DR. JAMES HANSON IS A SCUMBAG LIAR LIKE AL GORE

This man is out of his mind. No coal to heat our homes with, no coal? People will not be able to pay for their heating bills as without coal there is not an alternate and the MESSIAH is wanted to pass a new tax on energy companies that will of course be passed on to consumers. We have a mad man in the whitehouse that is trying really hard to appease every damn group out there with a cause. It is these groups that have caused so many problems for America as a whole and now we have a commander n thief that is robbing us.
WE THE PEOPLE NEED TO STAND UP AND SPEAK LOAD TO THAT ONE AND TO THESE DAMN GROUPS THAT ARE TRYING SO VERY HARD TO BRING AMERICA DOWN. DAMN THEM ALL AND THE DONKEYS THEY RODE IN ON.












NASA's Climate Chief Calls for Civil Disobedience by Warming Advocates
NASA's chief climate scientist is fending off criticism from colleagues and at least one lawmaker after calling on citizens to engage in civil disobedience at a recent global warming protest.

NASA's chief climate scientist is in hot water with colleagues and at least one lawmaker after calling on citizens to engage in civil disobedience at what is being billed as the largest public protest of global warming ever in the United States.

In a video on capitolclimateaction.org, Dr. James Hansen is seen urging Americans to "take a stand on global warming" during the March 2 protest at the Capitol Power Plant in Southeast Washington, D.C.

"We need to send a message to Congress and the president that we want them to take the actions that are needed to preserve climate for young people and future generations and all life on the planet," says Hansen, who has likened coal-fired power plants to "factories of death" and claims he was muzzled by the Bush administration when he warned of drastic climate changes.

"What has become clear from the science is that we cannot burn all of the fossil fuels without creating a very different planet. The only practical way to solve the problem is to phase out the biggest source of carbon — and that's coal."

• Click here to visit FOXNews.com's Natural Science Center.

But critics say Hansen's latest call to action blurs the line between astronomer and activist and may violate the Hatch Act, which prohibits federal employees from participating in partisan political activity.

"Oh my goodness," one of Hansen's former supervisors, Dr. John Theon, told FOXNews.com when informed of the video. "I'm not surprised ... The fact that Jim Hansen has gone off the deep end here is sad because he's a good fellow."

Theon, a former senior NASA atmospheric scientist, rebuked Hansen last month in a letter to the Senate's Environment and Public Works Committee, saying Hansen had violated NASA's official position on climate forecasting without sufficient evidence and embarrassed the agency by airing his claims before Congress in 1988.

"Why he has not been fired I do not understand," Theon said. "As a civil servant, you can't participate in calling for a public demonstration. You may be able to participate as a private citizen, but when you go on the Internet and call for people to break the law, that's a problem.

Officials at the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, which investigates possible Hatch Act violations, disagreed, saying Hansen is in the clear since it's an "issue-oriented activity," according to Hatch Unit attorney Erica Stern Hamrick.

The majority of federal government employees are allowed to take an active part in political activities, while workers at other departments like the FBI, Secret Service and National Security Council are subject to more restrictions on their political activities.

NASA spokesman Mark Hess also defended Hansen.

"He's doing this as a private citizen on his own time and there's nothing wrong with that," Hess told FOXNews.com. "There's nothing partisan here. You don't give up your rights to free speech by becoming a government employee."

Matt Leonard, a project coordinator for Greenpeace, one of more than 90 organizations endorsing the protest, said several thousand people are expected to participate and "peacefully disrupt operations" at the plant just blocks from Capitol Hill.

Participants are willing to "put their bodies on the line to stop climate change," including risking arrest, Leonard said.

"Our intention is to completely surround the facility, basically sending a message that these types of power plants can't be a part of our future," Leonard said. "They're destroying our environment."

Hansen will be in attendance and is expected to speak at the "completely nonviolent, peaceful" protest, Leonard said.

Meanwhile, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., urged Hansen to rethink his plans.

"If he wants to have a demonstration concerning global warming, coming to the Capitol is not a right choice," Rohrabacher told FOXNews.com. "The bottom line is if Hansen wants to protest global warming, he should go to the National Cathedral and take it up with God rather than going to Capitol Hill."

Rohrabacher, a member of the House's Committee on Science and Technology, called on Hansen to "step out" of his role.

"He obviously doesn't feel comfortable with the restraints that come with being a scientist rather than a political activist," Rohrabacher said. "Most of us have always thought he has been hiding behind a scientific facade, and really, he was a political activist all along."

Chris Horner, author of "Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud, and Deception to Keep You Misinformed," also denounced Hansen's latest call to arms against climate change.

"He's providing ample cause to question his employment on the taxpayer dime," Horner told FOXNews.com. "He's clearly abused his platform provided to him by the taxpayer, principally by the way he's been exposed of manipulating and revising data with the strange coincidence of him always found on the side of exaggerating the warming."

Horner claimed that Hansen doctored temperature data on two occasions in 2001 and once in 2007 in attempts to show an impending climate catastrophe.

"He's creating an upward slope that really wasn't there," Horner said. "At some point you have to say these aren't mistakes."

Hansen, who did not respond to repeated requests for comment on this story, was most recently honored for his work last month with the 2009 Carl-Gustaf Rossby Research Medal, the highest honor bestowed by the American Meteorological Society.

"Jim Hansen is performing a tremendous job at communicating our science to the public and, more importantly, to policymakers and decision-makers," Franco Einaudi, director of the Earth Sciences Division at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, said in a press release.

"The debate about global change is often emotional and controversial, and Jim has had the courage to stand up and say what others did not want to hear. He has acquired a credibility that very few scientists have. His success is due in part to his personality, in part to his scientific achievements, and in part to his refusing to sit on the sidelines of the debate."

Former Vice President Al Gore, who toured with Hansen while promoting "An Inconvenient Truth," did not return repeated requests for comment for this article.

Capitol Climate Action
“I can’t understand why there aren’t rings of young people blocking bulldozers and preventing them from constructing coal-fired power plants.” - Al Gore


Coalition Response to Call for Switch to Natural Gas at Capitol Power Plant
Capitol Climate Action Day, Biggest Civil Disobedience on Climate in U.S. History, to Go Forward
Today, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Leader Harry Reid released a letter asking the Capitol Architect to switch the Capitol Power Plant from coal to 100 percent natural gas by the end of 2009. Pelosi and Reid’s call comes just three days before more than 2,500 people from across the country are coming to converge at the power plant for the biggest civil disobedience on climate issues in U.S. history. Prior to the announcement of the Capitol Climate Action, pro-coal legislators had been able to prevent the switch from coal to natural gas.

