August 29th, 2009 |
Impending Attack on Freedom of Speech This time on the Internet Excerpts from CNet.com: Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate bill proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet. They're not much happier about a revised version that aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, have spent months drafting behind closed doors. CNET News has obtained a copy of the 55-page draft of S.773 (excerpt), which still appears to permit the president to seize temporary control of private-sector networks during a so-called cybersecurity emergency.
"I think the redraft, while improved, remains troubling due to its vagueness," said Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, which counts representatives of Verizon, Verisign, Nortel, and Carnegie Mellon University on its board. "It is unclear what authority Sen. Rockefeller thinks is necessary over the private sector. Unless this is clarified, we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill." Rockefeller's revised legislation seeks to reshuffle the way the federal government addresses the topic. It requires a "cybersecurity workforce plan" from every federal agency, a "dashboard" pilot project, measurements of hiring effectiveness, and the implementation of a "comprehensive national cybersecurity strategy" in six months--even though its mandatory legal review will take a year to complete. Probably the most controversial language begins in Section 201, which permits the president to "direct the national response to the cyber threat" if necessary for "the national defense and security." The White House is supposed to engage in "periodic mapping" of private networks deemed to be critical, and those companies "shall share" requested information with the federal government. ("Cyber" is defined as anything having to do with the Internet, telecommunications, computers, or computer networks.) (Read the full article at CNet.news) Doug's Comments: Trust-Worthy-ness. So, what is so bad about this? Well, it seems like a good idea for the President to have the authority to shut down the internet in a national emergency ... like President Bush had the authority to shut down the Airlines during the 9.11 event. On the surface, a good security measure. The problem with this is Trust. The outrage is because many American People do not TRUST this administration. And why not? Giving this President the power to shut down the internet gives him the power to do it any time he likes since the "emergency" is not defined and seems purposely vague. Looking at the August 27, 2009 alert, one can see that the radio waves could be controlled by the government, and now the internet. If the people "trusted" this administration, there would be little said about this ... but people have learned quickly NOT to trust this administration. This was going to be an administration of fiscal responsibility, not true not true, one where the 2nd amendment rights would be protected, not true , one where a Supreme Court nominee would not "legislate" from the bench, not true. There are too many instances of this administration saying one thing and doing another. Example, the President wants to "look forward" and not prosecute the former administration for "atrocities" like interrogation of terrorists responsible for the deaths of 3000 Americans. Yet he "allows" his Attorney General to initiate such prosecution. Trust-Worthy (my definition: WORTHY of my TRUST). So the American People are finally learning that what is "said" by this administration is not "what happens." This is why there is doubt on whether this is an attempt at securing national security, or another attempt for the government to take control of the 1st amendment, voiding the Constitution. This President has stated that the Constitution is an impediment and that it is "fundamentally flawed" ... here is a way for the administration to circumvent the Constitution. When you hear the outrage over this proposal, what you are actually hearing is a lack of trust by the American public. Why should we TRUST this administration, when they have proven themselves not Trust-worthy. Any sitting President, or anyone who votes for such a man who believes the Constitution of the United States is "Fundamentally Flawed" cannot continue to call themselves an American. Where are the Democrats? What happened to the Democrats, there used to be quite a few of them? I can remember many of them voting for Bill Clinton. I disagreed with those people, but they were good people and I believe THEY believed they were correct ... that was "politics." This is different, this is a government takeover, this is pure (not speculated) Socialism. And I am surprised that the Democrats are not up in arms about what is happening before their very eyes today. Why would any party or group want to be associated with radicals and radical ANTI-Constitutional thinking? I'm listening for an answer from Democrats, but I hear silence. This administration is besmirching Democrats in a way that should not be allowed. A two party system, debate and discussion are all healthy signs of a healthy Republic. Proposing measures to silence the internet and control the content of radio programs is not a sign of a healthy Republic. Can the "silence" from the Democrat next door be interpreted as support for Socialism and the dismantling of the United States Constitution? Is this silence simply "Democrat Permission?" (Maybe they're not Democrats anymore? Maybe there are not any Democrats left ... maybe now they are all just "quiet" socialists? ... I still don't "hear" anything!) Its difficult to interpret silence, isn't it? If you cannot TRUST your government, then you begin to FEAR it. Remember the words of Thomas Jefferson: When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; When the government fears the people there is liberty." 
|
|---|
Flag |
History |
Reason Flown |
. |
 |
Alert Level GREEN Flown on US Holidays and special USA Days/Events. The flag is flown with reverence to the greatness of the U.S.A. ... and to the Republic for which it stood. Also flown when Liberty is upheld (a red ribbon added to the flagstaff). |
||
 |
Alert Level GREEN Flown on NON national holidays. Individual liberties are not being threatened, the Constitution is not under apparent attack today. (There is always "talk" ... so we are green if they just "talk." When that talk starts toward action, the alert goes yellow). |
||
 |
Alert Level YELLOW Flown when the national government puts an INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY or the CONSTITUTION at risk. Also flown when there is a risk of RE-Distribution of MY wealth. Flown when an idea that threatens Liberty is in the Discussion Phase. |
||
 |
Alert Level ORANGE Flown when an Individual Liberty, a Redistribution of MY wealth, or a fundamental of the Constitution is at risk and government preparations are being made for enactment. |
||
 |
Alert Level BLACK Flown when Tyranny is successful over Liberty. Flown when MY wealth has been redistributed, (taxes raised), etc. A black ribbon is added to the flagstaff. |
||
 |
Alert Level BLACK Flown when Tyranny is successful over Liberty. Something egregious has occurred that has taken away a PERSONAL LIBERTY or has besmirched a foundation of the Constitution. Black Ribbon Added to Flagstaff |
August 27th, 2009 |
Impending Attack on Freedom of Speech Here comes the "back door" Fairness Doctrine
The new FCC Associate General Counsel and Chief Diversity Officer Mark Lloyd will seek to reinstate a backdoor ‘fairness doctrine’, designed to silence conservative and Christian talk radio. Under the guise of ‘diversity’, they will pressure broadcasters to diversify ownership which will lead to drastic programming changes not consistent with marketplace demands, but with an ideological agenda. These backdoor FCC regulations will achieve the same goals as the misnamed ‘Fairness Doctrine’. Mark Lloyd has apparently expressed disturbing ideas against free speech in his guidebook for liberal activists on how they can use the FCC to threaten the licenses of stations airing conservative or Christian programming. Using insidious euphemisms like “media diversity” they can justify any and all infringements upon free speech — it’s only ‘diverse’ enough when they say it is. Moreover, Lloyd seeks to impose an annual FCC license fee equal to each station’s annual gross operating budget. This fee would go to fund public broadcasting stations, which will then air liberal programming. (No, which are ALREADY airing liberal programming, paid for by the tax papers ... NPR?) Lloyd has stated, “we call for ownership rules that we think will create greater local diversity…we call for more localism by putting teeth into the licensing rules.” The idea that Lloyd and others in government seem to be operating under, is if you can’t compete in a free market, use the power of government to harass, extort and shut down your competition.
