Monday, September 28, 2009

Monday, September 28, 2009
 The Un-Aborted Obama by Mike Adams
 
Hello Barry. I've decided to write you a few questions in response to the unsolicited emails I keep getting from BarackObama.com. Since most of your form emails concern health care I'll confine most of my questions to one health-related subject: Abortion.
 
1. Did you know that about 150 young black people were admitted to Howard University School of Law this year? But, unfortunately, about 1370 black babies were aborted today. How can we effect "social justice" if the health profession kills far more blacks than the legal profession is currently accepting into its ranks?
 
2. Isn't abortion sort of like liberalism in a nutshell? It's just a way of asking others to suffer the consequences of your own bad decisions.
 
3. Doctors are supposed to save lives and not take them. Shouldn't abortion doctors then be required to take the hypocritical oath?
 
4. You been supported by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals throughout your political career. What if I trapped a dog in a cage and dismembered him slowly with a pruning tool I stuck through the bars of the cage? What if I then sucked out the bloody body parts with my Black & Decker power vacuum? Would PETA demand my arrest? Would they succeed? Would this not be eerily similar to what licensed doctors do to babies? Isn't that more serious than animal abuse? Even more serious than ACORN funding brothels with tax-payer dollars? Is this a procedure we want to nationalize?
 
5. When a white abortion doctor kills a black baby is it a hate crime?
 
6. Jesse Jackson was pro-life before he decided to run for president. He switched to the "pro-choice" position because he wanted to be the first black president. This, he thought, would show that America is no longer racist. Jesse still opposes the death penalty because – at least he claims - it is racist. In the American health care system, over 9000 black babies are aborted every week. Has the criminal justice system ever executed 9000 innocent blacks in a single week?
 
7. A Democrat historian once told me that, during its history, the mostly Democratic KKK lynched almost 5000 blacks. Today, the mostly Democratic pro-choice movement applauds (and even defends as a "right") the mutilation of over 9000 blacks on a weekly basis. You probably think it is unfair to compare pro-choicers to the KKK. But unfair to whom? Klansmen were never such prolific killers.
 
8. What would happen if we started shooting unborn babies with guns? Would you then decide to oppose abortion?
 
9. I was recently told that, as a Christian, I should support your health reform bill. But I would not want to be treated in a universal Canadian-style health care system. So why should I wish my neighbor to be treated the way I do not want to be treated?
 
10. I just ran into a fellow who was wearing a "Jesus" fish around his neck and an "Obama" hat on his head. That's like wearing a Star of David around your neck and carving a swastika on your forehead. Jesus was the greatest friend of the weak and powerless. Are you not the most powerful opponent of the weakest segment of society, the unborn?
 
11. Social Security is going bankrupt because large numbers of people born before Roe v. Wade are drawing from the system. But 50 million people who would be paying into the system have been aborted since Roe. Is it fair to say that in the same way Democrats destroy lives they created they also destroy government programs they created?
 
12. Since abortion kills so many black males, shouldn't we call it "homie-cide"?
 
I didn't sign up for your email newsletter but I guess someone did it for me as a joke. And I can't seem to get off the list no matter how many times I ask to be removed. So, I'll keep sending questions like these until you start responding with more than just your form email responses. Or maybe I'll find a way to send them directly to your teleprompter


Saturday, September 26, 2009

Does America Know Barack Obama?

Does America Know Barack Obama?

 

Aren't you curious as to why President Obama is in such an all fired hurry to get this socialized medicine bill passed? Do you wonder why he is so incessantly on TV continually talking about getting his "Health Care" plan passed, "For the good of the nation?" Do you wonder why the Democrat Party leaders are frothing at the bit to get this huge spending bill done, passed, and signed (despite the GOP) this year?

 

I think it is because he and his Democrat running buddies have realized some basic truths about the American People, particularly since so many showed up for the Nationwide Tea Parties and tax protests. The American people put their trust in and voted for a pig in a poke in 2008. They wanted to prove to the world America isn't a racist country so they elected their first minority President, a man who ran as a moderate who would reunite the country (and parties) in the things Americans believe important. Everyone wanted to believe Barack Obama was somehow better and different from the other ultra-leftists of his party and those with whom he was shown to associate himself. They simply believed him on faith.

 

Americans ignored his anti-white writings in his books, his quiet acceptance of hysterical anti-American diatribes by his minister, Jeremiah Wright, and his refusal to explain years at a time of his life as a student. The American people ignored his total zero of an academic record as a student and teacher and his complete lack of scholarship when he was being touted as a scholar. They even ignored his ultra-leftist liberal record as a "community organizer," Illinois state legislator, and US Senator.

