Posts Tagged ‘Corruption’

IS IT TIME TO PUT THE GOP OUT OF ITS MISERY? MAYBE – MAYBE NOT

November 14, 2012

IS IT TIME TO PUT THE GOP OUT OF ITS MISERY? MAYBE – MAYBE NOT

Social and Fiscal Conservatives May Want to Take a Second Look at the Libertarian Party.

Well, on November 6, the American people went to the polls to select a Santa – hmmm – President. It turned out to be a very sad day for both America and Israel. The outcome deeply disappointed many millions of voters because it became crystal clear that there are sufficient numbers of takers to overcome reason regarding economics, sustainability, the rule of law, the Constitution, and the negative impacts of big government.  They, the takers, seem completely at ease with subjugating the rights and liberties of everyone else in order get their stuff. Welcome to higher taxes, fewer jobs, death panels, more government control, longer lines, etc.

However, it’s now time to get back up, dust ourselves off and get back to work.

Emerging from this election were several lessons that the GOP must learn. First, the media will always aid the Democrat candidate’s effort to get elected, will twist the Republican candidate’s beliefs and record into something extreme regardless of what the truth actually is and will even go so far as to ignore and shape news that might negatively impact their candidate.  Second, election fraud is alive and well in Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio, Minnesota and other battleground states in sufficient degree to overcome the will of the people.  And third, the GOP must keep its principles or disband.  (I suppose one first has to define its principles, which might be different for the big government establishment of the Party.)

If the GOP elite are willing to toss away the principles of the majority of the Party (limited Constitutional government, fiscal responsibility, personal responsibility, helping those in need get to their feet without creating dependency/enslavement) then they can count on many social conservatives, fiscal ‘Tea Party’ conservatives and many in between staying home.  Principles must not only be important to the GOP, but also to a sufficient majority (enough to overcome voter fraud) if the nation has any chance to survive and avert becoming an authoritarian state.

Principles are not something to run away from. This is the argument the GOP must make to conservative Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians.  Unfortunately right now, it appears that the vast majority of minorities are either completely brainwashed by the media and the Democrat Party or simply more interested in voting for what they misperceive as being in their best interest.  That’s a real tragedy because what they are really voting for is allowing their potential lives to pass them by, being told where to go, when to go and why to go.  Sad.

However, there might be another option disenfranchised GOP voters might take. They (as individuals) might decide that for the good of the nation they can reach an understanding, accommodation, and/or alliance with the Libertarian Party and put the GOP out of its misery unless it wakes up.

If one really thinks about it, the Libertarian Party might be a much better philosophical match for many people of faith and fiscal conservatives.  There’s a quiz on the website that might surprise you.  Before you take the quiz, I hope you read 3 articles I wrote concerning marriage, abortion, and drug legalization. Marriage is the Domain of the Church and God proposes that government should not be in the business of marriage at all. Obama Would Evidently Throw the Baby Out with the Bathwater looks at Obama’s position and balancing interests along the timeline of pregnancy. A Step Towards Respect of Our Laws and The Social Mores by Legalizing Drugs is self-explainatory.

But first an admission – I was a bit angry with Gov. Gary Johnson for not throwing his support behind Gov. Romney to prevent Obama from further damaging the nation and the economy. However, after a few days, with reflection, I am now able to recognize (admit) that it is a principled act to vote for the person with whom you most agreed with.  But for me, even though I almost always self-identify as a Libertarian, I vote mainly Republican because they are the most likely to slow down the train on its journey to collapse of the economy and liberty.

So how can Social Conservatives possibly come to support a Party that could support legalization of drugs, prostitution and gay marriage without sacrificing their principles?

The answer goes back the very foundation of Christianity. Freewill, faith, and living a Christ like (spirit focused) life.  (Note – my personal beliefs have been shaped by family, study in college, and my own experiences through living, succeeding, failing, reflecting. It’s not my intention to endorse any particular path over any other here.)

Freewill is the essence of being a human being – the ability and right coming from God to make choices. Freewill applies to everyone (with the ability to make informed decisions, i.e. adults); even when we do stupid, self-destructive acts.  It’s what Obama and his supporters would like to remove from those with whom they disagree.

The Parable of the Good Samaritan

25 And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” 26 He said to him, “What is written in the Law? How do you read it?” 27 And he answered, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” 28 And he said to him, “You have answered correctly; do this, and you will live.”

Whatever your interpretation of these passages, they certainly involve choices freely made and carry consequences expressed and implied.  Even though different thoughts comes to each person’s mind when reading the words and phrases ‘love’, ‘soul’, ‘Lord your God’, ‘eternal life’, ‘your neighbor as yourself’, and ‘you will live’; I do hope they don’t involve giving the government power to limit your conscience and dictate what beliefs are acceptable.  (Even for the non-believer, these passages describe a process that could lead to a deep level of self-discovery.)

The above passages might also explain why the Bible says, “it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God.”  Can’t the same be said for all of us – we’re all damaged goods to some degree? We all struggle separated from our lives’ potential and/or the spirit by our own attachments (money, drugs, alcohol, jealousy, envy, power, wants, porn, politics, video games, iPhone 5,the Internet, dependency on government).

However, I do believe that one person’s problematic attachments can’t be universally applied to everyone else. Do you?

Separation is the issue and that which causes separation is the problem for the individual.  Those of faith can’t bring others to understanding or conformity simply by enacting laws forbidding objectionable conduct. It’s their journey and their decisions. You only make criminals of them and make it harder for them leave it behind when they come to their senses.  People of faith can only act as examples, live honestly, live with principles, raise strong families, voice their opinions, help their neighbors, find support in like minded people and vote. (We can rightly strengthen laws aimed at preventing the injurious consequences of bad decisions like drunk or drugged driving to the innocent.)

Those of every faith trying to live spiritual, reflective, loving lives are important because they act as examples of stability, responsibility, love and principle. They serve as models (for those caught up in the satisfy and serve me, me, me of today’s world) of thousands of years of understanding of what works, even today. Recognizing something bigger than yourself, raising a responsible family, redemption and achievement are not bad things.

Personal salvation (religious or otherwise) is not achieved through government action implementing its version of ‘social justice’ (code for socialism).  It is not social justice when the government steals from those who have struggled to be successful to ‘help’ thoseit chooses (creating dependency in exchange for dependable votes).  In fact, most times it makes it more difficult for those called (love your neighbor as yourself) to help the poor, the innocent, and those in need.  Take for example, the attack on the ‘religious liberty’ rights of employers (Catholic Church) by forcing them to pay for abortions and contraceptives vis-à-vis providing health insurance that must cover contraception and abortions.  To be true to Catholic beliefs about life beginning at conception, they will need to stop providing any health insurance to their employees, possibly close their hospitals.  This is actually what Obama wants. He wants to destroy the private insurance market so the government (while blaming believers and secular employers who can’t afford Obamacare) will be ‘forced’ to go to a single payer system with them (death panels) saying who is worthy of life and medical resources.

I’m sure the Libertarian Party would support the Religious Liberty rights of those (seeking to contract for appropriate health insurance) with deeply held beliefs struggling against intrusive government.