ProteinWisdom: (Quiet picture above courtesy of ProteinWisdom) A Senior Fellow at the George Soros’ Center for American Progress, Mark Lloyd’s antipathy towards non-leftist participation in the public square is well known. He has written two anti-free speech hit pieces on “conservative talk radio” … a CAP “analysis” “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio” which never examines talk radio in the larger sphere as being the only alternative to Leftist dominated broadcast television (news and entertainment), newspapers, university and college campuses … and “Forget the Fairness Doctrine”, a whiney little piece where Lloyd tries to bare his teeth against people who oppose his conclusions in the first piece and defends his Trojan Horse plan to achieve his own STFU policy towards conservative talk radio with so-called “local diversity” objectives. This rails against the fact that the American people overwhelmingly prefer to listen to conservative (and Christian) talk radio rather than the liberal alternative, and suggests ways the federal government can remedy this free-market created "problem." "Localism" is a nebulous FCC regulatory requirement that radio stations must meet to get and keep their broadcast licenses. How it is defined and enforced is wide open to the interpretation of whomever is doing the enforcing. It can mean something benign like airing local public service announcements, or it can be used as a weapon by activists to punish, harangue and ultimately shut down stations they don't like.
In a follow-up essay to the CAP report entitled "Forget the Fairness Doctrine," Lloyd specifically instructs liberal activists to do the latter - use the "localism" requirement to harass conservative stations by filing complaints with the FCC. The FCC would then assess these stations fines, with the money going to (very liberal) public broadcasting.
Or worse - the FCC would rescind these stations' broadcast licenses. In other words, shut them up by shutting them down. Thus, as Lloyd says, no need for the mis-named "Fairness" Doctrine. The other part of our proposal that gets the dittoheads (i.e. Rush Limbaugh fans, meant here by Lloyd to more broadly refer to fans of all conservative talk) upset is our suggestion that the commercial radio station owners either play by the rules or pay. In other words, if they don’t want to be subject to local criticism of how they are meeting their license obligations, they should pay to support public broadcasters who will operate on behalf of the local community. Lloyd's instructions to Leftist activists are clear: use the FCC to pummel conservative talk radio. With fines, or entirely out of existence. And now Lloyd works for the FCC. CastTV: Apparently Hugo Chavez's glorious revolution is something to be admired in the Obama Administration. Obama seems to have no problem having Socialists and Communists in his Administration. So if you take Obama at his word with what he said during last years Presidential campaign, which was that you would be able know how he will govern on any one issue by the people that he surrounds himself with. So does that mean that Obama will strike up a loving relationship with Hugo Chavez? I think we should all give Obama a chance and see if he takes us down that Socialist road, and I mean way down it. For after all he was voted in by the people, was he not? We should just give him a chance. If we don't like it down that Socialist road, then we can just come right back to where we are today, right? It will be easy. All we have to do is to just turn around. Even a child could do it. What is everyone worried about? So let's do it. Let's fundamentally change America into something that is as foreign to us as a bath is foreign to a bum. Doug's Comments: What is continuing to disturb my peace of mind is that Obama is surrounding himself with the people he promised he would not be associated with during the presidency. We have avowed Communists (Van Jones), tax dodgers (Tim Geithner), black [religious] liberationists (Agusto Pinochets), the new FCC czar,, (Mark Lloyd) to be placed in these high positions with the ear of the President. This is looking like a "parallel" government ... one that is not "of the people," but one that is "appointed by a "Dear Leader." This is the kind of stuff they do in Banana Republics ... is that what we've become? What has happened to us that such people have the ear of the President of the United States? And now this appointment which is a back door, but direct, attack on the Freedom of Speech. If there is a crisis, this "parallel government" will be in "position" to seize power to "protect us." Damn the "free press" in the United States of America ... worthless journalism, when you have to rely on something like this web page for "mining" the news ... I'm an amateur ... where the hell are the pros?????????
| |
|---|---|---|
August 26th, 2009 |
A Sobering Financial Wake up Call We are FINANCIALLY going BROKE with Obama's Policies
Chart courtesy of Perot Charts Yesterday the White House released their Mid-Session Review admitting that President Barack Obama’s policies would force our nation to borrow more than $9 trillion over the next ten years. Commenting on the gap between the new $9 trillion number and the $7 trillion number the Office of Management and Budget used to sell President Obama’s budget to Congress, the Washington Post reports: The extra $1.9 trillion in red ink mainly reflects the Office of Management and Budget’s adoption of more realistic — that is, more pessimistic — estimates of economic growth and unemployment. White House officials protest that their original, rosier numbers made sense at the time; actually, plenty of forecasters, including those at the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, made more accurate calls. This situation was foreseeable and should have been acknowledged earlier. So the numbers demonstrate the "White House Officials" were WRONG! While it is good that the Obama administration is finally admitting that the fundamental assumptions driving their economic policy were wrong, the reality of our current budget deficit, and what President Obama’s policies threaten to do to our national debt over the next decade, are truly sobering. Heritage senior policy analyst Brian Riedl details the carnage: Since World War II, the largest budget deficit recorded was 6.0 percent of GDP in 1983. The Bush Administration oversaw budget deficits averaging 2.0 percent of GDP. The projected 2009 budget deficit of 11.2 percent of GDP would nearly double the post-war record. The 2009 budget deficit will be larger than all budget deficits from 2002 through 2007 combined. More than 43 cents of every dollar Washington spends in 2009 will have been borrowed. While President Obama claims to have inherited the 2009 budget deficit, it is important to note that the estimated 2009 budget deficit has increased by $400 billion since his inauguration, and the whole point of the “stimulus” was to increase deficit spending to nearly $2 trillion based on the unproven notion that would it alleviate the recession. So the Stimulus didn't work, did it!The 22 percent spending increase projected for 2009 represents the largest government expansion since the 1952 height of the Korean War (adjusted for inflation). Federal spending is up 57 percent since 2001. How's that hope and change working? ... still glad you voted for Obama because you are a "fiscal conservative." In 2009, Washington will spend $30,958 per household–the highest level in American history–and under President Obama’s budget, the figure will rise above $33,000 by 2019. The White House brags that it will cut the deficit in half by 2013. The President does not mention that the deficit has nearly quadrupled this year. Merely cutting it in half from that bloated level would still leave budget deficits twice as high as under President Bush. Obamanomics are just lies for the dumb masses. The public national debt–$5.8 trillion as of 2008–is projected to double by 2012 and nearly triple by 2019. Thus, America would accumulate more government debt under President Obama than under every President in American history from George Washington to George W. Bush combined. (Read this statement again!) And now for the real kicker: none of these numbers include the costs of Obamacare which would create another $1.5 trillion health care entitlement on top of our existing unsustainable entitlement obligations. The OMB’s Mid-Session Review should serve as a wake up call to the American people. President Obama’s policies are leading us down a path of unsustainable spending and borrowing. One must begin to wonder if the President is intentionally destroying the country, since the direction we are heading is clearly and now factually the wrong course. And one then needs to ask why? Is he finally doing what his friends like Bill Ayers failed to do when they bombed the Pentagon and called for the destruction of the USA?There is another choice. Not all future spending is inevitable. In the 1980s and 1990s, Washington consistently spent $21,000 per household (adjusted for inflation). Simply returning to that level would balance the budget by 2012 without any tax hikes. Alternatively, returning to the $25,000 per household level (adjusted for inflation) that Washington spent before the current recession would likely balance the budget by 2019 without any tax hikes. So with very little sacrifice, and no new taxes, the government could get its budget under control and the American economy could get fully back on track in three years. Isn’t that worth considering?
