George's Classic Links
This page includes links to items that I believe deserve separate inclusion for reasons such as the historical record or repudiating long-standing misrepresentations.
For dated items in the table [more recent than "Failing liberty 101"]--
If you click a headline, you will be taken to the abstract with synopsized quotes on that article below the table. If you click the date in the table you will be taken to the original article on the Web.
For items undated in the table ["Failing liberty 101" and items earlier] you need to scroll down below the table to get to the abstract with synopsized quotes of an article and if you click a headline there or in the table, you will be taken to the original article on the Web.
Click here if you want to go to the bottom of the following table. Click a headline to go to the named article.
[Click here to go to the top of the headline links table.]
By David Harsanyi, The Federalist [Republicans who voted to confirm Lynch were Orrin Hatch (UT), Jeff Flake (AZ), Lindsey Graham (SC), Mark Kirk (IL), Susan Collins (ME), Kelly Ayotte (NH), Rob Portman (OH), Ron Johnson (WI), Thad Cochran (MS) and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.]
"Obama is the most dangerous president in history. He lied when promising the world that the U.S. would never allow Iran’s war fanatics to have nuclear weapons. While Obama was demagogically repeating, 'Never! Never!,' his alter ego Val Jarrett carried on secret talks with the mullahs, resulting in today’s total surrender. Today we have a fuzzy 'framework' (that Iran denies even agreeing to), which gives the world thirteen years before the mullahs can set off Armageddon. After thirteen years, all bets are off, assuming the enemy doesn’t violate its 'promises' tomorrow, which it has a long history of doing.
"This is not sane.
"Dick Cheney has correctly called Obama 'the worst president in history.' I think history will brand him with that flaming scarlet letter, because no U.S. leader has ever empowered a nuclear suicide cult. No U.S. president before this one could even imagine doing something so monstrous. Obama has gone rogue.
"Arab nations are also in danger of nuclear Armageddon from the mullahs, or blackmail under a threat of total destruction. Israel is officially target #1, but it is ready to retaliate with overwhelming force.
"My guess is therefore that Saudi Arabia will be the first big target for Iranian assault. The Iranians have already taken over the strategic country of Yemen, encircling Saudi Arabia from the south. They also threaten Arabia from their side of the narrow Gulf, and they have developed a giant pincer movement to surround Israel and aim at Egypt and Arabia.
"Khomeinist Shi’ites have always believed they are divinely entitled to Arabia, with the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. Today they are closer to that goal than ever before, simply by waging proxy terrorist war in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen. Already they threaten Arabia across the Gulf. The mullahs can choke off the world’s oil supply when the time is right, and nuclear weapons will keep them immune to retaliation.
"Our puffed-up, preening hero is therefore the most dangerous character in history. Bar none. Never before has an American president surrendered to a fanatical suicide cult with nukes.
"Now Obama tells us three lies. One is that this sleazy deal is the best we can possibly get. The second lie is that the only alternative is war. The third lie is that Obama’s 'framework' isn’t a 'treaty' at all – so it doesn’t need to meet the constitutional standard of advice and consent by the U.S. Senate.
"This is just like that used car salesman telling you not to bother reading the fine print. Hurry! Hurry! Sign now, or you’ll miss your last chance!
"This 'deal' is so full of holes it’s hard to see any paper. No sane person believes it. Henry Kissinger and George P. Shultz took it apart in the Wall Street Journal last week.
"Four-star admiral James ('Ace') Lyons is telling us outright that Obama has let the U.S. government be penetrated and sabotaged by the fascist Muslim Brotherhood, which has long-proclaimed genocidal goals. They are just like the mullahs. If it were up to Obama, we would be threatened by nuclear Arabs as well as nuclear Iranians. Fortunately, Egypt caught the Muslim Brotherhood in time and knocked down Mohammed Morsi, who is now in jail.
"Obama commands the greatest military force in history, and he’s done nothing but sabotage them under cover of 'peace' negotiations. Prime Minister Chamberlain’s infamous appeasement with Hitler was at least negotiated in good faith on the British side.
"Churchill’s comment on Chamberlain’s appeasement should ring in our ears today: 'You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.'
"That is the whole point the left pretends not to know. Obama is not avoiding war. Everything he has done in the last six years increases the chance of war, which is already going on everywhere Obama tried to fix things. The latest U.S. defeat is in Yemen, but we’ve knocked down the pillars of stability in Egypt, Libya, Syria, and Iraq. In Eastern Europe we’ve endangered the Ukraine (now being torn apart by Putin), but Putin has threatened everybody in sight.
"The only regime we’ve respected is Iran’s openly genocidal cult. Obama tried to overthrow Israel’s elected government more than once, and Israel is stable today in spite of Obama – no thanks to his repeated attempts at sabotage.
"Obama has never shown good faith in anything. He is simply an enemy of this country and the civilized world. [Emphasis added.] 'Why?' is irrelevant. We can see it every day.
"The U.S. Constitution, which Obama publicly despises, has a very clear definition of treason: 'aiding and abetting the enemy in time of war.' Judge Andrew Napolitano thinks that Obama has already crossed that threshold and can be charged with and tried for treason. [Emphasis added.] Any trial will expose a huge cesspool of provable betrayals by both Obama and Hillary Clinton, exposing many others in this administration. . . . "
"Under the English common law tradition, crimes were defined through a legacy of court proceedings and decisions that punished offenses not because they were prohibited by statutes, but because they offended the sense of justice of the people and the court. Whether an offense could qualify as punishable depended largely on the obligations of the offender, and the obligations of a person holding a high position meant that some actions, or inactions, could be punishable if he did them, even though they would not be if done by an ordinary person.
"Offenses of this kind survive today in the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It recognizes as punishable offenses such things as perjury of oath, refusal to obey orders, abuse of authority, dereliction of duty, failure to supervise, moral turpitude, and conduct unbecoming. These would not be offenses if committed by a civilian with no official position, but they are offenses which bear on the subject's fitness for the duties he holds, which he is bound by oath or affirmation to perform.
[This authoritative article deserves your full attention and consideration. Whether or not impeachment of President Obama would result in conviction by the current U.S. Senate, on the basie of this article, is immaterial. One would think that even our establishment media would sufficiently air the the seriousness of the charges by the U. S. House of Representatives to alert more of the public.]
"Perjury is usually defined as 'lying under oath'. That is not quite right. The original meaning was 'violation of one's oath (or affirmation)'.
"The word 'perjury' is usually defined today as 'lying under oath about a material matter', but that is not its original or complete meaning, which is 'violation of an oath'. We can see this by consulting the original Latin from which the term comes. From An Elementary Latin Dictionary, by Charlton T. Lewis (1895), Note that the letter 'j' is the letter 'i' in Latin.
"By Art. II Sec. 1 Cl. 8, the president must swear: 'I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.' He is bound by this oath in all matters until he leaves office. No additional oath is needed to bind him to tell the truth in anything he says, as telling the truth is pursuant to all matters except perhaps those relating to national security. Any public statement is perjury if it is a lie, and not necessary to deceive an enemy.
"When a person takes an oath (or affirmation) before giving testimony, he is assuming the role of an official, that of 'witness under oath', for the duration of his testimony. That official position entails a special obligation to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and in that capacity, one is punishable in a way he would not be as an ordinary person not under oath. Therefore, perjury is a high crime.
"An official such as the president does not need to take a special oath to become subject to the penalties of perjury. He took an oath, by Art. II Sec. 1 Cl. 8, to 'faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States' and to 'preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States' to the best of his ability. While he holds that office, he is always under oath, and lying at any time constitutes perjury if it is not justified for national security.
"Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr erred in presenting in his referral only those offenses which could be 'laid at the feet' of the president. He functioned like a prosecutor of an offense against criminal statutes that apply to ordinary persons and are provable by the standards of 'proof beyond a reasonable doubt'. That is not to say that such offenses are not also high crimes or misdemeanors when committed by an official bound by oath. Most such offenses are. But 'high crimes and misdemeanors' also includes other offenses, applicable only to a public official, for which the standard is 'preponderance of evidence'. Holding a particular office of trust is not a right, but a privilege, and removal from such office is not a punishment. Disablement of the right to hold any office in the future would be a punishment, and therefore the standards of 'proof beyond a reasonable doubt' would apply before that ruling could be imposed by the Senate.
"It should be noted, however, that when an offense against a statute is also a 'high crime or misdemeanor', it may be, and usually is, referred to by a different name, when considered as such. Thus, an offense like 'obstruction of justice' or 'subornation of perjury' may become 'abuse of authority' when done by an official bound by oath. As such it would be grounds for impeachment and removal from office, but would be punishable by its statutory name once the official is out of office.
"An executive official is ultimately responsible for any failures of his subordinates and for their violations of the oath he and they took, which means violations of the Constitution and the rights of persons. It is not necessary to be able to prove that such failures or violations occurred at his instigation or with his knowledge, to be able, in Starr's words, to 'lay them at the feet' of the president. It is sufficient to show, on the preponderance of evidence, that the president was aware of misconduct on the part of his subordinates, or should have been, and failed to do all he could to remedy the misconduct, including termination and prosecution of the subordinates and compensation for the victims or their heirs. The president's subordinates include everyone in the executive branch, and their agents and contractors. It is not limited to those over whom he has direct supervision. He is not protected by 'plausible deniability'. He is legally responsible for everything that everyone in the executive branch is doing.
"Therefore, the appropriate subject matter for an impeachment and removal proceeding is the full range of offenses against the Constitution and against the rights of persons committed by subordinate officials and their agents which have not been adequately investigated or remedied. The massacre at Waco, the assault at Ruby Ridge, and many, many other illegal or excessive assaults by federal agents, and the failure of the president to take action against the offenders, is more than enough to justify impeachment and removal from office on grounds of dereliction of duty. To these we could add the many suspicious incidents that indicate covered up crimes by federal agents, including the suspicious deaths of persons suspected of being knowledgeable of wrongdoing by the president or others in the executive branch, or its contractors.
"The impeachment and removal process should be a debate on the entire field of proven and suspected misconduct by federal officials and agents under this president, and if judged to have been excessive by reasonable standards, to be grounds for removal, even if direct complicity cannot be shown."
1/27/15 Open-eyed Assessment of Barack Obama George Henry Edwards, GIAC2002.org
"I believe an open-eyed assessment of Barack Obama’s actions and background is that he wants to transform the United States from a free-enterprise capitalist nation to a socialist, even communist one. He did not like America, even resented it.
"It is hard to find one of his actions that indicate differently. Can you name one that truly boosts America? He consistently apologizes for America to the world. He alienated or slighted our traditional friends—returned Great Britain’s gift of a bust of Winston Churchill [Jon Swaine, The Telegraph, 29 Jul 2012 <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/9436526/White-House-admits-it-did-return-Winston-Churchill-bust-to-Britain.html>], removed a long planned missile shield from Europe [Kenneth Hanner, NewsMax 17 Mar 2013 Obama Administration Caves to Putin on Missile Shield for Europe < http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/obama-missile-shield-russia/2013/03/17/id/495084/> and publicly decried Israel’s actions to build settlements and defend its borders.
"Meanwhile, he kow-towed to Russia and the Muslim brotherhood. He bowed to Muslim princes. He repeatedly extended, and made useless, talks with Iran that were supposed to stem its efforts toward developing itself as a nuclear empire.
"His actions consistently accord with the Cloward-Piven strategy to collapse America’s capitalistic economy in order to convert it to a socialistic one. The Cloward-Priven strategy is to over-extend governmental do-good efforts to the extent that they over burden the capitalist economy to destruction.
"He asked for and got a so-called economic stimulus of $831 billion through taxation allegedly for 'shovel-ready' infrastructure development [Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 <<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009>]
"From which he handed over much to his cronies in spending for pie-in-the-sky 'alternate energy' projects that failed. He diverted essentially none of it to free-enterprise.
"He and his administration continually over-spend that, with the federal reserve borrowing to compensate, inevitably cause more and more inflation effectively further over-taxing the middle class, so lowering its quality of life and pressing it towards extinction.
"He, and through his administration, resists when he does not absolutely deny or overburden with regulations coal, oil and natural gas production or shipment. The only economic gains America have made during his administration have been due to private enterprise developing fracking methods on non-government lands.
"His voluntary twenty-something year membership in the church of anti-American preacher Jeremiah Wright alone reasonably leads one to think it speaks to his attitude towards America. [Brian Ross, ABC, March 13, 2008, Obama's Pastor: God Damn America, U.S. to Blame for 9/11 http://abcnews.go.com/blotter/democraticdebate/story?id=4443788&page=1]. His wife said she did not like America before he was elected.
"After living through his formative years [6 to 10 years old] in Muslim Indonesia and being indoctrinated by his effectively foster father, communist Frank Marshall Davis, he is said to have made many comments attesting to his attitude towards Islam—'there is nothing more beautiful than the Muslim call to prayer in the evening' and 'the United States was not founded as a Christian nation' [bearingarms.com, Obama the Muslim, July 27, 2010, http://bearingarms.com/obama-the-muslim/].
"He chose to announce his entry into politics in the home of Bill Ayers, unrepentant American terrorist, who, as a leader of the notorious Weather Underground, participated in the bombings of police stations and the U. S. Capitol Building. [Wikipedia, Bill Ayers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Ayers ].
"Obama consistently sought out leftist, including Communist, associates. He was rated the most left in congress when he was elected president."
Click here to go to the top of today's Index
1/27/15 In India Speech, Obama Addresses The Claim That He's Muslim By Chuck Ross, The Daily Caller
"Speaking in India about religious tolerance, President Obama briefly addressed unfounded [?] rumors that he is a Muslim.
"Obama was speaking at the Siri Fort Auditorium in New Delhi on Tuesday after meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narenda Modi.
"'In our lives Michelle and I have been strengthened by our Christian faith,' Obama told the audience. 'But there have been times where my faith’s been questioned — by people who don’t know me, or they’ve said that I adhere to a different religion, as if that were somehow a bad thing.' [Note he did not deny it, even if one were to accept his word based on his record.]
"Obama has long been the target of unsubstantiated accusations the he is actually Muslim rather than Christian. Obama’s Kenyan father was a secular Muslim, and the young Obama was raised for a time in Indonesia, a majority Muslim country. However, as an adult, Obama became involved in Christian-led organizations. He and wife Michelle eventually began attending the Trinity United Church of Christ, led by the fiery Rev. Jeremiah Wright." (RELATED: Obama: ‘My Father Was Born A Muslim’)
Americans still seem willing to give a pass to the disaster in the White House.
"Obama is a willful, indoctrinated child of the Left with strong Islamic sympathies who is not fit to govern. Indeed, he would not be fit to govern Lower Slobovia, let alone the United States of America. Obama is a historic disaster of the first magnitude and, if not restrained, he will see to the irrevocable decline of the country which foolishly elected him, leaving the world on the brink of a conflict — or in the midst of one — whose repercussions cannot be underestimated.
"Accompanying the undeniable havoc and damage that Obama is wreaking on his country and equally on its allies — Honduras, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Poland, Czech Republic, Israel, and possibly Taiwan — is the sense of helplessness that overcomes one when writing or speaking about a rogue president and his destructive administration. I feel this personally, having done my utmost in books, articles and lectures, from 2008 to the present, to warn whomever might read or listen that Obama represented a greater threat to the U.S. and the oddly named 'free world' than any of our most dedicated and belligerent enemies. Even prior to his nomination as the Democratic candidate for the presidency, my distrust of this man was proprioceptive. And after his Missouri address, I wondered why anyone would want to 'fundamentally transform' a country which, for all its flaws, perched atop the pinnacle of success in comparison to any other country.
"Everything Obama has done since then has only served to confirm what was originally a deep suspicion and soon grew to become a complete certainty. Dozens of meticulously researched books have been published to the same effect. And yet very few people seemed to be paying attention. No less disconcerting, those who argue that to criticize Obama is a sign of deep-dyed racism are, of course, relying on slander and misappropriation of language to protect their chosen standard bearer and his Marxist/progressivist/utopian project.
"What will it take to convince the ersatz aristocracy of frivolous intellectuals and brainless celebrities, partisan journalists, editors and academics, and an indifferent or deluded laity that they are heading for a crisis that will change our lives immeasurably for the worse? The evidence is beyond dispute.
"America is drowning in a state of unredeemable debt — $17 trillion in actual debt and, according to economic historian Niall Ferguson, in the vicinity of $200 trillion in unfunded liabilities, while one in five households depends on food stamps. At the same time, it is printing money like there’s no tomorrow — and there may not be — while subsidizing green energy fiascos at enormous cost to the taxpayer ($90 billion in wasted stimulus funds, and counting). It finds itself in the throes of a metastasizing race war, caused in no small degree by the president’s rhetoric and behavior and fomented by his attorney general. It is a country increasingly governed by executive fiat and by an administration rocked by a near-endless gyre of political and ideological scandals. It is a country whose federal government opposes voter ID, opening the door to electoral corruption. It is a country that spies on its own citizens, software corporations and web search engines, tries avowed terrorists in civilian courts, allows its ambassador and his entourage to be killed, without reprisal, and suffers its higher echelons to be riddled with Muslim Brotherhood operatives, giving the impression of a College of mujtahids. They are the advance cohort. 'Today,' writes Larry Kelley in his sobering book Lessons from Fallen Civilizations, 'millions of militant Muslims awake every morning plotting the destruction of the US. Many are among us.' And there will be more, if these reports of fast-tracking the citizenship applications of large numbers of Muslim immigrants are reliable, as they appear to be.