 

Now, America is awakening to the truth. Barack Obama is a likeable orator even if super leftist. He is clearly not a fan of this country and is way, way too cozy with terrorist leaders and Marxist Dictators. His actions go far beyond naïve, in fact, border on active destruction of our interests, our allies (Israel) and our own future.

 

The American people have already awakened to the simple truth that the stimulus bill – some thought it a great idea in theory -- is just a huge bribe to Democrat Party interest groups and not really an effort to help average Americans.

 

Now, Americans are waking up to the awful truth that ObamaCare basically means that every time you are sick or injured, you will have some clerk from a Governmental Department telling your doctor what he can and cannot do and what you are eligible to receive or not receive in the way of "Healthcare", actually a pseudonym for insurance.

 

America (and yes, the Democrat Leadership as well) knows Mr. Obama's proverbial plan to lower health costs while expanding coverage and Government bureaucracy is merely a myth -- a promise of something that never was and never will be, a bureaucracy lowering costs in a free society. Either the costs go up or the free society goes away. We have all the evidence we need to see in Canada and Great Britain where the government runs the health care industry, with its interminable delays, long lines, and non-existent free care.

 

Mr. Obama and his Dem associates know Americans are getting wise to them and will stop them if they delay at all in taking away our freedoms. Waiting until next year puts the election cycle just too close and the Dem Party is rightfully scared that it will cost them their majority in Congress. One last question to be answered is why, if getting this bill passed is so incredibly important, do the great majority of the HealthCare provisions take hold AFTER Mr. Obama's next run for elected office. I believe America is on to them and they are scared of losing power. Nothing else drives them at all.

 

PL Booth, www.Blueeyeview.blogspot.com 09/26/09

 



Free Speech and the Constitution

Suggest looking up www.fire.org as well, interesting read blo.

Was Free Speech Protected? Not realy - Review of the Lay case

Posted: 25 Sep 2009 10:57 AM PDT

Editor's Note: the following "excerpt" from the article is long but it identifies a sinister effort to limit free speech (which should be of concern to all), especially the free speech of Christians exercised since the foundations of the United States.  And this situation exists in the "heart of the Bible belt" in Alabama.  A radical Federal Judge imposes her will on the citizen's of Alabama.
----------------
by Timothy Baldwin*: September 17, 2009 not only marked the celebrated day of the approval of our Constitution by the Constitutional Congress in 1787 . . ., it also marked another, what I call, LAY case, reflecting the power and control of the federal government over individual, local and state affairs, and the submission of its lowly subjects, We the People.

Some of you may have learned of the principal of Pace High School in Pace, Florida, Frank Lay, who was charged with violation of an order entered by Federal Judge Margaret C. "Casey" Rodgers, prohibiting him, the teachers and the staff of Pace High from praying or holding any religious ceremonies at school or at school functions, which originated out of a lawsuit brought by the ACLU. As you have likely already guessed, sometime after the order entered (and was actually consented to by Lay), Lay had a prayer conducted at a Pace High staff function (a building dedication with no students present). This was deemed a violation of the court's order and Lay was charged with contempt of court.

Lay had a hearing on the contempt charges on Constitution Day, September 17, 2009 at 9:00 a.m. (CDT). Hundreds of people stood outside the federal courthouse in Pensacola, Florida, showing their support for Lay, their disgust with the federal government, or just their interest to see what would happen. (A few even showed their protest against Lay.) It appeared as though it was a pep rally of sorts with high-school kids chanting, "We Love Jesus, Yes We Do, We Love Jesus, How 'Bout You!" and other similar chants. Around 11:30 a.m., much of the crowd began marching around the federal courthouse (which sits downtown Pensacola) seven times, to sort of re-enact and metaphorically demonstrate the judgment of God falling on the city of Jericho in the book of Joshua, as if to suggest that they wanted God to condemn Judge Rodgers, or that Judge Rodgers was attacking Lay and she was the sole evil presented in this case, or other similar theories to that effect.

It was obvious that most people present deemed the matter against Lay to be what they would classify as spiritual in nature; and by spiritual, I mean to say that the issue to them did not regard constitutional government, federalism, the evils of centralized power over State power, the true meaning and sense of the Constitution, etc. Rather, it had almost a tone of "We believe in God, and you, Judge Rodgers, do not . . . We believe in prayer, and you, Judge Rodgers, do not . . . We love Jesus, and you, Judge Rodgers, do not . . . Lay should be allowed to pray in school, and you, Judge Rodgers, should let him." It had very similar qualities to an "evolution verses creation" debate you would see at a college or university.

