citizenship now that the U.S. is rapidly devolving into the sort of tyrannical regime he left behind.
Natural-born Americans have never experienced such a regime, and so we proceed headlong into that authoritarian abyss like so many lemmings following the ignoble piper, Barack Hussein Obama, mmm, mmm, mmm.
Of such pipers, Alexander Hamilton wrote, "Of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people, commencing demagogues and ending tyrants."
Regarding the wayward affections for socialism of Obama's minions, Washington wrote, "[W]e ought to deprecate the hazard attending ardent and susceptible minds, from being too strongly, and too early prepossessed in favor of other political systems, before they are capable of appreciating their own."
"If a nation expects to be ignorant -- and free," wrote Thomas Jefferson, "it expects what never was and never will be."
But, ignorance is bliss -- at least until it runs head-on into reality, and reality is just around the corner.
Samuel Adams assured us that, "No people will tamely surrender their Liberties, nor can any be easily subdued, when knowledge is diffused and Virtue is preserved. On the contrary, when People are universally ignorant, and debauched in their manners, they will sink under their own weight without the Aid of foreign Invaders."
It is for this reason that The Patriot launched the Essential Liberty Project on Constitution Day last.
Essential Liberty is the most cost effective means for educating Americans of all ages and all walks of life about the proper context for understanding our Constitution and the liberty it preserves and safeguards.
We have created through Essential Liberty a foundation to accomplish the most important task we have ever undertaken. Our mission is based on the principles outlined in the Legacy of American Liberty and will utilize a whole series of educational tools to accomplish this mission.
I will continue to write concerning the Essential Liberty Project in the next couple of months, as we move to full throttle for 2010.
We must never forget our debt of obligation to those generations of American Patriots who have extended, at great cost in their fortunes and lives, the legacy of liberty to us, and we must remain steadfast and irrevocably committed with our fortunes and lives to extend that legacy to our posterity.
Honor Killing
Attempted honor killing in Arizona: Muslim runs down daughter for becoming too "Westernized"
Faleh Hassan Almaleki is still at large. "Iraqi man runs down daughter for becoming too 'westernized,'" from Yourwestvalley.com, October 21 (thanks to Art):
Peoria police are searching for a man they say ran down his 20-year-old daughter in a parking lot for becoming "too 'westernized' and ... not living according to their traditional Iraq values."
Noor Faleh Almaleki of Surprise was taken to a local hospital with life-threatening injuries, police said. Another woman, Amal Edan Khalaf, 43, of Surprise also was struck and is in the hospital with non-life threatening injuries.
The incident occurred Tuesday afternoon in Department of Economic Security parking lot at 8990 W. Peoria Ave....
Detectives from the Peoria Police Violent Crimes Unit, after talking with family and friends, learned Faleh Hassan Almaleki, 48, of Glendale was the driver, and that he is the father of Noor Faleh Almaleki.
Those interviewed also told police he was with her as she had become too "westernized" and had made threats toward her....
Can someone explain this? I keep asking why are we continuing to allow this, and why are we continuing to allow the people who perpetuate this to come to our country? We have a Czar in Obama's illegal cabinet, Dalia Mogahed, that is saying that Shira Law is good "it's just misunderstood in the West" she made these and other comments on a British television show that is done by a Muslim Group. The group believes in the non-violent destruction of Western democracy and the creation of an Islamic state under Sharia Law across the world. Now, someone want to justify why she was even on there? If you want to verify what I am saying about her comments, and to read the rest of them, you can go HERE to read an article about the show.
Faleh Hassan Almaleki is still at large. "Iraqi man runs down daughter for becoming too 'westernized,'" from Yourwestvalley.com, October 21 (thanks to Art):
Peoria police are searching for a man they say ran down his 20-year-old daughter in a parking lot for becoming "too 'westernized' and ... not living according to their traditional Iraq values."
Noor Faleh Almaleki of Surprise was taken to a local hospital with life-threatening injuries, police said. Another woman, Amal Edan Khalaf, 43, of Surprise also was struck and is in the hospital with non-life threatening injuries.
The incident occurred Tuesday afternoon in Department of Economic Security parking lot at 8990 W. Peoria Ave....
Detectives from the Peoria Police Violent Crimes Unit, after talking with family and friends, learned Faleh Hassan Almaleki, 48, of Glendale was the driver, and that he is the father of Noor Faleh Almaleki.
Those interviewed also told police he was with her as she had become too "westernized" and had made threats toward her....
Can someone explain this? I keep asking why are we continuing to allow this, and why are we continuing to allow the people who perpetuate this to come to our country? We have a Czar in Obama's illegal cabinet, Dalia Mogahed, that is saying that Shira Law is good "it's just misunderstood in the West" she made these and other comments on a British television show that is done by a Muslim Group. The group believes in the non-violent destruction of Western democracy and the creation of an Islamic state under Sharia Law across the world. Now, someone want to justify why she was even on there? If you want to verify what I am saying about her comments, and to read the rest of them, you can go HERE to read an article about the show.