"It is a country whose president purges its military — 197 senior officers, including nine commanding generals — as did Turkey’s autocratic leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan to ensure the continuity of his regime. It is a country that refuses to defend its borders, even suing to keep them as porous as possible. It is a country shifting precipitously to the Left, now mired in the exorbitant socialist travesty of Obamacare built on an ascending pyramid of lies and false enrollment numbers — or in the words of L.A. County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey at his Patterico blog, 'they’re not just lying about politics now. They’re lying about data. They’re lying about everything. All the time. Constantly. It’s what you have to do to prop up an unsustainable government. … You lie and lie and lie and lie and lie and lie and lie.'
"It is a country whose domestic agenda is predicated on the Marxist principle of redistributive economics that amounts to stealing from the productive class to maintain an ever-growing parasitical constituency. It is a country at war with honest science, transmuting NASA into a program for Muslim outreach and buying into the Gore/Hansen/Mann-inflated, IPCC climate scam. It is a country that is retreating on every front and that has lost the Middle East as well as the respect of its adversaries. It is a country that betrays its allies and endangers the world in the process, as in the phony, eagerly sought agreement that allows a self-described genocidal and nuclearizing Iran to keep spinning its centrifuges while profiting from relaxed sanctions. It is a country whose administration has sold its loyal partner, Israel, down the Jordan River.
'“The United States is no longer a rational nation,' mourns James Lewis. 'Under Obama we are burning our traditional allies, and since weakness brings aggression, Iran is now empowered, China is grabbing ocean territory for shale deposits, and the worst offenders against women’s rights are now elected to the UN Human Rights Commission.' It is hard to contend with his summation.
"All this proceeds under the direction of a president who has sealed his vital documents so that very little of crucial importance is known about him. Roger Simon notes, as many others have done, 'that Obama’s academic records are perpetually unavailable for a reason — and that reason is most likely that they reveal he received financial preferences, scholarships and/or loans, as a foreign student.' I have been arguing this thesis, and more, for several years about a president who is essentially a cipher. Intentional lack of evidence comprises evidence of its own that something is amiss. Further, if Obama was a foreign student, it follows that his presidential legitimacy is in question. But Simon is forgiving here, averring that he “would vote in a heartbeat for a foreign born person if I thought he or she were the best candidate, assuming it was all legal and public.…' Pace Simon, considering Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution, how such a process could be legal is distinctly moot.
"Indeed, all other reasons aside, to have conferred immense power on a public figure with so meager a track record and so thin and discontinuous a résumé defies even the most rudimentary logic. Who is this man who sits in the Oval Office? (As PJM commenter 'cfbleachers' correctly remarks in response to a previous article of mine, 'Obama has spent his entire life perfecting the art of the mask.') And what is his modus operandi? 'Obama,' writes Dinesh D’Souza in Obama’s America: Unmaking the American Dream, published just prior to the 2012 election, 'is possessed of a certain low cunning that makes him politically formidable. Obama’s skill…is to figure out what the American people want to see and hear, and then give it to them, while doing something entirely different.'
"By 2012 Obama’s lack of a paper trail, his craftiness and his penchant for deceit should have been blatantly obvious to any sensible and mature American voter, irrespective of class, race or gender.
"TV personality Monica Crowley concurs. In a recent speech, she spelled out what should have been plain for all to see: 'We have a president who…came out of the swamps of Chicago machine politics, who learned at the knee of the communist revolutionary Frank Marshall Davis, who studied under Marxist professors…who trained intensively in the revolutionary tactics of Saul Alinsky, who launched his political career in the living room of Marxist revolutionaries and domestic terrorists… who for two decades sat in the pews of the radical anti-American preacher, who tried desperately to bury that past, who spoke about the fundamental transformation of the nation…who waged war on entire news organizations, Fox News, and who spent his first term slamming into place radical wealth redistribution and socialized medicine….What I’m describing here is the classic tin-pot dictatorship. We never thought it could happen here, and yet, here it is….Those of us in this room knew what was going on from the beginning before he was even elected president, but now it’s starting to dawn on more and more people what is really happening here.” [Emphasis added.] She is right. Even for those who were not 'in this room,' there should have been little doubt that Obama was a man without a discernible moral core, inspired by an anti-American political philosophy and utterly devoid of presidential heft.
"But American voters were ready to be taken in by a smooth-talking, shape-changing, confidence-man, like the gullible 'marks' in Melville’s last novel about the exploits of an adroit charlatan, and to trust the image rather than the substance (or absence of same). This is another way of saying that America elected the results of Obama’s wholly predictable dogmatic fecklessness. America elected not to be America anymore, to fundamentally transform itself from a solvent, powerful, feared and respected nation into a quasi-European basket case. America surrendered to reparation chromatics, as if seeking absolution for a history that no one today is responsible for and that Obama himself never experienced. Admittedly, Obama’s approval ratings have plunged of late, but public opinion is notoriously volatile and will probably rebound at some point. Liberal dogma and white guilt will see to that. One can only hope it will assume the form of a dead cat bounce.
"The question remains. What will it take to awaken the tranquilized sector of the public and shake the elite corps of complacent opinion-makers out of their blind and factional torpor? How long before reality pre-empts fantasy? 'The last five years of the Obama administration,' writes Russian émigré Alexander Markovsky, 'have been like living on a volcano.' How long before the lava starts to flow?
"One must hope that America will come to its collective senses before it is too late. But I am afraid that it will take nothing less than a major catastrophe, a fiscal implosion that takes the 'food' out of food stamps, coupled with more high-casualty terrorist attacks both abroad and on its own soil, leading to the eruption of civil unrest and the possible impeachment of the most destructive president in the entire pageant of American history — a sorcerer’s apprentice in a house on fire or a Machiavellian schemer following a carefully contrived plan — before America emerges from its devastating slumber. Assuming, of course, that it ever does, or that a path to recovery will still be possible. For nothing is guaranteed in a nation so divided as America is today."
11/11/13 A gorilla in the room by Wayne Allyn Root, Daily Odds and Ends "[Obama] knows exactly what he’s doing. He is purposely overwhelming the U.S. economy to create systemic failure, economic crisis and social chaos thereby destroying capitalism and our country from within."
"Barack Hussein Obama is
no fool. He is not incompetent. On the contrary, he is brilliant. He knows
exactly what he’s doing. He is purposely overwhelming the U.S.
economy to create systemic failure, economic crisis and social chaos thereby
destroying capitalism and our country from within. Barack Hussein
Obama was my college classmate ( Columbia University , class of ’83).
[Click the date for transript and series of Obama video clips.]
"We are in the twilight zone. America has entered another dimension. Yesterday in Boston President Obama continued his campaign of misleading statements. [lies] . . .
"'Talking Points' understands Barack Obama very well. I've studied the man intensely and my analysis of him has been accurate and fair. I have never demonized the President, insulted him, or tried marginalize him. He is a committed left-wing man. A person who believes the USA would be a far better place if only we would all listen to him. And he'll say pretty much anything [lie] to make his progressive vision come true." [To heck with "misleading statements" and other bromides. Obama LIES abundantly.]
"All public officials, including presidents, are sure to err, but comparatively few will prove utterly unfit for high office. Thus impeachment was designed to be neither over- nor under-inclusive. The Framers considered limiting grounds for removal to 'treason, bribery and corruption,' but that would fail to account for severe derelictions of duty that could fatally compromise our constitutional order. 'Maladministration,' on the other hand, was rejected because it would empower Congress to impeach based on trifling irregularities.
"The Framers settled on 'high crimes and misdemeanors,' a standard that had been used by the British parliament for centuries. The concept is not rooted in statutory offenses fit for criminal court proceedings. Instead, it involves damage done to the public order by persons in whom great public trust has been reposed. In Federalist No. 65, Hamilton described impeachable offenses as those
"A useful article published by the Constitutional Rights Foundation is more concrete about the Framers’ understanding:
"President Obama, of course, has sworn to uphold the Constitution and is bound to 'take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed' (Art. II, Sec. 3). In stark contrast, he has usurped the lawmaking power of Congress by unilaterally amending some statutes and expressly refusing to enforce others — not because they are arguably unconstitutional but because he disagrees with them on policy grounds. For years, he has ignored the law requiring the executive branch to propose Medicare reforms when the program’s trustees issue a warning about inadequate funding. He has made recess appointments when Congress was not in recess. He has flouted judicial rulings, including those invalidating the work of illegally appointed officials. His Justice Department openly and notoriously flouts the Constitution by enforcing the civil-rights laws in a racially discriminatory manner. His administration has knowingly transferred firearms to murderous Mexican criminal enterprises, predictably resulting in the killing of at least one federal Border Patrol officer. He has sued sovereign states in order to extort them into acceptance of his gutting of immigration and voter-identification laws.
"After willfully empowering jihadists in Libya by instigating an unprovoked, unauthorized war against a regime the United States regarded as an ally and was funding, the president and his State Department were shockingly derelict in failing to protect American personnel they recklessly kept stationed in Benghazi despite repeated attacks. When American installations there were predictably besieged yet again by jihadists on the eleventh anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, the commander-in-chief compounded his default by abandoning Americans who were under lethal attack, failing to take action to attempt to save them. As a result of this serial malfeasance, four American officials, including the United States ambassador to Libya, were killed — a scandal the administration has exacerbated by stonewalling congressional investigations; attempting to defraud the public into believing an obscure anti-Muslim video provoked the siege; and shamefully jailing the video producer in a transparent effort to prop up the fraud and in violation of the producer’s constitutional rights.
"The president, moreover, oversees an administration that has turned the IRS loose to harass his political opponents, frustrating their capacity to organize prior to the 2012 election. And Obama has stood behind his attorney general despite the latter’s citation for contempt of Congress and multiple episodes of false congressional testimony — most recently in connection with the investigation of journalists covering the administration.
"With a record like this, George W. Bush would long ago have been impeached and removed.
"So Ted Cruz is right: The question of why President Obama is not being impeached is a good one, and the answer is what the answer usually is when a drastic political step has not been taken — the votes are not there. It is a bow to reality: Because impeachment is a political remedy, the commission of impeachable offenses is of far less moment than the lack of a political appetite.
"Every political choice has consequences. The Framers intended impeachment as the ultimate accountability. Without at least the credible threat of it, there is no realistic checking of a president who seems increasingly disposed to abuse his awesome powers, in fulfillment of a promise to 'fundamentally transform' the United States of America. Maybe we are already transformed. The Framers did not see impeachment as outlandish; it was a realistic response to an imperious executive’s seeking to upend our constitutional order — the specter of which gripped the constitutional convention with fear."
"For LIVs (“low information voters”) whom you might persuade to read this: the profligate government spending and Bernanke’s artificially holding down interest rates inevitably causes more and more inflation. And inflation means deflation of the value of all our dollars, because of the most obviously correct economic principle of supply and demand. The excess of dollars not spent as proof of an exchange for goods or services wanted by the public lowers the value of each individual dollar.
"As quoted near the front of GIAC2002.org, the quickest way to wreck a capitalistic economy is to devalue its currency. This closely accords with the Cloward-Piven strategy (LIVs: google it).
"Is WPA or PWA for people otherwise out of work to truly replace or repair public infrastructure in disfavor because we are somehow denigrating the recipients? It seems to me this is fair, and more respectable as honest wages rather than as handouts.
"Despite the inefficiency of government, good things can be done, not simply to pay off campaign donors. Former president, Franklin Delano Roosevelt established rural electrification that was simply too unprofitable to be feasible for private industry.
"If the use of e-mails has postal services less in demand and too costly, people should be laid off for other productive uses and costs cut. Buggy whip manufacturers had to go completely out of business when their product was no longer used.
"A devalued currency reduces a country’s capability to provide for its own defense, let alone to support a truly democratic foreign revolutionary movement fighting for freedom from tyranny. This is true even if it only supplies weapons or such as unmanned drones without supporting a country’s own troops and their equipage. (As a separate matter, putting at risk the lives and limbs of Americans in endeavors not directly in defense of the home country is, at the least, questionable.) Contracting for the return of the dollars spent in support of such a movement from a winning revolutionary government is not unreasonable—freebies are frequently not appreciated
"Inflation’s deflation of the dollar erodes the worth of people’s life-long savings and the true meaning of stock market advances. After raiding social security for years, the government should be shamed for further eroding payouts to recipients by suggesting even more ludicrous reductions in its so-called cost of living adjustments.
"Republican plans make more good sense. They advance the age that social security benefits start and allow those 55 and under the option to invest half of their money otherwise taken out for social security in approved private securities rather than count on the continued solvency of Social Security’s meager payouts."
By George Edwards, GIAC2002.org
"The basis of the most recommended voting system specified here is automated fingerprint and one vote per voter verification. Its key features are that it:
one vote per fingerprint,
"Basic Usage and Operation
"At registration, a voter places his fingertip on a fingerprint-scanner-reader that puts the voter’s fingerprint data on a smart card with a unique fingerprint number including the voter’s state and precinct number. Then the voter puts his fingertip on a fingerprint-scanner-reader that compares the voter’s live fingerprint with the fingerprint data on the newly prepared card. If the machine declares a fingerprint data match, a registration place worker gives the card to the voter. Otherwise, the procedure is repeated until the machine declares a match.
"To vote, the voter puts the card into a voting-place fingerprint-scanner-reader that compares the voter’s live fingerprint with the fingerprint data on the card. If the machine declares a fingerprint data match, the voter’s vote is automatically counted as long as the reader’s memory does not show the fingerprint number read from the card has already been used in that election.
"Otherwise the system will issue an alert that the vote has not been counted along with the reason or that there is some indication of fraud because of such as suspicious data added to or missing from the card or in a different form or pattern. The voter should ask poll workers, if present, or ask voter registration where they can vote if the reason is that the vote is not counted is because it is not allowed at that particular voting place. If the reason is that the same fingerprint number has already been used, no votes are allowed.
"Disputes about refused votes can be handled in the same way as challenges made against a voter--with the customary provisional paper ballot and associated hearing procedure." [Click the date to access other sections--
Considerations, Observations, Voter Fraud Instances, Conclusions and System Maintenance]
2/19/13 How Widespread is Voter Fraud? 2012 Facts and Figures Truethevote.org
"Here are the facts:
By George Edwards, GIAC2002.org
"Are you better off now than you were four years ago? Are you safer?
"Of course not! And another four years of the Obama administration will make things much worse. It makes no effective difference whether Obama is incredibly inept or purposely bent on destroying America as we have known it.
"He said that his aim was to 'fundamentally transform America.' He has been very successful in doing that so far. Not since the Great Depression, have we ever been so long getting out of a recession. By all measures except the stock market, as measured in deflated dollars, we are worse off than when Obama took office.
"He has practically destroyed the respect of the world for America by his continued ridiculous apologies to foreign countries, disrespect of allies, fawning over enemies and his every action weakening our economic capability. He further intends to hollow our military defenses after reneging on providing anti-missile defense capabilities for friends.
"Obama’s campaign appears to be winning battleground states by outspending Romney’s with outright lies in television attacks. Those states’ votes could win the election for Obama.
"The establishment media as a whole is overwhelmingly leftist and supporting Obama’s re-election with misinformation and not reporting or diminishing the importance of his administration’s continued policies and actions repressing the resurgence of America’s economy and international respect. Perhaps worse yet, they have discredited other sources from which people can get other information including Fox News and well-known conservative spokesmen that often show videos of the events they report. This all keeps people in the dark and is very dangerous to our country.
"Chamberlain’s appeasement encouraged Hitler to move forward toward what became World War II. Iran’s continued development of atomic bombs and their likely deployment to terrorists also brings to mind the anti-Goldwater television campaign ad showing a little girl counting petals as she plucks them from a flower until her count is changed into a booming 9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 countdown that ends with a movie of an exploding atomic bomb. Click here to view the video. Continued Obama policies of ineffective attempted appeasement, 'leading from behind' and abandonment of 'strength through power' could well lead to such an awful result.
"What can we do that is effective? Yard signs in our yards are obviously of no help in persuading those in other states. Repeated cold calls from phone banks may well be resented, especially with the advent of robo-calls. But people may still respond to phone calls or discussions with people they personally know and respect.
"Those of us who personally know people in other states, especially 'battle-ground' states such as Ohio, Florida and North Carolina, might try to help them become better informed and encourage them to talk to their personal friends also. One way, might be to refer them to GIAC2002.org especially to its 'Classic Links.' The latter has accumulated information regarding Obama administration actions over the last four years to help keep it from being lost or forgotten.
"GIAC2002.org provides a daily page excerpting from and linking to up-to-date information from credible sources, even including isolated revealing establishment-media reports on the Web. It includes transcripts and links to video records of events and speeches that the left would rather you not see. It has an added advantage of not being prominent enough for the media to have gotten around to downplaying it.
"We only have one month. America is at stake."
9/28/12 Obama Versus Obama: Part IV Thomas Sowell, TownHall.com
"In Barack Obama's case, the potential for catastrophe is international in scope, and perhaps irretrievable in its consequences, as he stalls with feckless gestures as terrorist-sponsoring Iran moves toward the production of nuclear bombs.
"The rhetoric of Obama 1 says that he will protect Israel but the actions of Obama 2 have in fact protected Iran from an Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities -- until now it is questionable whether Iran's deeply buried nuclear facilities can be destroyed by the Israelis.
"Those deeply buried facilities took time to build, and Obama's policies gave them that time, with his lackadaisical approach of seeking United Nations resolutions and international sanctions that never had any serious chance of stopping Iran's movement toward becoming a nuclear power. And Barack Obama had to know that.
"In March, 'Foreign Policy' magazine reported that 'several high-level sources' in the Obama administration had revealed Israel's secret relationship with Azerbaijan, where Israeli planes could refuel to or from an air strike against Iran's nuclear facilities.
