Posts Tagged ‘Obama smearing’

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

 

 

 

FBI Listens to FOX and Talk Radio – Rush Limbaugh – Palin Endorses Doug Hoffman – Michelle Malkin – The BOPAC Report

October 23, 2009

The BOPAC Report:

ChiBama Politics –

Heads In The Sand - Obama's Supporters

Heads In The Sand - Obama's Supporters

Play: Ostrich Sound

Yesterday I was listening to Rush Limbaugh and one of his callers confirmed what I believed.   Most of my friends and family who are in the military and law enforcement all listen to Fox and Talk Radio.  What’s Obama going to do when the FBI, Law Enforcement, and the Military say ENOUGH?   I urge everyone in the military to contact Dr. Orly Taitz.  Maybe we won’t lose the war in Afghanistan if the military makes sure they are being led by someone who is eligible to hold the Office of the Presidency.  I believe it is the sworn duty of every member of the military to make sure they are not following “unlawful orders”.

From Rush Limbaugh:

FBI Tells Caller: Listen to Rush

October 22, 2009

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Marie in Los Angeles. Hello and welcome to the EIB Network.  Great to have you here.

CALLER:  Yes, hi, Rush.

RUSH:  Hi.

CALLER:  Thanks for taking my call.  I’m a faithful listener for years.  I just wanted to make another comment about the salaries Feingold (sic) is telling them what they can pay their executives.

RUSH:  Feinberg.

CALLER:  Feinberg, I’m sorry.  No one is questioning Obama about this.  When he took over the banks and the automobile companies, he said, “I don’t want to run these companies.” He said, “We’ll just be shareholders.”  See, it’s our money, the taxpayers’ money.  He said, “I don’t want to, and I’ll give the money back.”

RUSH:  I remember it.  “I don’t want to run these companies. I got a war to win. I don’t want to run companies.”

CALLER:  Why aren’t they questioning him?  Because when Joe Wilson called him a liar, his whole campaign was on untruths.  I get so upset when I hear this, that when they wanted to pay the money back but he said, “Oh, no! We have a stress test.  We have to wait and see whether you have enough money before you can go back and run a bank,” and no one is following this.  He’s going to continue to run these banks.  This is what he wanted to do in the first place.  And so they should really call him down.  There’s nobody to talk to him about it.

RUSH:  Now —

CALLER:  I called Congress.  Who do you talk to when the top people you can’t trust?  You know, I called the FBI, and you know what they told me?

RUSH:  No.

CALLER:  They said, “Watch Fox cable and listen to talk radio,” and then I called another time —

RUSH:  Wait a minute! Wait a minute. Wait. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.  Whoa, whoa, whoa.  Back up.  You called the FBI?

CALLER:  Well, I wanted to find out what was going on with ACORN, the 14 states that they had arrested these people.

RUSH:  What FBI office did you call?

CALLER:  Los Angeles.

RUSH:  And they told you to listen to Fox News and talk radio?

CALLER:  Talk radio.

RUSH:  To find out what was going on?

CALLER:  Yes.  And the next time I called you know what they said?

RUSH:  No.

CALLER:  Listen to talk radio and watch Glenn Beck.  And they said, “We all watch Glenn Beck.”

RUSH:  That’s what they told you at the FBI?

CALLER:  Exactly.  And so when I wanted to find out they said call the Justice Department, what was going on.  Well if you can’t trust the Justice Department, who do you talk to?  Who do you talk to? You can’t trust the top. I called John Boehner, because he’s the one you can really talk to. I said, “You’ve got to tell them that Obama is going after the Internet and talk radio.  They’ve gotta stop it.”

RUSH:  And what did he say?

CALLER:  Well, I talked to the office. They said, “Yeah, we know what’s going on,” and when I called the FBI they said, “We know what’s going on, but we can’t do anything because the Secret Service will say they’re in charge.”  This is what’s going on right now.

RUSH:  You know what, folks?  I feel like I’m in that balloon flying over Colorado.

CALLER:  They all know what’s going on, but who do you go to?  I feel like screaming.