| |
August 21st, 2009 |
No Social Security $$ Increase until 2012 Collins Report: This is another important story being smothered by the Democrat controlled media. The Obama administration has quietly announced there will be no raise in social security payments next year and maybe not until 2012, a presidential election year. Citing a 2008 third quarter cost of living decline, Congress has voted no cost of living increase in next year’s Social Security checks for the first time since 1973. The Democrats are pointing to their own prediction of a “… [steady] decline in consumer prices through the first three quarters of this year…” Based on this they claim to foresee no need for raises until possibly 1212. (But I thought the stimulus was going to fix this!) Obama’s base will suffer the most. While 80% of our big cities voted for Obama it’s apparent the elderly, both White and minority, will be asked to “balance the budget” by themselves. There might not be any inflation but the Consumer Price Index (CPI) has risen steadily since January, and people are living by the CPI not the rate of inflation. Numbers show ignoring the CPI will crush elderly and minorities Using Gastonia North Carolina as a baseline for CPI, here are some comparisons with other centers where the population is White Black Hispanic elderly and overwhelmingly Obama supporters. In each of these Urban centers Obama got more than 80% of the vote but: Those living in New York City need 55% more to live than those in Gastonia. In Detroit they need 12% more; in Cleveland they need 10% more; Bostonians 25% more Chicagoans 10.7% more and Oakland Californians need 43% more than those in Gastonia The poor in these cities receive standard payments the same as everywhere else. The combination of no raise and a rising CPI will actually kill some of them. This seems to be exactly what Obama’s plan for making his plans appear to work. On top of these problems those who are newly signed up for Social Security during the next two years will pay more for Part B Medicare and everyone receiving Medicare Part D prescription drug benefits will pay more. The White elderly seem to be turning on Obama, but Black and Hispanic seniors will never follow them. They will continue to be dragged through the mud for the rest of time because they will never have the courage or good sense to let go of the Democrat level on Election Day. We have to get the word to all seniors whether they rely upon Social Security to survive or not. We have to tell them they have been fooled. Get the facts. Speak the truth and change some senior minds. America is depending on all of us. This from Coach Kevin at the Collins Report (Green Italics are my comments)
| |
August 11th, 2009 |
Remember the "random" choice of the little girl that spoke, giving Obama a perfect lead in for his discussion? CHECK THIS OUT So much for "random" .... nothing is "random" for this administration. Reprint from the Heritage Foundation The Morning Bell - (Sign up for Morning Bell HERE) Morning Bell: Obamacare Pep Rally Fact Check “I have not said that I was a single-payer supporter.” This is directly contradicted by candidate Barack Obama’s own website which quotes Obama at a rally in Ames, Iowa form 2008: “If I were designing a system from scratch I would probably set up a single-payer system. … So what I believe is we should set up a series of choices….Over time it may be that we end up transitioning to such a system.” So there you have in one paragraph the true purpose of Obama’s public option: a vehicle to slowly transition all Americans out of private coverage and into a government-run single payer health care system. This Trojan Horse view of the public option has been reaffirmed by Reps. Barney Frank (D-MA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Washington Post blogger Ezra Klein, and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman. “Under the reform we’re proposing, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.” This statement is also plainly false. Again, as demonstrated above, the true purpose of Obama’s public option is to move Americans out of their private coverage and into government run health care. Independent, non-partisan analysis from the Lewin Group has confirmed the House bill, H.R. 3200, will do exactly that: About 88.1 million workers would see their current private, employer-sponsored health plan go away and would be shifted to the public plan. “That’s what the health exchange is all about, is that you — just like a member of Congress — can go and choose the plan that’s right for you.” This statement is not false, but it is misleading. Members of Congress do purchase their health care through a health exchange: the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). Through the FEHBP 283 private plans compete for federal employees’ health care dollars. The Heritage Foundation has long been a supporter of health reform that empowers consumers to utilize a FEHBP like system. But Obamacare is nothing like the FEHBP system. There is no government run public option competing with private plans in the FEHBP. So whenever Obama says that a health exchange already “drives down costs” he is right … but remember that this cost reduction is achieved purely by private health coverage without any “competition” from a government run public option. “We have the AARP on board because they know this is a good deal for our seniors.” This is just plain false. The AARP released a statement late yesterday directly contradicting the President: “While the President was correct that AARP will not endorse a health care reform bill that would reduce Medicare benefits, indications that we have endorsed any of the major health care reform bills currently under consideration in Congress are inaccurate.” “I just want to be clear, again: Seniors who are listening here, this does not affect your benefits. This is not money going to you to pay for your benefits; this is money that is subsidizing folks who don’t need it.” Under the current system, more and more seniors are discovering that it is becoming harder and harder to find and keep doctors who will accept Medicare patients. A 2008 survey found that 29% of the Medicare beneficiaries it surveyed who were looking for a primary care doctor had a problem finding one to treat them. Obamacare will only make this problem worse by cutting $313 billion in Medicare reimbursements to health care providers over the next 10 years. This will only force more doctors to stop seeing Medicare patients. Obama also mentioned yesterday that he wants to pay for subsidized health care by killing the Medicare Advantage program. Medicare Advantage plans cover all of the traditional Medicare benefits and much more, including coordinated care and care-management programs for enrollees with chronic conditions as well as additional hospitalization and skilled nursing facility stays. 22% of all Medicare patients, which translates to 10.5 million seniors, are currently enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans. “I said I won’t sign a bill that adds to the deficit or the national debt. Okay? So this will have to be paid for.” That is a nice promise, but so was Obama’s October 2008 promise that he would enact a “net spending cut.” We all know how that has turned out. The reality is that the Senate still has not figured out how to pay for their bill and the House bill would increase the budget deficit by $239 billion over the next ten years. CBO director Doug Elmendorf has said: “In sum, relative to current law, the proposal would probably generate substantial increases in federal budget deficits during the decade beyond the current 10-year budget window.” “My belief is, is that [Obamacare] should not burden people who make $250,000 a year or less.” Both the House and Senate bills partially pay for Obamacare by imposing “employer mandates” or “pay or play” provisions that require employers to pay higher taxes if (a) they do not offer health insurance, or (b) they offer it but have employees who decline it and instead use the government system. Multiple studies have shown that such provisions cause both lower wages and lost jobs for low-income workers. And these are just some of the falsehoods and misinformation peddled by President Obama yesterday. It doesn't even include his choice to sell Obamacare as The “Post Office” of Health Care Plans. No wonder so many Americans are skeptical. JOIN Heritage.org HERE