"The administration feared 'the risks of an Israeli strike on Iran,' according to these 'high-level sources.' Apparently the risks of an Iranian nuclear strike on Israel are not so much feared.
"This leak was one of the historic and unconscionable betrayals of an ally whose very existence is threatened. But the media still saw no evil, heard no evil and spoke no evil.
"The only question now is whether the American voters will wake up before it is too late -- not just for Israel, but for America."
"It was Constitution Day yesterday, so I spent part of it compiling a non-exhaustive list of the ways Barack Obama has violated the Constitution.
"First, let’s dispense with a persistent media trope, which is that Barack Obama was a 'constitutional law professor' in Chicago. Former University of Chicago Law School Interim Dean Richard Epstein blew a hole through that recently with his recollection that New York Times reporter Jodi Kantor’s claim that Mr. Obama was offered tenure is utterly false. Mr. Obama was never even a law professor, just a part-time lecturer.
"'[U]nder no circumstances would an offer to Obama be
tenured…,' Dr. Epstein
"Now for some examples of Mr. Obama’s violations.
"Launching an illegal war in Libya. . . .
"Undermining the nation's armed forces . . . .
"Violating religious freedom. . . .
"Making illegal recess appointments. . . .
"Forcing Americans to buy health insurance. . . .
"Refusing to enforce laws that he doesn’t like. . . .
"Stonewalling Fast and Furious. . . .
"Violating Equal Protection and Voting Rights. . . .
"Using the EPA to attack America’s energy industry. . . .
"Allowing the FCC to grab the Internet. . . .
"Attacking a state for upholding federal law. . . .
"Giving a foreign leader platforms to denounce an American state. . . .
"Using the National Labor Relations Board as a goon squad. . . .
"There’s so much more, but I’ve run out of room. When liberals write the history of the Obama era, they’ll have to perform contortions to cover up the sheer amount of lawlessness." [Click the date to fill in his rationale as represented by the dots.]
Tom Skoch, Editor of The Morning Journal Serving Northern Ohio
"THERE’S really only one
issue in the 2012 presidential race; all the rest is trivia. That one issue
is: Do you want to be in control of your life, or do you want government to
control your life?
"Obama’s America will be a place where other people who are less talented or less hard-working will have a government-backed claim on your income in this new era of 'redistribution of wealth.' . . .
"The Obama-like mindset
that puts the state over the individual in an attempt to perfect society is
a pernicious sickness that leads to the death of such societies: witness,
the Soviet Union, which died 20 years ago, after three quarters of a century
of oppressing and murdering its own population in the name of the state.
"That’s the America that
Obama has vowed to “fundamentally transform” — and that’s the heart of this
Ben Shapiro, Breitbart.com
"He went right at Obama from the outset:
[H]as the American economy recovered?
Has our ability to shape world events been enhanced, or diminished?
Have we gained greater confidence among our allies, and greater respect from our adversaries?
And, perhaps most importantly, has the most severe security threat facing America and our friends, a nuclear-armed Iran, become more or less likely?
These clear measures are the ultimate tests of American leadership. And, by these standards, we haven’t seen much in the President’s first term that inspires confidence in a second.
"These are the questions upon which Romney can realistically stake his re-election bid. And Romney didn’t stop there. He delivered body-shot after body-shot:
The President’s policies have made it harder to recover from the deepest recession in seventy years … exposed the military to cuts that no one can justify … compromised our national-security secrets … and in dealings with other nations, given trust where it is not earned, insult where it is not deserved, and apology where it is not due.
"And he posed the contrast between his own vision of American exceptionalism and Obama’s, largely by focusing on the concept that this must be an 'American Century':
Like a watchman in the night, we must remain at our post – and keep guard of the freedom that defines and ennobles us, and our friends. In an American Century, we have the strongest economy and the strongest military in the world. In an American Century, we secure peace through our strength. And if by absolute necessity we must employ it, we must wield our strength with resolve. In an American Century, we lead the free world and the free world leads the entire world.
If we do not have the strength or vision to lead, then other powers will take our place, pulling history in a very different direction. A just and peaceful world depends on a strong and confident America. I pledge to you that if I become commander-in-chief, the United States of America will fulfill its duty, and its destiny.
"Romney had especially harsh words for Obama’s planned military cuts:
Today, we are just months away from an arbitrary, across-the-board budget reduction that would saddle the military with a trillion dollars in cuts, severely shrink our force structure, and impair our ability to meet and deter threats. Don’t bother trying to find a serious military rationale behind any of this, unless that rationale is wishful thinking. Strategy is not driving President Obama’s massive defense cuts. In fact, his own Secretary of Defense warned that these reductions would be 'devastating.' And he is right.
"And Romney ripped Obama for his administration’s national security leaks, which Romney said 'betrays our national interest … compromises our men and women in the field … demands a full and prompt investigation by a special counsel, with explanation and consequence … The time for stonewalling is over.'
"Where President Obama offered nothing but platitudes in his speech to VFW yesterday, Romney laid out a point-by-point attack on Obama’s foreign policy. He started with the “sudden abandonment of friends in Poland and the Czech Republic”; he moved on to Obama’s kowtowing to Russia; he slammed Obama for pooh-poohing Hugo Chavez’s team effort with Hezbollah.
"He deconstructed Obama’s attacks on Israel:
President Obama is fond of lecturing Israel’s leaders. He was even caught by a microphone deriding them. He has undermined their position, which was tough enough as it was. And even at the United Nations, to the enthusiastic applause of Israel’s enemies, he spoke as if our closest ally in the Middle East was the problem.
The people of Israel deserve better than what they have received from the leader of the free world. And the chorus of accusations, threats, and insults at the United Nations should never again include the voice of the President of the United States.
"His comprehensive assault on the Obama record included the usual litany of Obama abuses: the Middle East Islamist Spring, the rising danger of Iran, the bending over backwards for Chinese dictatorship. And he ended with this brutal takedown:
This is very simple: if you do not want America to be the strongest nation on earth, I am not your President. You have that President today.
Click here to go to the "month plus" index
Peter Ferrara, Forbes
"The U.S. has never before had a President who thinks so little of the American people that he imagines he can win re-election running on the opposite of reality. But that is the reality of President Obama today.
"Waving a planted press commentary, Obama recently claimed on the campaign stump, 'federal spending since I took office has risen at the slowest pace of any President in almost 60 years.'
Peggy Noonan aptly summarized in last weekend’s Wall Street Journal the take away by the still holding majority of Americans living in the real world:
"What this shows most importantly is that the recognition is starting to break through to the general public regarding the President’s rhetorical strategy that I’ve have been calling Calculated Deception. The latter is deliberately using a misleading argument to paint a false picture. That has been a central Obama practice not only throughout his entire presidency, but also as the foundation of his 2008 campaign strategy, and actually throughout his whole career.
"Rest assured, Ms. Noonan, that the President is not as nuts as he may seem at times. He knows very well that he is not a careful spender. His whole mission is to transform the U.S. not into a Big Government country, but a Huge Government country, because only a country run by a Huge Government can be satisfactorily controlled by superior, all wise and beneficent individuals like himself. That is why he is at minimum a Swedish socialist, if not worse. Notice, though, how far behind the times he and his weak minded supporters are, as even the Swedes have abandoned Swedish socialism as a failure. . . .
"Obama’s first major legislative initiative was the so-called stimulus, which increased future federal spending by nearly a trillion dollars, the most expensive legislation in history up till that point. We know now, as thinking people knew at the time, that this record shattering spending bill only stimulated government spending, deficits and debt. Contrary to official Democrat Keynesian witchcraft, you don’t promote economic recovery, growth and prosperity by borrowing a trillion dollars out of the economy to spend a trillion dollars back into it.
"But this was just a warm up for Obama’s Swedish socialism. Obama worked with Pelosi’s Democratic Congress to pass an additional, $410 billion, supplemental spending bill for fiscal year 2009, which was too much even for big spending President Bush, who had specifically rejected it in 2008. Next in 2009 came a $40 billion expansion in the SCHIP entitlement program, as if we didn’t already have way more than too much entitlement spending.
"But those were just the preliminaries for the biggest single spending bill in world history, Obamacare, enacted in March, 2010. That legislation is not yet even counted in Obama’s spending record so far because it mostly does not go into effect until 2014. But it is now scored by CBO as increasing federal spending by $1.6 trillion in the first 10 years alone, with trillions more to come in future years.
"After just one year of the Obama spending binge, federal spending had already rocketed to 25.2% of GDP, the highest in American history except for World War II. That compares to 20.8% in 2008, and an average of 19.6% during Bush’s two terms. The average during President Clinton’s two terms was 19.8%, and during the 60-plus years from World War II until 2008 — 19.7%. Obama’s own fiscal 2013 budget released in February projects the average during the entire 4 years of the Obama Administration to come in at 24.4% in just a few months. That budget shows federal spending increasing from $2.983 trillion in 2008 to an all time record $3.796 trillion in 2012, an increase of 27.3%.
"Moreover, before Obama there had never been a deficit anywhere near $1 trillion. The highest previously was $458 billion, or less than half a trillion, in 2008. The federal deficit for the last budget adopted by a Republican controlled Congress was $161 billion for fiscal year 2007. But the budget deficits for Obama’s four years were reported in Obama’s own 2013 budget as $1.413 trillion for 2009, $1.293 trillion for 2010, $1.3 trillion for 2011, and $1.327 trillion for 2012, four years in a row of deficits of $1.3 trillion or more, the highest in world history.
"President Obama’s own 2013 budget shows that as a result federal debt held by the public will double during Obama’s four years as President. That means in just one term President Obama will have increased the national debt as much as all prior Presidents, from George Washington to George Bush, combined.
"But this 2012 election is defined for the voters by the future, not the past. And that future is fully revealed by the stark contrast between President Obama’s spending, deficits and debt projected under his proposed 2013 budget, and the projections under House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s budget, adopted by the Republican House, and endorsed by presumptive Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney. . . . [Click the date to read ALL the analysis in the gap here.]
"Even under CBO’s horse and buggy static scoring, Ryan’s budget does serve to get federal debt under control and avoid any debt crisis, putting federal debt held by the public on a declining path from 77% of GDP in 2013 to 62% by 2022. That debt continues on a sharp decline from there, as the long term effects of Ryan’s structural entitlement reforms phase in. Debt held by the public is reduced to 53% of GDP by 2030, 38% by 2040, and 10% by 2050. That means the national debt is all but paid off by 2050, and would be soon thereafter. In fact, under dynamic scoring it probably would be paid off by then.
"In stark contrast, on our current course, under President Obama’s budget policies, federal debt held by the public rockets to 140% of GDP by 2030, 220%by 2040, and 320% by 2050, on its way to over 700% by 2080. That would undoubtedly create a Grecian style sovereign debt crisis for America before that point.
"So which course will you choose America?"
RUSH: You know, this Reverend Wright stuff with Barack Obama, it's back in the news again. Something is happening. It's anecdotal, but I happen to think that this might be applicable in a statistical way to the nation at large. We played the audio sound bite from Obama reading from one of his books a couple of weeks ago, in which he admitted bullying a young girl, in which he admitted trying cocaine, admitted that he drank a lot, basically just lollygagged around. I know we've got new listeners to this program. It's been documented by the official ratings companies that monitor such things.
There are tons and tons of new listeners, but even at that, I'm overwhelmed by the number of people -- we're three-and-a-half years into his regime, and I'm getting e-mails from people that the first time they'd heard he'd done cocaine was in the past two, three weeks. The first time they'd heard that he had bullied a young girl. They didn't know his college transcripts hadn't been released. They just assumed all that had happened and they missed it. They didn't know any of this.
Now, we know Obama wasn't vetted. We know the mainstream media has done everything they can to protect him. But the Reverend Wright stuff was out there. I'm even getting e-mail from people who had not heard all the Reverend Wright stuff. New listeners, not people who listen to this program regularly. New listeners say they're hearing this for the first time. I'm getting e-mails from people like we got when we were in the first year or first two years of the program. "My gosh, I found you the other day driving around. I couldn't get anything else on the radio, and I'm hooked now." Similar comments from customers at Two If By Tea who are finding the program for the first time and learning stuff about Obama that we've all known for four years. They're just now hearing about it.
It's driving home the fact that the Drive-Bys didn't vet this guy at all. We know it, but I'm sitting here, I assume everybody knows that Obama did cocaine, and this is the mistake we make. We know it, so we assume everybody else knows it because of word-of-mouth and this kind of thing. Some of the Reverend Wright stuff surfaced again because there's some new aspects to the Reverend Wright case. For example, in Ed Klein's book, The Amateur -- and Klein's got this on tape -- a friend of Obama's offered Wright 150 grand, a bribe, to stop preaching during the 2008 campaign. Yeah, it was just 150. That's probably why Wright didn't take it.
But there was another story in the Ed Klein book that Obama was talking to Wright one day, Reverend Wright, and said, "You know, Reverend, your problem is you have to tell the truth. As a politician, I don't. I don't have to tell the truth. I can make the truth whatever I want it to be." It's not on tape, but Klein claims that Obama said that to Wright. So there's all kinds of new stuff that's surfacing about Reverend Wright, in addition to the old stuff being recycled that people are hearing for the first time. It literally is amazing. The Wright stuff was all over talk radio. It was all over Fox News. But in one way this is encouraging because it is a great indication of just how many additional people are finding their way to conservative media now.
[In case you might be among the uninformed--Obama raised his kids in Reverend Wrights church that Obama and his wife attended for twenty years. Among other outrageous quotes from his sermons, Reverend Wright said: "Not 'God Bless America,' but 'God D**n America.' Obama never raised a peep." Click the date to read more that Rush describes in this article. I intend to add this to the "Classic Links" on this Web site so you and other readers can be informed perpetually and never again vote for this man with his un-American, even anti-American, background and beliefs.]
[As usual, click the date to access the video. This strikes me as an outstanding voting/vote counting procedure that, in my mind, deserves considerable serious thought beyond my and your initial consideration. It deals with the secrecy of the ballot, individual verification that votes are properly recorded and world wide access for count verification. It does not deal, for instance, with the registration process. The "TED conversations" provided below the video are intriguing and, I'm confident, deserve our review and our potential contributions to the dialogue. The ted.com Web site itself is intriguing.
Paul Grim for bringing this to our attention. Other related links on this,
GIAC,Web site that might deserve consideration with this are
Voting System and Fraud Prevention Tradeoffs,
Ensuring Valid Vote Counts,
Voting System Recommendations.
The other evening on my twitter, a person asked me why I didn’t like the Obama’s? Specifically I was asked: “I have to ask, why do you hate the Obama’s? It seems personal not policy related. You even dissed their Christmas family pic.” The truth is I do not like the Obamas, what they represent, their ideology, and I certainly do not like his policiesand legislation.
I’ve made no secret of my contempt for the Obamas. As I responded to the person who asked me the aforementioned question, I don’t like them because they are committed to the fundamental change of my/our country into what can only be regarded as a Communist state.
I don’t hate them per definition, but I condemn them because they are the worst kind of racialists, they are elitist Leninists with contempt for traditional America. They display disrespect for the sanctity of the office he holds, and for those who are willing to admit same Michelle Obama’s raw contempt for white America is transpicuous.
I don’t like them because they comport themselves as emperor and empress. I expect, no I demand respect for the Office of President and a love of our country and her citizenry from the leader entrusted with the governance of same. President and Mrs. Reagan displayed an unparalleled love for the country and her people. The Reagans made Americans feel good about themselves and about what we could accomplish. Could you envision President Reagan instructing his Justice Department to act like jack-booted thugs?
Presidents are politicians and all politicians are known and pretty much expected to manipulate the truth, if not outright lie, but even using that low standard, the Obama’s have taken lies, dishonesty, deceit, mendacity, subterfuge and obfuscation to new depths. They are verbally abusive to the citizenry and they display an animus for civility.
I do not like them, because they both display bigotry overtly, as in the case of Harvard Professor Louis Gates, when he accused the Cambridge Police of acting stupidly, and her code speak pursuant to now being able too be proud of America. I view that statement and that mindset as an insult to those who died to provide a country where a Kenyan, his illegal alien relatives, and his alleged progeny, could come and not only live freely, but rise to the highest, most powerful, position in the world. Michelle Obama is free to hate and disparage whites, because Americans of every description paid with their blood to ensure her right to do same.
I have a saying, that “the only reason a person hides things, is because they have something to hide.” No president in history has spent over a million dollars to keep his records and his past sealed. And what the two of them have shared has been proved to be lies. He lied about when and how they met, he lied about his mother’s death and problems with insurance, Michelle lied to a crowd pursuant to nearly $500,000 bank stocks they inherited from his family. He has lied about his father’s military service, about the civil rights movement, ad nauseum.
He lied to the world about the Supreme Court in a State of the Union address. He berated and publicly insulted a sitting Congressman. He has surrounded himself with the most rabidly, radical, socialist academicians today. He has fought for abortion procedures and opposed rulings that protected women and children, that even Planned Parenthood did not seek to support. He is openly hostile to business and aggressively hostile to Israel.
His wife treats being the First Lady, as her personal American Express Black Card (arguably the most prestigious credit card in the world). I condemn them because, as people are suffering, losing their homes, their jobs, their retirements, he and his family are arrogantly showing off their life of entitlement – as he goes about creating and fomenting class warfare.
I don’t like them, and I neither apologize nor retreat from my public condemnation of them and of his policies. We should condemn them for the disrespect they show our people, for his willful and unconstitutional actions pursuant to obeying the Constitutional parameters he is bound by, and his willful disregard for Congressional authority.