RUSH:  The woman calls the FBI (laughing) to find out what’s going on. The FBI says, “Listen to Limbaugh. Watch Fox”?  Look, to your original point here that Obama said he didn’t want to run companies, and yet he’s running companies. Don’t forget what I said at the top of the show: One of the primary ingredients to any president’s long-term success is the deniability.  The Drive-Bys are doing very well getting the story out, “Hey, this Feinberg guy acted totally on his own.  Obama is so busy working on Afghanistan, he didn’t even know.”  Now, let’s take ’em at their word just for the moment.  Obama didn’t know, okay?  So Feinberg says, “Hey, Wall Street, 90% you’re gone.”  Has Obama said, “I think that’s a little high. Uh, I wish I’d have been consulted on that. Uh, we’re going to roll that back to 88%.”  Has he said anything?  He ordered this, but they’re trying to give him deniability.  
 
END TRANSCRIPT 

 Tea Party –

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

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

 

 Good News from Michelle Malkin!

Lead Story

Message to GOP: Can you hear conservatives now?; Update: Palin is listening

By Michelle Malkin  •  October 22, 2009 12:00 PM

Scroll down for updates…Palin endorses conservative Doug Hoffman…

Continue Reading

Larry Sinclair’s Book Proofs Are Being Printed – CitizenWells Update on Schneller Lawsuit – Eligibility – Dr. Orly Taitz – Easterling – World Net Daily – Wenzel “Eligibility” Poll

June 17, 2009

The BOPAC Report:

Good News from Larry Sinclair.

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

THE PROOFS HAVE BEGUN PRINTING

I am thrilled to inform you that I have just received confirmation that the proofs for my book have begun printing. Since they are being shipped over night I am anticipating having them within the next two days….

…In addition Barnes & Noble and now Amazon will be able to obtain copies for sale by the two of them…Continue Reading

Mr. Sinclair and his family have endured all manner of threat and attack along the way from Obama supporters.  They deserve to have their story told.  I don’t know anyone so determined to have his story told.  All along, Obama’s state run media (ABC, CBS, NBC) has been hiding from Larry Sinclair’s allegations of drug use and sex with Obama.  I’m not including FOX as a member of the state run media, but they too have been hiding from Mr. Sinclair.

Congratulations Mr. Sinclair.

From CitizenWells, we have an update on one of the scores of lawsuits challanging Obama.

This was received from James D. Schneller regarding his lawsuit:

“Obama Suit Scheduled For Supreme Court Conference

Obama Fires U.S. Whistleblower Who Uncovered $$ 75 Million ACORN-type fraud !

Dear citizen who is horrified by events in Washington,

This is a news item that concerns our Supreme Court’s fourth chance to address the Obama birth certificate issue.  I wrote most of you in January, at a prior turning point.  Because you are a concerned citizen, you have to know about this, and I hope you’ll share it with your friends and family and pastor.  This is not a request for donation.

I have filed a supplementary brief in the Supreme Court of the United States in Case No. 08-9797 objecting to the failure of Barack Obama to file an answer, and requesting that the Supreme Court enable  newer evidence in the Obama birth issue.   The Supreme Court has set this case for a conference on June 18th….

…..Help Make Prosecution Happen Since the Supreme Court case is up for Court Conference on Thursday, I hope you’ll be able to offer prayers or a moment of silence, and to make serious talk at work and leisure, to impress all with the hard truth of our new government…..Continue Reading

The Supreme Court of the United States has yet another opportunity to do the right thing and protect America’s Constitution and possibly save America from economic and moral collapse.

Those who have dared to stand up to Obama or question his Administration have been met by tactics of intimidation that can only be called fascist. Maybe that is why the media is not covering him. I pray the Supreme Court of the United States will at the very least ensure that America is being led on her road to becoming a fascist/socialist nation by one eligible to do so.

United-States-Supreme-Court

Dr. Orly Taitz points out poll results from World Net Daily indicating that Americans want to know the answer to the fundamental question – Is Obama eligible to serve as President of the United States?

From World Net Daily:

WND/WENZEL POLL

Shocker! Most Americans know

of Obama eligibility questions

Despite near media blackout on coverage, 49.3% ‘troubled,’ think he should release birth certificate

Editor’s note: This is the second of a series of monthly “Freedom Index” polls conducted exclusively for WND by the public opinion research and media consulting company Wenzel Strategies.

WASHINGTON – It may be the issue few in the media dare address, but a new scientific public opinion survey of a cross-section of Americans shows they are not only aware of questions about Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility for office, but almost half are either “troubled” by the questions or believe he should release all relevant documents including his long-form birth certificate.