| |
August 10th, 2009 |
The purchases will help accommodate growing travel demand by congressional officials. The planes augment a fleet of about two dozen passenger jets maintained by the Air Force for lawmakers, administration officials and military chiefs to fly on government trips in the U.S. and abroad. The congressional shopping list goes beyond what the Air Force had initially requested as part of its annual appropriations. The Pentagon sought to buy one Gulfstream V and one business-class equivalent of a Boeing 737 to replace aging planes. The Defense Department also asked to buy two additional 737s that were being leased. With your HOME budget, do you increase your spending when you run out of money? It is time for congress to start cutting back like we have to (scratch that ... LIKE WE ARE HAVING TO!). Time for some fiscal responsibility. ----------------------------Related Subject------------------------------ REUTERS CAPE CANAVERAL, Florida (Reuters) - NASA plans to use $50 million of federal economic stimulus funds to seed development of commercial passenger transportation service to space, agency officials said on Monday. Aspiring spaceship operators will have 45 days to submit proposals, which will be competitively evaluated. Awards for the Commercial Crew Development program are expected to be announced before the end of September. Our "stimulus" money to fund a "space taxi" program and BY SEPTEMBER???... no damned wonder the stimulus isn't working! ----------------------------Related Subject------------------------------ The deficit, grew by $181 billion in July! Yes, in one month, the deficit grew by $181 billion. TheHill.com: "Bailouts for financial firms and billions in tax revenue lost because of the recession drove the deficit to a record $1.3 trillion in July, according to the independent Congressional Budget Office (CBO)." Congress treats the American taxpayer like a buffet... Pelosi and Reid, you need to put yourself on a diet or we'll do it for you in 2010! - Lynn Marino STOP the DAMNED SPENDING, DEMOCRATS!!! No Mas!!! |
|
August 8th, 2009 |
AARP Walks Out on Seniors (Health Care)
Time to walk out on the AARP - Cancel your Membership HERE See them PHYSICALLY walk out HERE
Compliments Townhall.com Two things are important in the linked video. One is that AARP is "walking out" on Seniors, not only in meetings, but in their protection of seniors' rights. Their latest newsletter said they supported the President's Health Care Proposal. The lady in the video says they do not, and she is "called" for it ... causing her to leave the meeting. The second thing of importance is ... look at the people. Are these "organized right wing extremists" or are they senior citizens worried about their health care? There's no organization here by the 'big insurance companies' ... and I don't see any swastikas either. Judge for yourself. Washington Examiner: Not that there was any doubt about it, but a new email campaign by AARP's liberal Democrat-dominated Washington staff makes it crystal clear that the leadership of the 40-million member seniors group is going all-out for Obamacare and the House Democrats' version of it, H.R. 3200. (See the Email here) The email alert is especially interesting because AARP is a tax-exempt non-profit that is barred from participating in partisan campaigns, though it is allowed to do a limited amount of legislative lobbying of Congress. No doubt the AARP leadership in Washington will argue they aren't doing anything they aren't allowed to do as a 501(c)(4), but this new email campaign throws the spirit of the law right out the window. Wikipedia: According to its mission statement,[1] it is "a nonprofit, nonpartisan membership organization for people age 50 and over ... dedicated to enhancing quality of life for all as we age." |
|
August 7th, 2009 |
In the HOUSE BILL Page 65, Section 164. The wording sets aside $10 Billion for "eligible" health plans...for retirees. Not only that, it specifies retirees can be as young as 55 yrs old. There are very few non-union private companies offering retirement health care plans (they assume their retirees will be on Medicare). And they especially don't offer it at age 55. The Boston Globe has an article where they publish the letter from John Sweeny, (head of the AFL-CIO union), to members exhorting them to turn out at town hall meetings. In the letter he also lays out the unions' non-negotiable demands in the health bill. One of Sweeney's demands is: "...that the legislation contain "relief for company/union funds providing pre-Medicare RETIREE coverage" Remember when the UAW whined about the "deep concessions" their retirees made? Well here is Obama giving them that back, plus a few billion. My Comments: This demonstrates the deceit written into the Health Care Bill and the reasons why the Obama administration is rushing it through.This becomes a primary reason why NO LEGISLATION SHOULD HAPPEN until it is FULLY VETTED by the public. If people have time (and if there is real transparency) these kinds of "hidden meanings and paybacks" become clear to the general public who will be asked to pay for it and who will REFUSE. We have already "given" GM and Chrysler to the unions... now we have to pay for their retirement? Personally, not ONE MORE PENNY to them ... nobody is subsidizing MY retirement! (And they shouldn't!) Source: FreeRepublic
| |
August 6th, 2009 |
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 111th Congress - 1st Session as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate Vote Summary Question: On the Nomination (Confirmation Sonia Sotomayor, of New York, to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court ) Vote Number: 262 Vote Date: August 6, 2009, 03:03 PM Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Nomination Confirmed Nomination Number: PN506 Nomination Description: Sonia Sotomayor, of New York, to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States Vote Counts: YEAs 68 NAYs 31 Not Voting 1 (Kennedy) Republicans voting FOR Sotomayor were: Alexander(TN), Bond (MO), Martinez (FL), Lugar (IN), Gregg (NH), Graham (SC), Voinovich (OH), and Snow (ME). Republicans voting AGAINST Sotomayor were: Barrasso (R-WY) Bennett (R-UT) Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Burr (R-NC) Chambliss (R-GA) Coburn (R-OK) Cochran (R-MS) Corker (R-TN) Cornyn (R-TX) Crapo (R-ID) DeMint (R-SC) Ensign (R-NV) Enzi (R-WY) Grassley (R-IA) Hatch (R-UT) Hutchison (R-TX) Inhofe (R-OK) Isakson (R-GA) Johanns (R-NE) Kyl (R-AZ) McCain (R-AZ) McConnell (R-KY) Murkowski (R-AK) Risch (R-ID) Roberts (R-KS) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Thune (R-SD) Vitter (R-LA) Wicker (R-MS) My observation: Not ONE Democrat voted against this confirmation.