Dislike for them has nothing to do with the color of their skin, it has everything to do with their behavior, attitudes, and policies. And I have open scorn for their playing the race.
It is my intention to do all within my ability to ensure their reign is one term. I could go on, but let me conclude with this. I condemn in the strongest possible terms the media for refusing to investigate them as they did President Bush and President Clinton, and for refusing to label them for what they truly are. There is no scenario known to man, whereby a white president and his wife could ignore laws, flaunt their position, and lord over the people as these two are permitted out of fear for their color.
As I wrote in a syndicated column titled “Nero In The White House” – “Never in my life, inside or outside of politics, have I witnessed such dishonesty in a political leader. He is the most mendacious political figure I have ever witnessed. Even by the low standards of his presidential predecessors, his narcissistic, contumacious arrogance is unequalled. Using Obama as the bar, Nero would have to be elevated to sainthood…Many in America wanted to be proud when the first person of color was elected president, but instead, they have been witness to a congenital liar, a woman who has been ashamed of America her entire life, failed policies, intimidation and a commonality hitherto not witnessed in political leaders. He and his wife view their life at our expense as an entitlement – while America’s people go homeless, hungry and unemployed.”
Oh, and as for it being personal, you tell me how you would feel if a senator from Illinois sent you a personally signed card, intended to intimidate you and your family. Because you had written a syndicated column titled “Darth Democrat” that was critical of him.
Hillsdale College Course [Free video lectrure series-- click the date to access]
By Dick Morris, DickMorris.com
"The core of Obamacare is obviously the requirement that everyone
have health insurance. It is likely, given the nature of Justice Kennedy's
and Roberts' questioning of the government attorneys defending the mandate,
that it will be overturned by the Supreme Court.
"Forty years after his death, Saul Alinsky — the father of the community-organizing model that inspired both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton — is more politically relevant than ever. . . .
"(Liberals have also largely ignored the fact that the subtitle of Hillary Clinton’s honors thesis at Wellesley was “An Analysis of the Alinsky Model.”) . . .
"[Alinsky's] approach was distinctive. He deployed pickets to the homes of slumlords and used megaphones to hurl insults at them; he dumped trash on the front step of a local alderman to demand better garbage collection; he flooded stockholder meetings with raucous protesters, a tactic Occupy Wall Street is emulating; and he tied up bank lines with people who exchanged loads of pennies for $100 bills and vice versa.
"He boasted that knowledge of his tactics often led to preemptive surrender by local officials or businesses. He was able to abandon plans to flood a department store with protesters who would order merchandise to be delivered that they had no intention of paying for; he also never had protesters occupy every bathroom stall for hours at Chicago’s O’Hare Airport. In both cases, the mere threat of such action won important concessions from his targets.
"Alinsky himself disdained the chaotic tactics of 1960s student radicals. He eschewed violence in favor of planting radical seeds. While students were rioting at the 1968 Democratic convention, former left-wing radical David Horowitz recalls, 'Alinsky’s organizers were insinuating themselves into [Lyndon] Johnson’s War on Poverty program and directing federal funds into their own organizations and causes.'
"His most enduring influence may have been to inspire the National Education Association to become a political powerhouse. Sam Lambert, the executive secretary of the NEA in 1967, when it hired Alinsky as a political trainer, boasted that it would 'become a political power second to no other special interest.' The NEA delivered on that promise. Between 1963 and 1993, the number of teachers belonging to unions grew to 3.1 million, up from only 963,720.
"Alinsky didn’t live to see that, or a number of other fruits of his labors. But just before his death in 1972, he synthesized the lessons he had learned into a book called 'Rules for Radicals,' in which he urged radicals to make common cause with anyone to further their ends. The book was even dedicated, presumably tongue in cheek, to Lucifer, 'the very first radical,' who 'rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom.'
"Alinsky argued for moral relativism in fighting the establishment: “In war the end justifies almost any means. . . . The practical revolutionary will understand [that] in action, one does not always enjoy the luxury of a decision that is consistent both with one’s individual conscience and the good of mankind.” . . .
"Alinsky’s tactics of intimidation are a case in point. His most oft-quoted rule is “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. . . . One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other.”
"Obama’s White House has honed that tactic to perfection. In 2009, then– communications director Anita Dunn sneered that Fox News 'really is not a news network at this point.' President Obama himself has, in the spirit of Alinsky, gone out of his way to lambaste “fat-cat bankers” and greedy health insurers.
"'[The administration has] shown they’ll go after anybody or any organization that they think is standing in their way,' Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell said in a February speech. 'You know the drill. Expose these folks to public view, release the liberal thugs on them, and then hope the public pressure or the unwanted attention scares them from supporting similar causes down the road.' . . .
"What exactly are the connections between Obama and Saul Alinsky’s thought? In 1985, the 24-year-old Obama answered a want ad from the Calumet Community Religious Conference, run by Alinsky’s Chicago disciples. Obama was profoundly influenced by his years as a , even if he ultimately rejected Alinsky’s disdain for electoral politics and, like Hillary Clinton, chose to work within the system. 'Obama embraced many of Alinsky’s tactics and recently said his years as an organizer gave him the best education of his life,' wrote Peter Slevin of the Washington Post in 2007. . . .
"In 1992, after Obama returned to Chicago from Harvard Law School, he ran a voter-registration drive for Project Vote, an ACORN affiliate set up by Alinsky acolytes. The purportedly non-partisan effort registered 135,000 new voters and was integral to the election of Carol Moseley Braun to the Senate. Obama then moonlighted as a top trainer for ACORN.
bama even became ACORN’s attorney in 1995, when he sued on its behalf to implement the 'Motor Voter' law — a loose system of postcard voter registration that has proven to be a bonanza for vote fraudsters — in Illinois. Later, while on the board of the liberal Woods Fund, Obama saw to it that the group gave substantial grants to ACORN.
"His 2008 presidential campaign quietly hired ACORN affiliates to handle get-out-the-vote efforts in Ohio and Pennsylvania, improperly concealing their activities in Commission reports as being for “staging and lighting.” Obviously, Team Obama was eager to distance itself from ACORN’s reckless record in voter-registration-fraud scandals. Indeed, since then ACORN has gone into bankruptcy following the surfacing of undercover videos showing its employees offering advice on setting up a whorehouse for underage illegal aliens.
"Obama’s 2008 campaign showcased many Alinsky methods. 'Obama learned his lesson well,' David Alinsky, the son of Saul Alinsky, wrote in the Boston Globe in 2008. 'The Democratic National Convention had all the elements of the perfectly organized event, Saul Alinsky style. Barack Obama’s training in Chicago by the great community organizers is showing its effectiveness. It is an amazingly powerful format, and the method of my late father always works to get the message out and get the supporters on board.'
Mr. Fund, a writer based in New York, is the author of Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy. This article appears in the February 20, 2012, issue of National Review.
"House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan defended
his budget package on Sunday and insisted that President Barack Obama is
denying the American people upward mobility.
3/16/12 Your 15 Question Quiz on Whether to Vote for Obama in 2012 John Hawkins, TownHall.com
"Should you vote for Barack Obama or the Republican candidate in 2012? Here's a little quiz to help you decide!
1) The latest report from the CBO shows that the one decade cost estimate for Obamacare has almost doubled from 900 billion to 1.76 trillion dollars, it will add 700 billion dollars to the deficit over its first 10 years, 3-5 million people will lose their health care, and 30 million people still won't have health coverage -- and history has shown that CBO projections of this sort almost always turn out to be optimistic. So, do you want the American health care system to be decimated by Barack Obama?
2) Do you want to see gas prices rise as fast as possible while Barack Obama slow walks offshore drilling, blocks the Keystone Pipeline, and opposes ANWR?
3) Obama's stimulus may have been the single most wasteful expenditure in human history. It cost more than the "Marshall Plan, the Louisiana Purchase, and putting a man on the moon" combined and yet, numerous critics correctly predicted that it wouldn't work. Do you want more stimulus bills like that one in the future?
4) Because of Barack Obama's policies, we've had 37 months in a row of above 8% unemployment. That's the longest streak since the Great Depression. Perhaps worse yet, there are 1.7 million fewer jobs today than there were when Obama took office. Do you want to continue to see this many of your fellow Americans unemployed because of Barack Obama's incompetence?
5) The Catholic Church opposes birth control and abortion. Do you think it's okay for the Obama Administration to violate its First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion by forcing it to give out birth control for procreation? Should Catholics have to help abort babies, even though the Catholic Church views it as murder, despite the fact that every last Catholic bishop in the United States has condemned that decision?
6) America lost its AAA credit rating under Obama, we had the highest monthly deficit in American history just last month, and the projected 10 year deficit under Obama is more than 13 trillion dollars. Do you want to see this kind of spending continue?
7) Do you approve of an American President servilely bowing to foreign leaders?
8) Obama's blundering diplomacy in Pakistan and Afghanistan has almost hopelessly fouled the war effort there. After all the blood and treasure we've spent in Afghanistan, do you want to see America lose to the Taliban and Al-Qaeda because Barack Obama doesn't know what he's doing?
9) Whether you're rich, poor, or the middle class, one thing you can be sure of is that your taxes will go up if Barack Obama is reelected? Do you want your taxes to go up?
10) Every Obama promise comes with an expiration date and you literally can't take him at his word on anything. Do you like politicians to treat you like you're stupid? Do you like being lied to by politicians?
11) Do you think it's okay for Barack Obama's campaign contributors at Solyndra to receive a 535 million dollar government loan, approved by one of Obama’s fundraisers, even though they knew the company was in trouble and there was an excellent chance they wouldn't be able to pay back the loan?
12) In a sop to the unions that supported Barack Obama, "he gave them majority control of Chrysler, the taxpayers lost 14 billion dollars on General Motors, and General Motors received a special 45 billion dollar tax break." Do you think it's okay for Barack Obama to waste 59 billion dollars to help his political allies?
13) Do you think that the molestation of 95 year old cancer patients, sexual assaults, and the bad touching of small children by Obama's TSA should continue even though it does nothing of significance to prevent terrorist attacks?
14) Barack Obama supported TARP and expanded it when he became President. Do you like seeing well-connected big businesses that make lots of money when times are good get government bailouts to cover their losses when times are bad?
15) Obama's Department of Justice helped Mexican criminals get their hands on guns that were used to kill hundreds of Mexicans and an American. Nobody has been fired, nobody has been prosecuted, and the DOJ isn't cooperating with a congressional investigation into a scandal that's as serious as Watergate. Do you think it's all right for the Obama Administration to help provide guns to Mexican cartels without accountability?
[Click the date to view
names, photos and what they do.]
2/19/12 Rep. Allen West Delivers Epic Speech on GOP's Proud History of Fighting For Black Equality By Wynton Hall, Big Government
"In a sweeping and stirring oration on the floor of the House of Representatives, Rep. Allen West (R-FL) proudly recounted the Republican Party’s long history of fighting for black freedom against the Democratic Party’s history of racism and oppression.
"Rep. West’s speech offered a timeline of Republican Party victories on behalf of African Americans’ long battle for equality. From the elections of the first black members of Congress (Sen. Hiram Revels (R-MS) and Rep. Joseph Rainey (R-SC)), to the adoption of the 13th Amendment, 14th Amendment, 15th Amendment, 1875 Civil Rights Act, 1957 Civil Rights Act, 1964 Civil Rights Act, and of course the Emancipation itself, Rep. West recounted how each victory was the result of the Republican Party’s commitment to freedom for all citizens, regardless of hue.
"Rep. West’s oration marking Black History Month also placed his own election in the pantheon of Republican victories on behalf of African Americans: [Click the date to read the transcript of his speech and see the video.] . . . .
"In the speech’s moving peroration, Rep. West closed his remarks by reaffirming the Republican Party’s commitment to conserving the dignity of every human life, regardless of position or color.
"[L]et us not forget that anybody the GOP picks will be far superior than the current resident at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Not convinced? Here’s the evidence:
"1. Mountain of
By Steve McCann, American Thinker
Son of Russian immigrant envisions something worse than Euro-socialism
"If Barack Obama wins in 2012, America is headed for something worse than a failing European-style socialist state, top-rated radio host Michael Savage said on his nationally syndicated show today.
"'I have to tell you that if this man, God forbid, is the next president of the United States, we’re going to be living in something along the lines of – people say Europe. I don’t believe it’s going to be like Europe – I think it will be closer to Chavez’s South American dictatorship,' he told his 'Savage Nation' audience.
"Recalling his background as the son of an immigrant from Russia, who has been around awhile and seen a number of administrations, Savage said that if he had one message to leave, it would be a warning about what he fears is on the horizon.
"'This is the most corrupt, incompetent, dangerous tyrannical administration in American history,' he declared.
"'It’s not politics as usual. It’s not just Democrats versus Republicans,' Savage said.
"Obama, he said, is 'not a Democrat,' noting the president’s history of ties to Marxists and other radicals documented in his book 'Trickle Up Poverty.'
"'Obama has a long history of being at odds with American values and with America itself and the core principles of this country.' Savage said.
"Savage pointed to media as one of the areas in which 'step by step, degree by degree, we’re losing our freedom.'
"He cited a WND story by Aaron Klein about a non-profit journalism group funded by supporters of MoveOn.org and the ACLU that will supply news to NBC television affiliates.
"'They don’t want government-sponsored opinions,' he said, 'They only want government-sponsored 'Pravda.’'
'Pravda,' which ironically means 'truth' in Russian, he noted, was the official Communist Party newspaper in the old Soviet Union.
"'That’s exactly what the government-media complex tells you on a daily basis – nothing but the government-media complex party line,' he said.
"'Pay attention,' Savage concluded. 'Your freedom may be at stake.'"
“Getting there from here—A practical guide for restoring America”
George Edwards, GIAC2002.org
"Purging voter registration lists could eliminate much of the known fraud that exists because dead voters remain on the rolls as well as those with at least obvious fraudulently given address such as graveyards. This requires volunteers, paid or otherwise, having access to and purging the voter rolls especially in the inner cities where much of this fraud is known to exist. . . .
"Once it’s gone it’s gone. Cutting a budget does not solve a problem. One must totally eliminate. Experience has shown that in just a few years the expenditures in a department with a cut budget will be much higher than before . . .
"If people do not get a benefit, they will keep it (e.g. a government department). He pointed out that the average American might think that the Department of Energy, for instance, might be important just because it is there although he might not see why. Therefore give every taxpayer a check. . . .
"When eliminating a department and not able to do it by normal attrition or transfer, give an optional early retirement—offer two years with full salary. This is a short term expense that would have been there anyway. Then it’s gone forever. . .
"Let states keep their money rather than funnel money through Washington.
"Need to de-fund the left. . . .
"Need a constitutional guarantee to limit taxes. If just balance the budget, taxes will be raised to do so."
· a conservative candidate should not accept even a teeny-weenie tax compromise,
· the deficit is NOT the biggest problem,
· the number one problem is that the 'government does insanely too much,'
· although it is true that lower tax rates will get more revenue, this assumes that it is desirable for the government to get
more money—money that is used primarily to get more votes and fund regulatory agencies [that have become
excessively burdensome on the economy].
· The question that needs to be answered is what government ought to be doing—not which department 'works' and
which does not." . . .
"Spivak pointed out that budgets that put off cuts till future years because they are too hard to make now are ludicrous. When the future years arrive, expenses will still be 'too hard to cut.'
"Spivak said that it makes him shudder when he hears a politician say that any money saved by deleting, say the Department of Education, will be sent back to the states. 'Why not send them back to the taxpayers, or in the case of education, back to the parents?'
"We must de-fund the left. We must have educational reform.Teachers unions need to be busted.. . . .. Providing vouchers to be paid to the school of the parent’s choice is a desirable approach.The poor minorities in inner cities are the major beneficiaries.
"In the just prior of four three hour Spivak talks to the Myrtle Beach Tea Party (the last two on “Getting There From Here”) two areas struck me as being especially note-worthy. One, the extreme susceptibility of absentee ballots to voter fraud (certainly if not done in person or with automated computer based biometric identification), another that Hispanics are a non-minority manufactured by the left and maintained by not requiring them to understand English and by printing information in Spanish."
Loren Spivak, “Free Market Warrior,” is a noted inter-state lecturer.
"Raising revenues through tax reform is better than simply raising rates, which Democrats insist upon with near religious fervor. It is more economically efficient because it eliminates credits, carve-outs, and deductions that grossly misallocate capital. And it is more fair because it is the rich who can afford not only the sharp lawyers and accountants who exploit loopholes but the lobbyists who create them in the first place.
"Yet the Democrats, who flatter themselves as the party of fairness, are instead obsessed with raising tax rates on the rich as a sign of civic virtue. This is perverse in three ways:
"(1) Raising rates gratuitously slows economic growth, i.e., expansion of the economic pie for everyone, by penalizing work and by retaining inefficiency-inducing loopholes.
"(2) We’re talking pennies on the dollar. Obama’s coveted Bush-tax-cut repeal would yield the Treasury, at the very most, $80 billion a year — offsetting 2 cents on the dollar of government spending ($3.6 trillion).
"(3) Hiking tax rates ignores the real drivers of debt, which, as Obama himself has acknowledged, are entitlements.
Has the president ever publicly proposed a single significant structural change in any entitlement? After Simpson-Bowles reported? No. In his February budget? No. In his April 13 budget “framework”? No. During the debt-ceiling crisis? No. During or after the supercommittee deliberations? No.
"As regarding the supercommittee, Obama was AWOL — then immediately pounced on its failure by going on TV to repeat his incessantly repeated campaign theme of the do-nothing (Republican) Congress.