Asked if they are aware of the questions raised about Obama’s constitutional eligibility for office, 51.3 percent answered affirmatively, while only 18.7 percent said no. Another 30 percent said they were unsure….Continue Reading

Dr. Orly Taitz has made another filing with the United States Supreme Court in Easterling et al.

Support Freedom – Boycott General Motors (GM)

Obama is still muted in his response to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. He must know that Ahmadinejad has the perfect answer to every accusation Obama might make challenging the legitimacy of the Iranian Election.

Where’s the Birth Certificate?



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.

Americans Must Keep Asking Questions about Obama – Saul Alinsky – Raum Emanuel – Governor Palin – NPR – Rush Limbaugh – Sean Hannity – Michael Savage – Glenn Beck – Larry Sinclair – Americorps – GM – Cap and Trade – Healthcare – The BOPAC Report

June 12, 2009

The BOPAC Report:

Americans Must Keep Asking Questions about Obama

His Goals and Their Consequences

(For a Dead Guy, Saul Alinsky Sure Gets Around)

Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” has once again been pulled off of shelf following the senseless attack on the Holocaust Memorial by one man filled with hate for the Jewish people and Israel.  Regrettably, writers on a few well known internet sites, a few “newscasters” and several others in the mediawho appear to take pride in their ability to distort facts and people’s motivations/opinions/beliefs in ways that serve their (or the people they support) purposes – are in high gear attacking ordinary Americans who have questions about Barrack Obama, trying to somehow equate them with the Holocaust Memorial shooter.  I’m sure most people see through these attempts and would agree that this purported “journalistic” reporting/commentary is neither journalism nor responsible.

What it is-is simply the “drive-by media’s” attempt to shape the news and portray anyone who disagrees with Obama as a hate filled racist bigot.  This type of reporting and commentary is despicable “ends justifies the means” activity engaged in by people who surely know better.  The vast, vast majority of people who oppose Obama are not racists or bigots – and the media knows it.  They are Americans (from all backgrounds and races) who want politicians, the Congress and Obama to follow the Constitution, support fair free market principles, and to be fiscally responsible and disciplined.  They are Americans who vote, pay taxes and believe that non-violence remains the only acceptable way to effectuate change.

The current feeding frenzy was set off by the despicable act of one crazed man.  Raum Emanuel says, “You never want to let a serious crisis to go to waste.”  However, many surrogates and many in the media take Emanuel’s advice to the extreme. They don’t want to let “any act” go to waste that they can springboard off of to portray people they disagree with (or those who cross/impede their goals) in as negative light as they can.

A recent example is the constant attack of Governor Sarah Palin and her family.  During the election, we all heard (over, over, and over) of ethics allegations raised against Governor Palin.  Well it seems that Governor Palin has been cleared of ever single one.  Where is the media?  Oh, they are busy using David Letterman’s recent attack on Governor Palin’s 14 year old daughter.  Yet there is no real condemnation from the media, no demand to fire David Letterman as would be the case for any “conservative” media personality – just reinforcement of negative perceptions against Governor Palin and her family.  What did CBS do to Don IMUS?  Sorry Don, you’re out of here.

While I’m fairly sure that most members of the media do not have pocket versions of Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals with them, if one does a minimal amount of responsible, balanced reading from various sources, they would soon find that what is being reported as factual and complete new stories by the main stream media are actually stories missing important information.  Stories that are missing important information that can change the meaning and/or inferences are not journalism.  Such stories are the very definition of news bias.

My wife listens to National Public Radio (NPR) every morning, so I have a valuable daily opportunity to observe the subtle ways by which the “news” is shaped by a seemly “objective” news source.  Many times tiny bits of information (facts, opinions, parts of opinion, context, parts of context) are left out, maybe a person being interviewed to give an opposing view regarding an issue is not the best spokesperson available (or their credibility has already been impugned to some degree), or the emphasis/order of presentation directs the listener to certain conclusions – each is a way to shape the news.  I’ve always hoped that NPR was not engaged in the intentional shaping of the news (as opposed to factual reporting); however the more I listen, the more I’m convinced that they are.  That’s too bad because they all have such nice calm morning voices that exude sincerity for what they are saying.

(I’m sure that’s how Obama has gotten away with so much of his deception thus far.)