Thankfully, the Catholic Church is saying there’s a 100% chance of civil disobedience if the feds don’t back off.  I’ll be there with them, will you?

The current path the government is on (dominated by socialists and leftists) is one of dictating what people must believe, how they must act, how they must think, what choices they have available, what recourse (lack of recourse, i.e. guns) they have available to stand up against unjust, dishonest, authoritarian government today and in the future.

The proper role of our federal government is intentionally limited and is meant to protect the space around the individual for him or her to make their choices and reach their potential (or not).  The path of Obama’s government can only lead to mediocrity and dependency for the masses.  It’s one with no real future or choices for anyone, especially the very old and the very young.  Surely people of faith must find such a future where freewill plays such a minimal role abhorrent.  It’s the Story of the Tower of Babel being repeated – turning Americans into uniform bricks.

It’s not a course for those who truly want to be free.

Dr. Orly Taitz – Judge Carter – Natural Born Citizen – New Jersey Election – Corzine – The BOPAC Report

October 30, 2009

The BOPAC Report:

Natural  Born  Citizen – Obama Birth Certificate Issue –

Camel-Gives-Birth-

Obama's Kenyan Birth Witnessed by His Family

As you know, Judge Carter granted the Government’s motion to dismiss.  However, once again, there is no ruling on the merits and Dr. Orly has plenty of grounds for an appeal.  In addition to the necessary appeal, I would advise Dr. Orly Taitz to follow Judge Carter’s notation concerning the WAY forward. 

“The writ of quo warranto must be brought within the District of Columbia because President Obama holds office within that district. The quo warranto provision codified in the District of Columbia Code provides, “A quo warranto may be issued from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in the name of the United States against a person who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises, a franchise conferred by the United States or a public office of the United States, civil or military.” D.C. Code §§ 16-3501 – 16-3503. Should a person other than the Attorney General of the United States or the United States Attorney wish to bring a quo warranto claim, that person must receive leave of court to do so. Id. at § 16-3502. This leave of court must be granted, according to the text of the statute, by the District Court for the District of Columbia.”

From DefendUSx (http://69.84.25.250/blogger/post/Prediction-This-is-whats-really-going-to-happen-to-bring-truth-to-the-Obama-eligibility-caseand-it-does-not-matter-where-he-was-born!.aspx)

Prediction: This is what’s really going to happen to bring truth to the Obama eligibility case….and it does not matter where he was born!

by DefendUSx October 30, 2009 00:27

From Blogsphere: 

Obama had declared before the election himself on his website, that he was British born through his father.
I have been following closely this lawyer at Natural Born Citizen, and I believe legally he is right on the money!

[link to naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com]

Judge Carter: “The writ of quo warranto must be brought within the District of Columbia because President Obama holds office within that district.”

I was impressed with the integrity of Judge Carter’s ruling today. It gives me hope that the POTUS eligibility issue will eventually have its day in court on the merits.

POLITICAL QUESTION DOCTRINE.

Congress is the branch the Constitution empowers to remove a sitting President. The power to judicially enforce any review of POTUS eligibility is a pre-requisite to judicial involvement as the federal courts do not have the power to issue simple advisory opinions. A declaratory judgment is more than an advisory opinion. This is because a declaratory judgment must have the power of enforcement attached whereas an advisory opinion does not.

The declaratory judgment requests of plaintiffs in the Barnett case had to be dismissed because the court does not have subject matter jurisdiction to grant the requested relief. It’s really that simple. Judge Carter’s analysis of this issue was perfect.

QUO WARRANTO

Because a quo warranto is the only proper action to review the eligibility of a sitting President – and because such an action requires a trial of facts – Congress empowered the DC District Court to hold such a trial (by jury if requested by either party) when the eligibility of the President (or any US national office holder) is called into question.

There is no political question doctrine defense available to a sitting President for a quo warranto brought in the DC District Court. This is because Congress properly exercised its Constitutional authority to review a President’s eligibility via the quo warranto statute which also provides for the removal of an ineligible person from that office if necessary.

The US Attorney General and the US attorney have been empowered by Congress to institute a quo warranto on their own volition. Furthermore, any person may request that these officers do the same. If consent is not given by the DOJ, section 3503 of the quo warranto statute allows an “interested person” to petition the DC District Court on its own. The Barnett plaintiffs failed to avail themselves of this option.

Additionally, the Department of Justice has created a genuine conflict of interest as to 3502 requests by any “third person” (meaning any citizen). By defending the President in this eligibility litigation involving quo warranto, it isn’t possible for the Department of Justice to remain impartial.

Therefore, either a special prosecutor must be named for purposes of allowing the Congressional intent of the quo warranto statute to be realized, or the DC District Court may waive the requirement and examine any verified petition on its own consent.

The conflict will eventually be tested in the DC District Court.

Meanwhile, it’s important for me to point out that everything I have told readers of this blog about quo warranto was confirmed by Judge Carter today.

JUDGE CARTER DID NOT HOLD THAT QUO WARRANTO WAS IMPROPER TO CHALLENGE THE ELIGIBILITY OF A SITTING PRESIDENT.

This was the most extraordinary part of today’s ruling. It opens the door wide for a proper eligibility challenge in the DC District Court where the hurdle for standing is different from ordinary federal cases.

Please take note that the Department of Justice attorneys argued before Judge Carter that quo warranto – even if brought properly in the DC District Court – could not be used to challenge the eligibility of a sitting President. Judge Carter’s ruling did not support the Department of Justice position.

The ruling today affirms that the proper venue for challenging the eligibility of a sitting President is the DC District Court.

This is a very encouraging ruling for those contemplating a quo warranto challenge to President Obama’s eligibility in the DC District Court.

THE ONLY SIGNIFICANT ERROR

The only part of today’s ruling I take issue with is footnote 3 on page 22 where Judge Carter assumes that since Congress has the Constitutional authority to enact legislation regarding naturalization and citizenship by statute that they also have the power to define the meaning of “natural born citizen”.

But Congress has not defined “natural born citizen” while they have defined “naturalized citizen” and “citizen by statute”. Since neither the Congress nor the courts have defined “natural born citizen”, we are left without a legal working definition.

Faced with a sitting President who admits to having been a British citizen at birth, the need for a quo warranto to be instituted is of the utmost importance to the future of this nation.

Here is Judge Carter’s correct ruling on the quo warranto issue:

C. Quo Warranto Claims…

The writ of quo warranto must be brought within the District of Columbia because President Obama holds office within that district. The quo warranto provision codified in the District of Columbia Code provides, “A quo warranto may be issued from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in the name of the United States against a person who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises, a franchise conferred by the United States or a public office of the United States, civil or military.” D.C. Code §§ 16-3501 – 16-3503. Should a person other than the Attorney General of the United States or the United States Attorney wish to bring a quo warranto claim, that person must receive leave of court to do so. Id. at § 16-3502. This leave of court must be granted, according to the text of the statute, by the District Court for the District of Columbia.

Nothing in today’s ruling appears to question the power of the DC District Court to issue a writ of quo warranto to President Obama which would require him to prove his eligibility to hold the office of President. I must commend Judge Carter for his exercise of judicial restraint on this issue.