"A swell slogan that fits nicely with the Norquist myth. Except for another inconvenient fact: It is the Republicans who passed — through the House, the only branch of government they control — a real budget that cut $5.8 trillion of spending over the next ten years. Obama’s February budget, which would have increased spending, was laughed out of the Senate, voted down 97– 0. As for the Democratic Senate, it has submitted no budget at all for two and a half years.
"Who, then, is do-nothing? Republicans should happily take on this absurd, and central, Democratic campaign plank. Bring Simpson-Bowles to the House floor and pass the most radical of its three deficit-reduction alternatives.
"Dare the Senate Democrats to vote down the grandest of all bargains. Dare Obama to veto his own debt commission. Dare the Democrats to actually do something about debt."
[Click date to view original.]
"Today millions of Americans are looking for work, millions have or will lost their homes, and millions more have pretty much lost their retirement savings. The reason? The economic crisis … the crisis that saw its genesis in our government’s push to make sure that every American who wanted to own their own home could do so --- regardless of credit worthiness or the ability to actually pay for that home.
"And who’s at fault? Why this is all Bush’s fault, of course. Just listen to Obama! Listen to the Democrats! Why, it’s true! George Bush did all of this to us! Blame Bush!
"Yesterday a listener sent me a gem. It was a video of a report by Bret Baier on Brit Hume’s newscast on Fox News on September 24, 2008. This report detailed efforts by the Bush Administration to stop the financial collapse from happening … and the efforts of some certain people to block the reforms. [Click date leading this article to view.]
"Hume begins the report by saying that many financial analysts are saying that if Fannie and Freddie had undergone regulatory reform earlier in the decade the financial meltdown might never have happened or wouldn’t have been nearly as severe. That’s a pretty important point, don’t you think? So what happened to the calls for regulatory reform?
"Here’s pretty much a point-by-point synopsis of Baier’s report:
"Then we hear Bush Treasury Secretary John Snow testifying before the House Financial Services Committee … where Barney Frank holds forth as the ranking member. That means the number one Democrat.
"So who in the congress was fighting Treasury Secretary Snow and the Bush Administration to reign in Fannie and Freddie? "Why that would be none other than our friend Democrat Barney Frank. At a hearing on the issue Barney said “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not in a crisis.” Baier reports that Barney Frank was actually encouraging Fannie and Freddie to work harder to get more low income families into homes. Here’s Barney:
"So Barney Frank then goes on to block the legislation calling for increased regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Despite the warnings, nothing gets done.
"Then in 2005 it’s Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan testifying before congress:
"Was anything done? Nope. And why not? Well, as Baier points out, that was thanks largely to the efforts of two dedicated defenders and protectors of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Barney Frank and Democrat Senator Charles Schumer." [Click this article's title date to view more shooting down this particular distortion of history by the Dems.]
[Have found that the ink no longer goes to the original video-have requested a link that does or a transcript from Fox News Sunday}
Video of Rep. Ryan's Remarks on today's Fox News Sunday show analyzing the Obama and Republican approaches
"A law professor, whom Damon leaves unnamed, shares this vision in a recent book: 'Longstanding notions of democratic citizenship are becoming obsolete. ... American identity is unsustainable in the face of globalization.' Instead of commitment to a nation-state, 'loyalties ... are moving to transnational communities defined by many different ways: by race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, and sexual orientation.' This law professor's vision is shared by many educators who look to 'global citizenship' as the proper aim of civics instruction, de-emphasizing attachment to any particular country, such as the United States, pointing out that our primary obligation should be to the universal ideals of human rights and justice. To be patriotic to one's own country is seen as suspect because it may turn into a militant chauvinism or a dangerous 'my country, right or wrong' vision.
"The ignorance about our country is staggering. According to one survey, only 28 percent of students could identify the Constitution as the supreme law of the land. Only 26 percent of students knew that the first 10 amendments to the Constitution are called the Bill of Rights. Fewer than one-quarter of students knew that George Washington was the first president of the United States. . . .
"Ignorance and possibly contempt for American values, civics and history might help explain how someone like Barack Obama could become president of the United States. At no other time in our history could a person with longtime associations with people who hate our country become president. Obama spent 20 years attending the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's hate-filled sermons, which preached that 'white folks' greed runs a world in need,' called our country the 'US of KKK-A' and asked God to 'damn America.' Obama's other America-hating associates include Weather Underground Pentagon bomber William Ayers and Ayers' wife, Bernardine Dohrn.
"The fact that Obama became president and brought openly Marxist people into his administration doesn't say so much about him as it says about the effects of decades of brainwashing of the American people by the education establishment, media and the intellectual elite."
"Something is wrong with Barack Obama. We all know it. We all see it. When he speaks about America, Americans cringe. There is a strangeness to his manner, an unease when he talks about America. He appears awkward and uncomfortable. His speech seems performed and practiced yet, oddly halting. It's reminiscent of American POW's in Vietnam or Iraq reading a forced confession. His eyes, expressions, and vocal tone are disconnected from his words. The words themselves often sound American, but the delivery is clinical and detached. His attempts at patriotic sentiment ring hollow and phony. 'Once again, with feeling!' is how Americans are left feeling. He just doesn't seem right. "He doesn't seem like, well...one of us.
"Before anyone 'goes there' and makes accusations of racism, this is about a pervasive, nagging, national perception that Barack Obama does not intuitively understand or appreciate America or Americans. Not our past. Not our present or future. He just doesn't act or sound like an American. In fact, there are good reasons and ample evidence for why.
"For many of us, 'being an American' was a normal part of our collective upbringing. We learned it in school. We said the Pledge of Allegiance every morning right alongside our teachers. Even in liberal Southern California the day began with the Pledge often followed by singing 'God Bless America' or 'America the Beautiful.' Annual "Flag Ceremonies" were held with quotations from the Declaration of Independence and patriotic songs performed by the student body, in public, for parents and passersby to enjoy. There were even songs that mentioned God. Christmas was celebrated, in school. It was understood that God was integral to the founding of America and that The Creator was the true source of our liberties. Schools reinforced parental authority, being a good citizen, and responsibility to God. Religion was never preached or taught, but it was also never denigrated and never censored.
"Public school teachers and administrators modeled patriotism for their students. It was part of growing up in America. Honoring America. Being an American. The 4th of July was a community celebration. We stood with parents, neighbors, and friends and together celebrated America. We learned early on to revere the Stars and Stripes. The Flag was sacred. Many of our fathers, grandfathers, uncles, and brothers had fought for it in wars past and were fighting for it in Vietnam. Many had died and would die for the American Flag and the people and ideals it represented. We saw the sacrifices on the nightly news with continual pictures of dead American soldiers and the daily 'body count' recited.
"From the World War II Generation to those who lived and fought through Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan today's Americans are those who know, all too well, the price of freedom. Our children and grandchildren witnessed the attacks of September 11, 2001. The memory of distraught parents, difficult dinnertime conversations, and the ensuing War on Terror shaped their youth and young adult years.
These and many other shared experiences before and since have created generations of Americans who cherish this land, this idea that is America. They do so with heart and soul. Standing on cue they remove their hats, place their hands over their hearts or salute, and then choke back the tears as the Star-Spangled Banner is played. They are Americans within the very fiber of their being.
"Naturalized citizens often display this same love of country, for many have escaped oppressive regimes or economic hopelessness to come to America and be adopted as America's sons and daughters. They came seeking their American Dream, the freedom and opportunity to build a better life for themselves and their families. There's a common, deep, and intimate connection that Americans feel for their country. The soul of America is maintained in the hearts of its people, fiercely loyal to the vision of our Founders and the ideas and precepts of our founding documents.
"These same kinds of experiences did not shape the young Barack Obama. His mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, was an atheist and politically extreme. At the age of 6 the future president was ushered off to Indonesia where he attended school registered as a Muslim, recited the Quran in Arabic, and learned how to be a good Muslim. In these studies, he would have learned that all non-Muslims were infidels worthy of deception and ultimately, death. Christians and Jews were the enemy. Despite what Obama may say, the United States remains a Christian nation with a strong Jewish population and deep ties to Israel. Judeo-Christian principles helped form and continue to influence our national identity with many signers of the Declaration of Independence having been clergy or devout Christians. America remains home to the largest Christian population in the world. What bigger infidel could there be than America?
"Obama's teen years were spent living with his maternal grandparents on the Hawaiian island of Oahu. There he met a family friend, communist, purported pedophile, and his eventual mentor, the radical poet Frank Marshall Davis.
Obama's connections to radical leftists are numerous and well-known. He's admitted to attending socialist meetings and participated in a rally organized by the Democratic Socialists of America. In 1996, he sought and received the endorsement of the far left group The New Party. He has worked with, supported, and attempted to shield from investigation the group ACORN which was recently convicted of massive voter fraud. Obama's White House is chock-full of radical leftist, anti-American advisors. As a 20-year attendee at Jeremiah Wright's Trinity United Church of Christ, Obama was steeped in Black Liberation Theology which is rooted in the collectivist philosophy of Karl Marx. Marx's most oft-quoted excerpt from his work 'Critique of the Gotha Programme' seems to foreshadow the future President Obama's stated belief in wealth redistribution: 'From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.'
"The reason that Americans feel unease when Barack Obama talks about America is that he is talking about a different America. His words are carefully chosen and crafted to sound American, but the hidden meaning is much more malevolent. His goal is 'fundamentally transforming the United States of America' into a nation where social justice reigns and injustice is counted as fairness and equity. He seeks a nation of redistribution where those who succeed through hard work, honest enterprise, financial investment, time, energy, and risk are rewarded with government confiscation of the fruits of their labor. His is a country where communication systems, travel corridors, and private property are tightly controlled by the State. It's a country where education is state-run and curricula are state-mandated. In a fully implemented Obama-nation, it would be illegal to pass the accumulation of one's lifetime on to heirs. This is the America of Karl Marx's dreams.
"Barack Obama does not sound like an American because Obama's heart and soul are not American in nature. His thoughts are not American. His attitude and philosophy are not American. He cannot speak from the heart about America because America does not reside there. With a Muslim upbringing, a radical family, radical mentor, a myriad of radical connections, radical advisors, a radical theology, and some say a radical spouse, it's no wonder.
"Obama's agenda is informed by Marx and guided by years of close associations with extreme individuals and groups whose stated goals are the demise of America and America's influence in the world. When he says he wants to 'fundamentally transform America,' he is dead serious.
For the first time in all of American history, we are at the mercy of an un-American American President.
"May God truly bless the United States of America."
Jay Clarke is a businessman and lifelong conservative from Southern California.
By Monty Pelerin, The American Thinker [I recommend that you click this headline link and read the entire article.]
"Two hypotheses are often cited to explain why things have gotten so much worse:
"These hypotheses are not mutually exclusive. Evidence is consistent with either or a combination of both. "The remainder of this article deals only with the first. Readers should not assume that the second is unimportant, inoperable, or impossible. . . .
"How dangerous this delusional man might be is moot. What seems no longer at issue is Obama's 'superior intelligence.' Obama's belief system is dominated by the dismissed exploitation theories of Karl Marx and the 60's-style radicals he grew up around. The Reverend Wright preached to him for twenty years about exploitation in terms of Black Liberation Theology.
"An unrepentant terrorist, Bill Ayers, was a close friend and arguably author of one of Obama's autobiographies. His personally selected 'Czars' are the sorriest collection of Presidential advisors ever, at least in terms of reflecting American values and beliefs.
"Many went on the same intellectual voyage that Obama did. Most of us outgrew this nonsense, usually by our mid-twenties. Obama never did. He is still a child, intellectually undeveloped and locked into the ideas from the 60's -- both the 1960s and the Marxist 1860s. In that sense he is an intellectual dwarf, frozen in the equivalent of a state of intellectual puberty. His 'knowledge' is based on nothing but the discredited ideologies of Socialism.
"The claim that Obama is the smartest man to ever hold presidential office is absurd and a reflection on the state of our media who insist on propping up this man-child. Obama's obsession with keeping his college records and personal past secret is prima facie evidence that the claim is untrue. His knowledge base and dismal performance on the world stage is even more damning.
"Instead of having a superior intellect, we likely have the most ignorant, ideological, brainwashed dupe this country has ever elected to high office. The man's intellectual development never progressed beyond the stage of all-night freshman bull sessions where all the world's problems were solved (with help from adequate amounts of beer of course).
"This intellectual pygmy must be removed from office by whatever possible peaceful means. Impeachment is in order, but will not happen. Thus the 2012 election is critical. [Emphasis added.]
"The Democratic Party knows what happened in 2010. They also know that they have an albatross at the top of their ticket. "It is likely they will turn on this poseur before the election. If so, this act will be their most significant public service in years.
Obama will not be reelected, but that may not be enough. A country filled with enough fools to elect this modern-day version of a snake oil salesman, this American Idol wannabe, this empty suit, is clearly dumb enough to replace him in kind. H. L. Mencken had it correct: 'Democracy is a form of worship. It is the worship of jackals by jackasses.'
"The Democratic Party is and should be worried about 2012. No Democrat, save the hapless Jimmy Carter, can be happy about their current situation. Carter is the exception because his lock on 'worst President ever' is about to be broken by the current occupant."
Editor's note: This is the first of a two part series on George Soros and the media.
"When liberal investor George Soros gave $1.8 million to National Public Radio , it became part of the firestorm of controversy that jeopardized NPR’s federal funding. But that gift only hints at the widespread influence the controversial billionaire has on the mainstream media. Soros, who spent $27 million trying to defeat President Bush in 2004, has ties to more than 30 mainstream news outlets – including The New York Times, Washington Post, the Associated Press, NBC and ABC.
4/9/11 a.m. The Radical Gradualism of Paul Ryan The Weekly Standard
The status quo is far more ‘extreme’ than the Republican budget
"Late last month, Senator Charles Schumer of New York led a conference call in which Senate Democrats briefed reporters about the ongoing budget battle. At the outset, unaware that his comments were already audible to reporters on the line, Schumer provided some marching orders, advising his colleagues to describe Republican proposals as radical. 'I always use the word extreme,' he said. “That’s what the caucus instructed me to use this week.”
"It was no surprise, therefore, that when House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan released the Republican budget proposal for 2012 last week, Democrats in Washington called it radical and extreme. The White House labeled the plan unbalanced. Representative Chris Van Hollen, the senior Democrat on the House Budget Committee, called it “ideology on steroids.” Iowa senator Tom Harkin said the Ryan plan 'gives new meaning to the term extreme.'
But it wasn’t only Democrats who seemed struck by the radical character of Ryan’s proposal. Many supporters of his budget, too, noted above all its boldness, or its wholehearted fiscal conservatism, which is just another way to say that he proposes a dramatic change.
"And it is true, of course, that Ryan’s budget offers an unflinching conservative program. He proposes to have the federal government spend $5.8 trillion less over the next decade than it would under current law. He would reduce the accumulated deficits by more than $4 trillion over that period, and continue such reductions in the years that follow. He would thereby quickly begin to reduce the size of the federal debt relative to the economy, and over the coming decades would not only balance the budget but actually begin to pay off the principal of the debt. He would do that by reducing domestic discretionary spending, reforming the tax code to broaden the base and lower rates, block-granting some federal welfare programs (including Medicaid) to the states, repealing Obamacare, privatizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, cutting back farm subsidies and corporate welfare, and (most significant in the long run) reforming Medicare for those now younger than 55 from an open-ended entitlement into a system of premium supports to subsidize the purchase of private insurance.
"This adds up to an extraordinarily comprehensive and ambitious conservative policy agenda—more so than any Republican budget we have seen before, including those proposed by the Gingrich Congress in the ’90s and by Ronald Reagan in the ’80s. And yet, to call it 'extreme' misses a crucial point. Ryan’s plan is above all a gradual and measured solution to our fiscal problems—one that offers continuity and security to help us avoid a truly extreme crisis.
"This becomes especially clear when Ryan’s approach is contrasted with the alternative offered by the Democrats. Ryan talks about this moment as a choice between two visions. But in fact, it is a choice between a vision and a nonvision. Opposed to the House Republicans’ agenda is not a different set of solutions to our deepening fiscal problems proposed by the left, or even a defense of our existing welfare state. What the Democrats offer instead is complaisance that amounts to a knowing acquiescence in a preventable disaster. The Democratic party now has no discernible policy agenda whatsoever. It offers only a reflexive defense of an indefensible status quo.
"In his own 2012 budget, released in February, President Obama proposed to do essentially nothing in response to the coming fiscal calamity—indeed, his budget would increase the deficit."
4/2/11 Top 10 Reasons George Soros Is Dangerous Human Events
"Human Events’ readers, in an online poll, recently voted billionaire financier George Soros 'the single most destructive leftist demagogue in the country.. Here are the Top 10 Reasons George Soros Is Dangerous:
"1. Gives billions to left-wing causes: Soros started the Open Society Institute in 1993 as a way to spread his wealth to progressive causes. Using Open Society as a conduit, Soros has given more than $7 billion to a who’s who of left-wing groups. This partial list of recipients of Soros’ money says it all: ACORN, Apollo Alliance, National Council of La Raza, Tides Foundation, Huffington Post, Southern Poverty Law Center, Soujourners, People for the American Way, Planned Parenthood, and the National Organization for Women.
"2. Influence on U.S. elections: Soros once said that removing President George W. Bush from office in 2004 was the 'central focus of my life.' . . .Soros hosted a 2004 fund-raiser for Obama when he was running for the Illinois Senate and gave the maximum-allowed contribution within hours of Obama’s announcement that he was running for President.
"3. Wants to curtail American sovereignty: . . .