Monday, October 19, 2009
In His Own Words...
Obama's plan to for Health Care... Single Payer (Government) system...
My final question... IF they do this, how many people will be put out of work, and how many major corporations will be forced into bankruptcy, how many people are going to loose their retirements... And for what?
My final question... IF they do this, how many people will be put out of work, and how many major corporations will be forced into bankruptcy, how many people are going to loose their retirements... And for what?
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Friday, October 16, 2009
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Huh... Whoda Thunk It?
OK... This is an archived newspaper article from 2004, when Obama was running for the US Senate. Read the article, and be sure to notice the headline... Then, click on the link to the website at the end of the article...
Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race on Friday night amid a furor over lurid sex club allegations.
The allegations that horrified fellow Republicans and caused his once-promising candidacy to implode in four short days have given Obama a clear lead as Republicans struggled to fetch an alternative.
Ryan’s campaign began to crumble on Monday following the release of embarrassing records from his divorce. In the records, his ex-wife, Boston Public actress Jeri Ryan, said her former husband took her to kinky sex clubs in Paris, New York and New Orleans.
"It’s clear to me that a vigorous debate on the issues most likely could not take place if I remain in the race," Ryan, 44, said in a statement. "What would take place, rather, is a brutal, scorched-earth campaign – the kind of campaign that has turned off so many voters, the kind of politics I refuse to play."
Although Ryan disputed the allegations, saying he and his wife went to one ‘avant-garde’ club in Paris and left because they felt uncomfortable, lashed out at the media and said it was "truly outrageous" that the Chicago Tribune got a judge to unseal the records.
The Republican choice will become an instant underdog in the campaign for the seat of retiring Republican Senator Peter Fitzgerald, since Obama held a wide lead even before the scandal broke.
"I feel for him actually," Obama told a Chicago TV station. "What he’s gone through over the last three days I think is something you wouldn’t wish on anybody."
The Republican state committee must now choose a replacement for Ryan, who had won in the primaries against seven contenders. Its task is complicated by the fact that Obama holds a comfortable lead in the polls and is widely regarded as a rising Democratic star.
The chairwoman of the Illinois Republican Party, Judy Topinka, said at a news conference, after Ryan withdrew, that Republicans would probably take several weeks to settle on a new candidate.
"Obviously, this is a bad week for our party and our state," she said.
As recently as Thursday, spokesmen for the Ryan campaign still insisted that Ryan would remain in the race. Ryan had defended himself saying, "There’s no breaking of any laws. There’s no breaking of any marriage laws. There’s no breaking of the Ten Commandments anywhere."
—AP
OK, here is the webpage, once there, check the article, then click on HOME and see where the paper is located...
Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race on Friday night amid a furor over lurid sex club allegations.
The allegations that horrified fellow Republicans and caused his once-promising candidacy to implode in four short days have given Obama a clear lead as Republicans struggled to fetch an alternative.
Ryan’s campaign began to crumble on Monday following the release of embarrassing records from his divorce. In the records, his ex-wife, Boston Public actress Jeri Ryan, said her former husband took her to kinky sex clubs in Paris, New York and New Orleans.
"It’s clear to me that a vigorous debate on the issues most likely could not take place if I remain in the race," Ryan, 44, said in a statement. "What would take place, rather, is a brutal, scorched-earth campaign – the kind of campaign that has turned off so many voters, the kind of politics I refuse to play."
Although Ryan disputed the allegations, saying he and his wife went to one ‘avant-garde’ club in Paris and left because they felt uncomfortable, lashed out at the media and said it was "truly outrageous" that the Chicago Tribune got a judge to unseal the records.
The Republican choice will become an instant underdog in the campaign for the seat of retiring Republican Senator Peter Fitzgerald, since Obama held a wide lead even before the scandal broke.
"I feel for him actually," Obama told a Chicago TV station. "What he’s gone through over the last three days I think is something you wouldn’t wish on anybody."
The Republican state committee must now choose a replacement for Ryan, who had won in the primaries against seven contenders. Its task is complicated by the fact that Obama holds a comfortable lead in the polls and is widely regarded as a rising Democratic star.
The chairwoman of the Illinois Republican Party, Judy Topinka, said at a news conference, after Ryan withdrew, that Republicans would probably take several weeks to settle on a new candidate.
"Obviously, this is a bad week for our party and our state," she said.
As recently as Thursday, spokesmen for the Ryan campaign still insisted that Ryan would remain in the race. Ryan had defended himself saying, "There’s no breaking of any laws. There’s no breaking of any marriage laws. There’s no breaking of the Ten Commandments anywhere."
—AP
OK, here is the webpage, once there, check the article, then click on HOME and see where the paper is located...
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
So you want Socialized Healthcare?
Take a look at what it will get you...
Soldier dies after receiving smoker's lungs in transplant
By Stephanie Busari
CNN
LONDON, England (CNN) -- A leading UK hospital has defended its practice of using organs donated by smokers after the death of a soldier who received the cancerous lungs of a heavy smoker.