 ChiBama Politics –

 

Martha-Vineyard-Path

No Rules Obama - Not the Constitution, New Jersey Election Rules or bike safety rules.

Don’ t be surprised if an Corzine pulls an upset!

From Atlas Shrugs:

The Democrat Rackeeteering Fix is in: NJ-GOV: Jon Corzine’s Absentee Ballot Slush Fund

Is there one, (one?!) honest Democrat? C’mon NewJersey!

 NJ-GOV: Jon Corzine’s Absentee Ballot Slush Fund NRO via Redstate

National Review’s Jim Geraghty has a tremendously important story. Jon Corzine is trying to build an absentee ballot slush fund to win a recount in the New Jersey Governor’s race. Basically, the Democratic Party has asked the Secretary of State to send provisional absentee ballots out to people whose signatures on their absentee ballot requests don’t match:

In a development that is depressingly predictable, the New Jersey Democratic party is asking the state to provide provisional ballots for all these voters. Those ballots could, presumably, be used to overcome any narrow lead by Republican Chris Christie over Democrat Jon Corzine on Election Day.

Now, let’s be clear how the absentee process works in New Jersey. Third parties can pick up and return absentee ballots.  A couple of weeks ago, a Democratic operative in Atlantic City plead guilty to a lesser charge of tampering with ballots. One practice mentioned in the indictment was the person picking up ballots from people and throwing them out if they weren’t for his candidate.  Another example was:

Continue Reading

 

 

 

Media Mischief, the Obama Eligibility Issue and the “Dispositive Fact” – The BOPAC Report

July 25, 2009

The BOPAC Report:

Article About Eligibility Issue –

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

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

Media Mischief, the Obama Eligibility Issue and the “Dispositive Fact”

Last week, the media was forced into reporting on the Obama birth-certificate/eligibility issue.  It had little choice because respected CNN Journalist Lou Dobbs had the audacity to suggest that Obama should produce his long-form birth certificate to put to rest the doubts of millions of Americans who believe Obama is not constitutionally eligible to serve as President.  Immediately and predictably, much of the reporting from the main stream media was in the form of vicious attacks, seeking to discredit Mr. Dobbs and others looking for clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Obama is or is not a “Natural Born Citizen” entitling him to serve as President of the United States.  Left-wing bloggers and those in the media who have been carry Obama’s water this past year circled the wagons, and calls that Lou Dobbs be fired rang out. I have to salute Lou Dobbs for his courage and sense of ethical responsibility in addressing this issue at all. Of all the CNN commentators, Lou Dobbs is the one who consistently tries to be fair to all sides.

Yesterday, the Los Angeles Times reported that “CNN/U.S. President Jon Klein told staffers at the cable news network Thursday night that the supposed controversy regarding the legitimacy of President Obama’s birth certificate is a “dead” story.”  The article went on to report:

…The website TVNewser reported today that Klein sent an e-mail to staffers of “Lou Dobbs Tonight” just as the program went to air, informing them that CNN researchers had determined that Hawaiian officials discarded all paper documents in 2001. A long-form birth certificate with details about the doctor who delivered Obama no longer exists, they reported. The shorter Certificate of Live Birth noting Obama’s birth on Aug. 4, 1961, that has been made public is the official record.

“It seems to definitively answer the question,” Klein wrote, according to TVNewser. “Since the show’s mission is for Lou to be the explainer and enlightener, he should be sure to cite this during your segment tonite. And then it seems this story is dead — because anyone who still is not convinced doesn’t really have a legitimate beef.”…

Whether or not the assertion that Obama’s long form birth certificate has been destroyed is true, the action by Mr. Klein was clearly intended to get Lou Dobbs to stop rocking the boat and move on.

It seems to me that if the facts are as Mr. Klein says, serious reporters and investigators would be turning over every stone to try to find the truth.  Serious reporters would be going to Kenya; talking to administrators, faculty, and students at all the colleges Obama attended to discover if he talked about his birthplace, applied/registered as a foreign student or received aid as a foreign student; they’d be looking at his past travel and what passports he carried; and they would be seeking the information provided on Obama’s Illinois Bar Application.  One would think that an innocent person sitting in the Oval Office would quickly provide all information necessary to put to bed this troubling “eligibility issue”. Obama has not. (George Bush or Bill Clinton would have, I’m sure.) In fact, Obama has spend hundreds of thousands of dollars (some say 1 to 2 million) trying to keep the past hidden. Thank you, Lou Dobbs, for having the courage to ask the simple question – Where’s the Birth Certificate?

I seriously long for the good old days, when if a reporter or CNN President said something, there was a better than 50% chance it was true.  Unfortunately, regarding the “birth certificate issue” most reporters today are intentionally misstating the facts.  In many of today’s news stories, the headline or body of the story will say something like “birthers don’t believe Obama is a Citizen” or “of course Obama is a Citizen” or “Lou Dobbs believes Obama is a Citizen”.  Such statements are intentionally misleading and are included to portray those asking questions as ridiculous tin-foil hat wearing fools. As Mr. Dobbs has quickly learned, there is a price to be paid for asking questions that might impugn the Obama narrative. (Larry Sinclair was certainly taught this lesson.)

It seems the media is reading from the same playbook. They have somehow decided that if they can blur the meanings of terms “Citizen” and “Natural Born Citizen”, the general public will not look deeply into the issue because the answer is so obvious, and it will go away.  I guess they hope that any time the issue comes up in conversation there will be a knee jerk reaction causing someone to say: That’s stupid, of course Obama is a Citizen, only a fool would think such a thing.

Ridicule is effective, but it won’t deter those who have seriously looked at the allegations and the “common sense” circumstances that compel further inquiry.  Why has Obama not provided his school records, Illinois bar application, long-form birth certificate, passport information, etc., if he doesn’t have anything to hide?  Why has he spent such enormous sums of money on lawyers to keep these documents hidden?  Common sense says there’s something here.  Common sense also says that if these allegations are true, this would be biggest fraud perpetrated against America in her history. Too far fetched?  Did you see the news about authorities arrest 44 in N.J. corruption case (2 lawmakers, 3 mayors, and rabbis accused)? (Mostly, Democrats as far as I can tell.)

The media playbook conveys the understanding that it’s important to blur the definitions of Citizen and Natural Born Citizen because it goes to heart of the matter, the legal and common sense notions of “dispositive facts”.  If this is true, then everything else is false or doesn’t matter. Period! Then anyone who raises such questions is a fool. Obama is a Citizen and of course he is eligible is what the media wants people to believe.  This is pure media mischief, dishonesty, and treachery through and through.

Here’s what people need to know. Even accepting as “fact” that Obama is a Citizen of the United States, it is not a “dispositive fact” that would determine the outcome of the “eligibility issue”.  There are many ways to become an American “Citizen”.  How one acquires “Natural Born Citizen” status is determined solely by the Constitution of the United States.  “Citizen” and “Natural Born Citizen” are NOT synonymous terms. It is the Law (Constitutionally required) that every person holding the Office of President must meet the “Natural Born Citizen” test, which was meant to provide an added measure of presumed allegiance to the United States and her Constitution.  (For example: We would not want an arsonist to be able to become a fireman. If a person does not have a clean record regarding arson, he or she should not be allowed to be a fireman.  It’s not a guarantee that a fireman with no criminal record of arson is not an arsonist, but it’s a step that gives an added measure security.) As Obama says, “let me be clear”, one can be a Citizen and NOT be a “Natural Born Citizen.”