ObamaPlusTruthEquals

Of course, some in the media and those who are Obama’s surrogates are always attacking conservative commentators/entertainers like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage or Glenn Beck because they are well known, influential and have large audiences.  It’s interesting to note that recently many have been trying to portray Rush Limbaugh as a spokesperson for conservatives and the Republican Party.  This is total slight of hand. I suppose they figure that if they can firmly establish a link to Republicans with Rush, then a tarnished Rush will keep voters (who sincerely believe that Obama and many Democrats are out of control) from voting Republican out of embarrassment. Stand by Mr. Limbaugh because, as usual, the Sh^% is coming your way.

Rush Limbaugh is the biggest danger to “them” because his audience is growing. It’s all a disheartening game that the media and politicians play.  However, I have not heard any of these men urge people to violence of any kind. In fact, Glenn Beck takes care to urge conservatives to immolate people like Gandhi and Martin Luther King – speak up with conviction – don’t sit in the back of the bus – don’t react with violence. What I hear from Rush, Hannity, Savage and Beck is that they want Americans to open their eyes and ears and truly behold what is before them.  They seem to trust that given full and complete information, Americans will come to their own conclusions – and that’s okay.

That used to be the proper role of the media but now it falls upon others such as radio personalities and those active on the internet.  They may use harsher words and speak louder, but they need to in order to break through the public’s perception of legitimacy regarding the old main stream media.  Thankfully the public’s perceptions of the media are crumbling.

The truth is that right now there is no clear leader in the Republican Party and most people know that. I will vote for candidates of either (any) party who support the Constitution, who refrain from marching us to a mediocre America through socialism, who strongly support the rights of the individual and States, and who will exercise fiscal responsibility.  I will be voting for a lot of challengers in 2010.  I think a lot of other Americans will be doing the same.

Most Radio Talk Show hosts are seasoned professionals who have thick skins regarding unfair criticism and they can take whatever is thrown their way.  Unfortunately, ordinary citizens who are just now finding their voices are not used to being unfairly tarnished and attacked.  It is important that they, that we, toughen up our skin and keep speaking out against injustice; that we keep taking to the streets in peaceful “Tea Parties”, that we write our Representatives, that we do not cower.

It is well known that Obama and his surrogates such as ACORN are well versed in Saul Alinsky’s Rules that are intended to intimidate and break down people’s resolve to do what they believe in.   We all need to understand what will be coming our way and we each need to commit to having our voices heard.  When Mr. Alinsky’s Rules refers to the enemy – that’s you, me, my family, Rush, Hannity, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, and anyone else who is not part of this D. C. power establishment who stands up and says, THIS IS NOT RIGHT.

Alinsky’s rules are ruthless and you can imagine how they work. Here are the rules to be aware of:

RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)

RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)

RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

Alinkiy’s Rule 5 is the one that can most easily intimidate ordinary people who have legitimate questions about Obama, questions about his birth certificate, questions about socialism, questions about Larry Sinclair, questions about out of control spending, questions about the government take over of GM, questions about closing GM dealerships based on who they made political contributions to, questions about setting aside the rights of secured creditors to do it, questions about Obama apparently firing the Inspector General of Americorps in retaliation, questions about the real consequences of cap and trade, questions about the real consequences of government run healthcare, questions about the intention to run private health insurance out of business, etc., etc., etc.

Americans want their questions answered but they don’t want to be ridiculed. They don’t want their friends and neighbors thinking that they are conspiracy theorists, irrational, stupid or easily misled.   It’s like Obama and his friends are the bullies on some schoolyard. Some of us will lose friends and more; but what choice do we have?  Surrender to injustice?  Screw that.

Americans have a fundamental right and duty to ask questions about their government and to try to get answers.

GM-Logo

Obama – Job Number Fiction – New York Senate – Obama Enemies List – Larry Sinclair – The BOPAC Report

June 9, 2009

The BOPAC Report:

Like most of Obama’s life story, Obama’s math is pure fiction supported by the “Obama Fairy Tale” media machine.

The Wall Street Journal

Tony Fratto is envious.
Mr. Fratto was a colleague of mine in the Bush administration, and as a senior member of the White House communications shop, he knows just how difficult it can be to deal with a press corps skeptical about presidential economic claims. It now appears, however, that Mr. Fratto’s problem was that he simply lacked the magic words — jobs “saved or  created.””Saved or created” has become the signature phrase for Barack Obama as he describes what his stimulus is doing for American jobs. His latest invocation came yesterday, when the president declared that the stimulus had already saved or created at least 150,000 American jobs — and announced he was ramping up some of the stimulus spending so he could “save or create” an additional 600,000 jobs this summer. These numbers come in the context of an earlier Obama promise that his recovery plan will “save or create three to four million jobs over the next two years.”
The president should ‘save or create’ more jobs in Cleveland.

