Protest In Washington – Biggest Ever – 2 MILLION – RightSideofLife, Examiner, Michelle Malkin – Dr. Orly Taitz Update – Pelosi Had Doubts of Obama’s Eligibility? – Unjust Justice Department – Larry Sinclair – Boycott GM – The BOPAC Report

The BOPAC Report:

Washington D. C. Teaparty –

 

Tea Party - Supporting Those of Any Party Who Support The Constitution, Limited Government, Responsible Fiscal Policy, Lower Taxes, and Free Markets

 I have to say I love the real photos below more than my graphic.

What a Tea Party!  Estimates range from 1 to 2 MILLION people showed up to protest Obama’s fiscal irresponsibility and march to socialism/fascism.  AP reported the event as tens of thousands of protestors when in fact it was well over a million.  Can you see why people are pissed at the media?

The RightSideofLife has a good article describing this historic event with many photos:

Up to 2 Million Freedom Lovers in DC; White House: “Know nothing” of Protest

Submitted by Phil on Sat, Sep 12, 2009

 

Congratulations, folks — the original tea party movement spawned what LibertarianRepublican is calling the “largest libertarian protest in history:”

It’s official. All major media are now reporting between 1.5 to 2 million marches on Washington D.C. for the Tea Party Protest. Sponsored by libertarian groups such as Americans for Prosperity, Freedom Works, and self-described “libertarian” Fox News Host Glenn Beck, today’s event is now the largest libertarian event in the history of the United States.…Continue Reading

And from the Examiner:

March on D.C. draws 2 million! UPDATE!

September 12, 3:46 PM Columbia Conservative Examiner Anthony G. Martin 

Photo courtesy of Michelle Malkin.

For the actual ariel time-lapse video of the march today, click here for the Rhetorician (via Instapundit).  In addition, 50 photos from the event are posted by The Patriot Room.

The photo above is a view of part of the crowd of protesters who gathered in Washington, D.C. and around the country today to demand control of reckless runaway government spending and to voice their opposition to the government takeover of healthcare.

Police agencies estimates the crowd at 1.2 million.  ABC News, however, reported this afternoon that the crowd was estimated at 2 million.

No matter which way you cut it, the size and scope of today’s citizen march on Washington is an historic, groundbreaking event.  Ordinary citizens who have been called ‘the great silent majority’ normally do not protest…at least not in public.  That day is long gone.

The outrage expressed by normal, everyday citizens from across the nation at the town hall meetings in August is a case in point.  Never before in recent history or memory have citizens been so clearly, visibly–and audibly–enraged by the actions of their government.

These are the people who go to work everyday, pay the bulk of the taxes of the country, raise families, and do their best to provide a safe environment for themselves in their local communities.  They don’t have time for ‘political activism’ as the hippies who protested the Viet Nam war.

Yet these dedicated men and women, at great personal expense, took the time to travel to Washington to make their voices heard in a tsunami of collective rage, mainly because they have become convinced that their elected leaders are not listening to them any longer.

And you bet they want ’change.’  They want to replace most if not all of the Representatives and Senators in Congress for being hopelessly out of touch with the citizenry.  They want a President who loves liberty, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and who reflects that love in the policies that are proposed…Continue Reading

And saving the best coverage for last, Michelle Malkin gives a  America a bird’s eye view:

Yes, the picture is real, nutroots

By Michelle Malkin  •  September 12, 2009 10:51 PM

 

I was offline for most of the afternoon and early evening — and just learned that the nutroots are claiming that the screenshot of the 9/12 march in D.C. that I posted — taken from a livecam of the event that I linked to here — is somehow “fake.”

The claim is that the shot came from the Kennedy procession or a previous left-wing protest and that the flag at half-mast proves that it was “fake.”

Newsflash for the clueless: Flags were still at half-mast earlier today in honor of the murder victims of the 9/11 jihadi attacks.

Guess the 9/11-was-an-inside jobbers are still that much in denial.

Unbelievable.

Yes, this is real:

And so is this: …Continue Reading

 Also from Michelle Malkin:

Celebrating the 9/12 rallies; Turnout estimated at 2 million; Update: How many?; FreedomWorks in error

By Michelle Malkin  •  September 12, 2009 10:06 AM

Scroll for updates…

 

Twitpic via Brooks Bayne

Twitpic via Prisminc

I can’t make it to Washington DC today for the national 9/12 march, but I’m with all the marchers in spirit.