The flip side of this coin – if Obama is found not to be a “Natural Born Citizen”, it would be the “dispositive fact” that would determine the outcome of the “eligibility issue”. Obama could not be President.

So, which type of “Citizen” is Obama?  Real reporters would be turning over heaven and earth to find out.  The American reporters are turning over heaven and earth to cover it up.

Dispositive Fact – Jural facts, or those acts or events that create, modify or extinguish jural relations. Black’s Law Dictionary 5th Edition

Is Obama a “Natural Born Citizen”? It is the one question that must be answered.

There is no middle ground. If Obama cannot serve as Office of the President of the United States, then all appointments (Holder, Sotomayor, Czars, etc.) made by Obama are invalid; as well as any laws, acts or treaties entered into.  If Obama cannot lawfully hold the Office of the President of the United States, all “orders” issued to the United States Military are “unlawful orders”.  This last point is why I am so thankful that it appears that Dr. Orly Taitz’s eligibility case will be heard on the merits. Every soldier has a legal responsibility to  follow only orders that are “lawful”.  Given that burden, every soldier must have a right to be certain of Obama’s authority.

When I look at what Obama has done, is doing and/or proposing regarding Obamanomics, ObamaCare, taking over the auto industry, taking over banks, corrupting Inspector Generals’ independence, the unwillingness to audit the Fed., his unjust treatment of Inspector General Walpin, his lack of transparency, his appointment of an army of Czars circumventing Congress, his appoint to the Supreme Court, his appointment to head Science,  Gitmo, abortion, eugenics, trans-nationalist ideologies, trampling on State’s rights guaranteed under the 10th Amendment, his assault on the Second Amendment, Homeland Security looking at returning Veterans as Terrorists, ACORN, national security, the Census, his treatment of the Cambridge police, and Cap & Tax; it sure looks to me like an arsonist trying to burn up the Constitution of the United States and replace it with some sort of Socialist manifesto.

If Obama is going to cause the destruction of America and Israel, I at least want to know that he was constitutionally empowered as a “Natural Born Citizen” serving as President of the United States to destroy us.  I hate to think all this could have been prevented by some state official somewhere doing their job and asking to see proof that Obama was eligible to run for office. That never happened.

Obama Can’t Criticize the Iranian Election – Ahmadinejad Might Ask Obama Where’s The Birth Certificate – The BOPAC Report

June 15, 2009

The BOPAC Report:

Iran held a historic election and it appears that reform minded voters came out by the millions. Unfortunately, a vote for former Prime Minister Mir Hossein Moussavi must have counted half as much as a vote for Ahmadinejad, given that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared that he won the Presidency of Iran in a landslide.

Even though it looks like there were serious problems with the Iranian election that should be investigated, it is unlikely that any legitimate investigation will take place.  Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has backed the outcome of the election, so that’s that.

It will be interesting to see how forcefully Obama will contest the apparent thwarting of the will of Iranian people.  I would love to see America stand with moderate voices in Iran but Ahmadinejad has the perfect answer to every accusation Obama  might make challenging the legitimacy of the Iranian Election.

Ahmadinejad-Birth-Certifica

It would be like the pot calling the kettle black.

To find current information regarding Obama’s lack of eligibility to serve as President of the United States, I would suggest visiting the following sites:

World Net Daily

The Right Side of Life

Dr. Orly Taitz’s Site

Philip Berg’s Site – Obama Crimes

CitizenWells

If you’re interested in keeping up with Larry Sinclair’s progress with his allegations against Obama, visit his site. Additionally, Larry Sinclair’s site sometimes provides interesting takes on the news that you’re not likely to find elsewhere.

Obama – Birth Certificate – Kindergarten Records – Punahou School Records – Occidental College Records – Columbia University Records – Thesis – Havard University Records – Law Review Articles – University of Chicago Records – Passport – Medical Records – Where Are Your Records? – Is Obama Recruiting for Al Qaeda? The BOPAC Report

June 10, 2009

The BOPAC Report:

World Net Daily continues beating the bushes for Obama’s hidden records.

BORN IN THE USA?

Obama: Where have all his records gone?

Footprints of president’s own history either vanish or remain covered up


Posted: June 09, 2009

By Chelsea Schilling


Obama’s alleged kindergarten class (photo: Maui News)

While nearly 400,000 concerned citizens demand President Obama present his elusive “long-form” birth certificate, more than a dozen other documents remain unreleased or otherwise blocked from the public eye.

Numerous documents which have yet to be surrendered include the following.

Obama kindergarten records

The Maui News reported that Obama attended kindergarten at Noelani Elementary School on Oahu during the school year 1966-67. It released a photo of two teachers, Katherine Nakamoto and Aimee Yatsushiro, with five students. The teachers claim one of the children is Barack Obama.

According to the Hawaii Department of Education, students must submit a birth certificate to register. Parents may bring a passport or student visa if the child is from a foreign country.

So far, no records have been released by the school. Noelani Elementary School officials have not responded to WND’s request for comment.

Punahou School records


Punahou’s alleged 1979 yearbook photo of Obama playing basketball

Though from a modest background, Obama began attending the prestigious Punahou School in Honolulu, one of Hawaii’s top private institutions. He reportedly received a scholarship and attended the school from the fifth grade until he finished high school, though no financial records have been released.

The Boston Globe reported, “In 1979, the year Obama graduated, tuition for high school students at Punahou was $1,990, a sizable expense compared with Hawaii’s median family income of $22,750 that year.

Obama, reportedly a “B” student, studied among the island’s richest and most accomplished students. According to the school’s website, he also played forward on Punahou’s 1979 state championship basketball team.

Occidental College records…Continue Reading

David Karki of NorthStarWriters has a poignant article that touches on something I’ve been thinking about for some time. Obama’s telegraphing American culpability, equating the holocaust and Palestinian issue, bowing to the Saudi King, rewriting history, his election promises to leave Iraq regardless of the situation on the ground, buttering up Iran, and attempting to strong arm Israel will serve as an amazing recruiting tool for al queda. Just like in Iraq, with the American media’s constant reporting aimed at undermining the American public’s resolve, al qaeda’s numbers increased along with their attacks.  The new recruits of al qaeda might have been more eager to join because they believed that the American press was making victory possible.

Now Obama’s state run media is slanting most of the news against Israel.  Obama’s obvious pro-Muslim positions and the state run media’s unquestioning support for whatever he says tells the world that the END of Israel is in sight.  Don’t you think it is more likely that new recruits will sign up to be on the winning side.  Pray for Israel and iron the burkas your wifes and daughters will need.

June 10, 2009

Obama’s Execrable Speech to Muslims

You won’t hear any of this via the state-run media, but President Obama gave an outrageous, pathetic, execrable speech in Cairo last Wednesday.