“Speaker Pelosi and Leader Reid’s dramatic action shows that Congress can act quickly on global warming when the public demands it,” said Greenpeace Deputy Campaigns Director Carroll Muffett. “This move demonstrates that they recognize the urgency of the climate crisis and the need for a switch to cleaner energy sources.”

“The more than 2,500 people coming to Washington to call for a solution to the climate crisis and an end to the use of coal are still coming because the climate is still in crisis and coal is still driving that crisis,” said Michael Brune, Executive Director of the Rainforest Action Network. “Today’s move reflects Congress’s growing awareness that the public is demanding change.”

“Speaker Pelosi and Leader Reid today showed the power of grassroots action,” said Mike Tidwell, executive director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. “That grassroots action is going to continue until Congress passes legislation that solves the climate crisis.”

For more information on the Capitol Climate Action, global warming, and coal, visit www.capitolclimateaction.org . The initial rally for the Capitol Climate Action will meet on March 2nd at 1:00pm in Spirit of Justice Park (C St. SW and Capitol St SE, two blocks west of Capitol South Metro).

Pelosi and Reid’s letter is available at .
http://speaker.house.gov/newsroom/pressreleases?id=1028

OBAMA & FRIENDS ARE SUCKING US DRY~NEW GAS TAX COMING

Panel: Raise Gas Tax, Charge Drivers by the Mile
A special commission created by Congress says the current 18.4 cents a gallon gas tax and 24.4 cents a gallon diesel tax are not raising enough money to keep pace with transportation costs.

WASHINGTON -- Raise federal gasoline taxes to help pay for road projects?

Not during a recession, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has said.

Then how about moving toward a system that finances highway construction by charging motorists by the mile?

When LaHood suggested last week that be considered among other potential financing schemes, he got bushwhacked by the White House. "It is not and will not be the policy of the Obama administration," the president's press secretary said.

With the administration's position seemingly clear, a special commission created by Congress is nonetheless endorsing those two ideas.

Its report Thursday warns that if government fails to find a new way to raise money, "we will suffer grim consequences in the future: unimaginable levels of congestion, reduced safety, costlier goods and services, an eroded quality of life, and diminished economic competitiveness as a nation."

The National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission says the current 18.4 cents a gallon gas tax and 24.4 cents a gallon diesel tax are not raising enough money to keep pace with the cost of highway, bridge and transit projects. The commission proposes lifting the gasoline tax by 10 cents per gallon and the diesel tax by 15 cents per gallon, and adjusting both for inflation.

The report also says fuel taxes increasingly will become a less reliable way to pay for highway construction as people drive more fuel efficient vehicles and the number of electric and alternative fuel cars and trucks grows.

Last fall, Congress transferred $8 billion from the general treasury to the highway trust fund to make up for a shortfall between revenue and money promised to states for highway projects.

Last week, LaHood said in an interview with The Associated Press that a vehicle-miles-traveled tax was an idea that should be considered to shore up the trust fund.

The report recommends moving to such a tax, which would mean equipping cars and trucks with a device that uses GPS technology to track the number of miles driven and compute the tax owed. The amount could be adjusted to charge more for travel during peak traffic hours.

Commission members said the transition to a national system would take about 10 years.

The concept was tried in a pilot program in Oregon. Idaho's governor is talking about it. A North Carolina panel suggested in December the state start charging motorists a quarter-cent for every mile as a substitute for the gas tax.

A tentative plan in Massachusetts has drawn complaints from drivers who say it's an Orwellian intrusion by government into the lives of citizens. Other motorists say it eliminates an incentive to drive more fuel-efficient cars because gas guzzlers will be taxed at the same rate as fuel sippers.
Advocates said the tax is environmentally friendly because it encourages motorists to drive less and that technology solutions are available for any privacy concerns.

Commission member Geoffrey Yarema, a Los Angeles transportation lawyer, said the commission examined more than 40 types of funding schemes before arriving at a consensus that a mileage-based system makes the most sense.

"If someone else can come up with a solution that achieves the goals we all know need to be achieved and is more politically acceptable, that's great. But we haven't seen that alternative and we tried hard to find it," Yarema said.

Yarema said he isn't discouraged by the White House's rejection of a mileage-based tax.

"I say let's wait and see," Yarema said. "We're all looking for solutions and I'm sure the Obama administration will be looking for solutions as well."

Rick Santelli and the "Rant of the Year" THANK YOU RICK

Rick Santelli and the "Rant of the Year" THANK YOU RICK
An instant classic...rick captures the mood of the country

Alan Keyes rightly calls Obama a radical communist

Alan Keyes was a featured speaker at a fundraiser for the Triple A Crisis Pregnancy Center in Hastings, Nebraska, on February 19, 2009, where a reporter from KHAS-TV interviewed him about his thoughts on Obama. With conviction, Alan firmly stated that Obama is a radical communist (which he is) and a usurper (which he has done since he hasn't produced an original birth certificate). And that Obama supports infanticide--the killing of babies born alive after botched abortions.

"Obama is a radical communist and I think it is becoming clear. That is what I told people in Illinois and now everybody realizes it is coming true. He is going to destroy this country and we are either going to stop him or the United States of America is going to cease to exist," said Keyes.

The story was later picked up by Keith Olberman (the scumbag)of MSNBC who spent time on the show calling Alan Keyes names in order to diminish the importance of what Alan said. Alan must have hit a nerve. Go Alan!

OBAMA WILL BANKRUPT THE COAL INDUSTRY AND TO HELL WITH CONSUMERS

Obama could care less about consumers. All he wants is TAX MONEY TAX MONEY TAX MONEY AND HE WILL DO ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING TO GET IT. The majority of homes in this country are heated by coal powered electric plants and the like. He claims that consumers will be able to pay for the increases in thier power and heating bills with the savings in their paychecks. If you get a savings then it want be a savings, it will go out the door in the way of increased expense to you the consumer to pay the increase in your bills.
Now, this increase can be covered by people that work, but what about people who are disabled and don't work and only have thier disability checks to pay bills with and what about people who are retired and no longer file a tax return. THEY WILL BE SCREWED AND SO WILL TAXPAYERS.
The man is a power hungry scumbag. What the hell have voters in this country done ?
Obama just says "kiss my butt" if you don't like it.











Obama Said He Would Bankrupt the Coal Industry
Sara Goss

From a San Francisco Chronicle interview on January 17, 2008 with then candidate Obama regarding the coal industry:

Let me sort of describe my overall policy.

What I've said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else's out there.

I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, imposed every year.

So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted.