It’s been an unprecedented year for limited government activism. It would never have been possible without the early initiative of grass-roots leaders in the #tcot community on Twitter, Smart Girl Politics #DontGo — and concerned women like Keli Carender and Amanda Grosserode who stood up in their communities against reckless spending in Washington before anyone was listening. Before the cable news was paying attention. Before it became fashionable for politicians to latch on.

Activists were derided as amateurs who couldn’t turn out a crowd. Then they were smeared as corporate shills. They were criticized for not having a coherent message. Then they were mocked for ideological single-mindedness. They are resented by professional strategists who accuse them of organizing empty protests that won’t translate into electoral gains. But the movement has given birth to a new generation of movers and shakers who have rejected establishment partisan politics for nimble, Internet-facilitated, issues-based advocacy.

The success of the Tea Party movement and its allies/successors shows that there’s no monopoly on “community organizing.”

You are the change we’ve been praying for.

March on!

***

Livecam of the D.C. rally here. Wow!

The Tea Party Express blog is here.

12:34pm Eastern: Police estimate 1.2 million in attendance. ABC News reporting crowd at 2 million — tweets Tabitha Hale from D.C.

Teeny, tiny fringe, huh?…Continue Reading

Natural Born Citizen Issue - 

 

Dr. Orly Taitz Searching for Truth About Obama!

 Dr. Orly Taitz is racking up the airline miles.  One day history will  recogize her vital role in protecting the Constitution.

From Dr. Taitz:

Update in Rhodes, GA case

Friday, September 11, 2009 2:06 PM

4:09-cv-00106-CDLRhodes v. MacDonald et al
Clay D. Land, presiding
Date filed: 09/04/2009
Date of last filing: 09/11/2009

U.S. District Court [LIVE AREA]
Georgia Middle District (Columbus)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:09-cv-00106-CDL

Rhodes v. MacDonald et al Assigned to: Judge Clay D. Land Cause: 15:5

Date Filed: 09/04/2009 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Defendant

…we had a hearing on 11th. Defendants were represented by 3 attorneys: US attorney, Pentagon attorney and Fort Benning attorney. they claimed that my client, flight surgeon Cpt  Rhodes MD didn’t show up for no reason, she just didn’t feel like coming.

I presented to the judge a notarized statement, showing that Col Jeffrey Johnson, her commander from Fort Riley, KS has forbidden Connie from leaving Fort Riley a day early and she was threatened that if she does, she will be court martialedand can be thrown into military prison. In this fashion the gov. prevented Connie from being at her own hearing and 5 minutes before the hearing they served me with the motion to dismiss.

Judge Land did not appreciate this strong hand tactic of the government and he ordered the government to make sure Connie is able to leave the base to be at her hearing, which was scheduled for Monday at 12 noon. This time it is their responsibility to do whatever is necessary for Connie to be in court.

It is a tough week for me as in 5 days I am making 5 red eye flights and long trips between OC, LA, Atlanta, Columbus and WA DC….Continue Reading

Natural Born Citizen -

Smoking Pelosi Gun Suggests NO!

The Closer Dr. Orly Taitz Gets to the Truth, the Greater the Spin (Lies) That Will Be Coming Out of White House!

 

From World Net Daily comes damning evidence that indicates Pelosi knew that Obama was not/is not a Natural Born Citizens. 

BORN IN THE USA?
What does Pelosi know about Obama’s eligibility?Online images for certification of nomination raise questions
Posted: September 11, 2009

By Bob Unruh

A commentator at Canada Free Press says he has obtained copies of two documents apparently prepared by Democrats to certify Barack Obama as their nominee for president in 2008 that suggest House Speaker Nancy Pelosi knew there was an unresolved issue with his eligibility under the U.S. Constitution.

 Writer JB Williams describes himself as a “no nonsense commentator on American politics, American history, and American philosophy.” And he say’s he’s gotten possession of copies of the documents in question.

The first includes a verification that Obama and Joe Biden, then-candidate for vice president, “are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.” ….Continue Reading

Larry Sinclair’s Journey –

 

Obama's Reading List - Larry Sinclair, Lenin and Marx

Larry Sinclair has an important post up today that represents the crisis in blind justice that America faces today.  I urge everyone to read the article Mr. Sinclair links to.  It is not America when only the few can find justice and others are ignored.