First, he falsely gave credit to Islam for all sorts of historical achievements that pre-dated it by centuries, and with which they had no involvement at all. Space precludes me from listing them all here, but a few of the whoppers included: Algebra (ancient Babylon, then Greece, both which pre-dated Islam by a millennium or so); navigation and the compass (China and the Mayans both easily surpass and well before Islam); pens and printing (Gutenberg invented movable type in Germany in 1439, and ink on parchment pre-dated Islam by the better part of two millennia); arches and spires (uh, Rome, Greece, Persia, et al?).

And to start that list, Obama described himself “as a student of history.” He apparently forgot to mention that he flunked the course. History, as the rest of us know, is stuff that actually happened….

Worst of all, he drew a despicable moral equivalence between the Holocaust and the Palestinians that should leave any human being with a sense of decency tossing his or her lunch:

The idea that there could ever be any moral equivalence between these two peoples and circumstances is disgusting in the extreme. More than that, it sends a clear message to Israel and whoever else doesn’t wish to live under the sharia law of the caliphate: You’re on your own – America will not be there for you. Consider yourselves thrown under the bus.

And in that, Obama all but assures the very war he arrogantly thinks he’s preventing. He will embolden the aggressors (e.g. Iran) and force the rest of us to take up arms in active defense (e.g. Israel preemptively bombing Iran, which would spark a regional war into which most of the world would quickly be drawn).

The world could well be lucky to survive the disgraceful abomination that is this presidency. Read Complete Article


Marriage is the Domain of the Church and God – Obama – Gay Marriage – Glenn Beck – Church – Market Risk – Stock Market – Federal Deficit – Social Security – The BOPAC Report

May 13, 2009

Marriage is the Domain of the Church and God –

Market Risk is the Domain of Individuals and Business –

Neither is the Domain of the Federal Government.

This morning I heard Glenn Beck talking briefly about gay marriage, civil unions and the possibility that triad couples (between more than 2 people) could soon start demanding the same rights. After I finished rolling my eyes, I began thinking about the issue and quickly came to the same opinion that I hold concerning gay marriages and marriage in general.  Marriage is an issue for the church, consenting adults, and God.  If there are some churches that recognize gay marriages, fine (as long they are between freely consenting adults).  If there are some churches that recognize marriage between more than two people or communal families, fine (as long as they are between freely consenting adults).  I’m not in the religion or morality business as long as actions don’t hurt others or infringe upon their rights.

Why in the world is the government, any government, state or federal, in the business of sanctifying or recognizing any marriage?  It has always been clear to me that when government makes it possible for people who are “married” to have benefits and rights (social security or medical decision making) different from “non-married” people, it is a violation of both the equal protection clause (14th Amendment to the Constitution) and the prohibition respecting the establishment of religion (1st Amendment to the Constitution).

Social Security benefits accruing to surviving spouses are probably the main reason people are upset about the federal government not recognizing gay marriage in general.  I agree completely that gay and single couples both have a legitimate right to be upset.  Where does the idea and definition of marriage come from?  It comes from the church. (Particularly churches of the Judea/Christian tradition.)

In this country, the Christian church’s biblical interpretation that marriage is only between one man and one woman is engrained in literature and history as the rule.  However today, there are churches that recognize and perform marriages between couples of the same sex, transgender persons, and even between a man and a woman.  So, when official government process bestows benefits to those individuals who are in “traditional marriages”, the definition of which was establish by the Judea/Christian beliefs, there is clearly a preference being made for one religion’s or church’s definition of marriage over those found in other religions or churches.

When government goes down the “we benefit you, but not you” path; it sure seems like government is either involved in establishing  a particular religion or government is not providing equal protection and opportunity for “single” individuals who wish to consolidate and share their resources as “partners” or “significant others” the same as “traditionally married” people.  Government should either benefit people equally or don’t benefit anyone.

If Joe and Mary, or Joe and Sam, or Joe, Mary, & Jane said to the government that we want to pool our social security contributions from this date forward, then every participant’s individual social security contributions would be pooled and the sum would be divided by the number of people involved and that amount would be credited to each person’s individual social security earnings account.

This would allow the stay-at-home mom or dad to make contributions to their individual social security account as if they were “working” (half of the family’s income would be credited to each person in the relationship).  It would work the same way for gay couples or communal families.  Each person in such an arrangement would have some measure of protection vis-à-vis social security.  There would be no surviving spouse benefit because they would have their own social security. Primary income earners or those with a bigger income could direct part of their social security contributions to another’s account because they are committed to the other person (or people) and/or recognize the value of another person(s) non-monetary contributions such as raising children, gardening or taking care of the house.

I would think that most people would not have a problem with such a restructuring of Social Security because the government would be recognizing the limits of its power by saying we are not going to involve ourselves with the definition of the term marriage.  Marriage is within the domain of the church, the consenting individual(s), and their God.

It amazes me that the government doesn’t try harder to stay out of the business of limiting the rights of individuals more.  It seems like politicians want division so they can play each side off the other and maintain their grip on power.  Every time the government and politicians get involved in anything they create fear and uncertainty; and then use that uncertainty to their own advantage.  One only needs to look at the current financial mess that the economy is in.

Obama likes to say that he inherited the mess and he is only doing what has to be done.  However, the truth is that he and many Democrats in Congress share a great deal of the blame for the economic mess and Obama is using this crisis to get his political objectives accomplished.  The entire mess can be traced back to when government (mostly Democrats, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd) decided it wanted to get into the business of setting up regulations that created opportunities for groups like ACORN to pressure banks into lending to people who were not able to afford mortgages. This led to many of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s problems; which coupled with packaging these sub-prime assets into financial bundles and selling them round the world; it caused the global house of cards to collapse.

The government was trying to manipulate business RISK principles and it backfired.  Banks wound up being in the position of making risky loans that could be sold to the government (or guaranteed) and the bank’s RISK of losing its own money was greatly diminished.  It’s a lot easier to play fast and loose with other people’s money.

Market Risk is the Domain of Individuals and Business.

Now, people are getting excited that the stock market appears to be signaling the end of the crisis.  Think again.  The news of the past few days paints a much bleaker picture.  Consider the following:

With passage of Obama’s budget, the government will have to borrow almost 50 cents for every dollar it spends this year.

The Federal deficit will be greater than 1.8 trillion dollars this year.

Social Security and Medicare financial projections have been revised to reflect that they are going broke sooner than expected.  Medicare is already losing money by the truckloads and Social Security will be sending out payments faster than money coming in by 2016. That’s only 7 years away! Congress is not only spending money like drunken sailors but they are also so afraid of risking the votes of senior citizens that they are unwilling to effectively address the Social Security/Medicare problem.  (That’s the problem with creating dependency for voter loyalty, the bill always comes due. Then it comes down to who can be blamed.  With the American media’s proclivity for supporting Democrats, blame usually finds it way to Republicans regardless of facts to the contrary.)

Last week, the Treasury auction went poorly and Treasury yields soared.  This means that the government has to pay much more interest on the amounts they are borrowing.