President Obama's first budget proposal includes $75 billion in tax revenues by 2012 from a cap-and-trade system that requires companies to buy credits if they exceed greenhouse gas limits. We don't have to guess which utilities this targets because POTUS told us last year: coal. This is part of his plan to bankrupt the coal industry.

The unintended (or intended?) consequence comes from the companies pass their costs to consumers principle: companies don't absorb costs, they pass them on to the consumer. How long will it be before the electric bills in areas where coal is the main provider of electricity are doubled or tripled? What is the consumer going to do? Switch power company providers? This isn't an option. These are monopolies. The consumer has no other choice.

Sadly, the administration feels that they can raise taxes and fees on companies and say that they're not hurting anyone. What you'll never see in the MSM is the observation that companies take these additional costs and pass them on to the consumer, you and me. So, when the administration raises taxes and imposes fees on business, they're really raising taxes and imposing fees on you and me, all of us, regardless of our income bracket. Don't look for that in the MSM.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/02/obama_said_he_would_bankrupt_t.html

LISTEN UP REPUBLICANS...HOW OBAMA WON THE PRESIDENCY

IT IS A TRADEGY THAT OBAMA WON THE PRESIDENCY BECAUSE NOW HE IS SCREWING US ROYALLY. Our country will not be as it once was for years to come. There is still hope that he will only be a 1 term president. I am praying this will be the case. Republicans are going to have to work 3 times as hard as all the Obama people worked to achieve this. It will not be an easy task but it can be done. YOU are going to have to be willing to volunteer some of your time to accomplish the take back our country however.

The attitude that your vote want count will not work. You have to be confident and determined in your efforts. Never give up, never lay down and just accept what is happening in AMERICA today.

We will take back our country. Sooner than later I hope if we all stick together and do something about it. Go to the GOP website and email them and ask them what you can do to help. Tell them what you can do and how much time to can give to them. I know that republicans in the house and senate made mistakes in the past and they are paying for those mistakes now. They have a new leader now in Michael Steele whom I think is a really good man. I know if republicans ban together and just try that we can take AMERICA BACK.

http://www.gop.com/Connect/ContactUs.htm



How He Did It: A Diagrammatic Analysis of the Obama Campaign

"All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and schizophrenia." ---George Orwell.

The audacity and speed with which Obama railroaded the stimulus bill through Congress took Republicans by surprise. It shouldn't have; it was a logical extension of his campaign tactics.

Like the spear-carrying soldiers of Ethiopia, overwhelmed by Mussolini's tanks and poison gas in 1936, the Republicans simply don't know what hit them in last year's election. Some felt that they had conducted an old-fashioned 20th century campaign while Obama mounted the first truly information-age 21st century political blitzkrieg. Others blame the blatant media bias, the race issue, or the unprecedented scale of fund raising and spending.

The first month of Obama's regime has provoked a similar bewilderment. A dazed Congress hastily authorized a huge document, filled with hidden booby traps like RAT, that none of them had actually read, let alone comprehended. Republicans are now cowering in corners, wondering what atrocity will come next

Anyone hoping to launch a successful counterattack must first analyze Obama's campaign and assess the factors that contributed to its success. To assist in such efforts, I have constructed a block diagram [1] of the post-nomination campaign's components, interactions, and successive stages [2]. A study of this diagram will, I think, reveal interactions that are too complex to be sorted out and comprehended from a verbal description alone.

The Diagram














The diagram is colored according to the phases of the campaign, which, like a military campaign, can be divided into the resources provided by the terrain, available forces and weapons, strategy and tactics, and objectives to be taken [3].

The resources, which Obama, or any other black liberal candidate, had to start with, were:

voter dissatisfaction with the prolonged war and the economy, which the Democrats had for years redirected and focused on George Bush,
the decades-long liberal domination of our education system and the consequent liberalization of the last two generations of the voting public,
the consequent liberal bias of the media, with regard to both journalists and entertainers,
traditional liberal guilt about racism,
the racially polarized outlook of the US black community and its radical leaders; an asset which any black candidate could count upon,
liberal special interest groups, such as the gay rights and abortion lobbies, and especially the financial, strategic, and organizational support of George Soros and the numerous political action organizations he controls, such as Acorn and MoveOn, and
experience and contacts with corrupt political machines such as (in Obama's case) the Daley organization in Chicago.
The forces and weapons that Obama had at his disposal, both from his personal attributes and from his access to the above resources, included:

his own personality and image as a young talented black liberal,
his consequent value to the media as a "hot" newsworthy topic,
his consequent personal attractiveness to the liberal elite in politics, journalism, entertainment, and finance; in particular, his suitability for backing by George Soros, who may well have been the eminence grise of Obama's campaign-the "man behind the curtain", as he has often been characterized,
this popularity, in conjunction with his persuasive and oratorical skills, gave him the opportunity to raise abundant campaign funds, which in turn caused Democratic party leaders to look favorably upon him,
the effect of his image {i.e. youth, dramatic appeal, charisma, and assuagement of guilt about racism) in arousing an enthusiasm that his revivalist style of oratory encouraged and amplified,
for the same reasons, his persona and newsworthiness, which induced journalists to give him favorable media coverage to the point of blatant bias,
in addition to these external advantages, his experience with the Daley machine and flamboyant Illinois politics, which developed his organizational skills and gave him access to numerous political contacts,
his natural audacity, as enhanced and trained by these same associations, and
familiarity with the arts of evasion, deception, and fraud, as learned from the same sources.
Thus armed, Obama, and/or his associates and mentors, employed the following strategy and tactics to exploit these assets:

aggressive and well organized fund raising and lavish spending at an unprecedented level,
the extensive use of the Internet for organizing and mobilizing activities,
an intense effort to attract and utilize young people,
the development of a grass roots network, based on both enthusiastic youthful recruits and money-bought hardcore organizers such as ACORN, to carry out registration and get-out-the-vote campaigns,
additional use of the Internet for aggressive purposes by his famous "dogs of war" and by the 527 groups of Soros and others,
the use of these resources and his media connections to attack and villify Bush and opponents, such as Sarah Palin, while appearing to be personally above such tactics,
an intensive appearance and speechmaking campaign focusing on emotional and charismatic appeal, publicly centered on vague platitudes while on a more private level making mutually contradictory promises to every special interest group,
emphasis on terms such as "hope" and "change", which were veiled allusions to criticisms of Bush and the current regime,
an unusually drastic post-nomination shift from far left to right of center,
domination of a docile media, so that issues favorable to Obama were spotlighted while unfavorable issues, such as his lack of experience, faded into the background (the equivalent of the military tactic of seizing the high ground) while Obama's gaffes, contradictory promises, and questionable associations were effectively obscured or covered up.
Finally, the attainment of the following objectives, or harvesting of votes:

a massive voter registration campaign aimed exclusively at young, Hispanic, and black voters, thereby changing the Democratic to Republican ratio of the voter registry,
a corresponding increase in young and black votes,
the development, by intensive media and 527 group attacks, of a substantial anti-Bush backlash vote,
the use of biased media coverage to divert centrist swing votes to Obama,
reliance on tradition and anti-Palin sentiment to keep feminist and traditional Democrat votes within the Obama camp, and
the use of questionable political forces, such as Acorn and the Daley machine, to allow indiscriminate and unchecked registration of new voters, who often turned out to be illegal aliens or frauds, and reliance on loyal Democratic state and city officials to sanction and abet voting "irregularities"; also the use of street money and other fraudulent tactics.
Another critical advantage the Obama campaign received was a decisive "October surprise"---a tactic similar to Napoleon's practice of reserving a hidden force to throw into battle at the most decisive moment. In the present election, the spectacular mortgage-market collapse in October seemed to be a fortuitous coincidence. However, some of us, bearing in mind George Soros' previous financial coups and the dictum that in politics, there are so such things as coincidences, are wondering what really happened. For the present, however, this item is colored black and its source is marked as unknown.
This diagram is herewith presented as a starting point for further discussion and study. It is by no means complete. Some factors, such as reactions to the Republican campaign and threats to potential McCain donors, have been ignored since they shed little light on Obama's overall strategy. In other cases, links have been omitted because of the limitation of a static two-dimensional diagram. For example, the links from "audacity" and "Soros" to other elements of the campaign are so numerous that their complete insertion would make the diagram difficult to decipher.

Readers are encouraged to modify the present diagram by adding boxes or links. Further analysis would be greatly facilitated by converting this diagram into a Muckety map, which would enable flexibility of arrangement and the tying of links to references. This might enable the construction and interpretation of a more detailed diagram, such as the one that James Simpson has constructed to show how Obama, in conjunction with his radical associates and Soros' organizations, has orchestrated a strategy of manufactured crisis.

A Possible Interpretation

Two people can look at the same diagram and come up with different interpretations. I herewith present mine, fully aware that others may legitimately disagree. I seem to see the following major strategic trends:

1. The exploitation of dissatisfaction with the Bush administration, as demonized by the Democrats and the media in a seven year long campaign, by a combination of (a) attacks from newspaper-radio-TV journalists and commentators, (b) mockery by TV personalities such as David Letterman, (c) vicious attacks by 527 groups, and (d) more subtly, by Obama's own emphasis on "change". This hate campaign was so successful that even Republicans distanced and disassociated themselves from Bush and claimed that they were for "change" too. The similar campaign of hatred and mockery that was launched against Sarah Palin made the venom and brazenness of this tactic even more obvious.
2. The skillful double-edged use of the race card by embarrassing white voters into refraining from criticizing Obama, lest they be considered racist, while obscuring and downplaying the obvious (if forgivable) racial bias of the black community.
3. The equally skillful "choosing of battles", i.e. refraining from activities that might do more harm than good. Note that no arrows lead away from the "black vote" resource box. Obama had this asset safely in is back pocket and, aside from intense voter registration, refrained from public activity in that sector. In the same manner, after defeating Hillary, he made no overt attempt to assuage feminist resentment or to publicly counteract the effect of Palin's nomination. Instead, he kept quiet about feminist issues and counted upon them falling into line by election time.
4. The audacity of outrageously outspending his rivals while avoiding the accusation of "buying" the election, or of having been bought
5. The audacity of claiming to offer all things to all voting groups and of making numerous mutually contradictory promises, such as the drastic left-to-center shift after his nomination.
6. The enlistment of youth for the formation of a grass roots network (now maintained and mobilized by MoveOn) and its use for the massive voter registration that gave the Democrats a new voter advantage.
7. The complete domination of media coverage, so as to present voters with a highly biased slant on the issues and to cover up Obama's numerous gaffes and contradictions.
8. The use of misdirection and deception to conceal Obama's contradictory statements and scandals; also, the apparent use of fraud in registration and balloting and the sanction and cover-up of such frauds by Democratic state and local officials.
Some of these strategies, such as the intensive fundraising, made effective use of TV, the Internet, and other tools of modern information technology. But this is mere technological adaptation. Every one of the above strategies has been used, albeit in a more primitive form, in previous presidential campaigns. Jefferson used most of them against Adams in the notorious campaign of 1800.

To determine what made Obama's campaign a success, we must look deeper to identify the basic psychological qualities that underlie these strategies. I perceive them to be:

a finely developed skill in strategy, worthy of a great general [4],
a tremendous audacity, enabling him to succeed in risky or controversial tactics that his opponents would not dare to attempt [5],
a stage magician's skill in misdirection, compelling the public to perceive only what he wishes them to see and ignore what he wishes them to overlook,
a penchant for evasion and concealment---the very opposite of his much-vaunted desire for "transparency"---often achieved by saying one thing (such deploring "negativity") while inciting others (such as 527 groups or his "dogs of war") to do the opposite,
utter ruthlessness: a willingness to resort to, or at least tolerate, deception and fraud to achieve desired objectives.
These are the qualities that I perceive in the person or persons who planned the Obama campaign, whether it was Obama himself, an associate or mentor, or a combination thereof. However, there can be no doubt that Obama at least assented to the use of the aforementioned strategies and therefore must to some degree possess the qualities that engendered them. Indeed, these qualities virtually define the sort of narcissistic personality that has been attributed to Obama.

If, as I contend, these are the root qualities that created the Obama campaign, then we should expect more of the same from the new Obama administration. For starters, the stimulus Trojan horse is a convincing example.

NOTES:

[1] I am deeply indebted to Richard Baehr, Ed Lasky, and Dagny D'anconia, who reviewed a draft of this article and pointed out several omissions and vagueries.

[2] The present diagram applies only to the post-nomination phase of the Obama campaign. The campaign against Hillary Clinton had a somewhat different and more orthodox set of strategies and tactics.

[3] Because of the fuzziness of the analogy between military and political campaigns, the difference between resources and forces is somewhat arbitrary. (I drew the line at the basic resources available to any black liberal Democratic candidate). Some boxes could be colored either red or purple. Similarly, intermediate objectives might be colored either blue or green.

[4] Unfortunately, political or military strategic skill doesn't always guarantee presidential skill. As in Grant's case, one can be a great general and a terrible president.