What most of these people fail to understand is that the matters of constitutional government, federalism, the evils of centralized power over State power, the true meaning and sense of the Constitution, etc., are just as spiritual in nature as the matters of praying in public and loving Jesus.

Do these people at the rally, most of whom would likely claim to be Christian, not understand that God created Natural Law (Thomas Jefferson called it "Nature and Nature's God" in the Declaration of Independence) upon His creation of the world, a Law that God Himself binds Himself to for His glory and for man's benefit? Do these people not recognize that binding our government (State and federal) to their respective constitutions conforms to God's Natural Law, that men adhere to their agreements (i.e., compacts/constitutions)? Are these people still ignorant of the principles of limited power, jurisdiction and self-government created by God and expressed by Him in His Word--and that these principles apply even when their favorite political party is in office?

After several hours of waiting outside (even during serious downpour of rain), Frank Lay and his entourage exited the courthouse, with Lay's wife giving the "peace sign" with both hands and the rest of the group with smiles on their faces, anticipatorily revealing that Judge Rodgers had found Lay "not guilty" of the contempt charges. It was as if a major victory had been won for Lay, his family, all those who were supporting him outside of the courthouse and for all "public-prayer-supporting" Americans. You can be certain that many felt this was a victory.

The crux of the "not guilty" verdict, in fact, demonstrates just how Lay lost, how America lost, how tyrannical our federal government is, and how far gone and ignorant we are. It showed just how the citizens of this country willingly LAY down when actual confrontation arises. Consider how Lay was found "not guilty" and supposedly victory was won in this case:
First. The Prayer Was "Unintentional": "Freeman was asked why he gave the prayer when Lay asked. 'It was just out of reflex,' he answered." (Source: The Pensacola News Journal) In other words, in order for Lay to "win" at this hearing, he essentially had to say, "Oops, Judge, I'm sorry; I didn't mean to do it; it won't happen again." You call that a victory?

Second. The Judge's Order, Which Lay Consented To, Is "Constitutional": "Both sides also agreed that the constitutionality of Rodgers' temporary injunction will not be up for debate, meaning today's proceeding will focus on whether Lay and Freeman violated the order." (Source: Ibid.) Not only did Lay have to metaphorically bow at the feet of Judge Rodgers to keep from going to jail, but Lay also had to literally admit that the order prohibiting him from praying at school or at school functions was constitutional and that he is bound to follow it. Again, how is this a victory?

Third. From Now On, He Will Comply With the Order Not to Pray: In a 10:00 p.m. interview with WEAR, Channel 3 News, Lay admitted on live television that he will comply with the "Consent Order" not to pray and that "changes will be made at Pace High School" to reflect this compliance. Just like a little child who gets caught with his hand in the cookie jar and knows he is in trouble with his parents, Lay had to promise to be a good little boy and to do exactly what he was told by the federal government to get off the hook of punishment.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is not victory! It shows every sign of defeat! This is, once again, precedent to reaffirm and reestablish that the federal government is America's god. We will do what it says, when it says, and how it says. We will not challenge the issue on philosophical and foundational merits, because to do so would require us to reconsider the power of the federal government over jurisdiction that originally belonged to the states and the people.

While I speak in irritation, I am pleased, of course, that Lay was not found guilty and that he was not sentenced to jail and fined. I do not wish that on any person of any faith for simply praying. But what has to be recognized is that Lay did not win, LAY LAID DOWN: the federal government showed its force, and the people submitted. Lay can go home, but the "law" remains the same and tyranny is triumphant. I am also pleased that there is a legal attempt underway to challenge Judge Rodgers' order as being "too broad" and, yes, unconstitutional (for indeed it is). For, in fact, this is the kind of challenge that is needed in cases such as this. The American people simply cannot sit by and let these rogue federal judges continue to trample our religious liberties!

In the meantime, people -- and particularly Christian people -- repeatedly complain about the federal government when issues like this arise, proclaiming that their "freedom of religion" is being denied. But do these same people stop to think about the reasons why? . . . Do they not stop to realize that the people they have been electing and reelecting to public office are the very ones who make the laws and appoint the judges and bureaucrats who continue to make war against our liberties?

To start with, the only way to become victorious in these matters (on a national level) is for the people to retake power usurped by the federal government through the constitutional amendment process. . . . We must support State representatives, governors, and sheriffs who will stand on the Tenth Amendment of the Bill of Rights to defend their citizens against federal encroachment. We must re-educate the masses into principles that founded our federal republic. We must begin taking responsibility for our own actions, and teaching our children the fundamental tenets of liberty. Only then will we be able to kick the federal government out of the affairs in which they do not belong.