Corporal Matthew Millington, 31, died at his home in 2008, less than a year after receiving a transplant that was supposed to save his life at Papworth Hospital -- the UK's largest specialist cardiothoracic hospital, in Cambridgeshire, east England.
Papworth Hospital released a statement saying using donor lungs from smokers was not "unusual."
The statement added that the hospital had no option but to use lungs from smokers as "the number of lung transplants carried out would have been significantly lower," if they didn't.
Should hospitals use smokers' lungs in transplants?
An inquest held last week heard that Millington, who served in the Queen's Royal Lancers, was serving in Iraq in 2005 when he was diagnosed with an incurable condition that left him unable to breathe.
He was told he required a transplant and in April 2007 received a double lung transplant at Papworth Hospital.
Less than a year later, doctors discovered a tumor in the new lungs. Despite radiotherapy, Millington died on February 8, 2008, at his family home near Stoke-on-Trent, in Staffordshire.
The inquest found a radiologist failed to highlight the growth of a cancerous tumor on the donor lungs.
Tests found that he had received the lungs of a donor who smoked up to 50 cigarettes a day, the inquest at North Staffordshire coroner's court heard.
The hospital said in the statement: "This is an extremely rare case. Papworth Hospital has a very strong track record of high quality outcomes and this is an extremely rare case.
"Patients who are accepted on to the transplant waiting list have no other option open to them, however, we must stress that all donor organs are screened rigorously prior to transplantation.
"Using lungs from donors who have smoked in the past is not unusual. During 2008/09 146 lung transplants were carried out in the UK.
"During the same period 84 people died on the waiting list. If we had a policy that said we did not use the lungs of those who had smoked, then the number of lung transplants carried out would have been significantly lower."
The tumor's growth was accelerated by the immuno-suppressive drugs Millington was taking to prevent his body rejecting the transplanted lungs, the inquest heard.
North Staffordshire coroner Ian Smith recorded that Millington, had died of "complications of transplant surgery and immuno-suppressive drug treatment."
Soldier dies after receiving smoker's lungs in transplant
By Stephanie Busari
CNN
LONDON, England (CNN) -- A leading UK hospital has defended its practice of using organs donated by smokers after the death of a soldier who received the cancerous lungs of a heavy smoker.
Corporal Matthew Millington, 31, died at his home in 2008, less than a year after receiving a transplant that was supposed to save his life at Papworth Hospital -- the UK's largest specialist cardiothoracic hospital, in Cambridgeshire, east England.
Papworth Hospital released a statement saying using donor lungs from smokers was not "unusual."
The statement added that the hospital had no option but to use lungs from smokers as "the number of lung transplants carried out would have been significantly lower," if they didn't.
Should hospitals use smokers' lungs in transplants?
An inquest held last week heard that Millington, who served in the Queen's Royal Lancers, was serving in Iraq in 2005 when he was diagnosed with an incurable condition that left him unable to breathe.
He was told he required a transplant and in April 2007 received a double lung transplant at Papworth Hospital.
Less than a year later, doctors discovered a tumor in the new lungs. Despite radiotherapy, Millington died on February 8, 2008, at his family home near Stoke-on-Trent, in Staffordshire.
The inquest found a radiologist failed to highlight the growth of a cancerous tumor on the donor lungs.
Tests found that he had received the lungs of a donor who smoked up to 50 cigarettes a day, the inquest at North Staffordshire coroner's court heard.
The hospital said in the statement: "This is an extremely rare case. Papworth Hospital has a very strong track record of high quality outcomes and this is an extremely rare case.
"Patients who are accepted on to the transplant waiting list have no other option open to them, however, we must stress that all donor organs are screened rigorously prior to transplantation.
"Using lungs from donors who have smoked in the past is not unusual. During 2008/09 146 lung transplants were carried out in the UK.
"During the same period 84 people died on the waiting list. If we had a policy that said we did not use the lungs of those who had smoked, then the number of lung transplants carried out would have been significantly lower."
The tumor's growth was accelerated by the immuno-suppressive drugs Millington was taking to prevent his body rejecting the transplanted lungs, the inquest heard.
North Staffordshire coroner Ian Smith recorded that Millington, had died of "complications of transplant surgery and immuno-suppressive drug treatment."
Monday, October 12, 2009
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Truly Amazing
This is from Canada Free Press... and Why are there NOT similar articles being written in US papers?
Robert E. Lee was the son of Henry "Light Horse Harry" Lee III who was a Major General in the Contentinal Army in the Revolutionay War. He was the Great-Nephew of Richard Henry Lee, Virginia Representative to the Contentintal Congress who brought forth the resolution - "Resolved, that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved." He graduated from the US Military Acadmey at West Point with honors and served for 32 years in the US Army, before turning down President Lincolns offer to command the Union Army and instead resigned his commission and took command of the Confederate Military.