This week, the government was buying their own securities to bring the yields back down some.  Where are the funds coming from to for the Fed to do all this buying? They have the printing presses running overtime.  This will, in the not too distant future, damage severely the value of the dollar and cause a substantial rise in inflation.  The price of everything will go up and foreign countries will be reluctant to purchase our debt to keep the charade going.

China, who holds a great deal of our debt, will be looking for treasuries paying higher interest in order to entice them to purchase more debt.

The more the government prints money out of thin air, the more the dollar’s value will be affected.  There will more money available to buy the same number of goods – causing inflationary pressure. Demand will likely take a downturn once consumers figure out they need to be protecting bank balances.  However, with a decline in dollar’s value, it means that many goods will cost more to produce because the materials required for production will cost more. Therefore producers will either need to raise prices, lower profit margins, lower labor costs (lower wages and/or cut jobs), and/or relocate to areas where the costs of production (taxes etc.) are lower.  However, even with these actions, consumers may not buy at higher prices (or even current prices) and businesses will go under.

So why are stock going up? I believe that many people are being led to think the crisis is ending by Obama and the media and they want to be in on the bull market.  I also believe that many people are moving out of U.S. Securities because the yields are relatively low right now, some stocks price/earnings ratios look attractive comparatively and some investors are starting to believe that Treasuries are too risky and could collapse in the future.  I think people are buying stocks because they feel like they are buying something tangible like buildings, machinery, etc. I bet buyers are looking at companies that don’t have high debt to equity ratios.  Stocks just look better than most of the other choices right now.  Now is the operative word because once interest rates on government securities are forced to rise to 6 or 7%, a lot of investors will shift back trying to stay ahead of the calamity that’s nearly certain to come.  This amount of debt and planned taxation is not sustainable.

This crisis can only be overcome by returning to sound economic principles now. Congress and Obama must stop trying to spend and tax our way out of this. The media needs to be telling the story of how to work toward healthy long term economic fundamentals and not just promoting Obama’s plan.  Obama’s massive stimulus is a short-term feel good illusion; but like social security, the bill will come due.

The media should encouraging Tea Parties instead of attacking them.  The media needs to tell the truth about Obama and his real objectives.  The media needs to investigate & report factually about Obama’s eligibility issue, Rezko, Ayers, Larry Sinclair’s allegations, Obama’s associations with ACORN, and the numerous other issues and scandals from Obama’s past. Before America can come together, these questions must be addressed fully. The media generated Obama “fairy tale” must stop because America’s future is at stake. The media needs to tell the truth and report the news.

We need to support companies like Ford who are not feeding off tax payers and taking direction from self-serving politicians.  Boycott companies like GM, Chrysler, Citigroup and others who undermine ingenuity and lead America to mediocrity.

Neither marriage nor market risk should be within the domain of the Federal Government.

Americans Might Want To Heed the Admonitions of The Past Regarding Election

October 25, 2008

Americans Might Want To Heed the Admonitions of The Past

We are quickly approaching the day when the direction of America will be decided. Will America follow a course steeped in ideology tempered by history or will she follow a course steeped mainly in ideology? Will the electorate be aware that these are America’s choices? Probably not, looking at the current polls, it appears that this election will be based mostly on faith and hope for change. If informed reason were being applied, the poll results would most likely be different.

One can easily draw the distinction between Senators McCain and Obama based on ideology tempered by history verses ideology alone by looking closely at their lives.

A person I admire, Oprah Winfrey, once said, When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time. I think this is sound advice that proves true 99 percent of the time. America has seen Sen. McCain through many years and he has remained a consistent and dedicated public servant. Early in his career in the military he probably held strongly to some sort of ideology that grew out of the cold war. Maybe it involved the concepts of good forces prevailing over unjust forces. Just as the Vietnam War grew out of the cold war and threw light on the realities of conflict; the Vietnam War experience threw light on Sen. McCain’s own view of life.

When I look at Sen. McCain, I see a man who understands that core principles are what you are and they must not change simply because a situation changes. A severely battered John McCain had had an opportunity to leave his prison in Vietnam before other prisoners who were more senior, but he refused. Sen. McCain looked the immigration issue in America with compassion and tried to find a practical solution, an action that brought him condemnation by many. Sen. McCain warned of the financial nightmare that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac abuses were causing; but the Democrats in charge chose to ignore his advice. Many times Sen. McCain has reached across the aisle, pragmatically, to try to find solutions to America’s problems.

Sen. John McCain is a man of core principles and the one he holds most dear is “Country First”. I believe him because as Oprah said, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.” Whatever ideology Sen. McCain may have held as a younger man has been tempered by his own history and America’s history into a commitment to put the interests of America above his own. This is the America voter’s choice of ideology tempered by history.

When I look at Sen. Obama, I see a man who has burst on the scene and captured the imaginations of millions. Surprisingly, supporters seem to have developed an incredibly strong attachment to the idea of Obama and what they perceive that means; so strong, in fact, that it boarders on religious faith. Many issues that would have sunk any other politician have disappeared in the mist. The Senator’s backers appear more preoccupied with his rhetoric of the future than anything about the past, any past, including Sen. Obama’s. The past is cliché, boring, out of date, damaged goods with no place in today’s world. However, Albert Einstein might have a little different view of the past. He has said, The distinction between the past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion”. I think Albert Einstein would consider Sen. Obama’s past just as important as the man being presented today.

Given the relative lack of leadership experience of Sen. Obama, reason would seem to dictate that his past should be even more important as a predictor of his future actions. However, in the politics of the day, the Media has assumed the role of advocate and obscurer for Sen. Obama’s campaign. Americans, who are trying to make a reasoned decision, are therefore having a very difficult time discerning what information is truthful and accurate; and what is not. What are the facts? This is a very real question in the minds of many voters. Quills drawn, the Media’s theory is that Obama is the one who must lead America. To support their vision, the Media does as Einstein, in a different context, counseled; If the facts don’t fit the theory, change the facts.”

Sen. Obama has been relentlessly pounding the theme that McCain equal four more years of George Bush, a narrative that has been sold in lockstep with the Press and Democratic Party leadership. One would think that common sense could see through the sales pitch, but it hasn’t. The Press has been constantly bashing President Bush for going on eight years. (I suspect mostly because they think he’s stupid, inarticulate and beneath them.)

Many of the America’s newly registered voters are younger; and therefore, they may be more susceptible to the myths of the Media. Apparently, their minimal life experience hasn’t given most of them much of an accurate barometer or enough common sense to judge fact from fiction. “Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen” another truism from Einstein’s repertoire that is at play here. The anti-Bush prejudice is raging, gathering steam, and Sen. McCain has been unjustly caught up in it web.

One other fact that the Media has attempted to distort is that somehow the current financial crisis was the result of the mean old Republican attempts to deregulate everything in sight. This is just another collection of prejudice reinforced by the Media that it is untrue, especially for Sen. McCain. He was one of the leaders in the efforts to rein in Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac; unfortunately, his efforts were blocked by the Chris Dodds and Barney Franks of the Democratic Party.