The reality is, this federal takeover did not happen overnight, and if things keep going the way they are, and people keep acting the way they do, you will never be free from the tyranny in your lifetime and your children will never be free from it in their lifetime. What is worse, the vast majority of people's ignorance seems to be at a pinnacle, thus perpetuating the death grip of federal control over freedom. The result: LAY case after LAY case after LAY case; one person LAYing down after the other. Consequently, these cases are never victories for the principles of freedom in America. They serve only to remind us that the principles of tyranny prevail in this country. Yes, individuals like Frank Lay may be let go from time to time -- at least for now. But the time will inevitably come when EVERYONE will be forced to submit and lay down. [Full Article]
----------
*Tim Baldwin is the son of Dr. Chuck Baldwin. He is an attorney who graduated from Cumberland School of Law at Samford University, Birmingham, Alabama. He is a former felony prosecutor for the Florida State Attorney's Office and now owns his own private law practice.


Thursday, September 24, 2009

Lying Propaganda

Here is a column by Dr. WE Williams, one of the greater minds in the U.S.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Lying Propaganda by Walter E. Williams

Michael Moore's new film, "Capitalism: A Love Story" will be released next month. I've neither seen nor read reviews of the film, except for a short piece in the London Telegraph (9/6/09) titled "Michael Moore film calls capitalism evil." Aware of Michael Moore's previous films, I know that it will be at best a misleading story about capitalism. So let's do some defensive mental preparation, not about the film but what is and what is not capitalism.

Capitalism is an economic system characterized by private ownership and control over the means of production. The distribution of goods and services and their prices are mainly determined by competition in a free market. Under such a system the primary job of government is to protect private property, enforce contracts and ensure rule of law.

Arguing with Idiots By Glenn Beck

There has never been a pure free market capitalistic system just as there has never been a pure communist or socialist system, where there is government ownership of the means of production and each individual has equal access to society's resources. However, we can rank economies as to whether they are closer to capitalism or closer to communism or socialism. If one ranked countries according to whether they were closer to the capitalistic end of the spectrum or the socialistic or communistic end, then ranked countries according to per capita GDP and finally rank countries according to Freedom House's "Map of Freedom in the World," he would find a pattern that is by no means a coincidence. The people in those countries closer to the capitalist end of the economic spectrum have far greater income and enjoy greater human rights protections than those toward the socialist and communist end.

According to the London Telegraph article, Moore's film features priests who say capitalism is anti-Christian by failing to protect the poor. This is pure nonsense and revealed as such by asking, "If you're an unborn spirit, condemned by God to a life of poverty but allowed to choose the country in which to be poor, would you choose a country near the communist end of the economic spectrum or the capitalist end?" If you chose the United States, you'd find that according to the government surveys, the typical "poor" American has cable or satellite TV, two color TVs, and a DVD player or VCR. He has air conditioning, a car, a microwave, a refrigerator, a stove, and a clothes washer and dryer, and whether he has health insurance or not, he is able to obtain medical care when needed. Try to find that in Cuba, Russia, China or North Korea. If we buy into the nonsense of Moore's priests, the world's poor people are incredibly stupid. Whether fleeing legally or illegally, their destination country is likely to be closer to capitalism than their departure country.

Most of our country's serious problems can be laid at the feet of Congress and the White House and not at capitalism. Take the financial crisis. One-third of the $15 trillion of mortgages in existence in 2008 are owned, or securitized by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Ginnie Mae, the Federal Housing and the Veterans Administration. Banks didn't mind making risky loans and Wall Street buyers didn't mind buying these repackaged loans because they assumed that they would be guaranteed by the federal government: read bailout by taxpayers. Under a capitalist system, financial institutions would not have been intimidated or encouraged into making risky loans and neither would they have been bailed out if they did so.

Social Security, Medicare and its coverage of prescription drugs have an unfunded liability that exceeds $100 trillion. When those roosters come home to roost, they will make the financial meltdown we've been though look like child's play.

Not withstanding all of the demagoguery, it is capitalism not socialism is that made us a great country and its socialism that will be our undoing

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

2009 US MARTIAL LAW APPROVAL...?

Please view this video. At the end, it authorizes a classified something to form a new Bill of Rights. This amongst many other things which should certainly make you feel uneasy if not queezy. Even the Congressman reading the bill was appalled. Since our current representatives no longer are capable of following our Constitution, they must be removed, wholesale, every last one of them. Not a single Representative protested this bill. NO ONE. We can no longer afford to allow this congress to continue unchallenged. Throw them all out! Elect a new congress. We certainly cannot do worse.