Mr. Fratto sees a double standard at play. “We would never have used a formula like ‘save or create,'” he tells me. “To begin with, the number is pure fiction — the administration has no way to measure how many jobs are actually being ‘saved.’ And if we had tried to use something this flimsy, the press would never have let us get away with it.”

Of course, the inability to measure Mr. Obama’s jobs formula is part of its attraction. Never mind that no one — not the Labor Department, not the Treasury, not the Bureau of Labor Statistics — actually measures “jobs saved.” As the New York Times delicately reports, Mr. Obama’s jobs claims are “based on macroeconomic estimates, not an actual counting of jobs.” Nice work if you can get away with it….Continue Reading

Even though, I don’t like the idea of politicians switching allegiance for personal power reasons, it would be just fine if two or three conservative U. S. Senators switched allegiance to save America from Obama’s march to socialism and to prevent further disregard of the “rule of law.”

Two Democrats in New York abandon ship, give GOP control of state Senate

By Michelle Malkin  •  June 8, 2009 04:56 PM

Eeenteresting (via City Room, hat tip–The Anchoress):

Republicans seized control of the New York State Senate on Monday, in a stunning and sudden reversal of fortunes for the Democratic Party, which controlled the chamber for barely five months.

A raucous leadership fight erupted on the floor of the Senate around 3 p.m., with two Democrats, Pedro Espada Jr. of the Bronx and Hiram Monserrate of Queens, joining the 30 Senate Republicans in a motion that would displace Democrats as the party in control.
Dean G. SkelosGiovanni Rufino for The New York Times Senator Dean G. Skelos, a Long Island Republican, would likely be the new majority leader if his party takes control….Continue Reading

Obama and Saul Alinsky march on.

Obama’s Enemies List Grows

Just having the appearance of someone who might possibly vote for an opponent of Barack Obama could land them on the President’s enemies list where proxies do the dirty work. Political appointees in the Justice Department killed a six-month investigation by career DOJ lawyers into the most blatant voter intimidation case in 40 years. Last November, jack-booted, uniformed, baton-wielding thugs from the New Black Panther Party calling themselves “security” obstructed a Philadelphia polling location and behaved in an intimidating manner toward white voters.

Days after dismissing charges against the menacing thugs, the Justice Department moved in the opposite direction by blocking responsible steps to stem voter fraud. The DOJ barred the administrative procedures Georgia authorities put into place – under federal court guidance — to verify voter registrations. The DOJ claimed the procedures violated the rights of minority voters.

A de facto Obama enemies list and dirty political machine have been expanding since last year. Obama has established several embarrassing presidential firsts including targeting private individuals by names, assigning a well-known “partisan dirt-digger” and non-lawyer to the White House Counsel’s Office to likely gain access to Bush Administration documents protected under attorney-client privilege, and moving the senior political advisor into the West Wing. These are heretofore unseen partisan practices….

….Two military psychologists who supervised the enhanced interrogation techniques that were used on only three terrorist leaders were publicly outed by Democratic Senator Carl Levin placing both doctors and their families in personal danger. The doctors’ identities had previously been kept under wraps.

Obama’s lawyers are attempting to financially ruin individuals party to the most absurd soap opera involving the 44th president. There is unabated controversy regarding his birth, citizenship and foreign travel. Obama could immediately silence his critics by authorizing the release of his original birth certificate and passport. One has to wonder what could possibly be in either document that has caused Obama to wage a fierce and expensive legal battle to keep the files secreted. Aside from Joan Rivers, nearly every American would willingly make their birth certificate available and Obama’s stubborn refusal to do so only adds to the controversy.