[5] Similarly, as Kennedy demonstrated, successful audacity in a political campaign is no guarantee of statesmanship or good judgment in dealing with foreign powers.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/02/how_he_did_it_a_diagrammatic_a.html

NANCY PELOSI DOES HER AROBIC WORKOUT WITH HER COMMI FRIENDS

I could not help but notice all the jumping beans and springs in the seats in the capitol building while The Messiah was lying to the AMERICAN Public about no Pork in any of the spending bills he has signed and will be signing in the future all the other lies he is telling to the AMERICAN PEOPLE. Richard Simmons needs to get her on his show sometimes. LMAO




Here is another video. LOL

Pat Leahy is another scumbag in our government !

If I saw this blabbering, slobering creep on the street I would spit in his damn ugly face.
He is another digusting lying, theiving, crooked politician.
Damn him and the donkey he rode in on. He is getting old maybe I want have to look at him much longer.


Sen. Pat Leahy is running into stiff resistance from conservatives -- and a mixed response from liberals -- as he pursues a "truth commission" to investigate the alleged abuses of the Bush administration.

The Vermont Democrat, who is the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, pitched the idea last week during a speech at Georgetown University, saying the commission would not pursue criminal indictments but would launch a fact-finding mission to "learn the truth" about the Bush years.

He said the commission would strike the "middle ground" between those who want to prosecute Bush officials for alleged violations of civil liberties and the politicization of the Justice Department and those who want to resist any inquiries into the past eight years. Leahy has since launched an online petition that has garnered more than 26,000 signatures.

Republicans have spoken out against the idea, and reaction from Democrats has been mixed.

Some Democrats say the proposal is no good because it doesn't go far enough. Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island said officials should not be "afraid" to use the Department of Justice to investigate torture allegations and punish anyone who broke the law.

"I don't know if we require a formal new commission to do that," Reed told MSNBC.

Bob Fertik, co-founder of Democrats.com, wrote on his Web site: "I truly do not understand the distinct minority of 'liberals' who would rather 'learn the truth' about George Bush's most heinous crimes than prosecute them. And when I read the 'arguments' for a 'Truth Commission,' all I see are fallacies."

But other Democrats, including President Obama, have suggested that an investigation of the Bush administration would be too divisive. Obama declined to endorse the idea of a "truth commission" at his prime-time press conference last week.

"My view is also that nobody's above the law, and if there are clear instances of wrongdoing, that people should be prosecuted just like any ordinary citizen, but that generally speaking, I'm more interested in looking forward than I am in looking backwards," Obama said.

"So I will take a look at Senator Leahy's proposal, but my general orientation is to say let's get it right moving forward," he said.

Leahy said the commission could look at matters ranging from the firings of U.S. attorneys, interrogation techniques used on terrorism suspects and the authorization of warrantless wiretapping.

A poll conducted last week by USA Today/Gallup found that nearly two-thirds of Americans polled want some kind of investigation into whether the Bush administration allowed terrorism suspects to be tortured. But they were split on what form that investigation should take.

Thirty-eight percent said a criminal investigation would be best; 24 percent called for an independent panel. Thirty-four percent said neither option should be pursued.

Asked about the proposal Thursday, Leahy told FOX News, "I don't see it as partisan to find out what happens."

Leahy has attracted at least one prominent supporter behind his idea. Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) promptly released a statement last week praising his colleague.

"Getting all the facts out about what happened over the last eight years is a crucial part of restoring the rule of law," Feingold said. "There needs to be accountability for wrongdoing by the Bush administration, including the illegal warrantless wiretapping and interrogation programs. We cannot simply sweep these assaults on the rule of law under the rug."

But Republicans say a commission would be nothing more than a witch hunt.

Texas Rep. Lamar Smith told The Associated Press that Leahy's proposal amounts to a scheme to "unjustly malign former Bush administration officials."

Smith also opposes House Democrats' efforts to subpoena former Bush adviser Karl Rove.

"For all their talk about change, House Democrats just can't seem to move on from their party line of blaming Bush. They've developed an unhealthy fixation on re-fighting lost battles, even at the expense of the American taxpayer," Smith said in a written statement.

Marc Thiessen, Bush's former speechwriter, told FOX News the Leahy commission could be "very deadly" and "terribly dangerous" because the investigation could air the techniques the U.S. government uses not only to interrogate terrorism suspects, but also to intercept e-mails and telephone calls.

"And when you get those facts out, it's not just going out to the American people and to the viewers on television. It's going out to Usama bin Laden," he said.

Republicans should ban together and never give up ! Stay strong GOP !

An Excellent Read !
February 24, 2009
No Surrender
By J.R. Dunn
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/02/no_surrender.html