Monday, September 21, 2009

Daily-Kos Polls on Obama Birth Issue; Will Obama Become History's "Unnatural President"?

Bill Smith, Editor,ARRA News Service: While I wouldn't trust the leftist biased DailyKos polling numbers, I found it interesting that they polled Arkansas on the following Question:
Do you believe that Barack Obama was born in the United States of America or not?
      Yes    No    Not Sure
All   63     17     20
Dem   84      8     8
Rep   33     29     38
Ind   68     16     16

DailyKos added their opinion that "Two-thirds of Arkansas Republicans are deluded conspiracy theorists." Their polling numbers identify that 37% of those polled said no or not sure regarding Obama being born in the United States of America.

As with many polls, the DailyKos sought to highlight what we all already know. While it was interesting to poll what "what one believes." that is not the important issue. The important issue is "Was Barack Obama born in the United States of America?" A president should not leave 37% of those polled in doubt. Omitting even those classified as "birthers," a properly designed detailed polling question would yield a significantly higher percent for those in doubt of his citizenship. For example, the following question would yield a different results: "President Barack Obama has never allowed public access to his birth certificate by even the press and election officials to validate that he was a natural born American Citizen (born in Hawaii verses a foreign country or territory). This situation has caused some people to be concerned about Mr. Obama meeting the requirement of being a natural born citizen to be qualified to be the President of the United States as set forth in the U.S. Constitution. This issue has not been an unresolved issue previously in U.S. history. Note: that all citizens of the United States are required from time to time to provide their birth certificate to meet legal requirements or to obtain benefits and services. Do you believe that Barack Obama should make his birth certificate public to alleviate the unanswered question concerning his meeting the requirement of the U.S. Constitution and thereby allow the citizens of the United States of America to resolve this issue for all time?"

Like other citizens, I have been required to present my birth certificate on numerous occasions. For example, to be sworn in as a commissioned "regular" military officer, I had to provide my birth certificate to prove that I was born in the United States of America. To receive a Top Secret clearance, the U.S. Government investigated to see if I was born in the United States of America. For one of my sons to be validated as a natural-born American, both my wife and I had to provide proof to the State Department overseas and before a Federal Judge in the United States that we were both born in the United States of America. To get my previous diplomatic passport, I had to provide my birth certificate. And there are other situations for which I had to prove that I was born in the United States of America! They same is true for all other U.S. citizens.

While I am not part of or pursuing the interests of the "birther movement," both as a citizen and commissioned military officer, I expect President Obama to do no less than I have done. Mr. Obama is not a potentate but a citizen servant. I would expect him to resolve this issue by demonstrating leadership and by presenting any and all documentation to remove all doubt by citizens of the United States as to his being a natural-born citizen of the united States.

Like many others, I am disappointed that the traditional media failed to do their job and to address this issue prior to the primary so that this issue would not be an issue. They clearly showed a bias unequaled in history and their failure to do so will be judged by history.

It has been almost nine months since Barack Obama took the following oath of office to be President of the United States:
"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 previously, took the following oath as Senator:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."
By the taking both of these oaths, President Barack Obama has a responsibility to resolve this issue by laying before American citizens his birth certificate and by allowing the press public access to his original birth certificate. This issue will never be hidden in history by the things which Mr. Obama hopes to achieve as President or even by the things he does later in life. If not resolved, Mr. Obama will go down in history as the "Unnatural President" and his actions and his programs will be tainted in history. This can be easily resolved by Mr. Obama presenting his birth certificate as other Americans have done on numerous occasions.

Friday, September 11, 2009

WWII Hero passes on

We're hearing a lot today about big splashy memorial services.
I want a nationwide memorial service for Darrell "Shifty" Powers.

Shifty volunteered for the airborne in WWII and served with Easy
Company of the 506th Parachute Infantry Regiment, part of the 101st
Airborne Infantry. If you've seen Band of Brothers on HBO or the
History Channel , you know Shifty. His character appears in all 10
episodes, and Shifty himself is interviewed in several of them.

I met Shifty in the Philadelphia airport several years ago. I didn't
know who he was at the time. I just saw an elderly gentleman having
trouble reading his ticket. I offered to help, assured him that he was
at the right gate, and noticed the "Screaming Eagle," the symbol of
the 101st Airborne, on his hat.