Petty personal politics, while damaging to the dignity of the White House, have allowed the Obama Administration to elevate political allies and their causes and denigrate valid critics…Continue Reading

Right Side of Life provides an update on Kerchner v Obama

Kerchner v. Obama: Court is “working on it”

Submitted by Phil on Mon, Jun 8, 2009

Mario Apuzzo, attorney for Plaintiffs in Kerchner v. Obama, had filed a Declaration Opposing Defendants’ Motion to Extend Time to Answer or Otherwise Move as to the Amended Complaint Returnable June 1, 2009 (a brief background can be found here). He posted an update concerning the status of this case today:

There are many who want an update on what is going on with the court in the Kerchner case. The court listed the defendants’ (Obama, USA, Congress, Senate, House, Cheney, and Pelosi) motion for a second extension of time to answer or otherwise move as to the amended complaint for June 1, 2009. Not receiving any decision from the court as of June 5, 2009, I contacted Judge Schneider’s law clerk on June 5, 2009. She advised me that the June 1, 2009 date was a tentative date, with the court being able to decide the motion either before or after the date. She told me that the defendants’ motion was still pending and that “they” were working on it. She was not able to give me any more specific information as to when we can expect a decision.

I know that many of you are frustrated and have lost faith in the integrity of our legal system….Continue Reading

Larry Sinclair continues to make progress on his book.

Monday, June 8, 2009

THE BOOK PROOFS SHOULD BE RECEIVED THIS WEEK

This is to inform you that the Book files went through the “Premedia” setup this morning at 8:27:49 AM and was accepted for printing of the “proofs” at 8:59:21 AM this morning. The turn around time for the receipt of the proofs is 3 to 5 days. The below information is directly from my printers.

We are in the home stretch on this one.

Title Setup Status History
ISBN: 978-0-578-01387-9

Title: Barack Obama & Larry Sinclair: Cocaine, Sex, Lies & Murder?

Author: Sinclair, Lawrence W

Title Submitted: 03/20/2009 01:40:48
Title in Premedia: 06/08/2009 08:27:49
BOOKBLK Accepted: 06/08/2009 08:59:21

allegiance

Obama – Gay Cover-Up – Michelle Obama – Larry Sinclair – Censorship – American Mediocrity

May 29, 2009

The BOPAC Report:

I looks like the latest addition of The Globe is out in some parts of the country!

From Larry Sinclair’s site and also Obambi.com:

Thursday, May 28, 2009

MICHELLE OBAMA :”Thats The Name of The Game, Discredit Larry Sinclair.

Get your copy of the latest issue of Globe Magazine on sale now at a Wal-Mart and Super Market near you for the whole story. Globe Magazine is more accurate in their reporting than the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, etc……

Below are some excerpts from the recent Globe Magazine article concerning Michelle Obama’s campaign to stop the book,
BARACK OBAMA & LARRY SINCLAIR:
Cocaine, Sex, Lies & Murder?

If Michelle Obama can intimidate book publishing companies with a few phone calls, what will happen when Obama has a like minded individual on the Supreme Court?  I never thought I would see the day when the publishing industry is leading the way to censorship.

Will the internet continue to be a forum for the free expression of opinion?  Maybe not. It seems Judge Sotomayor has little hesitancy in siding with the powerful in their efforts to punish a little girl’s “douche bag” comment on her blog.  Where’s the ACLU?  Will they oppose this nominee?

Sotomayor Ruled in “D-Bag Case” Ruled teen’s blog post created a created “foreseeable risk of substantial disruption”

By YVONNE NAVA and LEANNE GENDREAU

Updated 12:16 PM EDT, Thu, May 28, 2009

President Barack Obama’s nominee to fill a Supreme Court vacancy has yet another tie to Connecticut. She sided against a student in the infamous “douche bag” case, and that has upset some free-speech advocates.

//

In August 2007, Judge Sonia Sotomayor sat on a panel that ruled against an appeal in Doninger v. Niehoff.

Avery Doninger was disqualified from running for school government at Lewis S. Mills High School in Burlington after she posted something on her blog, referring to the superintendent and other officials as “douche bags” because they canceled a battle of the bands she had helped to organize.

The case went to court and in March 2008, Sotomayor was on a panel that heard Doninger’s mother’s appeal alleging her daughter’s free speech and other rights were violated. Her mother wanted to prevent the school from barring her daughter from running.