Death of General Robert E. Lee
Calvin E. Johnson Jr. Bio
By Calvin E. Johnson Jr. Sunday, October 11, 2009
The headline from a Richmond newspaper read,;
“News of the death of Robert E. Lee, beloved chieftain of the Southern army, whose strategy mainly was responsible for the surprising fight staged by the Confederacy, brought a two-day halt to Richmond’s business activities.”
The United States flag, which Robert E. Lee had defended as a soldier, flew at half mast in Lexington, Virginia and throughout the USA.
General Lee died at his home at Lexington, Virginia at 9:30 AM on Wednesday, October 12, 1870. His last great deed came after the War Between the States when he accepted the presidency of Washington College, now Washington and Lee University. He saved the financially troubled college and helped many young folks further their education.
Some write that Robert E. Lee suffered a cerebral hemorrhage on September 28, 1870, but was thought to greatly improve until October 12th, when he took a turn for the worse. His condition seemed more hopeless when his doctor told him, “General you must make haste and get well—-Traveller—-has been standing too long in his stable and needs exercise.”
Virginia Military Institute (VMI) Cadet William Nalle said in a letter home to his mother, dated October 16, 1870;
“I suppose of course that you have all read full accounts of Gen Lee’s death in the papers. He died on the morning of the 12th at about half past nine. All business was suspended at once all over the country and town, and all duties, military and academic suspended at the Institute, and all the black crape and all similar black material in Lexington, was used up at once, and they had to send on to Lynchburg for more. Every cadet had black crape issued to him, and an order was published at once requiring us to wear it as a badge of mourning for six months.”
Read entire letter on Virginia Military Institute website
The rains and flooding were the worse of Virginia’s history on the day General Lee died. On Wednesday, October 12, 1870, in the presence of his family, Lee quietly passed away.
The church bells rang as the sad news passed through Washington College, Virginia Military Institute, the town of Lexington and the nation. Cadets from VMI College carried the remains of the old soldier to Lee Chapel where he laid in state.
Memorial meetings were held throughout the South and as far North as New York. At Washington College in Lexington eulogies were delivered by: Reverend Pemberton, Reverend W.S. White—Stonewall Jackson’s Pastor and Reverend J. William Jones. Former Confederate President Jefferson Davis brought the eulogy in Richmond, Virginia. Lee was also eulogized in Great Britain.
When all settled down, Mrs. Robert E. Lee said, “If he had succeeded in gaining by the sword all the South expected and hoped for, he could not have been more honored and lamented.”
Many thousands witnessed Lee’s funeral procession marching through the town of Lexington, Virginia, with muffled drums and the artillery firing as the hearse was driven to the school’s chapel where he was buried.
US President Dwight D. Eisenhower knew and appreciated our nation’s rich history. President Eisenhower was criticized for displaying a portrait of Robert E. Lee in his office. This was part of his response;
“Robert E. Lee was, in my estimation, one of the supremely gifted men produced by this nation.”
Robert E. Lee was the hero of the Southern people and admired both North and South of the Mason-Dixon Line. This Christian- gentleman’s last words were, “Strike the Tent.”
There will be a Remembering Robert E. Lee Program at Lee Chapel on Monday, October 12, 2009. For details click here:
Calvin E. Johnson Jr. Most recent columns
A native of Georgia, Calvin Johnson, Chairman of the National and Georgia Division,
Sons of Confederate Veterans, Confederate History Month Committee—-Scv.org lives near the historic town of Kennesaw and he’s a member of the Chattahoochee Guards Camp, Sons of Confederate Veterans. He is the author of the book “When America Stood for God, Family and Country.” Calvin can be reached at: cjohnson1861@bellsouth.net
Robert E. Lee was the son of Henry "Light Horse Harry" Lee III who was a Major General in the Contentinal Army in the Revolutionay War. He was the Great-Nephew of Richard Henry Lee, Virginia Representative to the Contentintal Congress who brought forth the resolution - "Resolved, that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved." He graduated from the US Military Acadmey at West Point with honors and served for 32 years in the US Army, before turning down President Lincolns offer to command the Union Army and instead resigned his commission and took command of the Confederate Military.
Death of General Robert E. Lee
Calvin E. Johnson Jr. Bio
By Calvin E. Johnson Jr. Sunday, October 11, 2009
The headline from a Richmond newspaper read,;
“News of the death of Robert E. Lee, beloved chieftain of the Southern army, whose strategy mainly was responsible for the surprising fight staged by the Confederacy, brought a two-day halt to Richmond’s business activities.”
The United States flag, which Robert E. Lee had defended as a soldier, flew at half mast in Lexington, Virginia and throughout the USA.
General Lee died at his home at Lexington, Virginia at 9:30 AM on Wednesday, October 12, 1870. His last great deed came after the War Between the States when he accepted the presidency of Washington College, now Washington and Lee University. He saved the financially troubled college and helped many young folks further their education.