Making conversation, I asked him if he'd been in the 101st Airborne
or if his son was serving. He said quietly that he had been in the
101st. I thanked him for his service, then asked him when he served,
and how many jumps he made.

Quietly and humbly, he said "Well, I guess I signed up in 1941 or so,
and was in until sometime in 1945 .. . . " at which point my heart
skipped.

At that point, again, very humbly, he said "I made the 5 training
jumps at Toccoa, and then jumped into Normandy . . . . do you know
where Normandy is?" At this point my heart stopped.

I told him "yes, I know exactly where Normandy is, and I know what
D-Day was." At that point he said "I also made a second jump into
Holland , into Arnhem ." I was standing with a genuine war hero . . . .
and then I realized that it was June, just after the anniversary of
D-Day..

I asked Shifty if he was on his way back from France , and he said
"Yes. And it's real sad because, these days, so few of the guys are
left, and those that are, lots of them can't make the trip." My heart
was in my throat and I didn't know what to say.

I helped Shifty get onto the plane and then realized he was back in
Coach while I was in First Class. I sent the flight attendant back to
get him and said that I wanted to switch seats. When Shifty came
forward, I got up out of the seat and told him I wanted him to have
it, that I'd take his in coach.

He said "No, son, you enjoy that seat. Just knowing that there are
still some who remember what we did and who still care is enough to
make an old man very happy." His eyes were filling up as he said it.
And mine are brimming up now as I write this.

Shifty died on June 17, 2009 after fighting cancer.

There was no parade.
No big event in Staples Center .
No wall to wall back to back 24x7 news coverage.
No weeping fans on television.
And that's not right.

Let's give Shifty his own Memorial Service, online, in our own quiet
way. Please forward this email to everyone you know.
Especially to the veterans.

Rest in peace, Shifty.

Should Congress be on the same Health Plan as we..should Obama's plan pass? PLEASE read!

I am a firm believer that Congress should be forced to live under the same laws they force upon us. If we must have Gov't run Health care then Congress must have the exact same deal. Received this via email:
----------------

Here is the chance we've been waiting for! Everyone needs to do this!!!

Please pass this on!!

On Tuesday, the Senate health committee voted 12-11 in favor of a two-page amendment courtesy of Republican Tom Coburn that would require all Members and their staffs to enroll in any new government-run health plan. Yet all Democrats - with the exceptions of acting chairman Chris Dodd, Barbara Mikulski and Ted Kennedy via proxy - voted nay.

It took me less than a minute to sign up to require our congressmen and senators to drink at the same trough! Three cheers for Congressman John Fleming of Louisiana !

Congressman John Fleming ( Louisiana physician) has proposed an amendment that would require congressmen and senators to take the same healthcare plan they force on us (under proposed legislation they are curiously exempt).

Congressman Fleming is encouraging people to go on his Website and sign his petition (very simple - just first, last and email). I have immediately done just that at: http://fleming.house.gov/index.html . Please urge as many people as you can to do the same!

If Congress forces this on the American people, the Congressmen should have to accept the same level of health care for themselves and their families.

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Listening to Our President

Listening to Our President

 

What is more important, a person's words or the credibility of the speaker? Last night I watched and listened to our president's speech concerning the healthcare bill before congress. Like the Congressman from SC, I believe he is a liar.

 

Bernie Madoff was clearly able to beguile many people we regarded as knowledgeable. If you believe words alone, you can be led into most anything. If you consider all the available evidences, you are sometimes unpersuaded by even the most charmingly confident liars.

 

I am sure many millions listened to President Barack Obama's Wednesday night televised address to Congress on his medical care plans. But, if his words alone are what matters, we will be forced into something much worse than merely being swindled out of our monies. Our nation will be taking a long step into further Socialism, lowering our nation's ability to care for its self medically at all stages of life, and diving into incredibly increasing deficits sure to bankrupt us.

 

As Thomas Sowell points out, "One plain fact should outweigh all the words of Barack Obama and all the impressive trappings of the setting in which he says them: He tried to rush Congress into passing a massive government takeover of the nation's medical care before the August recess-- for a program that would not take (full) effect until 2013!"

 

President Obama is many things but not obviously stupid. Why is it so urgent to pass a healthcare bill NOW that won't entirely go into effect until after the end of BO's first term in office? If the public benefits are so great, why not let them enjoy those benefits before the next Presidential election? Doesn't it seem likely that BO doesn't want the effects of this huge expenditure to affect his reelection for a second term?

 

If it isn't actually urgent that this legislation go into effect immediately, why don't we have time to go through the normal process of Congressional hearings on the pros and cons and public discussions of its innumerable provisions? Why "hurry up and wait" on things considered literally matters of life and death? Could it be that BO and the Dems fear public knowledge? I think it is so.