| |
August 5th, 2009 |
The Heritage Foundation: A Taste of Their Own Medicine. (Coburn Amendment #226) For many liberals in Congress, a new public health insurance plan, to compete against private health insurance, is an absolute “must” for health care reform. Virtually all independent analysts estimate that, given the special advantages of taxpayer subsidies and regulation, that the competition would be rigged, and millions of Americans with private health insurance today would be dumped by their employers into the new public plan. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) proposed an amendment that would require all members of Congress and their staffs to enroll in the newly created public health insurance plan. This means that they would be required to give up their private insurance coverage (nationwide there are 283 plans competing for federal employees’ dollars), which is today provided through the popular and successful Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). With many members of Congress openly willing to create incentives that would drive Americans out of their existing private coverage, Sen. Coburn put his colleagues to a test. Although 10 Senate Democrats voted against it, the Coburn amendment passed by one vote. Taxpayers should watch very closely whether this amendment is preserved or buried.
| |
August 3rd , 2009 |
Citizen Informants? Sound like 1939 Germany?
(Are you going to "turn in" my Web Page?) Black Ribbon Added AmericanThinker: In 1930's Germany, the new socialist government of Adolf Hitler (NAZI National Socialist Workers' Party) began indoctrinating children in the quasi-military organization, the Hitler Youth, to inform on their parents should they overhear discussions subversive to the policies of the Leader. As the noose was tightened, local community organizers were appointed to watch their neighbors and were told to report subversive comments to the bureaucrats above them. Neighbors informed on neighbors, some for reasons of patriotism or loyalty, some from fear. A modern inquisition ensued; a terror to free thought and expression. Increasingly harsh penalties were meted out to those who dared to dissent. The socialist governments of the Soviet Union, Fascist Italy, N. Korea, Cuba, Yugoslavia, and the People's Republic of China employed the same citizen informer techniques. Citizens of those societies were reduced to either silence or whispered discussion only among those they trusted the most. Of course none of those things would ever occur here in the land of the free. But wait... Now on the White House website posted by Macon Phillips comes an eerily similar request for citizens to inform on their neighbors. It states, "There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to the end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can't keep track of all of them here at the White House, we're asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov ." Note from Webmaster: Careful folks, the link is REAL ... if you are using Outlook Express you'll go right to the mailbox, if you are using GMAIL, COPY the link and PASTE it when you "Compose". Read this again carefully. The government of the United States is openly asking citizens to report rumors, the contents of casual conversation, and the contents of emails. They decry the fact that they are unable to "keep track" of the communication between citizens effectively and are asking for help from informers. Of course forwarded emails would contain the electronic addresses of the sender. Does this sound like the country you know (knew)? Are these the words of people who think of themselves as public servants, or is this something darker? Does a constitutional government tasked with protecting the rights of its citizens ask them to inform on each other to the White House?... Source: AmericanThinker "Designed to secure Liberty, the American government --- today under radical leftist control --- now views freedom as competition, and a threat. And as you exercise that liberty, the threat is you." Rush Limbaugh (Linbaugh Letter July) Update August 7th, White House Press Conference: Asked if the White House was "taking names." from the site, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said, “nobody is collecting names.”But When asked, Gibbs acknowledged that the White House is required by law to save all correspondence it receives.“Obviously, the National Archives documents correspondence with the White House,” he said. So, in outside-the-beltway speak, they are not "taking names" ... just "email addresses." =========================It is ILLEGAL!!! ======================= Fox News: The White House strategy of turning supporters into snitches when they see "fishy" information about the health care debate may run afoul of the law, legal experts say."The White House is in bit of a conundrum because of this privacy statute that prohibits the White House from collecting data and storing it on people who disagree with it," Judge Andrew Napolitano, a FOX News analyst, said Friday.
"There's also a statute that requires the White House to retain all communications that it receives. It can't try to rewrite history by pretending it didn't receive anything," he said. Napolitano was referring to the Privacy Act of 1974, which was passed after the Nixon administration used federal agencies to illegally investigate individuals for political purposes. Enacted after Richard Nixon's resignation in the Watergate scandal, the statute generally prohibits any federal agency from maintaining records on individuals exercising their right to free speech.