Some write that Robert E. Lee suffered a cerebral hemorrhage on September 28, 1870, but was thought to greatly improve until October 12th, when he took a turn for the worse. His condition seemed more hopeless when his doctor told him, “General you must make haste and get well—-Traveller—-has been standing too long in his stable and needs exercise.”
Virginia Military Institute (VMI) Cadet William Nalle said in a letter home to his mother, dated October 16, 1870;
“I suppose of course that you have all read full accounts of Gen Lee’s death in the papers. He died on the morning of the 12th at about half past nine. All business was suspended at once all over the country and town, and all duties, military and academic suspended at the Institute, and all the black crape and all similar black material in Lexington, was used up at once, and they had to send on to Lynchburg for more. Every cadet had black crape issued to him, and an order was published at once requiring us to wear it as a badge of mourning for six months.”
Read entire letter on Virginia Military Institute website
The rains and flooding were the worse of Virginia’s history on the day General Lee died. On Wednesday, October 12, 1870, in the presence of his family, Lee quietly passed away.
The church bells rang as the sad news passed through Washington College, Virginia Military Institute, the town of Lexington and the nation. Cadets from VMI College carried the remains of the old soldier to Lee Chapel where he laid in state.
Memorial meetings were held throughout the South and as far North as New York. At Washington College in Lexington eulogies were delivered by: Reverend Pemberton, Reverend W.S. White—Stonewall Jackson’s Pastor and Reverend J. William Jones. Former Confederate President Jefferson Davis brought the eulogy in Richmond, Virginia. Lee was also eulogized in Great Britain.
When all settled down, Mrs. Robert E. Lee said, “If he had succeeded in gaining by the sword all the South expected and hoped for, he could not have been more honored and lamented.”
Many thousands witnessed Lee’s funeral procession marching through the town of Lexington, Virginia, with muffled drums and the artillery firing as the hearse was driven to the school’s chapel where he was buried.
US President Dwight D. Eisenhower knew and appreciated our nation’s rich history. President Eisenhower was criticized for displaying a portrait of Robert E. Lee in his office. This was part of his response;
“Robert E. Lee was, in my estimation, one of the supremely gifted men produced by this nation.”
Robert E. Lee was the hero of the Southern people and admired both North and South of the Mason-Dixon Line. This Christian- gentleman’s last words were, “Strike the Tent.”
There will be a Remembering Robert E. Lee Program at Lee Chapel on Monday, October 12, 2009. For details click here:
Calvin E. Johnson Jr. Most recent columns
A native of Georgia, Calvin Johnson, Chairman of the National and Georgia Division,
Sons of Confederate Veterans, Confederate History Month Committee—-Scv.org lives near the historic town of Kennesaw and he’s a member of the Chattahoochee Guards Camp, Sons of Confederate Veterans. He is the author of the book “When America Stood for God, Family and Country.” Calvin can be reached at: cjohnson1861@bellsouth.net
Monday, October 5, 2009
Hollywood at it's "Finest"
Michael Moore: ‘It's Absolutely a Good Thing’ for Government to Drive Private Health Insurance Out of Business
Monday, October 05, 2009
By Nicholas Ballasy, Video Reporter
(CNSNews.com) - Academy Award-winning documentary filmmaker Michael Moore told CNSNews.com "it's absolutely a good thing” for government to drive private health insurance companies out of business and replace them with a single-payer system.
President Obama, Moore said, should stop trying to sneak a single-payer health care system through the “backdoor” and come straight at it instead. Moore said he would advise the president to tell the American people: “Look, we should be like every other Western Democracy and have a single-payer health care system. Pure and simple.”
CNSNews.com spoke with Moore on the red carpet at the Uptown Theatre in Washington, D.C., last Tuesday night before the premiere of his documentary, “Capitalism: A Love Story."
CNSNews.com asked Moore about comments he made to Rolling Stone in August.
Moore told the magazine: “If a true public option is enacted--and Obama knows this--it will eventually bring about a single-payer system, because the profit-making insurance companies won't be able to compete with a government run plan and make the profits they want to make. I probably shouldn’t be saying this, but I’m counting on the fact that Republicans won’t be reading Rolling Stone.”
CNSNews.com asked Moore if he stood by his comment that creating a government-run health insurance provider—the “public option”--would eventually lead to a single-payer health care system.
“I think that’s probably true,” Moore said. “But what I would say to President Obama is: ‘Why backdoor this thing? Why not just come at it full force, right in front of them and say, “Look, we should be like every other Western Democracy and have a single-payer health care system. Pure and simple.’”
CNSNews.com asked Moore whether it would be a good thing or a bad thing for a public-option health insurance provider to drive private health insurance companies out of business.
“Oh, it’s absolutely a good thing,” said Moore. “We should have no talk of profit when it comes to helping people who are sick. The profit motive should be nowhere involved in this. And you know what? It’s not fair to the insurance companies either because they have a fiduciary responsibility to make as much money as they can for their shareholders. Well, the way they make more money is to deny claims or to kick people off the roles or to not even let people on the rolls because they have a pre-existing condition. You know, all of that is wrong.