 

If the President and his Dem henchmen are not stupid, then what is to be believed? There is only one reasonable alternative. It must be that they wanted to get this massive government takeover of medical care passed into law before the public understood just what it is. That is despicable and contemptible.

 

Recall the massive oh-so-important "stimulus" legislation the administration was successful in rushing through Congress in just two days - after which it sat on the President's desk for three days while he was away on vacation. It just had to be passed before the economy fell apart! Well, like this medical care legislation, the "stimulus" legislation was designed to take effect slowly so no one would notice the huge government takeover and increased control of our banking system and auto manufacturers. Alas, the public noticed anyway.

 

The Congressional Budget Office estimates September 2010 before even three-quarters of the "stimulus" money is to be spent. Some economists expect it won't all be spent by even the end of 2010. Some say it could be even longer. Meanwhile, mortgage defaults and bankruptcy continues growing unabated.

 

SO, what was the rush to pass it? Wasn't the stated idea to get that money out into the economy as fast as possible? Actually, the real reason was to get that money - and the power that goes with it - into the hands of the Democratic Party controlled government. Power is what politics is all about and money IS power.

 

From the viewpoint of those seeking more government power over the   economy (BO and his Socialist Dems), the very worst thing that could happen would be for the economy to begin recovery on its own while months were spent debating the need for a "stimulus" bill. As the President's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel has said, you can't let a crisis "go to waste" when "it's an opportunity to do things you could not do before."  

 

Want proof no stimulus bill was required? Look to Europe, Germany, Denmark, etc who recovered nicely without Government stimulus monies. Then compare them to ourselves, Japan, etc. who did and are still suffering.

 

This administration wants to do many things that have not been done before - and to do them before the public realizes what is happening. That is why there is this proliferation of White House "czars" in charge of everything from financial issues to media issues. It's just more circumvention of the public and of the Constitution. Czars don't have to be confirmed by the Senate the way Cabinet members must be, even though these czars may wield as much or more power. You may never know what these people are like, until it is too late.

 

Mark Twain once said, "There is no native criminal class in America – except Congress." He was partially right. Not the House or the Senate or either party has a lock on dishonesty. But this Whitehouse may yet win the title of the "Most Dishonest" away from the Clinton's. From his cabinet members to his recollections of his previous associates to his current Czars to his incredible mendacity this past Wednesday night; Obama's words constantly belie his actions. What Barack Obama says is not nearly as important as what he does - and how he has been doing it.

 

We may well remember this 9/11 eve as the beginning of the end of America and Obama, not as savior but as our national Satan.

 

PL Booth, www.blueeyeview.blogspot.com 09-10-09

 



Wednesday, September 09, 2009

ObamaCare: The Death Story

A parody of the consequences of ObamaCare presented by FortHardKnox.com.

ARRA News Service

Friday, September 04, 2009

Letter to Editor on Obamacare

Why Obamacare designed by a Congressional Committee cannot succeed.

 

The U.S. Postal Service was established in 1775 - they have had 234 years to get it right; it is broke and spends millions more than it earns annually.

 

Social Security was established in 1935 - they have had 74 years to get it right; it is broke and no longer takes in as much as it spends.

 

Fannie Mae was established in 1938 - they have had 71 years to get it right; it is broke and nearly caused the entire economy to collapse.

 

The "War on Poverty" started in 1964 - they have had 45 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to "the poor"; it hasn't worked and our entire country is broke. The national debt exceeds $30,000 for every man, woman, and child in the USA, citizen or not.

 

Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965 - they've had 44 years to get it right; they are broke and Medicare fraud alone amounts to tens of millions annually.

 

Freddie Mac was established in 1970 - they have had 39 years to get it right; it is broke. Thanks to congressmen like Barney Frank, it'll never recover.

 

Trillions of dollars were spent in the massive political payoffs called TARP, the "Stimulus", the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009... none yet show any signs of working, although ACORN appears to have found a new benefactor: the American taxpayer. Unemployment has hit an all time historical high, more than the "great depression" of the thirties.

 

And finally, to set a new record:

 

"Cash for Clunkers" was established in 2009 and went broke in 2009! It bought good dependable cars (that were the best some people could afford) and replaced them with high-priced and less-affordable cars, mostly Japanese instead of American. A good percentage of the profits went out of the country. And the American taxpayers take the hit for Congress' generosity in burning three billion more of our dollars on yet another failed experiment.