We are family and we get to choose who's we! Chibama Politics

From Larry Snclair:

Saturday, September 12, 2009

MORE US ATTORNEY FAILURES TO APPLY LAW TO OBAMA SUPPORTERS

The below link is to the story about The Atlantic magazine writer Andrew Sullivan being given special treatment by the US Attorney while continuing with prosecuting others in the same court at the same time for the same charge. It seems the US Attorney feels Mr. Sullivan’s attacks on Sarah Palin and her infant son Trig was worthy of being exempt from prosecution.

Mr. Sullivan should face the same prosecution as others who were in the court for the exact same violations. Read the article and click on the link to read “…the full Opinion” at the bottom of the article.

Judge angered by special treatment for Andrew Sullivan

It’s always interesting and informative to visit Larry Sinclair’s blog once a day to get is take on what’s going on in his life and the world of politics.  Larry Sinclair is the man who has alleged that he and Obama engaged in consensual sex and used cocaine back in 1999.  Nothing in Mr. Sinclair’s story has been contradicted by any facts.  Obama was available in Chicago during the week in question as far as anyone can tell.  Just like the question of whether Obama is a Natural Born Citizen, entitling him to remain in the Oval Office, Obama has refused to provide any documentation from his past that might refute Mr. Sinclair’s allegations.  I for one, from observing the incredible amounts of deception and hidden agendas present in the White House, believe Larry Sinclair.

Larry Sinclair has sent a copy of his book to the Michelle and Barack for their reading pleasure on their many taxpayer-funded vacations.   I suppose Larry Sinclair would be willing to consider any corrections that Obama would care to point out.  Maybe the Limo was not exactly white, but eggshell white.  Or maybe Obama wanted to do a little catching, but Mr. Sinclair refused him.  Who knows?  It’s interesting how everyone’s memories about events from years back differ in the small details.

I saw that Larry Sinclair had a post up that indicated that he had sent a copy of his book (Barack Obama & Larry Sinclair: Cocaine, Sex, Lies & Murder) to Glenn Beck.  Hopefully, Glenn Beck will read it.  Given that Glenn Beck’s eyes are now wide open to the deceptions and socialist/progressive agendas of the Obama Administration, he may just believe Mr. Sinclair. 

 I also hope that Glenn Beck would revisit the Obama eligibility/natural born citizen issue. Given that Glenn Beck is fully aware how dangerous Obama’s agendas are to our American Republic and freedoms – maybe he will understand that if Obama is found to ineligible to serve as President, ALL of the Czars could be removed and everything Obama did undone. There could be real hope to set America back on course, based on fidelity to its Constitution!

Stop Obama Enterprises -

 

Obamanomics - It's a Crap Shoot!

If our economic system of innovation and individual initiative is to survive and stand ready to tackle the enormous challenges that face America and the world, we must not allow the government to takeover American businesses.  Government run anything is a initiative, motivation, innovation, efficiency, freedom killing slug.

Support freedom – boycott General Motors, Chrysler, Citi-Bank and any other enterprise feeding off the taxpayer’s.

NOTE:   I will be back online in a month or so.  Out of Country with no phone or internet access.

 

Obama Would Evidently Throw The Baby Out With The Bathwater

I am reposting this article today because unfortunately a teenager’s pregnancy is in the news. It is shocking that Obama’s campaign would attack a teenager with vicious unfounded rumors that claim Gov. Palin faked her pregnancy with her 5th child to cover for Bristol Palin. So it looks like Abortion is in the news; and therefore, I am revisiting Sen. Obama’s position.

The media covers for Sen. Obama and quickly pounces against a teenage girl. The media sends out its “reporters” to Wasilla but will not send a reporter or investigator to investigate Larry Sinclair’s allegations that he and Obama used cocaine and engaged in gay sex in 1999. The media will downplay and not report the past of Obama and his mentors such as Wright, Rezko and Ayers. By the way, Larry Sinclair is in Minnesota if the media would like to find him.

Obama Would Evidently

Throw The Baby Out

With The Bathwater

(Birth water?)

The Abortion Issue

It seems that Senator Obama is described as having one of the most extreme positions that one can find when it comes to the issue of abortion. In this article, I want to briefly investigate the issue of abortion and determine where Senator Obama is regarding this issue within the context of the protecting rights of the mother and the developing baby.