In the same interview in front of the Uptown Theatre, Moore, who has made millions from the proceeds of his films, told CNSNews.com: “Well, capitalism did nothing for me, starting with my first film.”
Here is a transcript of CNSNews.com’s discussion with Michael Moore about driving insurance companies out of business:
CNSNews.com: “I want to ask you about comments you made in a recent interview with Rolling Stone—actually it was a couple of months back. You said that a public option would eventually lead to a single-payer system and put private insurance companies ultimately in a position where they can’t compete. Do you stand by those comments?”
Moore: “I think that’s probably true. But, why, I mean--But what I would say to President Obama is: ‘Why backdoor this thing? Why not just come at it full force, right in front of them and say, “Look, we should be like every other Western Democracy and have a single-payer health care system. Pure and simple.’”
CNSNews.com: “If the public option does put private insurers out of business over time, do you think that’s a good thing or is that a bad thing?”
Moore: “Oh, it’s absolutely a good thing. We should have no talk of profit when it comes to helping people who are sick. The profit motive should be nowhere involved in this. And you know what? It’s not fair to the insurance companies either because they have a fiduciary responsibility to make as much money as they can for their shareholders. Well, the way they make more money is to deny claims or to kick people off the roles or to not even let people on the rolls because they have a pre-existing condition. You know, all of that is wrong.
Monday, October 05, 2009
By Nicholas Ballasy, Video Reporter
(CNSNews.com) - Academy Award-winning documentary filmmaker Michael Moore told CNSNews.com "it's absolutely a good thing” for government to drive private health insurance companies out of business and replace them with a single-payer system.
President Obama, Moore said, should stop trying to sneak a single-payer health care system through the “backdoor” and come straight at it instead. Moore said he would advise the president to tell the American people: “Look, we should be like every other Western Democracy and have a single-payer health care system. Pure and simple.”
CNSNews.com spoke with Moore on the red carpet at the Uptown Theatre in Washington, D.C., last Tuesday night before the premiere of his documentary, “Capitalism: A Love Story."
CNSNews.com asked Moore about comments he made to Rolling Stone in August.
Moore told the magazine: “If a true public option is enacted--and Obama knows this--it will eventually bring about a single-payer system, because the profit-making insurance companies won't be able to compete with a government run plan and make the profits they want to make. I probably shouldn’t be saying this, but I’m counting on the fact that Republicans won’t be reading Rolling Stone.”
CNSNews.com asked Moore if he stood by his comment that creating a government-run health insurance provider—the “public option”--would eventually lead to a single-payer health care system.
“I think that’s probably true,” Moore said. “But what I would say to President Obama is: ‘Why backdoor this thing? Why not just come at it full force, right in front of them and say, “Look, we should be like every other Western Democracy and have a single-payer health care system. Pure and simple.’”
CNSNews.com asked Moore whether it would be a good thing or a bad thing for a public-option health insurance provider to drive private health insurance companies out of business.
“Oh, it’s absolutely a good thing,” said Moore. “We should have no talk of profit when it comes to helping people who are sick. The profit motive should be nowhere involved in this. And you know what? It’s not fair to the insurance companies either because they have a fiduciary responsibility to make as much money as they can for their shareholders. Well, the way they make more money is to deny claims or to kick people off the roles or to not even let people on the rolls because they have a pre-existing condition. You know, all of that is wrong.
In the same interview in front of the Uptown Theatre, Moore, who has made millions from the proceeds of his films, told CNSNews.com: “Well, capitalism did nothing for me, starting with my first film.”
Here is a transcript of CNSNews.com’s discussion with Michael Moore about driving insurance companies out of business:
CNSNews.com: “I want to ask you about comments you made in a recent interview with Rolling Stone—actually it was a couple of months back. You said that a public option would eventually lead to a single-payer system and put private insurance companies ultimately in a position where they can’t compete. Do you stand by those comments?”
Moore: “I think that’s probably true. But, why, I mean--But what I would say to President Obama is: ‘Why backdoor this thing? Why not just come at it full force, right in front of them and say, “Look, we should be like every other Western Democracy and have a single-payer health care system. Pure and simple.’”
CNSNews.com: “If the public option does put private insurers out of business over time, do you think that’s a good thing or is that a bad thing?”
Moore: “Oh, it’s absolutely a good thing. We should have no talk of profit when it comes to helping people who are sick. The profit motive should be nowhere involved in this. And you know what? It’s not fair to the insurance companies either because they have a fiduciary responsibility to make as much money as they can for their shareholders. Well, the way they make more money is to deny claims or to kick people off the roles or to not even let people on the rolls because they have a pre-existing condition. You know, all of that is wrong.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Prayer to Obama???
OK... Now I'll be willing to give the benefit of the doubt to some people, but I think that some of them are saying "Hear us Obama" and "Deliver us Obama". It sure does sound like it to me, anyway... Give it a listen and see what you think...