 

So with a perfect 100% failure rate and a record proving "services" that are shoved down our throats are failing at an ever-faster rate, the Democrat Congress wants Americans to believe they can be trusted with a government-run health care system? Really, now they want total control of more than 20% of our entire economy?

 

Do they think we are just crazy? It is time to correct the problem, elect an all new congress. It certainly can't be any worse than this one.

 

I am not the originator of the above but agree with it 100%.  PL Booth, www.blueeyeview.blogspot.com 9/4/09



Tuesday, September 01, 2009

Americans folowing Obama

cid:_1_026D2404026D215C0050D43C8525761D


Suicide of the West by Dr. T. Sowell

Tuesday, September 01, 2009
Thomas Sowell :: Townhall.com Columnist
Suicide of the West?
by Thomas Sowell

Britain's release of Abdel Baset al-Megrahi-- the Libyan terrorist whose bomb blew up a plane over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988, killing 270 people-- is galling enough in itself. But it is even more profoundly troubling as a sign of a larger mood that has been growing in the Western democracies in our time.

In ways large and small, domestically and internationally, the West is surrendering on the installment plan to Islamic extremists.

The late Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn put his finger on the problem when he said: "The timid civilized world has found nothing with which to oppose the onslaught of a sudden revival of barefaced barbarity, other than concessions and smiles

He wrote this long before Barack Obama became President of the United States. But this administration epitomizes the "concessions and smiles" approach to countries that are our implacable enemies.

Western Europe has gone down that path before us but we now seem to be trying to catch up.

Still, the release of a mass-murdering terrorist, who went home to a hero's welcome in Libya, shows that President Obama is not the only one who wants to move away from the idea of a "war on terror"-- as if that will stop the terrorists' war on us.

The ostensible reason for releasing al-Megrahi was compassion for a man terminally ill. It is ironic that this was said in Scotland, for exactly 250 years ago another Scotsman-- Adam Smith-- said, "Mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent."

That lesson seems to have been forgotten in America as well, where so many people seem to have been far more concerned about whether we have been nice enough to the mass-murdering terrorists in our custody than those critics have ever been about the innocent people beheaded or blown up by the terrorists themselves.

Tragically, those with this strange inversion of values include the Attorney General of the United States, Eric Holder. Although President Obama has said that he does not want to revisit the past, this is only the latest example of how his administration's actions are the direct opposite of his lofty words.

It is not just a question of looking backward. The decision to second-guess CIA agents who extracted information to save American lives is even worse when you look forward.

Years from now, long after Barack Obama is gone, CIA agents dealing with hardened terrorists will have to worry about whether what they do to get information out of them to save American lives will make these agents themselves liable to prosecution that can destroy their careers and ruin their lives.

This is not simply an injustice to those who have tried to keep this country safe, it is a danger recklessly imposed on future Americans whose safety cannot always be guaranteed by sweet and gentle measures against hardened murderers.

Those who are pushing for legal action against CIA agents may talk about "upholding the law" but they are doing no such thing. Neither the Constitution of the United States nor the Geneva Convention gives rights to terrorists who operate outside the law.

There was a time when everybody understood this. German soldiers who put on American military uniforms, in order to infiltrate American lines during the Battle of the Bulge were simply lined up against a wall and shot-- and nobody wrung their hands over it. Nor did the U.S. Army try to conceal what they had done. The executions were filmed and the film has been shown on the History Channel.

So many "rights" have been conjured up out of thin air that many people seem unaware that rights and obligations derive from explicit laws, not from politically correct pieties. If you don't meet the terms of the Geneva Convention, then the Geneva Convention doesn't protect you. If you are not an American citizen, then the rights guaranteed to American citizens do not apply to you.

That should be especially obvious if you are part of an international network bent on killing Americans. But bending over backward to be nice to our enemies is one of the many self-indulgences of those who engage in moral preening.

But getting other people killed so that you can feel puffed up about yourself is profoundly immoral. So is betraying the country you took an oath to protect.

(I have long considered Dr. Sowell one of the smartest men in America, a treasure, and rarely miss his columns, regardless of subject. Here he hits the mark exactly when discussing this Administrations mismanagement of the CIA and attempts at persecution of its interrogators. We shall pay dearly for such stupidity, the mere tantrums of 60's leftist children now playing at being adult administrators. I see no end in sight and no correction possible except the complete removal of every vestige of Obama's administration, something I believe impossible so long as the Dems remain in power. Our country may well not survive this Presidency because no opposition power exists to temper his extremes, rather the other two cornerstones of government, the SCOTUS and Congress, are more likely to assist than oppose. PL Booth