"4. Media Matters: Soros is a financial backer of Media Matters for America, a progressive media watchdog group that hyperventilates over any conservative view that makes it into the mainstream media. Now its founder, David Brock, has openly declared war on Fox News. . . .
"5. MoveOn.org: Soros has been a major funder of MoveOn.org, a progressive advocacy group and political action committee that raises millions for liberal candidates. This is the group that had on its website an ad comparing President George W. Bush to Adolf Hitler and ran the infamous 'General Betray Us' ad in the New York Times, disparaging the integrity of Gen. David Petraeus.
"6. Center for American Progress: Headed by John Podesta, White House chief of staff under President Clinton, the Center for American Progress has been instrumental in providing progressive talking points and policy positions for the Obama administration. There has also been a revolving door between the White House and the Soros-funded think tank, with Obama staffing his administration with many CAP officials.
"7. Environmental extremism: . . .
"8. America Coming
Together: Soros gave nearly $20 million to this
527 group with the express purpose of defeating President Bush. A massive
get-out-the-vote effort, ACT’s door-to-door canvassing teams included numerous
felons, its voter registration drives were riddled with fraud, and it handed out
incendiary fliers and made misleading taped phone calls to voters. ACT was
fined $775,000 by the Federal Election Commission for violations of various
federal campaign finance laws.
"10. Delusions: Soros has repeatedly said that he sees himself as a messianic figure. . . .If only the loony bin were an option. As it is, one of the wealthiest men in the world is using his billions to impose a radical agenda on America."
2/19/11 Obama budget doesn't cut it Charles Krauthammer, TheSunNews.com"Five days before his inauguration, President-elect Obama told The Washington Post that entitlement reform could no longer be kicked down the road. He then spent the next two years kicking - racking up $3 trillion in new debt along the way - on the grounds that massive temporary deficit spending was necessary to prevent another Great Depression. . . .
1/24/11 Get Involved in the Process
The above links to a YouTube video describing the S.C. Republican party organizational process that can be essential to getting the party organization behind conservative candidates.
1/22/11 Repeal of law is a start Charles Krauthammer, TheSunNews.com
"Suppose someone - say, the president of United States - proposed the following: We are drowning in debt. More than $14 trillion right now. I've got a great idea for deficit reduction. It will yield a savings of $230 billion over the next 10 years: We increase spending by $540 billion while we increase taxes by $770 billion.
"He'd be laughed out of town. And yet, this is precisely what the Democrats are claiming as a virtue of Obamacare. During the debate over Republican attempts to repeal it, one of the Democrats' major talking points has been that Obamacare reduces the deficit - and therefore repeal raises it - by $230 billion. Why, the Congressional Budget Office says exactly that.
"Very true. And very convincing. Until you realize where that number comes from. Explains CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf in his "preliminary analysis of H.R. 2" (the Republican health care repeal): "CBO anticipates that enacting H.R. 2 would probably yield, for the 2012-2021 period, a reduction in revenues in the neighborhood of $770 billion and a reduction in outlays in the vicinity of $540 billion."
"Of course, the very numbers that yield this $230 billion "deficit reduction" are phony to begin with. The CBO is required to accept every assumption, promise (of future spending cuts, for example) and chronological gimmick that Congress gives it. All the CBO then does is perform the calculation and spit out the result.
"In fact, the whole Obamacare bill was gamed to produce a favorable CBO number. Most glaringly, the new entitlement it creates - government-subsidized health insurance for 32 million Americans - doesn't kick in until 2014. That was deliberately designed so any projection for this decade would only cover six years of expenditures - while that same 10-year projection would capture 10 years of revenues. [Emphasis added, and the so-called 'Doc fix' of an estimated additional $300 billion over 10 years was dropped out of the bill so it will appear instead in other legislation than this.] With 10 years of money inflow versus six years of outflow, the result is a positive - i.e., deficit-reducing - number. Surprise.
"If you think that's audacious, consider this: Obamacare does not create just one new entitlement (health insurance for everyone); it actually creates a second - long-term care insurance. With an aging population, and with long-term care becoming extraordinarily expensive, this promises to be the biggest budget buster in the history of the welfare state.
"And yet, in the CBO calculation, this new entitlement to long-term care reduces the deficit over the next 10 years. By $70 billion, no less. How is this possible? By collecting premiums now, and paying out no benefits for the first 10 years. Presto: a (temporary) surplus. As former CBO Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin and scholars Joseph Antos and James Capretta note, 'Only in Washington could the creation of a reckless entitlement program be used as 'offset' to grease the way for another entitlement.'
"That a health care reform law of such enormous size and consequence, revolutionizing one-sixth of the U.S. economy, could be sold on such flimflammery is astonishing, even by Washington standards. . . .
"This does not absolve the Republicans from producing a health care replacement. They will and should be judged by how well their alternative addresses the needs of the uninsured and the anxieties of the currently insured. But amending an insanely complicated, contradictory, incoherent and arbitrary 2,000-page bill that will generate tens of thousands of pages of regulations is a complete nonstarter. Everything begins with repeal."
12/18/10 Congressional Review Act Usage Possibility [Not a link] George Edwards GIAC2002.org
The House can pass a joint resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act, overturning any order. Senate Republicans then can force a Senate vote with a petition of just 30 senators and force a floor vote that would require just 51 votes to pass. Such an act would protect the privileged resolution from filibuster. The Senate has 60 legislative days from when the order is issued before the privileged status is lost.
Using the Congressional Review Act would require just four Democratic senators to join Republicans in saying any department should not be permitted to create for itself vast new regulatory powers. If it succeeds, it will dare Mr. Obama to concede and suffer a political loss as Congress asserts its power, or veto it and take full ownership of completely disregarding this election to keep pushing left with ever more government control. Either way, it would be a huge statement from Congress that regulatory power grabs will not go unnoticed.
This sets up a crystal-clear test case of whether the Obama administration can get away with ignoring the election, Congress, the legitimate legislative process and the American people to force a big-government power grab through a regulatory back door.
The following shows the changes to the Congressional Review Act article under the Web URL http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/dec/14/silencing-voices-of-internet-dissent/?page=1 and giac2002.org: 12/14/10 Silencing voices of Internet dissent By Phil Kerpen, The Washington Times justifying the preceding statement:
“[T]he House should pass a joint
resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act, overturning [
"Using the Congressional Review
Act would require just four Democratic senators to join Republicans in saying
"This sets up a crystal-clear test case of whether the Obama administration can get away with ignoring the election, Congress, the legitimate legislative process and the American people to force a big-government power grab through a regulatory back door.
"Congress must assert itself now before the Obama administration uses regulatory back doors to thwart the electorate and continue shoving the country hard to the left. If the FCC can get away with this, expect the Environmental Protection Agency to be emboldened in its backdoor "cap-and-trade" efforts and the National Labor Relations Board in its backdoor card-check efforts. Expect the vast new regulations from the Department of Health and Human Services and the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau under the health care and financial regulation laws to be extremely aggressive.
"The primary purpose here is to suggest potentially desirable amendments to the U.S. Constitution as food for thought while recognizing that the 230 year old document is probably one of the most remarkably well thought out and effective documents for providing and protecting individual liberty in world history. However, Kurt Gödel, arguably the foremost logician of the twentieth century, believed that it did not prevent a dictatorship from being set up under it, some constitutional interpretations in rulings by five U.S. Supreme Court justices have been questionable and legislation has been passed that conflicts with the concept of a “government of the people, by the people and for the people.” These facts coupled with a couple of centuries’ experience under the constitution suggest that clarifications and additional protections against the power of the U.S. government over its citizens are desirable.
"The answer to the final question as to what good is a constitution if its provisions are not enforced before violations cause irremediable harm may be beyond the scope here. Despite all the checks and balances, the power to enforce lies only within the executive branch. One possibility suggested is to add an amendment empowering a 2/3 vote of both houses to discharge any nationally elected official, including the president, who violates the constitution or fails to enforce its provisions. Other suggested amendment sections with some of their reasons for inclusion and other information follow."
8/6/10 Independence Caucus Report George Edwards, Giac.2002.org
"The Independence Caucus is a nationally active, citizen-led organization of conservatives which started in Utah with the election in 2008 of US Representative Jason Chaffetz. The organization as been very successful in getting candidates they vetted and endorsed to win in major party primary elections. They offer what they have found to be winning strategies. . . . Click here to view the PowerPoint presentation opening the meeting."
George Edwards and Sam Shanely, Giac2002.org
"Let’s list some of the examples of the actions he [Obama] has sponsored, blocked or dawdled with that have filtered past the media people responsible for covering up for him and whom we should likewise be outraged with. In my opinion, any reasonably intelligent person looking at them could come to only one of two conclusions: he is either the dumbest most ineffective person that this planet has ever seen or so thoroughly misguided that he wants to completely destroy the America that most of us loved. Unfortunately, I believe the last is the only rational conclusion.
"While huge numbers of Americans continue to be unemployed Obama and his fellow travelers have ignored their plight for the first one and a half years of his Presidency, put their all behind a Trillion dollar health care plan the majority did not want and now will not allow the so-called stimulus proceeds to be touched to extend unemployment benefits—insisting it only will be done with further spending or not at all.
"Now that his health care plan has passed, Obama is placing amnesty for twelve to twenty million illegal aliens ahead of our unemployed. That would only more thoroughly wreck the U.S. economy.
"He continues to press 'cap and trade' which, by his own words, he fully knows will push energy prices out of sight although the so-called crisis of “global warming” has been discredited. Raising energy prices in addition to reducing purchasing power raises all prices as well because of the increased costs to transport goods.
"The failures to act and bureacratic obstacles raised by Obama’s troops in the Gulf cleanup has been breathtaking. The damage to not only the Gulf state’s economy but the entire nation’s that this has and will result in is overwhelming. In case you haven’t been following the frequent reports, see the footnote below.*
"Include with this, Obama’s executive order shutting down all oil well drilling activity in the gulf that is estimated to cause 20,000 to 60,000 people in the region to lose their jobs. This will also cause owners of the massively expensive, slow-to-construct drilling rigs to move never to return or at best further destroy the economy of at least three Gulf States for years and further harm the entire economy of The United States.
"Surely, when all these are added together, we must ask the question: 'Is Obama intentionally out to destroy America’s financial underpinning and thereby our Constitutional Republic by forcing the indebted states, the unemployed and bankrupt businesses to turn to his Federal Government for bail outs in return for every individual and every entity trading in their freedoms for a Socialistic form of government ? ' Unfortunately I see no reasonable alternative
--By George Edwards and Joe Dugan, GIAC2002.org
4/15/10 Tea Party Protesters Descend on D.C. With New 'Contract From America' FOXNews.com
"WASHINGTON -- Thousands of protesters descended on the nation's Capitol for April 15 tax deadline protests as activists offered up a new 'Contract From America' aimed at using the winning formula of the 1994 Republican revolution while also developing a direction for the burgeoning movement. . . .
"'After garnering nearly half a million votes in less than two months, the Contract from America has now been finalized into a blueprint that will serve notice to public officials about what the people want for their future,' reads a from the contract's organizers
"When the votes of more than 443,000 were cast, the top ten planks were:
(1) Require each bill to identify its constitutional authorization
(2) Defund, repeal, and replace government-run health care
(3) Demand a balanced budget
(4) End runaway government spending by imposing a statutory cap limiting growth in federal spending
(5) Enact fundamental reform to simplify and lower taxes
(6)Create a Blue Ribbon task force that engages in a complete audit of federal agencies and programs
(7) Reject cap-and-trade
(8) Pass an “all of the above” energy policy
(9) Stop the 2011 tax hikes
(10) Stop the pork. . . .
Tax day protests did occur nationwide, with the D.C. rally marking the end of a 23-state Tea Party Express tour targeting vulnerable Democratic Sens. Harry Reid of Nevada, Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Arlen Specter or Pennsylvania as well as nine House members who voted for health care reform.
"Anti-Tea Party counter-protesters carried a huge banner that read 'The Other 95 percent. Say thanks for your tax cuts Obama.' They walked around the crowd but represented only a miniscule percentage of the ralliers.
"Speaking from the podium, Kingston welcomed the counter-protesters. 'Welcome. I'm hoping that you'll learn something.'
"Tea Party activists have been on the lookout for infiltrators. In recent weeks, Web sites such as crashtheteaparty.org have urged people to "act on behalf of the Tea Party in ways which exaggerate their least appealing qualities (misspelled protest signs, wild claims in interviews, etc.) to further distance them from mainstream America and damage the public’s opinion of them."
"Armey offered a message to any would-be infiltrators.
"'My daddy told me when I was boy, it's better to be persecuted than ignored. We must be meaning something to these folks or they wouldn't be attacking us.'
"However, Armey did express concern about the havoc infiltrators could wreak on the movement.
"'Why don't you have the decency to be proud to be you for crying out loud? Just don't come in here like a bunch of juvenile delinquents on a lark and try to sabotage our event. We have a right to present ourselves to the American people without mischaracterization. It's hard enough for the conventional press in America to get it, who we are and what are the lessons of liberty that we are so committed to, without you confounding the picture with your antics.'"
George Edwards, giac2002.org
"Don’t vote to re-elect ANY Democratic Senator or Independent. They ALL voted for the Senate Health Care Bill. Don’t vote to reelect ANY House member who voted for the original House Health Care Bill, HR3962, OR the subsequent overhaul bill. . . .
"Click here to view a listing of the states and names of the senators up for re-election in 2010 who voted for the Senate health care bill in defiance of the people. . . .Neither South Carolina senator voted for this bill.
"Click here to view a listing of the states and names of the House members who voted for the House’s original 2009 health care bill, HR3962, OR its overhaul, in defiance of the people. The congressmen include Democrats John Spratt of South Carolina District 5 and James Clyburn of South Carolina District 6. Anh Cao of Louisiana was the Sole Republican House member voting for the bill."
[The clearest exposé of the so called 'health care' bill that I have seen anywhere]
"You can say -- mistakenly -- that the liberals' plan is more compassionate. You can say -- also incorrectly -- that it will be fairer. On no set of facts can you say it will be cheaper.
11/29/09 People Said it Didn't Matter . . .
-- received in an e-mail
"A coup has occurred in America. Our Republic has been overthrown without firing a shot.
"We have a small window of time to possibly reverse this and save our Constitutional Republic from permanent 'transformation.'”
[The unfortunate thing is that all the particulars here are, in my belief, absolutely true. This is absolutely fantastic in the amount of highly pertinent facts it gets into one place.]
11/30/09 The Down Low on GITMO
"President Obama is now bringing terrorists held at Guantanamo Bay (GITMO), the American military base in Cuba, to the USA for trial. He is risking our safety by bringing these terrorists to the USA; he is also setting an ugly legal precedent, one where terrorists who are not even American citizens, are given the same legal rights as the citizens some of these same terrorists have harmed or killed.
"What is behind the decision to bring terrorists to the USA for trial and then place them in American prisons? It appears that the Democrats in Congress believe the Bush administration was somehow abusive to the terrorists held at GITMO. . . .
"Just a few years ago, when President Bush was in office, the American media were abuzz concerning the alleged abuse of terrorists and enemy combatants being held at GITMO. Well, here we are some years later and the hard evidence of abuse occurring at GITMO has yet to surface. If anything, the hard evidence demonstrates the American news media engaged in nothing more than a modern day witch hunt against the Bush administration.
"The American media were hoping to throw enough mud at the Bush administration that something would stick. It never did. As it turns out, the most pressing issue of concern, as it pertains to GITMO, was the admission by the Bush Administration that several members of the American military 'might have' mishandled a Koran. . . .
Well, as it turns out, no such Koran flushing incident occurred. Newsweek retracted its story and the cat was finally out of the bag. The American media were exposed as mudslinging reactionaries, as were the Democrat leaders in Congress, who tried and failed to capitalize on the perceived abuse of GITMO prisoners. . . .
"There was no abuse at GITMO. The Red Cross even said so after inspecting GITMO several times. So why do the Democrats in Congress and Obama continue to sell the lie?
"One reason is the Democrats want to exploit the GITMO issue for the upcoming 2010 races. If the terrorists go to trial in the USA, instead of a military trial, then the Democrats can use the trials for constant drama -- drama that further demonizes Bush and the Republicans in hopes of winning over more voters. It is nothing more than political grandstanding. . . .
"[T]he charges of abuse at GITMO, aimed against the Bush administration, are outrageous to say the least. Even more outrageous are the claims that GITMO prisoners are denied their Constitutional rights. Those imprisoned at GITMO are not even American citizens. They have no Constitutional rights. Therefore, their Constitutional rights can't be violated.
"Secondly, those imprisoned at GITMO are terrorists who fit the legal category of 'enemy combatants.' Even when it was unclear if enemy combatants were entitled to the protection and rights of the Geneva Convention, the Bush Administration afforded these terrorists the protection rights agreed upon at the Geneva Convention anyway. That's right, the Bush administration actually treated the enemy combatants -- some of who were caught in the very act of attacking American military personnel in Iraq -- better than the terrorists deserve to be treated.
"Now let's consider the conditions at GITMO.
"The conditions at GITMO are far superior to the conditions these terrorists were accustomed to in their own countries of origin. Some of these terrorists used toilets, drank clean water and ate three square meals a day for the first time in their very lives. The enemy combatants at GITMO were treated to Muslim diets daily -- diets that met their strict religious standards.
"GITMO terrorists were given the Koran (paid for by American tax dollars), along with ample time to pray 5 times per day. All while our nation's military was under investigation for alleged, "Christian proselytizing" at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs.