| |
August 3rd , 2009 |
The Glenn Beck Show (From Transcript) When a dealer is filling out the 30 page document required by the government for the Cash for Clunkers (CARS) program, as they begin to enter the information, a warning comes up from the DOT site on the dealer's computer: -----------------------------Warning----------------------------------- This application provides access to the DOT CARS system. When logged onto the CARS system, your computer is considered a federal computer system and it is property of the United States government. Any or all uses of this system, any or all uses of this system and all files on this system may be intercepted, monitored, recorded, copied, audited, inspected, and disclosed to authorized CARS, DOT, and law enforcement personnel as well as all authorized officials of other agencies, both domestic and foreign. By using this system, the user consents to such interception, monitoring, recording, copying, auditing, inspecting and disclosure at the discretion of CARS or the DOT personnel. --------------------------------If you agree, press I ACCEPT---------------------------- This makes the car dealer's computer a part of the "government system" and gives them full access to it. What will happen with Health Care? Once your information is put in so you can be covered by the 'public option' ... does the health care system's computers become part of the government system? So all records at a hospital could be reviewed and intercepted just as now can be done with the CARS system? (see also Aug 1, 2009) In the presently proposed bill, there is a provision for the government "making transactions with your bank account. It will use the "online banking" concept, meaning it can debit your account! (See page 58 of the proposed bill) Update Monday August 3rd 7 pm: "Glenn (Beck) calls out Cars.gov, Government removes warning from the web site." See Source HERE. Had this not been on Glenn Beck's Program, they would have never removed it. This from today's show, the Government issued a statement saying that the "federal warning" on the Cars.gov site had been removed. You can see Glenn Beck's video HERE. Talk radio is making the difference ... why didn't the main stream media outlets pick up on this? Why is it always talk radio? Update Aug 6 9:00 pm: WASHINGTON (CNNMoney.com) -- The Senate voted 60-37 passing a $2 billion extension of the popular Cash for Clunkers program Thursday evening, as lawmakers rushed to finish business before their August recess. |
|
August 2nd , 2009 |
American Thinker has this on Obamacare: The House version of the Health Care Bill is going to require (p 425-430) mandatory counseling for all seniors at a minimum of every five years, more often if the senior is sick or in a nursing home. Think they're over-reacting? See for yourself: Here is the section dealing with end of life counseling for seniors. HERE (CNSNews.com) - The House health-care reform bill proposes to decrease hospital visits by establishing a “medical home pilot program” for elderly and disabled Americans. Audio HERE for Audio from Fred Thompson Interview Defend Our Healthcare US ... SOURCE SITE for Health Care Plan |
|
August 2nd , 2009 |
1. Offended the Queen of England. 2. Bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia. 3. Praised the Marxist Daniel Ortega. 4. Kissed Hugo Chavez on the cheek. 5. Endorsed the Socialist Evo Morales of Bolivia. 6. Announced we would meet with Iranians with NO pre-conditions. 7. Gave away billions to AIG also without pre-conditions. 8. Expanded the bailouts. 9. Insulted everyone who has ever loved a Special Olympian. 10. Doubled our national debt. 11. Announced a termination of the space defense system the day after the North Koreans launched an ICBM. 12. Despite the urgings of his own CIA director and the prior four CIA directors, released information on intelligence gathering. 13. Accepted without public comment the fact that FIVE of his cabinet members cheated on their taxes and two others withdrew after they couldn't take the heat. 14. Appointed a Homeland Security Chief, Janet Napolitano, who quickly identified as "dangers to the nation," groups including Veterans Of The Military, and opponents to abortion on demand, and who ordered that the word "Terrorism" no longer be used but instead referred to such acts as "Man Made Disasters". 15. Circled the globe so he could openly apologize for America's greatness. 16. Told the Mexican President that the violence in their country was because of us. 17. Politicized the census by moving it into the White House from its Department of Commerce origins. 18. Appointed as Attorney General, Eric Holder, the man who orchestrated the forced removal and expulsion from America to Cuba of a nine-year old (Elian Gonzalez) whose mother died trying to bring him to a life of freedom in the United States. 19. Salutes as heroes three Navy SEALS who took down three terrorists in a boat who threatened one American life, and the next day announces that members of the Bush administration will likely stand trial for "torturing" one terrorist by pouring water up his nose, who had played a part in killing 3000 Americans on 9/11. 20. Allowed Air Force One to circle low over New York City for a photo op. 21. Sent his National Defense Advisor to Europe to assure Europe that the US will no longer treat Israel in a special manner and they might be on their own with the Muslims. 22. Began the process of nationalizing the Auto Industry and the Insurance Industry. 23. Announced that for all intents and purposes the Health Insurance Industry will be nationalized. 24. Denigrated a Police Officer for acting "stupidly" while trying to do his duty. |
|
August 1st , 2009 |
Doug's Comments: If there ever was a prototype for why Government Run Health Care will not work, this is the perfect example. Here is a "paltry" billion dollar program (pennies compared to other government programs) and it goes bankrupt in a couple of weeks, needing more money to continue. If the government can't run a little one like this, imagine what will happen if they try to run our health care. This is the proof we needed to demonstrate to everyone the disaster that WILL happen if we let THIS government take over our health care system. Every SEASONED CITIZEN in the country should be heading for the streets to keep this from happening , as it is a virtual death sentence for seniors. And how can you say it won't happen ... Cash for Clunkers DID FAIL and needed more money immediately. The example is a teachable moment. The difference, besides the magnitude, is that people will DIE. Doug Linn |
|
July 30th, 2009 |
(CNSNews.com) – Since the 1970s, some radical environmentalists have argued that trees have legal rights and should be allowed to go to court to protect those rights. This administration is being "filled" with all the crazies from the '60s. Czars are "unconstitutional" ... they are not regulated by Congress ... and Obama has more of them than any president. He seems to be setting up a "parallel" government (Shadow Government?). |
|
July 26th, 2009 |
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday voted to approve Sonia Sotomayor as the first Hispanic Supreme Court justice over nearly solid Republican opposition, paving the way for a historic confirmation vote. "I'm deciding to vote for a woman I would not have chosen," Graham said. Obama's choice to nominate the first-ever Latina to the highest court is "a big deal," he added, declaring that, "America has changed for the better with her selection." Source: Brietbart.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lindsey Graham has BETRAYED any Conservative Ideals he may have claimed during his recent campaign. This man is a Moderate Liberal ... he can no longer call himself a conservative and should be admonished by any conservative living in South Carolina. You can express your displeasure with his actions by writing him HERE. He should change parties and declare himself a Democrat. (Black Ribbon Prepared ... will fly at confirmation of Sotomayor) |
|
July 25th, 2009 |
OBAMACARE (Socialized Medicine) VOTE PENDING! (Orange Alert)
Congressman Mike Rogers on YouTube ... probably says it best HERE Washington, DC ... Nancy Pelosi is deciding to go forward with the House of Representatives vote on Obamacare. This is what they are voting for:
To see this chart better and its details ... come to the site below often, as the author changes the information as new information is discovered. CLICK HERE: JeffHead.com |
|
July 23rd, 2009 |
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said on Thursday the full Senate will debate and vote on healthcare overhaul legislation after it returns in September from a month long recess. Reid told reporters he expected the Senate Finance Committee would approve its version of the legislation before the Senate starts its recess August 7. "We'll come back in the fall," and work in the full Senate on the bill, he said. Source: Brietbart News ---America is waking up!!!!! Update: Aug 1, 2009 - House AND Senate votes put off until the fall!!! |
|
July 23rd, 2009 |
Liberty-Defying Wording in the Health Care Bill (Orange Alert) Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC bill – a Government committee (good luck with that!) will decide what treatments/benefits a person may receive.