Abortion -

The Courts have generally looked at the issue as a balancing of the rights of the mother and her body against the rights of the State and its interest in protecting her rights and the rights of the unborn. If my memory serves, Roe v. Wade laid out a continuum of increasing and decreasing interests regarding the decision about having an abortion. Basically, the mother’ interests were strongest the earlier in the pregnancy, especially in the first trimester; and the State’s interest in protecting the unborn increases as we get further along in the pregnancy, especially in the last trimester. The Court I believe also clearly recognized the State’s duty to protect the mother’s health and privacy interests regarding the decision to terminate a pregnancy, which were stronger earlier in the timeline until the issue of viability comes into question.

However, because this issue raises the question of when a human life begins, a baby, a person – some will always be severely distressed if the line of “a person worthy of protection” is drawn past what a person’s personal believe is. If the line is drawn one second past an individual’s personal line, abortions could be considered murder and could morally demand the person’s constant struggle to change the law. With that understood I still want to explore this issue and the balancing of interests in terms of the places where the decisions are harder and places where the decisions appear easier to most, in order to examine where the Senator comes down. Therefore, I’m going to basically agree with the Court’s reasoning in Roe v. Wade regarding how the interests of the parties are balanced as a starting point for this discussion. (I’m not going to address the right to privacy implied by the Court here.)

However, I do want to consider shifting some of the meaning of terminology that is always used with this issue – fetus and viability. It seems to me that given how far today’s science and medicine have advanced since 1973 when Roe v. Wade was decided, I would hope that we can consider taking a deeper look regarding what science might be able to tell us in terms of the development of the fetus. Instead of primarily addressing the question in terms of viability of the fetus, why not first try to answer the question of when the emergence of a human consciousness or behavior begins? Then perhaps that could that be the starting point where the State’s opposing interests begin to collide?

This determination might entail utilizing some sort of test for a particular type of brain activity or reflex response. (I’m not a medically trained person.) Today’s science may be able to find a definitive point, a level of brain activity, or test of development that would assure or reassure a substantial majority of the population (70-80%) that we understand a clear point of development that is equivalent to “the beginnings of a person under the law”? At any point prior to this point, the mother’s interests would be exclusive for purposes of this discussion. (As I understand it, the brain is actively beginning to grow at week 6 and then at week 10 the medical terminology of fetus begins.)

Week 6 & Week 10

I realize this method will not give any relief to people who believe life begins at conception and I’m sorry; however, I suspect it might also raise concern for those who are perfectly content with the viability analysis which I believe occurs somewhere at the end of the 4^th month or beginning of the 5^th month of fetal development.

However, on the other end of the development issue, given the medical advances, is the term fetus now too broad? Could a similar test of brain wave activity or reflexes indicate appropriate brain activity and/or consciousness in terms of a normal baby at birth? (Pain, recognition, awareness) Maybe that occurs at the 6^th, 7^th or 8^th month? Might we call this fetus an “Infant” instead of merely a viable fetus? Could this type of analysis redefine how we weight the interests being balanced under the Court’s decision?

I think there is and has been such strong resistance to changing this particular term because it would just be too hard to get around the morality involved in terminating the life of an infant as opposed to that of a fetus. To me, this dancing on a pinhead regarding the semantics of terminology borders on absurdity, it is what it is. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck – I prefer to be honest with myself and call it duck. In this case, in the last trimester it sure looks like an infant to me.

So what are the interests to be considered in this context of this discussion?

The Mother’s

The Fetus’s

The State’s

The Father’s

Morality

Let’s quickly look at the first 3 separately, starting within the core areas of agreement and continuing out towards the situations where the many would disagree. Considering all the circumstances (point in pregnancy, adoption an option, etc.), this might be the place where the State says, I sort of see your position but not quite.

The Mother:

Jeopardy to the mother’s life, rape or incest, health of the mother, likelihood of baby contracting a horrible condition, mental instability of the mother, drug addicted mother, severe depression, mother’s in jail, moderate depression, age of the mother, does not want a baby, financial situation of the mother, father is not available, father doesn’t want it, parents won’t allow it, career would be negatively impacted, inconvenient at this time, apartment doesn’t allow children, etc.

I think most people could agree that the first 6, 7 or 8 of these weigh heavy in the mother’s favor regarding the mother’s right to chose to terminate a pregnancy.

The Fetus:

Week 40 (9.3months) –

The Baby is delivered.

Week 34 (8 months) –

Your baby acts completely like a newborn, with her eyes opened when awake and closed when sleeping. You may also find her settling into more of a routine for sleeping & awake times.

Week 30 (7 months)-

His head is getting larger to accommodate a period of rapid brain growth.