"You may find it interesting to know that after breaking up Osama Bin Laden's terrorist network in Afghanistan, our nation's military forces came upon the Al Qaeda training manual. In the manual were instructions for a member of Al Qaeda to cry 'abuse' if captured by the American armed forces. The manual went on to say that forces within America would be sympathetic to the terrorists' cause if they only cried, "abuse."
"Judging by the behavior of the American media and the Democrat Party of recent years, it is easy to figure out who is more sympathetic to terrorists."
By George Edwards, giac2002.org
"The congressional health care bills have many bad parts but a central issue is that we can't afford them. This with the $12 Trillion of debt, so far and more to come if Obamaites get their way, they may totally collapse our economy and with it our American system of freedom and free enterprise. . . .
"The current congressional health care plan costs are fraudulent in that, among other things, they are based on the first ten year cost estimates that do not provide benefits in the early years. Most importantly, they add to individual and company costs that they were supposed to lessen, they further financially burden the government that has no money except that they print (counterfeit), and they further impinge on the liberties and the opportunities of the people to avoid bankruptcies caused by previous governmental actions."
"Click Health Care Plan Comparisons for more information and some suggestions that might actually help."
By Mac Fuller, American Thinker [Extremely insightful. You may want to save.]
"The following thumbnails describe a very small sampling of the locust horde of Leftist bureaucrats President Barack Hussein Obama has deliberately chosen to help him grasp the helm of America's ship of state, strip it from the American people, and steer it hard to port.
"The Obama Administration is plainly subverting democracy in America, wildly careening our previous 230-year history of democracy so dangerously Leftward that after a mere nine months we are in terrible danger of sinking.
"In these thumbnails, three dominant themes of the Obama Administration emerge - fanatically uncompromising anti-capitalism, dangerous and blatant anti-Semitism, and the societal inculcation of dogmatic Leftist, Socialist "faith" through indoctrination of American school children beginning with the earliest ages - a practice instituted by Lenin in Communist Russia and now pounding its way into the American academic mainstream through the prolific efforts and influence of self-proclaimed Communist, Obama friend, and likely 'autobiography' ghost writer, William Ayers, as well as Obama appointees like Charles Freeman and Kevin Jennings.
"Make no mistake. These people are about Socialism, and they are about power. Their power." [Please continue scrolling down past the list of names and read the thumbnail bios -- extremely important and illuminating. Consider saving.]
9/4/09 Wake up America! By George Edwards, GIAC2002.org
[As always, click the above headline link to read the article. It reflects my belief that Obama and his fellow travelers are a "clear and present danger" to our economy, freedom and the American way of life. They have, using quotes from our Declaration of Independence, engaged in: "a long train of abuses and usurpations, . . . [that] evinces a design to reduce" us "under absolute Despotism." It then lists more than two dozen grievances. So I felt it appropriate and desirable to include a list of grievances in the linked to Obama-ite article before suggesting a possible "out."]
7/7/09 a.m. Believed Uncontested facts: Barack Hussein Obama’s Presidency and Background as of July 7, 2009 By George Edwards, GIAC2002.org
7/7/09 p.m. I Still Hate You, Sarah Palin
By David Kahane National Review Online
. . .
6/9/09 Discoverthenetworks.org A guide to the political left.
"ACORN is a private corporation, it does not divulge its finances. Complicating any effort to calculate ACORN's income is the fact that the organization operates an enormous number of front groups, many of which conceal their relationship to ACORN. As of October 2008, there were at least 294 front groups, [click preceding to see the list] nonprofits, and businesses related to ACORN, the vast majority of which listed their headquarters as: 1024 Elysian Fields Avenue in New Orleans, Louisiana -- the site of a now-defunct funeral home.
The Discoverthenetworks.org Home Page also includes links to comprehensive information you may not be aware of on George Soros, Barrack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Saul Alinsky.
6/8/09 a.m. Obama's Enemies List Grows
By Mark Hyman, The American Spectator
[Pardon the extensive quotations from this one article; it's critical that everyone be fully aware of the instances it sums up.]
"Just having the appearance of someone who might possibly vote for an opponent of Barack Obama could land them on the President's enemies list where proxies do the dirty work. Political appointees in the Justice Department killed a six-month investigation by career DOJ lawyers into the most blatant voter intimidation case in 40 years. Last November, jack-booted, uniformed, baton-wielding thugs from the New Black Panther Party calling themselves 'security' obstructed a Philadelphia polling location and behaved in an intimidating manner toward white voters.
"Days after dismissing charges against the menacing thugs, the Justice Department moved in the opposite direction by blocking responsible steps to stem voter fraud. The DOJ barred the administrative procedures Georgia authorities put into place . . .
"A de facto Obama enemies list and dirty political machine have been expanding since last year. Obama has established several embarrassing presidential firsts including targeting private individuals by names, assigning a well-known 'partisan dirt-digger' and non-lawyer to the White House Counsel's Office to likely gain access to Bush Administration documents protected under attorney-client privilege, and moving the senior political advisor into the West Wing. These are heretofore unseen partisan practices. . . .
"Attempting to build-up the Obama Administration by criticizing that of his predecessor has become a near-daily exercise. Obama has personally led efforts to demonize George W. Bush. . . .
"Interrogation techniques used on tens of thousands of U.S. servicemen and women for more than two decades were suddenly considered criminal acts and Bush officials in the review and approval chain have been smeared as criminals. . . .
"Obama's lawyers are attempting to financially ruin individuals party to the most absurd soap opera involving the 44th president. There is unabated controversy regarding his birth, citizenship and foreign travel. Obama could immediately silence his critics by authorizing the release of his original birth certificate and passport. . . .
"The targeting of perceived political enemies by the Obama Administration has grown from mere individuals to entire groups. Evidence emerged that a common thread among the list of 789 Chrysler dealerships ordered closed by the White House is that the owners donated to GOP candidates, Republican-leaning causes or donated to Hillary Clinton or John Edwards during the Democratic presidential primaries.
"Auto industry observers and others report that apparently successful franchises (such as Chrysler's highest-rated 5-star dealerships) were ordered closed in favor of less successful car lots and the consistent discriminator was which political party the owners supported. . . .
"Representatives of three secured creditors that did not receive any government bailout money reported they were threatened if they did not agree to White House demands in Chrysler's restructuring. . . .
"Thomas Lauria, a lawyer for financial firm Perella Weinberg Partners, reported the car czar threatened that 'the full force of the White House press corps would destroy its [Perella Weinberg's] reputation' unless the firm agreed to Obama administration demands in Chrysler's bankruptcy. The failure by the White House press corps to repudiate Rattner's threat speaks volumes and underscores their role as an ally of the Obama Administration."
8/19/09 List of Obama's Czars Glenn Beck
Not only is ethanol proving to be a dud as a fuel substitute but there is increasing evidence that it is destroying engines in large numbers
"First, the primary job of the Environmental Protection Agency is, dare it be said, to protect our environment. Yet using ethanol actually creates more smog than using regular gas, and the EPA's own attorneys had to admit that fact in front of the justices presiding over the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in 1995 (API v. EPA).
"Second, truly independent studies on ethanol, such as those written by Tad Patzek of Berkeley and David Pimentel of Cornell, show that ethanol is a net energy loser. Other studies suggest there is a small net energy gain from it.
"Third, all fuels laced with ethanol reduce the vehicle's fuel efficiency, and the E85 blend drops gas mileage between 30% and 40%, depending on whether you use the EPA's fuel mileage standards (fueleconomy.gov) or those of the Dept. of Energy.
"Fourth, forget what biofuels have done to the price of foodstuffs worldwide over the past three years; the science seems to suggest that using ethanol increases global warming emissions over the use of straight gasoline. Just these issues should have kept ethanol from being brought back for its fourth run in American history. . . .
"Last July was bad enough for motorists on a budget—gasoline prices had shot up to more than $4 a gallon. But for some the pain in the pocketbook was about to get worse. At City Garage in Euless, Tex., for example, the first of numerous future customers brought in an automobile whose fuel pump was shot. A quick diagnosis determined that that particular car had close to 18% ethanol in the fuel. For that unlucky owner, the repairs came to nearly $900. The ethanol fun was just beginning.
"City Garage manager Eric Greathouse has found that adding ethanol to the nation's gasoline supply may be a foolish government mandate, but it has an upside he'd rather not deal with. It's supplying his shop with a slow but steady stream of customers whose plastic fuel intakes have been dissolved by the blending of ethanol into our gasoline, or their fuel pumps destroyed. The average cost of repairs is just shy of $1,000. . . .
"Most individuals who have had to repair their fuel systems in recent years never had the gasoline tested to see if the ethanol percentage might be the problem. Today most repair shops and new-car dealers are still not testing for ethanol blends. They're simply repairing the vehicles and sending their unhappy and less wealthy customers on their way. But, where dealer and repair shops are testing the gasoline, ethanol is becoming one of the leading culprits for the damage.
"Sadly, when a truly bad idea is exposed today, Washington's answer is to double-down on the bet, mandate more of the same, and make the problem worse. Only this time around motorists will be able to gauge the real cost of ethanol when it comes time to fix their personal cars."
5/6/09 Economic Truth By George
Economically, it is apparent to me that people will, as a whole, do more than just survive only if their effort will improve their or their family’s lot. The so-called free enterprise system enables individual effort to improve an individual’s lot so that everyone’s lot is improved.
From Investor Words.com:
"Capitalism - 'Free enterprise’ redirects here.
“Capitalism is an economic system in which wealth, and the means of producing wealth, are privately owned. Through capitalism, the land, labor, and capital are owned, operated, and traded, without force or fraud, by private individuals either singly or jointly, and investments, distribution, income, production, pricing and supply of goods, commodities and services are determined by voluntary private decision in a market economy. A distinguishing feature of capitalism is that each person owns his or her own labor and therefore is allowed to sell the use of it to employers. In a "capitalist state", private rights and property relations are protected by the rule of law of a limited regulatory framework. In the modern capitalist state, legislative action is confined to defining and enforcing the basic rules of the market, though the state may provide some public goods and infrastructure. . . .
“Adam Smith's attack on mercantilism and his reasoning for 'the system of natural liberty' in The Wealth of Nations (1776) are usually taken as the beginning of classical [capitalist] political economy. Smith devised a set of concepts that remain strongly associated with capitalism today, particularly his theory of the ‘invisible hand’ of the market, through which the pursuit of individual self-interest unintentionally produces a collective good for society.”
When I went to school, we were taught that in 1607 Jamestown after a winter of famine under a failed socialist system of “from each according to their capability, to each according to their need,” Captain John Smith ordered: "He that will not worke, shall not eate." More recently the communist central planning economy of the U.S.S.R. failed while China upon adopting a free market system, if not general freedom, is prospering economically.
Unfortunately, U.S. government schools apparently no longer teach the effectiveness of the free market system, instead lauding failed or failing socialistic economic systems. And the idea of free choice in publicly supported education is supplanted by central government controlled public schools, although free choice via a voucher system has proven very successful. Their use in Washington D.C. at half the cost per student as compared to public schools has yielded significantly superior scholastic results.
Nevertheless, the Obama government has moved to stop that successful program that allows economically disadvantaged children an education in the schools that Obama and senator’s children attend.
to me by
"'Patently, the commitment to close Guantanamo Bay within a year was made without a plan for what to do with these detainees who cannot be tried. Consequently, the Detention Policy Task Force is not an effort to arrive at the best policy. It is an effort to justify a bad policy that has already been adopted: to wit, the Obama administration policy to release trained terrorists outright if that’s what it takes to close Gitmo by January.'"
"[Obama] can be tied directly to a malevolent overarching strategy that has motivated many, if not all, of the most destructive radical leftist organizations in the United States since the 1960s -- The Cloward-Piven Strategy of Orchestrated Crisis. . . .
"The Strategy was first elucidated in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation magazine by a pair of radical socialist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. David Horowitz summarizes it as:
The current president wants higher taxes, more regulation, more spending and loose money.
"In his inaugural address, President Barack Obama said, "The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works -- whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified." Or as administration spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter said in January, the touchstone is, "What will have the biggest and most immediate impact on creating private sector jobs and strengthening the middle class? We're guided by what works, not by any ideology or special interests."
"Unfortunately, this rhetoric is not true. Mr. Obama's economic policy is following not what has been proven to work but liberal ideology.
"The best way to understand this is to compare what's being proposed now with what Ronald Reagan accomplished. In 1980, amid a seriously dysfunctional economy, Reagan campaigned for president on an economic recovery program with four specific components. . . .
"We know such policies work because they turned around in just two years an economy far worse than today's. We were suffering from multiyear, double-digit inflation, double-digit unemployment, double-digit interest rates, declining incomes, and rising poverty. In fact, what we suffer with today is not the worst economy since the Great Depression, but the worst economy since Jimmy Carter -- the last time liberals were dominant politically and intellectually. . . .
"The Obama administration's economic policies do not include any of the four Reagan components. In fact, the stimulus plan is the greatest increase in government spending in the history of the planet. Meanwhile, the Fed is furiously reinflating, sowing more havoc down the line. Mr. Obama is still promising future increases in tax rates by letting the Bush tax cuts lapse, because for ideological reasons he thinks even current rates are too low. And instead of deregulating for more energy production, he is still promising massive increases in regulatory barriers -- through global warming cap-and-trade legislation -- to increased production from proven energy sources to serve an extreme environmentalist ideology."
By George: Obama's approach has never worked. Japan tried for years to rescue its economy by pouring government money into it. It did not help. I am repeating the 1/20/09 GIAC entry (re-dated: the lesson is timeless) below to show how it failed when FDR tried it.
“'We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work.' . . .
"It was May 9, 1939, [more than 6 years into the New Deal] and Morgenthau was appearing before powerful Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee. . . ."
-- next two items:
2/7/09 Obama radio address: OK with stimulus scrutiny - but hurry up and pass it! By Jimmy Orr
"In today’s weekly radio address, there were immediate clues that the topic would be the economic stimulus package.
"It only took Obama four words before he said 'devastating.' And 11 words before he said 'crisis.' "But a full 193 words before 'catastrophe' was spoken. (Armageddon and annihilation were not mentioned)." By George: Let me use my own scare tactics: "This may cause a wheelbarrow-full-of-money-for-a-loaf-of-bread-hyper-inflation as was said to occur during the Weimer Republic's hyper-inflation described in the item below. Those on a fixed income may starve."
Excerpt from Paper Money by "Adam Smith," (George J.W. Goodman), pp. 57-62.
"Before World War I Germany was a prosperous country, with a gold-backed currency, expanding industry, and world leadership in optics, chemicals, and machinery. The German Mark, the British shilling, the French franc, and the Italian lira all had about equal value, and all were exchanged four or five to the dollar. That was in 1914. In 1923, at the most fevered moment of the German hyperinflation, the exchange rate between the dollar and the Mark was one trillion Marks to one dollar, and a wheelbarrow full of money would not even buy a newspaper. . . .
"[T]he printing presses ran, and once they began to run, they were hard to stop. The price increases began to be dizzying. Menus in cafes could not be revised quickly enough. A student at Freiburg University ordered a cup of coffee at a cafe. The price on the menu was 5,000 Marks. He had two cups. When the bill came, it was for 14,000 Marks. 'If you want to save money,' he was told, 'and you want two cups of coffee, you should order them both at the same time.' . . .
"A factory worker described payday, which was every day at 11:00 a.m.: 'At 11:00 in the morning a siren sounded, and everybody gathered in the factory forecourt, where a five-ton lorry was drawn up loaded brimful with paper money. The chief cashier and his assistants climbed up on top. They read out names and just threw out bundles of notes. As soon as you had caught one you made a dash for the nearest shop and bought just anything that was going.' Teachers, paid at 10:00 a.m., brought their money to the playground, where relatives took the bundles and hurried off with them."
By George: I hope I have your attention. The current massive "stimulus" package will effectively print a historically unprecedented number of American dollars.
I urge you to contact Pennsylvania Senator Specter and Maine Senators Snowe and Collins and any of their state constituents that you may know seeking for these senators to insist on far more spending cutbacks in the "stimulus" bill than they have agreed to in exchange for their needed votes to reach the 60 senatorial votes required for the bill's passage.
All U.S. Senators have phone numbers starting with 1-202-224.
For Specter follow those numbers with 4254, Collins with 2523 and Snowe with 5344.
In the longer term, we should continue to keep on the U.S. Congress as long as it takes and it is possible for it to correct this situation. Below is a more extensive list of links to contact information for congressional members:
2/7/09 Obama's Leninism
"In time, 'Democratic Centralism' came to mean what everything eventually meant in Lenin’s universe: my way or the highway. 'Bipartisanship' for example meant discussing different viewpoints within the party as long as they didn’t reflect 'bourgeois consciousness.' In short, Lenin, like President Obama it seems, claimed 'I won' and would only entertain a certain 'politically correct' form of bipartisanship. . . .
"The Founding Fathers divided the American government against itself so that, according to James Madison, 'ambition is made to check ambition.' The purpose was to preserve our freedom and make it impossible for leaders to frighten and manipulate the citizens into accepting rash and precipitous proposals. The cost may be a certain clumsiness in reacting to pressing social issues, but the benefit is twofold: a healthy debate from each branch of government, and the knowledge that the Constitution remains the final arbiter, not fallible men who claim 'I won.'
2/7/09 Obama's era of hope winds down Charles Krauthammer
11/07/08 The Decency of George W. Bush
"I have seen President Bush show more loyalty than he has been given, more generosity than he has received. I have seen his buoyancy under the weight of malice and his forgiveness of faithless friends. Again and again, I have seen the natural tug of his pride swiftly overcome by a deeper decency -- a decency that is privately engaging and publicly consequential."