Original Information from: Familysecuritymatters |
|
July 22nd, 2009 |
Alert - Building Energy Performance Labeling Program The program requires that states label their buildings so that we can all know how efficient every building (that includes residential and non-residential buildings) is and it requires that the information be made public. It's section 304 of the bill and it says, basically, that your house belongs to the state. To that end, the bill suggests a number of circumstances under which the states could inspect a building, including: (A) preparation, and public disclosure of the label through filing with tax and title records at the time of-- (B) other appropriate means.
Pay close attention to (iii), (iv), and (vi) because those hit you right where you live. What that's saying is the state will be empowered to inspect your home if you want to 1) renovate your house in any way that requires a building permit, 2) sell your house, or 3) change the name of the person responsible for any utility bill. HR2454 Text Here |
|
July 19th, 2009 |
Obama Justice Department Decision Will Allow Non-Citizens to Register to Vote in Georgia (Orange Alert) Atlanta - “The decision by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to deny pre clearance of Georgia’s already implemented citizenship verification process shows a shocking disregard for the integrity of our elections. With this decision, DOJ has now barred Georgia from continuing the citizenship verification program that DOJ lawyers helped to craft. DOJ’s decision also nullifies the orders of two federal courts directing Georgia to implement the procedure for the 2008 general election. The decision comes seven months after Georgia requested an expedited review of the pre clearance submission. “DOJ has thrown open the door for activist organizations such as ACORN to register non-citizens to vote in Georgia’s elections, and the state has no ability to verify an applicant’s citizenship status or whether the individual even exists. DOJ completely disregarded Georgia’s obvious and direct interest in preventing non-citizens from voting, instead siding with the ACLU and MALDEF. Clearly, politics took priority over common sense and good public policy. |
|
July 13th, 2009 |
Sotomayor Hearing - Confirmation of Empathy? (Yellow Alert) Today is scheduled to be introductions and opening statements from the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee as well as Sotomayor, with questions coming tomorrow. Justice will not be "blind" if this woman is nominated, she has demonstrated she intends to be empathetic ... and this is why Obama appointed her. |
|
July 11, 2009 |
Alert - Czar Appointments are NOT Constitutional (Yellow Alert) Do You Know Who These People Are and What Qualifications They Have to Hold the Authority they Do ? Show me WHERE in the Constitution the President is given the power (and funds ... without legislative approval) to appoint and pay for Czars. To See the latest list of Czar's (total at this writing of 31) Click on IReport |
|
July 10, 2009 |
Democrats Block Audit of Federal Reserve (Orange Alert) Senate Democrats blocked an amendment this week requiring transparency for the Federal Reserve. Watch the video of Sen. DeMint exposing Democrats for ducking the issue. (Why would the Democrats block an amendment that would tell us where the stimulus money is going? Could it be going to people who only support them?) Senate Conservatives Fund |
|
July 9, 2009 |
Border Fence Amendment Passes Senate - House may Strip It Out By a 54-44 vote, the Senate passed an amendment Wednesday offered by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) requiring the Dept. of Homeland Security to complete 700 miles of double-layered physical fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border by the end of next year. Sen. DeMint's amendment follows through on the three-year-old promise made by Congress to secure the border under the Secure Fence Act of 2006. To date, only a fraction of the promised double-layered physical fence has been completed. We expect liberal appropriators in both parties to try to strip this border security provision out of the bill when it goes to conference with the House. Please see how your Senators voted and encourage them to finish the fence. Senate Conservatives Fund |
|
July 8 2009 |
Missile Defense Shield / Europe - Scratched (Orange Alert) Obama is giving up the Missile Defense Shield for Europe to placate the Russians. How naive can this man be? Its like a shop owner disarming his burglar system because he now "trusts" the neighborhood that has been robbing him blind. This man is DANGEROUS for America! |
|
June1, 2009 |
Government takes over General Motors - (Black Ribbon Added) This is pure SOCIALISM, the government has now taken over the control of General Motors. Under the plan, the government would own 60% of the new GM, but Obama said GM execs would be calling the shots (remember, he fired the previous CEO for not calling the shots the way Obama wanted them called. |
|
May 30, 2009 |
Rule of Law Upheld - (Red Ribbon Added) Legal Contracts (Mortgages) cannot be changed by judges - S-896 Thanks to 12 (brave) Democrats, S-896 was defeated stopping a judge from re-deciding the value of a mortgage CONTRACT which would have set a precedent for any "contract" to be decided by the government even though legal signatures are on the contract agreeing to it originally. The Democrats voting NAY were: Caucus (MT), Bennet (CO), Byrd (WV), Carper, (DE), Dorgan (ND), Johnson (SD), Landrieu (LA), Lincoln (AR), Nelson (NE), Pryor (AK), Spector (PA), Testor (MT). Thank you to these people and the Republican votes for upholding LIBERTY. (Thomas Record Here) |
|
May 22, 2009 |
Constitution Upheld - 2nd Amendment - (Red Ribbon Added) As an amendment to the Credit Card bill, the right to carry in National Parks has been upheld. This formerly rescinded by President Obama's executive order, now signed into law by President Obama on 5/22/09. Reference: Thomas Register |
|
May 21, 2009 |
Liberty and National Security Sustained - (Red Ribbon Added) 90-6 Passage of HR 2346 Amendment AMENDMENT PURPOSE: To prohibit funding to transfer, release, or incarcerate detainees detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to or within the United States. The vote was overwhelming NOT to fund any transfer or release of terrorists held at Guantanamo Bay. Our national security was made safer by both Republicans and Democrats. Reference: Thomas Register |
|
May 20, 2009 |
A Liberty Lost - (Black Ribbon Added) National C.A.F.E. Standards By order of the President The government, having taken over direction of the auto companies, now has the power to decide for us what kind of car we will have a "choice" of buying in the future. The new standards are for 2 reasons: (1) Reduce Pollution - (2) Save Energy, reduce foreign dependence on oil (1A) The same, and sometimes more stringent, standards are already in place in California. There has been no change in air pollution there, the problems of smog remains. Their "lead" has led us nowhere. - (2A) We have energy here in the United States which the ENVIRONMENTALISTS will not let us access. We need to be increasing the access to the domestic energy supply for the future growth of America. The Government should NOT be making our choices for us. 545 people in congress are NOT smarter than 300 million plus! ... and THERE IS NO MAN-MADE GLOBAL WARMING! Reference: Heritage.org |