I'm curious -- does anyone know of any situation, current, historical, hypothetical, or otherwise, in which some American conservatives don't immediately start hollering that it's time to give in?
That's a serious question. It seems that whenever things get rough, the cry goes up: it's over. The left has won. It's not our country anymore. There's no hope, never has been, never will be again. And almost always, it comes from people who claim that they're the true nail-hard conservatives, the core element, of whom everyone else is merely a pale reflection.
With Obama, this chorus has become deafening. It's the counterpoint to the Obama-as-Messiah drone from points left. Obama is the watershed, the spearpoint of a seventy-year-long conspiracy against the Republic. With his advent, the game has ended. There is no possibility of resistance. All he needs to do is raise a hand and his disciples will fill the streets, waving the little green book of the One's Sayings and sweeping all before them. There's nothing to be done now but to pack a single small bag and await the summons to appear for "reformation through labor".
That or take to the woods with a cheap Kalashnikov knockoff and a knapsack full of canned baked beans.
It could happen just that way, I guess. But I have my doubts.
The argument (up until now unvoiced) appears to be that the country has been hollowed out by decades of liberal activity to a point where all that's all required is a single kick for it to fall apart. Every institution has been undermined, every principle eroded. The intelligentsia are traitors, the business world has sold out, the populace as a whole is dumb as a dishrag. There's nothing left worth saving even if it was possible to save it.
To say this is a one-sided vision is to insult one-sided visions. The first question we need to ask is: does this in fact resemble anything at all going on in the real world?
Thirty days into the Obamiate, we have seen that the man cannot put together a working cabinet. Four major figures have fallen by the wayside due to corruption of one form or another. A fifth -- O's major attempt at "bipartisanship"-- scrambled back ashore just before this Titanic set sail. O's successful nominees have been not quite what the situation demands either. Tim Geithner, the man who would pull a whole new economy out of his hat, is still looking for the hat. Eric Holder attempted to fulfill his duties as the nation's chief law enforcement official by inflaming long-buried hostile feelings between the races. (I wonder if Obama grasps that, on some level, this is a blow aimed against him personally, in his persona of the man who embodies racial reconciliation?)
His great "victory", the stimulus bill, succeeded in uniting the GOP in opposition, annoying members of his own party, dismaying the public, and sending the markets into a 300-point tailspin. Obama, and his followers, desperately need to contemplate the story of King Pyrrhus. A few days later, his banking proposal led to a repetition of the market collapse. But he succeeded in topping even that with his mortgage plan, which triggered, another market slide, nationwide defiance, and converted a little-known market commentator, Rick Santelli, into a focus of opposition. Nice work for a single week.
On the international front, he has triggered the disdain and contempt of Iran, Russia, and Venezuela among others. Mighty Kyrgyzstan has unceremoniously ejected U.S. forces. He has even succeeded in annoying the amiable Canadians prior to his visit to Ottawa. And to round that out, on Friday, February 20th, he for all practical purposes surrendered to the Taliban, a group sharing responsibility for the only successful attack on the mainland U.S. in modern times.
And this is the American Lenin, you say? The man who is going to overthrow the republic, trample the Constitution, and put the chains of socialism on a helpless, despairing populace?
What's bothering many conservatives today is a kind of institutional memory of the FDR epoch. Roosevelt truly did carry out a revolution in political affairs. His first "hundred days" did in fact turn the country upside down. Such efforts as ending the gold standard, closing the banks, and establishing the New Deal with its complete control over the economy, were unprecedented, in no way comparable to anything that had come before.
Of course, you don't fix a wounded economy by turning it upside down, a fact that became apparent in relatively short order. But even aside from the failure of the New Deal, FDR had a dramatic and lasting effect on the political landscape. Nowhere was this effect more apparent than with America's conservatives.
Most of the Republicans of the era were country-club Babbits -- go-along to get-along types who joined the GOP because Dad did. It comes as no surprise that these people had no solution to the country's economic problems, or could put up any worthwhile resistance to FDR's "reforms". They were swept aside, and little serious opposition ever confronted Roosevelt. The era's conservatives simply retreated to isolated pea patches while communicating only with each other. It took a generation for William F. Buckley to revive conservatism as a vital political and cultural force.
Even today, FDR remains a nightmare figure in the conservative mind. He's denounced in contemporary books (such as the asinine Day of Deceit of which I was given three copies by people convinced it was a worthwhile read, despite its being one of the most ill-researched and badly written historical works I've ever encountered) with the energy and venom you'd expect to be directed at a man who left office last week, and he's spoken of with a sense of fear and apprehension, as if he's right around the corner and will come rolling back any minute, to scatter all before him like the Steelers' offensive line.
But there is no third-millennial Roosevelt, only poor O, overwhelmed and getting in deeper every day. The Democrats are a gaggle of every-pol-for-himself hustlers of the Dodd, Rangel, Schumer, and Frank school, far from the unified, all-powerful party they were during the 30s. The progressive impulse is played out, a hollow ideology with no intellectual force behind it. The left-wing media is collapsing almost as quickly as the Madoff financial empire, from the venerable El Tiempos de Nuevo York to your local Democrat & Whatever. All that's keeping the mad whirl going is the adoration of the simpler members of the public, than which no more fickle force exists.
Compare this to today's conservatism. A GOP cleansed of its most egregious malefactors and unified as in a way unseen since the mid-90s. Consider only the leading names -- Sarah Palin, Eric Cantor, John Boehner, Bobby Jindal. A greater distinction from the nonentities of the 1930s GOP can scarcely be imagined. The unity of the House Republicans against the stimulus bill came as a surprise even to me, and was of a nature to bring cheer to a stone. The Senate was not quite as impressive, but that merely marks yet another of the RINO's offenses against intelligence, good sense, and common decency. (Has anyone ever considered the fact that "moderates" such as Spector, Snowe, and Collins are the among the least trustworthy of current politicians?)
In addition, there's something that was scarcely imaginable in the 30s, or even in the 60s -- a thriving and intellectually diverse conservative movement. A movement that has been through the fire, that has matured in both message and execution, and that remains underestimated by both its opposition and their media enablers. The modern conservative movement is even now moving into a new phase. It's impossible at this point to say exactly where it's going, but anyone wishing to write it off needs a little serious study.
Given the choice between this and a party headed by an intellectual juvenile who thinks he can disburse a trillion dollars one week and talk about "halving the deficit" the next, a party staffed with superannuated hustlers and grifters, with a rank and file comprised of mesmerized, glassy-eyed true believers, I know which one I'd pick.
The time may come when that choice will matter quite a lot. Obama has promised everybody everything. He will fail to bring any of it off, as Johnson and Carter failed before him. When he does fail, he will need to attempt something to shore up his base. He will move against the enemies of the people. He has several avenues open -- gun control, the "fairness doctrine", even euthanasia. Each will mark a fundamental attack on human rights and the American character that must be opposed and defeated. All hands will be required in this effort. There will be no excuse then for self-centered whining or skulking in the woods.
We will at that point have an opportunity to give the collectivist heresy a beating from which it will never completely recover. And if that isn't worth a battle, what is?
So lighten up. The story ain't over yet, and the fat lady hasn't even buckled on her armor. And when the song comes at last, it may well be a tune we like.
And besides -- I'll bet you left your can opener home.J.R. Dunn is consulting editor of American Thinker.

Senator Charles D (Chuck) Schumer is a Real Porker

Chuckie sissy boy,(Boy George..lol) people do care about the pork you scumbags dug up for the last 40 years and put in that porkus bill. SHAME ON YOU, YOU ARE A DISGRACE AND PEOPLE ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE. YOU LYING SCUMBAGS. ALL OF YOU.

Awesome stuff. I am just so happy to know that my tax dollars are going on the following extremely important stimulus items which are bound to stimulate economic growth…HT Michelle
Hill staffer Tom Jones is going through the omnibus spending bill with a fine-tooth comb, and Twittering his earmark findings, including:
* $200,000 for “Tattoo Removal Violence Prevention Outreach Program,” pg. 283;
*Maine lobster earmark in the omnibus, pg. 173;
*$5.8 million earmark for the “Ted Kennedy Institute for the Senate…for the planning and design of a building & an endowment,” pg. 232;
*and National Council of La Raza, $473,000 earmark from Sens. Bingaman and Menendez, pg. 212.
a $75K earmark pg304 » link to is.gd for “Totally Teen Zone” tells “teenagers that it’s okay to “totally zone out” » link to is.gd…

big brother gets #pork $250K “for deployment of security cameras in 15 different business districts” in Pitt pg. 207
earmark to the stars?? $2M for “for the promotion of astronomy in Hawaii” Really? pg. 332 » link to is.gd

This is just a teenie winnie bit of all that pork. I am amazed as some of the crap I am reading.