"In a personal and wide-ranging interview conducted by his sister about his legacy, his faith and the influence of his father, President George W. Bush said he hopes to be remembered as a liberator of the Iraqi people. 'I'd like to be a president [known] as somebody who liberated 50 million people and helped achieve peace' . . .
"'I would like to be a person remembered as a person who, first and foremost, did not sell his soul in order to accommodate the political process' . . .
"'I came to Washington with a set of values, and I'm leaving with the same set of values. And I darn sure wasn't going to sacrifice those values; that I was a president that had to make tough choices and was willing to make them,' . . .
"'I surrounded myself with good people," Bush said. "I carefully considered the advice of smart, capable people and made tough decisions.' . . .
"'I think the No Child Left Behind Act is one of the significant achievements of my administration' . . .
"'It's certainly been very rewarding to look at Afghanistan and both know that the president and the United States military liberated women there; that women and girls can be in school now; that women can walk outside their doors without a male escort,' the first lady said . . .
"'[T]he greatness of America -- it really is -- is that you can worship or not worship and be equally American. And it doesn't matter how you choose to worship; you're equally American. And it's very important for any President to jealously protect, guard, and strengthen that freedom.'"
2008 Presidential Candidate Comparison Talking Points
10/1/08 Time for McCain to Name Names
"The good news for McCain, should he decide to grasp it, is that the party against which he is (supposed to be) running can easily be pegged with the lion's share of the blame regarding our economic meltdown. There is no doubt that liberal policies on energy and housing have combined to put the country in this situation, and only unwinding these policies will lead the nation out of this problem. Naming names properly will name a whole lot of folks with "D" beside their names.
"Congress, of course, is now led by the very people who put us into this mess to begin with. If McCain thinks he can thread the needle in a bi-partisan fashion here, he is sadly mistaken. If he does not point out the facts, then his party will take the blame for and he will not win the election. It cannot happen."
10/16/08 Bush Proposed Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac Supervision In 2003 [ A 2003 NYT article shows President Bush proposed “the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago:” An agency within the Treasury Department to supervise Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The proposal was blocked by many Democrats atop the list of Fannie/Freddie money recipients.
"A September 11, 2003 New York Times article shows that President Bush proposed “the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.”
"A report by outside investigators in July  concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors . . .
"”These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. . .
"The proposal worked its way around Congress for a couple of years. Efforts at reform of the kind proposed by President Bush were shot down by Democrats each time. . . .
"In 2005, Republican Mike Oxley, then chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, brought up a reform bill (H.R. 1461), and Fannie and Freddie’s lobbyists set out to weaken it. . .
"According to OpenSecrets.org, between 1988 and 2008 Dodd received $133,900, Kerry $111,000, Clinton $75,550, and Obama — in only 143 days in the Senate — received a whopping $105,849 from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. . . .
"And, in case you were wondering, John McCain co-sponsored a bill requiring greater Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac regulation in 2005. It was also blocked procedurally by Democrats. . . .
"UPDATE: 2004 video posted to YouTube shows Republicans arguing for, and Democrats arguing against, regulations that would have saved us from the current crisis. [Video on linked site]
"Even former President Clinton knows where to place the blame for the mortgage crisis. [Video on linked site]
"UPDATE: Democrat Congressman Artur Davis admits Democrats dropped the ball on the mortgage crisis.
The following link to videos showing how the U.S. got into its current financial crisis and where the bulk of the blame lies:
10/24/08 Bailout Politics by Thomas Sowell
"Nothing could more painfully demonstrate what is wrong with Congress than the current financial crisis.
"Among the Congressional "leaders" invited to the White House to devise a bailout "solution" are the very people who have for years created the risks that have now come home to roost. . . .
"Neither do the voters deserve to be deceived on the eve of an election by the notion that this is a failure of free markets that should be replaced by political micro-managing.
"If Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were free market institutions they could not have gotten away with their risky financial practices because no one would have bought their securities without the implicit assumption that the politicians would bail them out.
"It would be better if no such government-supported enterprises had been created in the first place and mortgages were in fact left to the free market. This bailout creates the expectation of future bailouts.
"Phasing out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would make much more sense than letting politicians play politics with them again, with the risk and expense being again loaded onto the taxpayers."
(This excellent Article is dated 10/1/08. Dating on George's Information and Comments is for occasional readers convenience.)
10/23/08 Obama's Amazing Fannie Contributions
Getting to the bottom of Congress's role, slowly.
"Mr. Waxman has apparently decided it's safe to hold a hearing after those inconveniently partisan things called elections are over. He will call several ex-CEOs of the mortgage lenders, including Mr. Raines. Republicans are already making a list of all of the inconvenient facts that won't be aired until it's too late to influence voters at the ballot box. For one, who knew that Senator Barack Obama was the largest single recipient of Fannie Mae campaign contributions over the last 20 years, save for Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd? More amazing still, Mr. Obama pulled off this feat even though he had only been in the Senate for four of those 20 years."
Barack Obama's Pattern of False Statements on Bill Ayers There is too much here to reasonably synopsize. It includes convincing public information of Obama's false statements on his association and alliances with ACORN, Jerimiah Wright and "two other self-professed spiritual leaders, Father Michael Pfleger and Rev. James Meeks." The article also points out how FactCheck.org and other so-called fact-checkers have painted over the reality.
"As discussed quite a bit around here, David Axelrod says Obama didn't know about Ayers' past when Obama first started allying himself with the former terrorist. Ayers was "just a guy in the neighborhood" — which, if true, says something just plain awful about that neighborhood if you ask me. But anyway, just out of curiosity, I decided to see if the Chicago Tribune had written anything about Ayers and his terrorist past during the period of Obama's plasible deniability. The Tribune is basically the paper of record in Chicago and also probably a good bellweather of other media coverage in the region (i.e. local TV news, the Sun-Times etc). And, yep, it turns out the Trib ran quite a few pieces on Ayers and his work as a founder of the Weather Underground, including a few before Obama's fundraiser at Ayers' home and a great many during Obama's tenure on the Woods Foundation board. Indeed, Ayers' memoir came out during that period and received national coverage, including a big story in the NYT. . . . "I don't know Chicago well. But my sense of the place is that they take politics pretty seriously there. Young, very smart and hyper ambitious politicians like Obama tend to read the local paper (never mind the New York Times, which ran a couple dozen stories mentioning Ayers and his terrorist ties between 1990 and 2004). The political class in Chicago knows who everybody is, where they came from, what they believe. They tend to learn about people who give them jobs, money and political opportunities. And, people like Ayers don't exactly keep their views or radical past a closely guarded secret, particularly when they remain unrepentant. "In short, I think it's a lie — and a pretty stupid one — to say that Obama didn't know about any of this. The obvious answer is he just didn't care."
“Who is Barack
— all of
to be to
It is by
"As discussed quite a bit around here, David Axelrod says Obama didn't know about Ayers' past when Obama first started allying himself with the former terrorist. Ayers was "just a guy in the neighborhood" — which, if true, says something just plain awful about that neighborhood if you ask me. But anyway, just out of curiosity, I decided to see if the Chicago Tribune had written anything about Ayers and his terrorist past during the period of Obama's plasible deniability. The Tribune is basically the paper of record in Chicago and also probably a good bellweather of other media coverage in the region (i.e. local TV news, the Sun-Times etc). And, yep, it turns out the Trib ran quite a few pieces on Ayers and his work as a founder of the Weather Underground, including a few before Obama's fundraiser at Ayers' home and a great many during Obama's tenure on the Woods Foundation board. Indeed, Ayers' memoir came out during that period and received national coverage, including a big story in the NYT. . . .
"I don't know Chicago well. But my sense of the place is that they take politics pretty seriously there. Young, very smart and hyper ambitious politicians like Obama tend to read the local paper (never mind the New York Times, which ran a couple dozen stories mentioning Ayers and his terrorist ties between 1990 and 2004). The political class in Chicago knows who everybody is, where they came from, what they believe. They tend to learn about people who give them jobs, money and political opportunities. And, people like Ayers don't exactly keep their views or radical past a closely guarded secret, particularly when they remain unrepentant.
"In short, I think it's a lie — and a pretty stupid one — to say that Obama didn't know about any of this. The obvious answer is he just didn't care."
10/6/08 The Ayers Question vs. the Keating Scandal
"Very soon after she was picked to be McCain’s running mate, Sarah Palin was attacked by Obama campaign spokesmen and a Democratic member of Congress for once being seen wearing a Pat Buchanan button. She had an answer and the campaign offered it. Yet now we are asked to believe that it’s somehow inappropriate to inquire why Barack Obama’s political career began in the home of an admitted and unrepentant domestic terrorist of the radical left? “Who is Barack Obama?” is not an irrelevant question given the job Obama is seeking, and it’s a question he has sought mightily to avoid answering. The veil of secrecy he has thrown over his past (journalists have been denied access to his state legislative office records, documents about state earmarks he distributed in Illinois, a list of his legal clients, his state bar application, billing records related to Tony Rezko, medical records, academic records — all of which are the sort of documents candidates routinely make public) forces the question all the more.
"The Obama campaign’s response to the [Ayers] question appears to be to raise John McCain’s connection to the Keating Five scandal. It is by no means out of bounds to raise the issue. McCain received campaign funds from Keating, his wife’s company had been involved in investment ventures with him, and he once met with federal regulators about Keating’s bank — though the Senate Ethics Committee found that unlike three other senators involved in the scandal, 'Senator McCain’s actions were not improper.' The committee said only that he had exercised bad judgment by being involved with Keating at all and not seeing what others were doing. In fact, Bob Bennett, who was the Democratic lawyer selected by the committee to investigate the Keating Five, says in his book that he recommended that McCain’s name be dropped from the investigation because there was no evidence against him but, for political reasons (the other Senators were all Democrats), McCain’s name was left on the list."
10/18/08 Record Versus Rhetoric "Sarah Palin's record is on the record, while whole years of Barack Obama's life are engulfed in fog, and he has had to explain away one after another of the astounding and vile people he has not merely "associated" with but has had political alliances with, and to whom he has directed the taxpayers' money and other money.
"Sarah Palin has had executive experience-- and the White House is the executive branch of government. We don't have to judge her by her rhetoric because she has a record.
"We don't know what Barack Obama will actually do because he has actually done very little for which he was personally accountable. . . .
"Senator Biden's "experience" has been a long history of being on the wrong side of issue after issue in foreign policy. He was one of those Senators who voted to pull the plug on financial aid to South Vietnam, which was still defending itself from Communist invaders after the pullout of American troops.
"Biden opposed Ronald Reagan's military buildup that helped win the Cold War. He opposed the surge in Iraq last year.
"Sarah Palin will not be ready to become President of the United States on the first day that she and John McCain take office. Nobody is.
"But being Vice President is a job that can allow a lot of time for studying, and everything about Governor Palin's career says that she is a bright gal with her head on straight. The country needs that far more than it needs people with glib answers to media "gotcha" questions.
"Whatever the shortcomings of John McCain and Sarah Palin, they are people whose values are the values of this nation, whose loyalty and dedication to this country's fundamental institutions are beyond question because they have not spent decades working with people who hate America. Nor are they people whose judgments have been proved wrong consistently during decades of Beltway 'experience.'"
"This has been the campaign of the fact-checker. After presidential debates, campaign commercials, or even off-hand statements from the candidates, newspapers, networks, and websites come out with seemingly objective analyses of the specific claims involved. Putting analysis under the heading of “fact-checking” sends the message that it has an added measure of accuracy, that what readers and viewers are about to read or see is no spin, just facts. . . .
"Let’s assume that FactCheck’s analysis is correct. Why shouldn’t McCain and Palin use the new, supposedly more accurate, numbers? When Palin said in St. Louis last week that Obama 'had 94 opportunities to side on the people’s side and reduce taxes and 94 times he voted to increase taxes or not support a tax reduction' — well, why not change it to 'had 54 opportunities to side on the people’s side and reduce taxes and 54 times he voted to increase taxes or not support a tax reduction'? Wouldn’t that still be a damning critique of Obama’s stance on taxes? . .
"The point of all this is that factchecking reports begin with an analysis of details but end with the factchecker’s opinion of what an ad or speech 'implies' or what 'impression' it leaves. And that takes the fact-checkers away from the realm of fact."
3 Ways to Lower Gas Prices I strongly recommend your viewing this You Tube talk as well as the item just below.
Facts about ANWR This file has been inadvertently deleted from this site. Synopsis follows:
Our view on energy policy: Alaska drilling is no quick fix, but it needs to happen "It wouldn't bring relief from today's high prices, as President Bush implied Monday. And it wouldn't make the United States energy independent.
"So does that mean, as critics suggest, that it's not worth doing? Not at all. Drilling in ANWR and offshore is an important piece of any long-term strategy to make the nation less vulnerable to oil-producing nations and supply disruptions. It is one of many imperfect steps needed to both increase the supply of oil and curb the demand for it, while seeking energy alternatives.
"It's true that any serious oil production from ANWR would take about 10 years. But dealing with the energy situation requires an ability to look beyond quick fixes. The fact is, ANWR oil would be flowing now if President Clinton hadn't vetoed a drilling bill in 1995.
"Environmentalists charge that drilling would despoil a pristine area in northern Alaska that is about the size of South Carolina and is a critical habitat for caribou, musk oxen, bears and birds. In fact, exploration in the 19 million-acre refuge would be confined to 1.5 million acres, and drilling to just 2,000 acres, an area less than half that of Atlanta's airport.
"Oil production would inevitably affect the refuge. But studies at Prudhoe Bay to the west, where oil has been produced since 1977 in an area more than twice the size of the one planned for ANWR, show that the effects can be minimized and wildlife protected, particularly with today's newer exploration technology."
"WMD: Hear about the 550 metric tons of yellowcake uranium found in Iraq? No? Why should you? It doesn't fit the media's neat story line that Saddam Hussein's Iraq posed no nuclear threat when we invaded in 2003."
Efforts to discredit Bush distort the truth and hurt our country "To believe — as the Center for Public Integrity recently charged — that President Bush and members of his administration, including Colin Powell, a natural born hero of the left, lied more than 900 times to promote and prolong the Iraq war is to concede that each and every member of Congress, along with assorted members of the Clinton administration, were complicit in that lie. Every dog in this hunt believed the intelligence. Bush didn't get there alone. Not by a long shot. . . ."
"[D]ive into [Sen. Jay] Rockefeller's report, in search of where exactly President Bush lied about what his intelligence agencies were telling him about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein, and you may be surprised by what you find.
"On Iraq's nuclear weapons program? The president's statements "were generally substantiated by intelligence community estimates."
"On biological weapons, production capability and those infamous mobile laboratories? The president's statements "were substantiated by intelligence information."
"On chemical weapons, then? "Substantiated by intelligence information."
"On weapons of mass destruction overall (a separate section of the intelligence committee report)? 'Generally substantiated by intelligence information.' Delivery vehicles such as ballistic missiles? 'Generally substantiated by available intelligence.' Unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to deliver WMDs? 'Generally substantiated by intelligence information."
"As you read through the report, you begin to think maybe you've mistakenly picked up the minority dissent. But, no, this is the Rockefeller indictment. So, you think, the smoking gun must appear in the section on Bush's claims about Saddam Hussein's alleged ties to terrorism.
"But statements regarding Iraq's support for terrorist groups other than al-Qaeda "were substantiated by intelligence information." Statements that Iraq provided safe haven for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and other terrorists with ties to al-Qaeda 'were substantiated by the intelligence assessments,' and statements regarding Iraq's contacts with al-Qaeda 'were substantiated by intelligence information.' The report is left to complain about 'implications' and statements that 'left the impression' that those contacts led to substantive Iraqi cooperation."
2/20/08 Big News from Baghdad "If you're looking for one measure of the impact of last year's troop surge in Iraq, look at Gen. David Petraeus as he walks through a Baghdad neighborhood, with no body armor, and no helmet. . . . We are now seeing extraordinary security gains from the last year translate into both political reconciliation and legislative progress. Within the last week the Iraqi parliament passed key laws having to do with provincial elections (the law devolves power to the local level in a decentralization system that is groundbreaking for the region), the distribution of resources, and amnesty. And those laws follow ones passed in recent months having to do with pensions, investment, and de-Ba’athification. . . . Having strongly opposed the surge, Obama and Clinton have been forced by events to concede that security progress has been made. But until now they have insisted that the surge is a failure because we're not seeing political progress. That claim is now shattered. Soon Obama and Clinton will have no argument left to justify their position on Iraq. It will become increasingly clear that they are committed to leaving Iraq simply because they are committed to leaving Iraq, regardless of the awful consequence that would follow."
Web of Deceit This link has been dropped because the target Web site requires registration.
Reminder: Bush Won in Florida Recounts Conducted by the Media "Sunday and Monday night at 9 PM EDT/PDT) sure to rekindle claims that Al Gore would have won if only the U.S. Supreme Court had not 'stopped the counting,' a reminder that both recounts conducted by major media outlets in 2001 determined George W. Bush would have won anyway. Two stars of the film have fueled the re-writing of history with actor Kevin Spacey, who plays Gore operative Ron Klain, charging that 'the Bush people were trying to stop votes from being counted and the Gore people were just trying to get votes counted' while Laura Dern, who plays Katherine Harris, recalled that the U.S. Supreme Court ruling left her 'devastated because there were uncounted votes.'
By Alexis Madriga [an arrow wound]
[A] study published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences used a different technique to pin down the diet of Peruvians who lived 6,000 to 8,000 years ago. The examination of starch grains scraped from dirty teeth recovered from an archaeological site revealed that agriculture was in full swing in the region during that time."