Where does Sen. Obama stand on the economy? He has stated and restated a desire to redistribute the wealth in America. This is exactly the wrong approach. Even a basic level of understanding about economics would act as a bar against trying to tax our way out of the current financial crisis. You don’t damage (over tax) those who are creating jobs and wealth for America and Americans. Regrettably, somehow too many Americans today have become accepting of the notion that the world (well the Federal Government) owes them a living and that wealth should be redistributed more ‘fairly’ to them.

The history of the ‘Great’ Depression clearly reveals that the measures implemented by government to overcome it were the reasons that the Depression became ‘Great’. Almost everyone recognizes that a thorough knowledge of the past is critical if we are not to repeat the mistakes of yesterday. However, I don’t think Sen. Obama understands it quite that way. Higher taxes and too much Federal intervention are not what the American economy needs today. As much as he hates to hear it, Sen. Obama’s economic ideas reek of socialism. We need to get back to the ideas of American innovation and personal responsibility.

Sen. Obama has been hailed as a superior intellect and amazing orator. But, who is he? What is his past? Who were those that stimulated and helped to form his thinking and beliefs? Sal Alinsky? Is he the same person today that he has been for the past 20 years?

A man is known by the company his mind keeps.
Thomas Bailey Aldrich

How much has the media allowed us to know about the depth of the relationships Sen. Obama had with William Ayers? Sen. Obama said he was just a guy in his neighborhood.

How much has the media allowed us to know about the depth of the relationship with Frank Davis? Andy Martin raises some interesting questions about this relationship.

How much has the Media allowed us to know about the depth of the relationships with Father Michael Pfleger, Minister Louis Farrakhan, and Rev. Wright? Aren’t these all company Obama’s mind kept? Are the ideologies encapsulated by many of Sen. Obama’s past associates very far from those espoused by Socialists and Marxists?

A man is known by the company his mind keeps.
Thomas Bailey Aldrich

How much has the Media allowed us to know about the relationship with Tony Rezko and his associates? Are the ideologies encapsulated by Tony Rezko’s actions those of corrupt politics?

A man is known by the company his mind keeps.
Thomas Bailey Aldrich

How much has the Media allowed us to know about the alleged relationship with Larry Sinclair?

To date, Sen. Obama has disavowed most of these people and/or their statements and actions. How much weight should Americans give to such a disavowal?

Should we accept the revelation of Rev. Wright?

“He’s a politician. I’m a pastor. We speak to two different audiences. And he says what he has to say as a politician. I say what I have to say as a pastor. Those are two different worlds. I do what I do, he does what politicians do.”

Or should we follow Oprah’s direction?

“When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.”

Common sense and reason tell me to listen to both Oprah and Rev. Wright in Sen. Obama’s case. Sen. Obama, at the very least, has shown an incredible naiveté concerning his past associations and their impact on his reputation.

Associate yourself with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation. It is better be alone than in bad company.
George Washington

Common sense and reason also implies that if Sen. Obama were the man he is portrayed as, there would be a line of people from his past standing, waiting to tell his story. The story of how Sen. Obama became such a partisan divide bridge builder, such a healer, such a patriot, such a reconciler, such an economist, such a negotiator, such a defense strategist would all be stories I would like to hear.

Who from Sen. Obama’s past is standing or waiting to tell his story?

What is the Media not telling America about Sen. Obama’s relationship to ACORN?

How many other scandals and allegations are there just from our view? Are there some yet unknown scandals being hidden by the Media? What about the Berg v. Obama lawsuit that is challenging Sen. Obama’s eligibility to hold the Office of the Presidency? What about the other lawsuits is several states? What about the validity of Sen. Obama’s birth certificate? What about all the allegations set forth in Berg v. Obama? What about the allegations that Sen. Obama was born in Kenya? Why is that not news? What would happen should he win the election and then be found to be ineligible to hold office? What about the questions about the allegations about Obama’s past and/or current Indonesian citizenship? What about Sen. Obama’s alleged membership in a Socialist organization, New Party? What about Sen. Obama’s extreme views on abortion? What about the allegations that Sen. Obama violated provisions of the Logan Act during his last trip to Iraq and during the run-up to the Kenyan elections?

There is so much about Sen. Obama that Americans don’t know. Some people are choosing to ignore the reasonable inferences from Sen. Obama’s past, some people don’t care and some people are not informed or misled by Obama’s campaign and the Media. The mainstream Media has done a grave disservice to America in 2008. The full consequences of Sen. Obama becoming President, under so many clouds as are set forth above, cannot be fully predicted or prepared for.

Therefore, it is critical that Americans take this election seriously and start considering the numerous allegations facing Sen. Obama before November 4th.

Nine-tenths of wisdom is being wise in time.
Theodore Roosevelt

In conclusion, America needs to take a breath and give another American voice a few moments of consideration.

The words spoken by Benjamin Franklin:

To follow by faith alone is to follow blindly

&

Hear reason, or she’ll make you feel her

The End

zachjonesishome.wordpress.com

Voter’s, Obama, Will o’ The Wisp, Change, Confounding Voter’s Perceptions

October 19, 2008

America’s Attachment to the Idea

of Change is the Perilous

“Will o’ The Wisp” That’s

Confounding Voter’s Perceptions

The phrase will o’ the wisp has be used to describe one, metaphorically speaking, who is holding so tightly to a goal that they doggedly follow any hints of it, oblivious to what lies unnoticed right under their noses. One of many descriptors is the image of a peasant farmer following a lantern light off in the distance, held by a mythical creature, whereupon the farmer winds up deep in the marsh. The farmer’s focus on the light is such that he becomes unaware of his surroundings; and waiting in the darkness, the consequences of blindly following the creature’s light stand ready to appear.

This is what seems to be happening in the 2008 Presidential election. Many voters are so attached to the idea of “change” or “change from” that they are not noticing information that is critical for sound decision making concerning their votes. It’s the information that gives hints of what consequences lay in the darkness and for the future. For these voters, the election is about solely about change; and therefore, thoroughly analyzing new information as it comes available is not necessary. “Change” is the goal, the lantern light, the treasure and they can see it just there.

This year Sen. Obama has been ordained by the media as the only way to that goal. Normally most voters would be constantly reviewing and searching for information about an unknown candidate; but not this year. Normally the media would be diligently searching for information that would give voters a glimpse of a unknown candidate’s character; but not this year. Unfortunately, the media has relinquished their traditional role as the source of reliable (true) information this year. This year, the media has assumed the role of advocate and protector. (Consider what has happened when an average citizen confronted Sen. Obama. The media immediately circled the wagons and brought their resources to bear in an effort to destroy Joe the Plumber’s credibility.)

When it comes to recognizing truth, I believe half of what I see and very, very little of what I read. With today’s media so clearly taking sides regarding this election and regarding most issues, what I read must be scrutinized to discover what facts are facts, what’s the real context, what facts are omitted, where opinion is stated as fact, what is implied as fact, what is credible, what is the author’s bias. As a voter, I’m not willing to blindly follow a party’s or a newscaster’s version of truth. It’s difficult and time consuming work. The critical questions for me are: Am I as fully informed as I can be? Am I putting my country first and my own self-interests second?