ERIC HOLDER~YOU ARE THE RACIST HERE ! GET A LIFE !

THERE ARE STORIES LIKE THIS ALL OVER AMERICAN MR. HOLDER ! GET A LIFE, GET A CLUE ! SCUMBAG ! YOU ARE PATHETIC ! YOU ARE NOT A GOOD CHOICE FOR THE OFFICE YOU WILL BE HOLDING. YOU ARE DANGEROUS AND SCARRY!
SHAME ON YOU ! SHAME ! YOU NEED TO BE THROWN UNDER THE DAMN BUS ! YOU EARNED IT. YOU ARE VERY DISTURBED EXCUSE FOR A HUMAN BEING !










February 23, 2009
By Larrey Anderson
Racism, Eric Holder, my Son and Me
Enough is enough. I have had thirty plus years of enough. I have had enough of being called a "racist." I will not sit here and be called a racist and a coward by a self-serving, race-baiting politician like Eric Holder.

You wanna talk racism, Mr. Holder? Okay. It's time we talked. In fact, we should have had this talk thirty years ago. It's time someone like me talked to someone like you about race.

Why am I qualified to talk about racism? Simple: I am a middle-aged white American male -- this fact alone qualifies me as a racist in this Wonderland of political correctness that is the United States.

But my "racism" goes much deeper than particulars of gender and skin color. In fact, as a working writer and a retired politician, I have a lifelong pattern of "racism." I was called a "racist" twenty-five years ago when I voted against "hate crimes" legislation in the Idaho State Senate. I had this insane notion that all violent crimes were hate crimes -- clearly a racist thought (no doubt instilled by the white culture of hate that surrounded me).

I have been called a racist for writing that the science behind man made global warming is shaky -- and for defending Sarah Palin's acceptance speech for her vice presidential nomination at the RNC. Surely these are thoughts that spring from a childhood that must have been spent with the KKK.

During the past twenty-five years, I have been called a racist for writing about gun control, taxes, international banking, property rights, the Constitution, and abortion. All of these topics are obviously crucially related to race relations in the United States. How could I have been so blind?

In short, I am a racist because I am not a liberal. I am a racist because I do not agree with Eric Holder's politics. Not only am I a racist, Mr. Holder informs me, I am also a coward because I don't want to talk about being a racist.

Mr. Holder wants me to pony up, be a man, and finally face my cowardice -- and the inner hatred I may have of human beings that have a skin color different from mine.

There is one tiny little problem: Holder's request is coming about thirty years too late. And, if my son's and my life experiences are any indication, Holder is twenty to thirty years late challenging other Americans to look inside of themselves.

The fact is that most Americans have already been there, done that. We let go of our racism -- if we happened to have had any -- years ago.

I first heard about my soon to be son when he was two days old. I had had a friend call me about the baby. My friend was on an adoption list. He was seventh on the list. He told me that there was this newborn baby boy that no one wanted.

I bluntly asked my friend if the infant was physically deformed or had some mental impairment. "No. Not exactly," he told me. "Maybe you should come and take a look at him."

So I did. I first held my son when he was three days old. His skin was discolored by jaundice and his body was swollen with some type of blood incompatibility. His skin was a puffy, dark, almost Brunswick green -- except for his fat butt -- which was glaucous hued.

I still tease my son about our first few moments together. Honest to goodness, I thought I was holding My Favorite Martian. He looked like some creature out of a really bad science fiction movie.

As I gazed down at this strange and lonely little being in my arms, I had, what might be called, a religious experience. Lights flashed at the periphery of my vision. (Think of the lights that flash by in the tunnel on a subway.) I found myself sitting in a park on a bench staring into the eyes of a handsome young black man. We were laughing together. We were connected through the laughter to a profound friendship and empathy. I understood and loved this young man and he understood and loved me.

The lights flashed again. I was staring into the eyes of the little baby boy in my arms that I now knew, beyond a shadow of a doubt, was my son.

That was some thirty years ago. And in those thirty years, I have watched America grow up regarding matters of race. I have watched most of my fellow citizens learn how to treat all people as human beings. And my fellow citizens have been doing a damn good job of it. I know this for a fact because for thirty years I have watched the people around me mature and treat my own son with increasing respect and dignity as a human being.

Sure there were a few racial related problems in the late 70s when I first adopted my son. (I was still in graduate school when he was adopted. We lived in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia until the early 80s.) I went to meetings where some people would not sit next to me because I was holding a little black baby. (Not very many people -- but there were a few.)

I had a couple of people ask me if I was "looking for trouble" by adopting a non-white child. My response? I asked them if they were looking for trouble by asking me such a stupid question.

Reflecting back, problems like these were few and far between.[i] Most people congratulated us, supported us, and admired us. I don't remember any person openly hating us.

They certainly did not hate my son. In 1982 we moved from the east coast back to Idaho. My son started his education here in Idaho. He was an extraordinarily popular kid in school. In a few of the schools he attended he was the only black student in the school. Although there was some name calling in some of these schools (there always is in every school), there was only one outright racial incident that I know of.

One time, in the sixth grade, one of his classmates called my son a "nigger." The kid physically challenged my son. My son accepted the challenge (he was taught never to back down from this kind of mindless bullying) and agreed to meet the young thug in the playground after school to settle the matter.

I found out about the impending confrontation and drove to the school. I hid behind some cars in the parking lot to watch the episode unfold. Apparently, the ruffian expected my son to be a no-show. I watched as the punk walk down the steps into the schoolyard, got a good close look at my son's fists, and then turned tail and sprinted back into the school crying.

The thirty young white kids, who had gathered in the playground to witness the event, encircled my son and cheered. Six years later, my son went on to be elected student body president of one of the whitest high schools in America. That, Mr. Holder, is how racist America really is -- which is to say not much.

Racism exists in America only in the communities were it is stipulated, reinforced, and taught as a alternative to the veracity of hard work and lasting opportunity that is the real America. In other words, Mr. Holder, racism, where it exists in this country, is a political and cultural contrivance sustained and manipulated by people like you.

Is more evidence needed? My son has always had a job (in fact, he has always had multiple job offers) since he reached manhood. Why? Because he is a responsible, articulate, hard working, smart, human being -- who happens to be black. For someone like my son, belonging to a minority race in today's America is not a curse -- it is a blessing.

My son is married to a very good-looking young white woman. They have two (soon to be three) beautiful sons.[ii] Maybe my daughter-in-law carries the brunt of the racism. I called her the other day, told her I was writing this article, and asked her how bad the racism surrounding her marriage was. What was it like to walk into a store with a black husband and two little mixed race sons. Was she ever threatened? Was she ever afraid?