|
May 06, 2009 |
Rule of Law Ignored - Chrysler - (Black Ribbon Added) Hedge fund bondholders (investors like you and me) risked their capital to aid Chrysler with a return promise of being guaranteed that if bankruptcy occurred, they would be "first in line." This CONTRACT was broken by the administration which means the rule of law was totally disregarded. When a "White House Spokesman" was asked where the $7 billion in Stimulus funds went, the answer was ... "it is gone." This was a payback to the UAW for voting for Obama, their retirement funds remain the same, but bondholders and taxpayers are left holding the bag. This is an egregious loss of Liberty and a perfect example of Tyranny. CNN Link Here ... and how did the UAW get 55% of Chrysler in this deal when they only owned 10% of the stock? White House Puts UAW ahead of Property Rights | |
May 5th 2009 |
11 % Reduction in Social Security - (Black Ribbon Added) Democrats promised no reduction in Social Security and campaigned that the Republicans would reduce Social Security and the Democrats would protect it. Not True, but 67% of seniors fell for it again. | |
April 26, 2009 |
9th District Upholds 2nd Amendment - (Red Ribbon Added) The 9th District Court upheld the validity of the 2nd Amendment ... a surprise for the very "liberal 9th Circus Court" (California area). |
|
March 14th, 2009 |
$3.5 Trillion Dollar Budget Approved - (Black Ribbon Added) Congress has approved the $3.5 TRILLION dollar budget proposed by President Obama. |
|
March 11, 2009 |
Omnibus Bill is Passed by Congress - (Black Ribbon Added) This bill had 8000 earmarks, both REPUBLICAN and DEMOCRAT! |
|
March 30, 2009 |
President forces GM CEO's Resignation - (Black Ribbon Added) The government can now decide WHO will be the CEO of a major corporation. This is Fascism at its best. |
|
March 9, 2009 |
Stem Cell Executive Order - (Black Ribbon Added) President Obama, by Executive Order, has reinitiated stem cell research. |
|
March 6, 2009 |
$74 Billion Dollar SCHIP Bill PASSED - (Black Ribbon Added) During the administration of George W. Bush, two attempts to expand funding for the program failed when Bush vetoed them. In February 2009, President Barack Obama signed legislation expanding the program to an additional 4 million children and pregnant women, including for the first time legal immigrants without a waiting period. On February 4 2009, President Obama signed Children's Health Insurance Reauthorization Act of 2009. |
|
March 1st, 2009 |
Trillions for Stimulus Bill!! - (Black Ribbon Added) The Stimulus bill of 2009 was passed. This Bill was for "shovel ready" job creation and to stimulate the economy. Its purpose was to keep unemployment under 8% Update: July, 2009 ... Unemployment is up to 9.5% and congress doesn't know where the stimulus money went. |
|
March 7, 2009 |
No "Legal Carry (guns)" in National Parks - (Black Ribbon Added) President Obama signed an Executive Order banning the legal carry of firearms in National Parks. Update: This was overridden by a bill signed on 5/22/2009.
|
|
Jan 23 , 2009 |
Tax Dollars for International Abortions - (Black Ribbon Added) F.O.C.A. passed giving OUR tax dollars to international organizations for abortion. This was done without MY permission of how to spend this money!
|
|
Jan 23 , 2009 |
Updated: August 10, 2009 (It doesn't go away!) August 10: Its not about the "birth certificate" anymore. It is about honesty and integrity. Why, if there is nothing to hide why does President Obama continue to pay legal fees to block his submission of records? Source: WND President Obama may be using his political action committee funds to stomp out eligibility lawsuits brought by Americans, as he has paid more than $1.35 million to his top lawyer since the election. Obama for America, Obama's 2008 political campaign, merged with the Democratic National Committee in January and is now known as Organizing for America. The grassroots army that some refer to as "Obama 2.0" is still collecting financial contributions. Federal Election Commission records for "Obama for America" show that the lobby organization has paid international Perkins Coie exactly $1,352,378.95 since the 2008 election. August 2nd: Obama: The Missing Records These are the records that are not being made available to the public. Almost $1,000,000 in legal fees have kept these records "unavailable". Why?
01 Kindergarten Records from Noelani Elementary School 66-67 Source: WorldNetDaily The indisputable fact is that Obama has not released his birth certificate (nor any of the above records). The State of Hawaii issues these for all of its citizens, why not Obama? Instead, his campaign has only released his certificate of live birth from the state of Hawaii, which is a document that offers a summarized version of the birth certificate. During the 2008 presidential campaign, GOP nominee Sen. John McCain quickly released his birth certificate when liberal bloggers raised questions about his eligibility to be president. McCain was born at a military hospital in Panama. Obama could likewise put the matter to rest by releasing his actual birth certificate, which would show, among other things, the place of his birth and the doctor who performed the birth procedure. This information is not provided on the certificate of live birth. As it stands, Obama is the only president in history whose birthplace is unknown to the public – a fact that would be stated on the actual birth certificate. Interestingly, his family has mentioned two different hospitals in Hawaii as the place of birth. The fact that Obama has refused to release his actual birth certificate does not mean conspiracy theorists are right when they claim he was born in Kenya and therefore not eligible to be president. Investigators who have reviewed the claims have found no evidence Obama was born outside of Hawaii. But Obama’s refusal to release his birth certificate does mean that Obama remains one of America’s most mysterious and opaque presidents ever. Among the key documents that continue to be shielded from the public by Obama: Obama released just one brief document detailing his personal health. McCain, on the other hand, released what he said was his complete medical file, totaling more than 1,500 pages. Obama’s campaign refused to give Columbia, where he earned an undergraduate degree in political science, permission to release his transcripts. Former President George W. Bush and presidential contenders Al Gore and John Kerry all released their college transcripts. Obama did not release records from his time at Harvard Law School. During the presidential campaign, McCain’s campaign released a full list of all online donors. Obama’s campaign still has not released the names of those who donated at least one-third of the $750 million he raised. Ironically, Obama accused the Bush White House of being "one of the most secretive administrations in our history," and chided then-Sen. Hillary Clinton for not releasing her White House schedules. Source: Newsmax.com
|
Source