Regarding Sen. Obama, instead of providing real information for voters to use to judge Senator Obama’s character, intentions, believes, and actions; the media continues to feed voters a ‘fairy tale’ that paints the Senator as new, pure, wise, a messiah, the bringer of Hope and Change. I know the media won’t like this, but they ARE the peasant farmer blindly following the mythical creature who carries the lantern into the marsh because they too have lost their objectivity.

I can’t just blame the media for this phenomenon. It IS the responsibility of every voter to investigate and try to find out as much as they can about the candidates. The will o’ the wisp is the mantra of “change” this year. Change is the goal for voters. I do agree that Sen. Obama will bring the most change if he is elected; however, the change he brings has the possibility of seriously damaging America’s economy and future. Regrettably, many voters appear to be looking for a type of change that changes how much they can take from the government. The federal budget ballooning, the degradation of the concept of personal responsibility, the effect on others as the economy sputters doesn’t seem to matter to those who would vote on the basis of what they might get. These voters are not considering what consequences might be in the darkness on the marsh.

Obama’s wanting to “spread the wealth around” is textbook socialist economic policy. It does have a strong appeal to those Americans who would rather take from others and not earn for themselves. Unfortunately, it does seem as though American is becoming a “what’s in it for me” country. History has shown us over and over that raising taxes on businesses and those who create jobs (especially during an economic downturn) results in less revenue for government, less growth in the economy, fewer jobs being created, less incentive to take risks that lead to innovative solutions for problems. Why would we want to go there? Senator Obama’s change would not result in any betterment of the situations of American families. Obama’s change would result in a further slowing of our economy and the concurrent lost of jobs and benefits. The “what’s in it for me” voters would be cutting off their noses to spite their faces.

When I pull the lever on Election Day, I will be fully aware of what voting means. It means that I have tried to best of my abilities to ascertain who my selectee is, what they believe, where they will take the country, what their character is, and what will be the likely consequences if my candidate prevails. In the end, I believe that America will deserve the consequences of this election, good and bad. If America, an informed America, wants to go down the road of socialism with an inexperienced, minimally vetted candidate; so be it. I however will not voluntarily be on board for such a journey.

If voters and the media were not so intoxicated by the idea of change, change they have to have, they would likely be paying attention to all of the skeletons in Sen. Obama’s closet.

They would be looking closely at Sen. Obama’s past associations with Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Pastor Michael Pfleger, Bernadine Dorn, Minister Louis Farrakhan, and William Ayers. They would be looking into Sen. Obama’s connection to ACORN, the organization that is up to its ears in voter fraud. They would be looking into Sen. Obama’s connections to the crisis in the U.S. financial system through the actions, policies and political contributions regarding Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac. They would be looking into the allegations of Larry Sinclair, who says that he and Sen. Obama used cocaine and engaged in consensual sex in 1999. They would be looking into allegations concerning Sen. Obama’s campaign’s involvement with censorship and intimidation against those who oppose Sen. Obama – (Stanley Kurtz for example). They would be looking into Sen. Obama’s extreme views concerning abortion, some would say infanticide. They would be looking into the allegations set forth in Berg v. Obama that challenge whether Sen. Obama is even eligible to hold the Office of President of the United States. They would be looking into the allegations that Sen. Obama violated the Logan Act during his last trip to Iraq and during the elections in Kenya that left more than a thousand people dead.

In conclusion, it is my belief that this is the most important election in my lifetime. It will hurt me deeply if America is destroyed by such a naïve and short sighted phenomenon as is the “Will o’ the Wisp” that the bumper sticker of “Change We Can Believe In” has set in motion.

CitizenWells, Larry Sinclair and his Obama drug and sex allegations from 1999

October 6, 2008

This from CitizenWells:

Nashville TN, Larry Sinclair, Barack Obama, Town Hall Meeting, John McCain, Sinclair Obama drug encounter, Donald Young, October 6, October 7, 2008

October 5, 2008

I just spoke to Larry Sinclair a few minutes ago on Sunday, October 5, 2008. Larry is traveling to Nashville TN and will be there Monday, October 6 and Tuesday, October 7, 2008. Larry Sinclair will be in Nashville for the Town Hall Meeting with Barack Obama and John McCain and to tell his story of a drug and sex encounter with Obama in Chicago in November 1999. Sinclair will also share his knowledge of phone conversations with Donald Young, the gay choir director at TUCC, Obama’s former church, that was murdered in December 2007. Sinclair will also educate the public about the Philip J Berg  lawsuit that states Obama is a citizen of Indonesia.

Ever since Larry Sinclair went public with his allegations he has received non stop personal attacks and even death threats from the Obama camp. He is getting them already as preemptive strikes from the Obama camp before his visit to Nashville. I just read an ad on Craigslist in Nashville that is full of lies about Sinclair. I have covered the Larry Sinclair story more than any other source and can provide the truth about Larry Sinclair and his allegations.

Here is a brief statement I have sent to members of the media:

Larry Sinclair will arrive in Nashville on Monday for the Town Hall Meeting. I have covered Sinclair more than any other source and can separate fact from fiction.
I also helped break the Philip J Berg lawsuit and continue to report on this monumental story.
Both of these stories, in addition to continued fallout from the Tony Rezko trial, have barely been touched by the MSM.
Larry Sinclair is on a Take it to the Streets Tour and his story is not going away.
If you would like to interview Larry Sinclair, Philip J Berg
or me, let me know.
Citizen Wells

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com
http://larrysinclair-0926.blogspot.com
http://obamacrimes.com

The Citizen Wells blog is a good place to start to learn about the Larry Sinclair story as well as many other dubious aspects of Obama and his past. Another example of the Obama camp attacking people for asking questions about their messiah is the actor Jon Voight. He and his family were viciously attacked several months ago for questioning Obama.

Larry’s assault on media bias and Sen. Obama’s “fairy tales” that he is telling America. Sunday, October 5, 2008

October 5, 2008

Larry Sinclair is continuing to get his story out on Sen. Obama’s campaign trail. Mr. Sinclair is dogging the Senator at Chicago and Trinity United Church Of Christ asking the Senator where is was and what was he doing on the dates that Larry says that he and Sen. Obama were doing cocaine and having consensual gay sex. Everyone needs to stay tuned to Mr. Sinclair’s most excellent adventure trying to break through the media’s wall of See No Obama Scandals, Hear No Obama Scandals, Speak No Obama Scandals. Go to: http://larrysinclair-0926.blogspot.com/ to keep up Larry’s assault on media bias and Sen. Obama’s “fairy tales” that he is telling America. (To quote President Clinton)

I hope Mr. Sinclair will be extremely careful today.  CitizenWells reports that Mr. Sinclair will try to attend a service at Trinity United Church of Christ. This is the church that Sen. Obama and his family attended for many years and from where America heard “God Damn America” spewing from the Rev. Wright’s pulpit.  I hope Larry Sinclair will be treated well by the members of Trinity United Chruch of Christ.

It seems that Larry Sinclair is already receiving threats regarding his proposed visit.

The media is once again AWOL regarding this story and any other negative issue that may cause Obama to stumble. 2008 is the year American Journalism died.