Either way, in my opinion it is questionable at least, and bad either way.
Either way, in my opinion it is questionable at least, and bad either way.
Monday, September 28, 2009
Uncovered Audio: Obama’s ‘Safe Schools Czar’ Encouraged Child Sex With Older Man
OK, like that part of it in and of its self wasn't bad enough, but if you listen to the end of it, he turned that situation into a discussion about gay lifestyle with other high school kids... And this is a "safe school czar"?
Friday, September 25, 2009
DNC Failed to Certify Obama as Eligible in MOST States!
By JB Williams Friday, September 25, 2009
When I first became aware that the Democratic National Committee prepared, signed and notarized two slightly different Certification of Nomination documents for the Obama-Biden ticket in the 2008 election, I was shocked and after verifying both documents as real, I wrote about it in The Theory is Now a Conspiracy and Facts Don’t Lie released on September 10, 2009.
The question was obvious – Why TWO different DNC Obama certification documents, and why did one have proper certification of constitutional eligibility in it, while the other had that certification deleted?
The Obama camp had been using the defense that the DNC had properly vetted and certified Obama’s eligibility for months. Judge after judge had used that claim and the fact that Obama’s COLB (Certification of Live Birth) had been “Snoped – FactChecked – blogged and twittered” as “legal proof” that Obama was eligible for office, despite the very real fact that Obama has never released any authenticated proof on the subject.
Then we find out that the DNC did NOT certify Obama as eligible under Article II – Section I of the Constitution, in 49 of 50 states. The DNC had only filed such certification in the state of Hawaii, Obama’s alleged birth place. The other 49 states received a Certification of Nomination which did NOT certify Obama as constitutionally eligible for office.
This story caused a firestorm of interest, comment and speculation across the web, leading Bob Unruh at World Net Daily to ask, What does Pelosi know about Obama’s eligibility?
On September 15, I released a follow up report, The Theory is Now a Conspiracy—II in which I was able to provide answers to many of the questions swirling around the two DNC docs.
•Both docs were real and both docs had been filed with Election Commission offices
•Only the doc filed in Hawaii certified Obama as constitutionally eligible
•Nancy Pelosi did in fact sign both documents, indicating awareness
•Both documents had been used before by the DNC, in 2000 and 2004
•Different states have different state statutes on the matter
•But the Constitution is clear, and the DNC ignored it
More interesting however, is the news I got back from a document and handwriting expert, a graphologist, which asserted the following in a detailed analysis of both documents.
In short, the answer to Bob Unruh’s question at WND seems to be yes, Nancy Pelosi knew that she was signing a false statement on behalf of Obama. But she also knew that this false statement of eligibility would only be filed in Hawaii, which has a very specific state statute that requires that each party certify the constitutional eligibility of their candidates, using specific text.
It further appears that this Certification of Nomination which includes text concerning constitutional requirements is the basis for statements made by Hawaii officials, who have proclaimed that Obama is a “natural born citizen” on the basis that Nancy Pelosi said so in her false Certification of Nomination.
After all, NO actual birth certificate has ever been released by Obama. A COLB, which anyone born anywhere in the world could purchase from Hawaii in 1961, in fact at least two different COLB’s from Hawaii, are all that has been offered by Obama.
The Story Continues
After releasing Parts I and II of this ongoing investigative report, literally hundreds of American citizens have taken it upon themselves to call their state Election Commission office and request copies of what the DNC filed in their state. Many of those documents have since been faxed or emailed to me.
In all cases except Hawaii, the DNC form without certification of constitutional eligibility was filed by the DNC. Meanwhile, everywhere we look, the RNC used one universal certification document which included full certification of constitutional eligibility in every state, in 2000, 2004 and 2008.
The following explanations have been offered on the subject.
•Only Hawaii has a state statute requiring such language
•Other states don’t require certification of constitutional standing for office
•The DNC certified Obama during the primary process
•Certification is “implied”
Obviously, while Hawaii’s statute requires that such language be there in the certification of nomination, no state statue requires that such language not appear in the document. So, why didn’t the DNC use one universal doc like the RNC?
Upon further investigation, we did indeed learn that some state primary filings do include language of constitutional eligibility by each candidate. However, that is a statement made by each candidate, not a certification of compliance made by the Party which had vetted the candidate and certified.
And, I can’t believe that anyone needs me to explain the significant difference between “implied” and “certified?” A personal check “implies” that you have money in your account, which may or may not be true. But a “certified” check guarantees that you have that money in your account.
We are talking about the highest office in this land and the most powerful office in the world. “Implied” won’t cut it when the US Constitution itself has very specific requirements for this office, even if Snopes, FactCheck and Obama bloggers don’t care, the rest of America should.
NO DNC Certification in many States
Not only did the DNC NOT certify eligibility in their Certification of Nomination for 49 states, they didn’t certify during the primary process in many states either. In fact, in most states, it appears that the DNC never certified constitutional eligibility for Barack Hussein Obama, despite their many claims of proper vetting and certification, all of which we now know to be false.