Your baby has the capability now to produce tears — yes, within the womb.

Week 26 (6 months) -

Brain wave activity for hearing and sight begins to be detectable.

Fetal brain scans show response to touch. If you shine a light on your abdomen, your baby will turn his head, which according to researchers, means his optic nerve is working.

Week 23 (Viability 15% at 5.3 months)

Your baby is able to hear.

Week 22 (5.1 Months)

“Your baby can now hear your conversations more clearly than before!. When you talk, read, or sing, expect her to hear you. …Your baby’s brain has entered a stage of rapid growth, especially in what’s called the germinal matrix. This structure deep in the middle of the brain serves as a kind of factory for brain cells and disappears shortly before birth. But the brain’s amazing expansion program continues until around the five birthday.

Week 21 (4.9 Months)

Abortions from here forward are considered late term abortions.

Week 17 (4 Months)

He or she has a much more normal “human” appearance now. She holds her head more erect and her body and limbs are longer in proportion to her head.

Week 13 (3 Months)

Fetus begins to practice inhaling and exhaling movements

Week 9 (Just over 2 Months)

Baby has begun movement –

Week 4 (1 Month)

Heart and primitive circulatory system rapidly form – While still in its beginning stages, this is the very life support system that will carry your child throughout his or her life.

Week 1

I believe that most people would agree if they considered the situation, the first 5 or 6 situations weigh heavy in the fetus’s favor to not have the pregnancy terminated.

The many stages of development of the fetus clearly indicate the need to make a decision as early as possible in a pregnancy and it seems to me most people would agree that waiting to make the decision to terminate should not be held against the fetus except for very good reason.

The State:

As indicated earlier, the State has two basic interests to protect. The first duty is to protect the rights and health of the mother which are strongest in the earlier stages of a pregnancy. The second duty is to protect the rights of the unborn. Naturally, at some point the rights of the fetus will collide with the mother’s rights. I believe it was Justice O’Conner that pointed out that this point of collision will come earlier and earlier as science and medicine advance. It seems that States are all over the place regarding how these opposing interests are weighted and interpreted. That’s an issue for another day.

So where does Senator Barack Obama fit into this discussion. His position is being defined by a series of votes and committee actions that occurred when he was in the Illinois Senate. The issue involved the Illinois Induced Infant Liability Act, which would have protected babies that survived late-term abortions. Senator Obama voted against it in 2002 and killed it in committee. A very similar Bill was making its way through Congress at about the same time, which passed unanimously in the Senate on a voice vote. Senator Obama has since said that he too would have voted for the federal bill because the language included could not be used to undermine Roe v. Wade.

According to factcheckbarackobama.com:

The Illinois legislation read, “A live child born as a result of an abortion shall be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate protection under the law.” The Born Alive Infant Protections Act read, “Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being ‘born alive’ as defined in this section.…

…NARAL Executive Vice President Mary Jane Gallagher said, “We, in fact, did not oppose this bill. There’s a clear legal difference now between a fetus in utero versus a child that’s born. And when a child is born, they deserve every protection that this country can provide them.”…

I just wonder how one explains the clear legal difference to a fetus in utero who is exactly the same age as the baby that is born?

Normally, I can understand a lawyer’s dancing on the head of a pin for the sake of not wanting to undermine a future legal argument or position. However, regarding Senator Obama, some other details give me pause and raise questions about whether his stated motivation(s) can be trusted.

Ms. Carpenter, former congressional correspondent & assistant editor for Human Events, reported:

…Jill Stanek, a registered delivery-ward nurse who was the prime mover behind the legislation after she witnessed aborted babies’ being born alive and left to die, testified twice before Obama in support of the Induced Infant Liability Act bills. She also testified before the U.S. Congress in support of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.

Stanek told me her testimony “did not faze” Obama.

In the second hearing, Stanek said, “I brought pictures in and presented them to the committee of very premature babies from my neonatal resuscitation book from the American Pediatric Association, trying to show them unwanted babies were being cast aside. Babies the same age were being treated if they were wanted!”

“And those pictures didn’t faze him [Obama] at all,” she said.