Sotomayor joined two other judges from the 2nd Circuit in ruling that the student’s off-campus blog remarks created a “foreseeable risk of substantial disruption” at the student’s high school and that the teenager was not entitled to a preliminary injunction reversing a disciplinary action against her, Education Week reports….Continue Reading

Recently, it was reported that mainly Chysler’s car dealerships whose owners donated to Republicans were the ones targeted to close. These actions sound a lot like the work of the mob silencing opponents – silencing political speech.  It seems that  the Obama Administration (with the help of their minions and the media) is continuously making  attacks (direct & indirect) on people who have taken positions opposed to the official narrative or have expressed opinions they want silenced. Larry Sinclair, Stanley Kurtz, Dr. Orly Taitz, Philip Berg, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Carrie Prejean, Justice Clarence Thomas, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, FOX and many others could give first hand experiences with Obama’s efforts to control what the public hears.

A free America… means just this: individual freedom for all, rich or poor, or else this system of government we call democracy is only an expedient to enslave man to the machine and make him like it.
Frank Lloyd Wright

By silencing opinions in opposition, the  masses will likely buy into the rhetoric and gladly put on the yoke of enslavement themselves. Ignorance is bliss, I suppose.  It amazes me that America’s march to enslaving its people by controlling information is being led by publishing companies.

How do they make them like it? Vilify others such as business, Republicans, Conservatives, and those who don’t tow the line – then make these evil “taxpayers” (the vast majority of those paying the bulk of taxes are much fewer in number than voters who receive some type of government handout) support the dependent masses who vote, give voters stimulus checks, hand out temporary government jobs, promise “good” government run health care, grant amnesty to illegals and make voters out of them too, etc.  In other words buy their votes and/or create dependency and help them forget and/or ignore America’s founding principles.  Welcome to the United States of Mediocrity!

Blame others, reward some and create victims.   It works for votes, but it is not sustainable and will bankrupt the country.

Update:  I just saw on Drudge the following headline:

Obama Offers Prime Posts to Those Who Helped Bankroll Campaign...

It fits in perfectly with the blame, reward, and create victims tactics of Chicago Politics. Change my left foot.

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.

NoQuarter Post – Obama Votes “Present” On Mortgage Reform

October 17, 2008

This excellent article about the Mortgage Crisis and Obama is found at NOQuarter:

Obama Votes “Present” On Mortgage Reform

In the Wall St. Journal,, Peter J. Wallison, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, argues that Senator Obama voted “Present” on mortgage reform when it counted:

In each of the first two presidential debates, Barack Obama claimed that “Republican deregulation” is responsible for the financial crisis. Most viewers probably accepted this idea, especially because Republicans generally do favor deregulation.

But one essential fact was missing from the senator’s narrative: While there has been significant deregulation in the U.S. economy during the last 30 years, none of it has occurred in the financial sector…

If Sen. Obama had been asked for an example of “Republican deregulation,” he would probably have cited the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (GLBA), which has become a popular target for Democrats searching for something to pin on the GOP. This is puzzling. The bill’s key sponsors were indeed Republicans, but the bill was supported by the Clinton administration and signed by President Clinton. The GLBA’s “repeal” of a portion of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 is said to have somehow contributed to the current financial meltdown. Nonsense.

Adopted early in the New Deal, the Glass-Steagall Act separated investment and commercial banking. It prohibited commercial banks from underwriting or dealing in securities, and from affiliating with firms that engaged principally in that business. The GLBA repealed only the second of these provisions, allowing banks and securities firms to be affiliated under the same holding company. Thus J.P. Morgan Chase was able to acquire Bear Stearns, and Bank of America could acquire Merrill Lynch. Nevertheless, banks themselves were and still are prohibited from underwriting or dealing in securities.

Our resident economics expert, Larry Doyle* agrees:

The repeal of Glass-Steagall (GLBA) is a total non-event in the midst of the current economic turmoil. What this repeal did was allow commercial banks to get more deeply involved with investment banking activities. Thus, JP Morgan, Citigroup, Bank of America were able to utilize their significant balance sheets and capital bases to become a force on Wall St. Fast forward ten years and it is those institutions that are now thankfully supporting and bailing out our system.

I asked Mr. Doyle to elaborate, to help make sense of the current situation regarding Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (“F/F”). This also serves to clarify Senator Obama’s ‘non-role’ in working to get us out of this mess and makes clear that John McCain actually stood up when he said he did:

Throughout the 90s and into the early part of this century, F/F were utilizing their significant lobbying power to gain an ever increasing portion of the overall U.S. mortgage market. They had the enormous advantage of being able to borrow at just marginally over U.S, government rates given the “implied” but not explicit backing of Uncle Sam. I mean come on that worst case scenario could never come to pass!!