While the RNC filed the same proper certifications in all states with 100% consistency, the DNC filed a variety of improper documents which essentially certified nothing. They certainly failed to certify that Barack Hussein Obama met all legal requirements for the office.
There is NO argument about it now.
Barack Hussein Obama fails to meet Article II – Section I requirements for the office of President because he is NOT a “natural born citizen” according to the foundation for that clause, the Law of Nations based upon Natural Law, which requires that one be the natural born child of TWO US citizens, born on US soil.
Whether or not Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961, he is NOT the natural born citizen of TWO US citizens. He is the natural born son of a father who was at all times, a citizen of Kenya. Just as he adopted by natural law, his fathers name, he also adopted by natural law, his fathers citizenship. The efforts by Obama fans to use “anchor baby” arguments, claiming Hawaii as his birth place, fall short of the actual qualification.
But even more important, we now know that the DNC never certified to the contrary, except in Hawaii. The DNC never “certified” that Obama met all legal requirements for the office of president, like the RNC did for McCain.
Even in the primary filings, Obama filed documents like this one filed in Arkansas, which certifies absolutely nothing and isn’t even dated correctly at the signature line, also received from the Election Commission in Arkansas in November 2007, but allegedly signed by Obama in November 2008.
At no point in the string of documents filed by the DNC or Obama, did anyone certify to the state of Arkansas that Obama was eligible for the office he sought. This is true in many states… though not all 50 states have been reviewed as of this writing.
The US Senate never passed a resolution affirming that Barack Hussein Obama is a “natural born citizen” in accordance with the same definition the Senate used to make just such an affirmation on behalf of John McCain during the 2008 election.
Everyone in America knows who John McCain is, who his parents are, where he was born and that he is a true American war hero. Still, the Senate felt it necessary to pass a resolution affirming McCain’s “natural born citizen” status on the basis that he was the son of TWO US citizens, born on American soil at a US Navy base in Panama where his father was deployed at the time of John’s birth.
But nobody knows who Obama is or where he came from, as even his family in Kenya claim to have been present at his birth in Kenya, and no authenticated proof to the contrary has ever been presented.
Many Americans, at home, in congress and in the media, have assumed that Obama meets all qualifications because the DNC said he did. But in 49 states, they never said it, at least officially!
If you ask Nancy Pelosi, on what basis did she “certify” Obama as eligible under Article II, she would simply state that she never made any such certification, except in Hawaii… and she would be telling the truth!
The language necessary to certify Obama as eligible was omitted from the documents filed at 49 Election Commission offices, and in most of those cases, such certification was also missing in the primary filings.
Now, to be fair, the DNC had been omitting that language from their official filings for years. Refusing to certify their candidates as “constitutionally eligible” has been a practice of the DNC for at least a few election cycles now. Why?
The Final Questions
1.Why did the DNC certify Obama’s eligibility only in Hawaii?
2.Why did no state DNC office, DNC elector, or Election Commission office catch it?
3.Since the DNC made no such certification, on what basis do we assume Obama to be eligible?
4.Without any such certification, isn’t it more important than ever to see the actual birth certificate and ask the courts to make an official ruling on the definition of “natural born citizen?”
5.Why did the DNC use TWO different docs, one incomplete, when the RNC used the same complete doc nationwide?
6.On what basis will the media continue to claim that Obama is eligible?
7.Why did Nancy Pelosi show signs of stress in her Hawaii certification of Obama?
8.When will every American demand answers to these and many more questions?
After four weeks of investigation, we certainly know a lot more than we did four weeks ago. Still, this three part report raises more questions than answers.
At the end of the day, we clearly have a political Party currently in power which gained that power by ignoring or intentionally subverting the US Constitution. At a minimum, they were very sloppy and derelict in their duty. At worst, they are complicit in a crime of monumental proportions.
Article II requirements exist, they are quite clear, the parties are obligated to vet and certify their candidates, and yet the DNC failed miserably in all categories. Still, the nation assumes that all was above board. On what basis do we now make that assumption?
This is the last in this three part report. If any more answers are to be found, the American citizens will have to demand them, the courts will have to agree to allow discovery in the matter and Obama will have to become the transparent president he promised so many Americans he would be.
Armed with this information, it is now up to the American people to decide what to do with this information. But one thing is vividly clear, nobody in the DNC wants to address any of these questions and Obama’s Department of Justice is too busy running interference for their Messiah to be bothered with such minor details as the rule of constitutional law.
It’s all in the hands of the people now! I hope you choose wisely!
(3) Reader Feedback | Subscribe
JB Williams Most recent columns
JB Williams is a business man, a husband, a father, and a writer. A no nonsense commentator on American politics, American history, and American philosophy. He is published nationwide and in many countries around the world. JB Williams’ website is jb-williams.com/
JB Williams can be reached at: letters@canadafreepress.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