At the end of the hearing, according to the official records of the Illinois State senate, Obama thanked Stanek for being “very clear and forthright,” but said his concern was that Stanek had suggested “doctors really don’t care about children who are being born with a reasonable prospect of life because they are so locked into their pro-abortion views that they would watch an infant that is viable die.” He told her, “That may be your assessment, and I don’t see any evidence of that. What we are doing here is to create one more burden on a woman and I can’t support that.”…

When I weigh his spontaneous use of the words “one more burden on a woman” against a “new born baby” or the possibility of a “viable fetus” of exactly the same age that has also survived an abortion attempt, I fail to see that he is consciously making or considering any kind of legal distinction or analysis that the Illinois bill might undermine Roe v. Wade. He appears to be Pro-Choice, period, with no limitations. The Senator’s statement certainly does not entertain the idea that the same bill with a few more words of legal disclaimer would garner his eager support.

Considering the Senator’s statement earlier this year when he said, “I don’t want my daughters to be punished with a baby.” I genuinely question if there is any point in a pregnancy where the Senator would come down on the side of the right of a “fetus” to live if it went against the wishes of the mother. (I thought about describing the partial birth abortion procedure in this article, but it is too gruesome. If you care to read about it go to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial-birth_abortion )

I suspect that Senator Obama’s after the fact defense of his votes against the Illinois bill were nothing more than political pandering for votes of the worst kind. Women can vote and a fetus can’t. It’s kind of like his statement that if he had been in the Senate when the Iraq war resolution was taken up he would have definitely voted against it. His words appear only to be, “Just Words”, words for political advantage.

Therefore, I urge anyone who is Pro-Life or somewhere in the middle on this issue to think very carefully how you cast your vote. You may wind up with some very troubling consequences.

Again, the main stream media lets Senator Obama have a pass. Just the way they have regarding serious allegations surrounding his associations with Rezko, Wright, Ayers, Farrakhan and the many other questionable characters in his life. The media is just now starting to cover the John Edwards scandal, only because they can’t avoid it. However, they continue to avoid like the plague, the allegations of Larry Sinclair that he and Senator Obama used cocaine and engaged in consensual gay sex in 1999.

The following sites provided most of the information for this article.

http://www.pregnancy.org/pregnancy/fetaldevelopment1.php (First Trimester of Fetal Development)

http://www.pregnancy.org/pregnancy/fetaldevelopment2.php (Second Trimester of Fetal Development)

http://www.pregnancy.org/pregnancy/fetaldevelopment3.php (Third Trimester of Fetal Development)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial-birth_abortion

http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/06/30/washington_times_wrong_on_obam.php

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18647

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial-birth_abortion

Serenity Prayers for Sen. Obama, The Media, & Larry Sinclair

Suggested Prayers From a Concerned Citizen

Obama’s Prayer

Lord grant Senator Obama the serenity to accept his embrace of the controversial people from his past and the things he’s done that convey culpability from his past for which he has tried so hard to hide or brush aside;

The courage to take responsibility for the implicit approval all such people and their ideas, as was demonstrated through the affirmative step of seeking to create relationships which would stand the test of time and for such acts, if true, upon review by any reasonable person would impart a sense of criminal conduct;

And the wisdom to know the difference between owning up and covering up.

Larry Sinclair’s Prayer

Lord grant Larry Sinclair the serenity to accept his past culpable behavior and his stated objective to present his story to the American public so that the every person will have complete information concerning his allegations against Senator Obama, and then leaving it to each person to decide what and who they choose to believe;

The courage to tell the complete truth, whatever it may be, including those things that raise questions concerning Mr. Sinclair’s own credibility, the courage to withstand the vicious attacks that he and his family have already endured and surely will continue to endure, especially if the Media and Senator Obama can prove the allegations that Mr. Sinclair and the Senator engaged in the use of crack cocaine and gay sex in 1999 are not true;

And the wisdom to know when all of this ceases to be worth the pain and torture which he and his family have been put through to date – and probably will be put through in the weeks and months to come.

The Main Stream Media’s Prayer

Lord grant the Media the serenity to accept their bias that has permeated their reporting during this election and their susceptibility to pressure from the networks, leftist political forces and politicians that have caused them not to report legitimate issues or to report such issues in a light most favorable to said politicians and networks;

The courage to overcome and publicly admit their bias and susceptibilities to political pressures to the public; and to, from this point forward to live up to their responsibilities to investigate and hold all politicians accountable for their past culpable actions and past relationships that might impact each and every politician’s credibility, reliability, honesty, capability, and suitability for the Office of the Presidency in a fair and objective manner;

And the wisdom to know the difference between “Investigative Journalism” and “Sucking Hind Tit” in regards to the Truth and their professional responsibilities.

From me, I hope each of you say your prayers tonight.

Zach