While F/F were designed to provide liquidity to the market in the form of bundling mortgages into securities, charging a guarantee fee for return of principal to the investors in these Mortgage Backed Securities (“MBS”), and then selling the MBS into the private market, they decided to take a different path. What path was that? Given their ability to borrow at very cheap rates they decided to effectively grow their own internal portfolios. This business model was nothing more than a massively levered hedge fund under the guise of “helping the homeowner”.

In order to grow these portfolios, though, they needed more mortgages. Thus they went directly to the mortgage originators and worked with them to increase the mortgage terms and types that they would buy.

As Freddie and Fannie were executing this strategy, there were 3 groups that stood up and said that this activity was getting out of control. Who were they?? On Capitol Hill, Senator Richard Baker (R-LA) carried the torch. There were actually a number of large banks including Chase and Citi that formed a group called FM Watch that complained that Freddie and Fannie were taking market share from them in their own mortgage origination business. This group was conflicted because the investment banking arms of these institutions were pressured by Freddie and Fannie to quell their complaints or they would refrain from doing business with them. Lastly, the Wall St. Journal was vociferous in their complaints that these entities were getting out of control. Freddie and Fannie responded that they were merely trying to fulfill their mission of providing affordable rates to potential homeowners.

Well how was the impact of Freddie and Fannie on the overall mortgage rates that passed through to the consumer? A number of private studies put the “benefit” of Freddie and Fannie to the American homeowner at between 2 and 4 basis points. In layman’s terms, if a homeowner would have gotten a 6.75% rate then having Fannie/Freddie on the scene helped them get a 6.72% rate.

Now wait a minute, you mean the system was taking all that risk and F/F grew their internal “hedge fund” portfolios of north of 1.5 trillion for a benefit of 3bps. How does that work? Well, the benefits accrued to the shareholders and the executives including Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson.

And as we know, these two gentlemen have been linked to Barack Obama. More good judgment?

As this scenario played out, Senator Baker and then Senator McCain and other Republicans started to get up in arms about the enormous “systemic” risk that was developing. To be fair, Freddie Mac did work to root out the most egregious “predatory lending” that had been undertaken. That said, Freddie was the buyer of the bulk of sub-prime product in the market and without their bid the “overly aggressive” lending would not have taken place to the extent that it did. Fannie was the buyer primarily of Alt-A product which included a lot of the loans without full documentation.

Both F/F were effectively cooking their books. Freddie actually made more money than they were reporting (putting revenue away for future years) while Fannie had truly pathetic risk management and grossly overstated earnings. Both firms reporting of earnings were totally driven by “maximizing” executive bonus packages. Very simply, heads I win, tails you (meaning Uncle Sam and taxpayers) LOSE!!

Even in the midst of this, while Baker, McCain, the WSJ and others were railing on how these agencies were managed, regrettably the necessary regulations and oversights never got out of committee because the Democrats, primarily Sen. Chris Dodd, Sen. Chuck Schumer, and Rep. Barney Frank crushed it.

At this juncture, Barack Obama votes present. He was not willing to stand up to his party because he was in bed with Fannie/Freddie and was well on his way to being the second greatest beneficiary of their largesse only after Chris Dodd. To think that this crowd is now going to hold hearings to “review” this crisis is akin to the “inmates running the asylum!!

Continue Reading Article:

Comment:

The media continues to put out misinformation regarding culpibility for the financial crisis and Sen. Obama role.  Where are they? AWOL and in the tank for Obama at the cost of America.

The Media’s behavior is shameful. What about the allegations that Obama used cocaine and engaged in consensual gay sex with Larry Sinclair in November of 1999?   Will the MSM stop taking sides in the election and do their jobs? Will they investigate Mr. Sinclair’s allegations?  Will they dig into Obama’s past as hard as they have jumped on Sarah Palin? Will they look deeply into Obama’s relationships with William Ayers, Rev. Wright, Tony Rezko, Acorn, and all the rest? Will they look into the Democratic involvement in Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac failures? Will they call Sen. Obama to task for his possible violations of the Logan Act in Iraq and Kenya?

To find information the media is not telling the public, go to:

CitizenWells

Obambi

The Real Barack Obama

TexasDarlin

NoQuarter

ObamaCrimes

Andy Martin