She just laughed at the questions. (She tends to laugh at me -- must be a daughter-in-law thing.)

"Never," she replied in one word.

"Never what?" I asked.

"Racism. Never. Not once ... well, my ninty-year-old great grandmother didn't like the idea of me dating a ‘colored man.' I remember she really hurt my feelings. But, other than that, I can't think of anything. It just doesn't happen. People love my husband. They respect our family. We just don't have those problems. I don't think people have those problems."

She then told me about some of the mixed race marriages of some of her friends. None of them have problems either. When these couples get together, they don't even talk about racism -- because there isn't any.

Sorry, Mr. Holder, it isn't cowardice that keeps Americans from discussing racism -- it is the fact that there is nothing to talk about. The racist America that you are talking about started to disappear at least thirty years ago.

There are, of course, certain communities in this country that have been deliberately and continually segregated by people like you. In these communities people eat, drink, and breathe racism.

It is a shame that racism still exists in this country. But the Eric Holders, the Jesse Jacksons, the Al Sharptons, and the Barack Obamas of the world are keeping this issue alive. Mr. Holder, the shame and the cowardice of racism belong to you -- not to my son and me.

Larrey Anderson is a writer, a philosopher, and submissions editor for American Thinker. His latest award-winning novel is The Order of the Beloved. His memoir, Underground: Life and Survival in the Russian Black Market, has just been released.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

[i] I suppose our little family broke a few racial barriers. It was certainly not our intention. I didn't adopt my son because he was black. I adopted him because I fell immediately and deeply in love. Still, not many people were adopting kids of different races back then. So we were pioneers -- of a sort.

[ii] These three boys will be the only males in our family to carry the "Anderson" name into the future.
5 Comments on "Racism, Eric Holder, my Son and Me"

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/02/racism_eric_holder_my_son_and_1.html

Obama Destroying the USA to rebuild it in his own image?

CHEERS TO ALL. WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT ME NOW? ....(THAT I HAVE REALLY SCREWED ALL AMERICANS)












It’s amazing to me that so many talking heads who seem befuddled as to what Obama is actually attempting to accomplish with his bound-to-fail stimulus bill cannot seem to see the forest for the trees. To put it another way, they cannot grasp what’s actually happening to We-the-People at the hands of the developing ‘Obama Emperium’. Shall we take a look at the events leading up to today? By the way, I mean the actual events—not the lies manufactured by the mainstream media and other of his sycophants to make the secular messiah Obama ‘look good’. I say let’s do!

In September 2003, then President Bush proposed that oversight of Fannie Mae be tightened. Congressional Democrats balked at the idea and vigorously opposed and blocked it. Then, in a 2006 bill, Senate Republicans created a bill calling for oversight of the Democrat-run corrupt Fannie Mae (and its partner organization Freddie Mac) US mortgage giant. At that time, those who ran Fannie Mae (again—ALL Democrats) had already been caught in an $11 billion accounting scandal. Tragically—for all of us—this bill was shelved. Wimpy Republicans actually wanted bi-partisanship and Democrats refused. Despite their protestations to the contrary, Democrats do not want bi-partisanship. This is an historical message that the now-liberal Republican Party leadership refuses to learn from or even acknowledge. Note: At this time the Democrat/Leftist-created financial catastrophe of 2008-2009 could have been brought to light and prevented. However, it appears that dark forces were at work to purposefully bring forth said disaster.

In September 2007, Fannie Mae began (the truly intelligent said inevitable) its two month downward spiral that would culminate in its November crash. Then, in September (September again—weird) 2008 a strange one to two hour electronic run on US banks to the tune of $550 billion was affected before authorities were able to put a stop to it. One Democrat—Rep. Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania said that if authorities had not closed the banks, $5 ½ TRILLION would have been withdrawn from US banks, which would have caused the collapse of the US and within 24 hours the collapse of the world’s economic system. There are certainly those within our own government who know who and what were the perpetrators. But, no one is talking.

All of these deliberate actions brought forth the ammunition that the Left needed to make its contrived fake case that Communists and/or Fascists (they’re now called Democrats) needed to be placed in charge and the US (if not the world) and that freedom—including any and all free market capitalism—had to be dumped in favor of implementing dictatorial controls. The creation of the fake “stimulus package” is the seizing of control of the country’s financial resources and their redistribution to the power elite—not to you and me. The nationalization of banks is the seizure of the financial houses—for use by and of the governmental power elite—not for you and me. The “stimulus package”—which will result in the TOTAL theft of the country’s resources—was never meant to stimulate anything save the Democrat power brokers and their friends. A dumbed-down population—aided by the election fraud group ACORN—assisted in “electing” GL (‘great leader’) Obama to the office of the US presidency (an individual whose US citizenship is still highly suspect). And within less than a month, Obama has succeeded in pushing the USA (using the largely Democrat-created economic crisis) toward Socialism. By the way, we who have been paying our mortgages are now expected to subsidize those who have not. The “flakes” are being rewarded for their failure and the able are being punished. What a way to destroy a country!

I predict that any real socialistic endeavors will be bypassed in favor of pure Marxism-Stalin style. Obama has already begun his plan to clamp down on free-speech with his adherents’ resurrection of the inaptly named “Fairness Doctrine,” which is meant to shut down conservative and Christian speech. Only Obama-speak is now acceptable. Obama’s National Security Force—AKA Gestapo or Secret Police—is already being formed with his Defense Department Directive 1404.10 and according to Worldview Times “H.R. 645 that calls for no less than six federal camps to be built to house U.S. Citizens.”

This is only the tip of the iceberg, folks. Obama and his minions have accomplished these in only one month after seizing office. Can those of you who still have a working mind see where this is leading? Are there still people out there who do NOT want to live in a totalitarian state? I further predict that within the next 2 months, Obama’s Congressional adherents will arrange yet another “stimulus bill” in an attempt to confiscate the US’ remaining wealth. The stock market continues to tank while Obama continues to tell us this is his country and his victory. The rest of us are only the worker-serfs who are expected to produce for the powerful in D.C. and shut up while we’re doing it. Are any of you who were blind to Obama’s real plan beginning to see again?

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/8675

Dems block Bush Fannie Mae oversight proposal:

Republicans push for Fannie Mae oversight then drop the ball:

September 2008 Run on the Banks: Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-PA) video:

The Fairness Doctrine is the Censorship Doctrine: Obama Gets His Civilian Military Underway:

Every American Is Now a Criminal !

You think you are a law abiding citizen, don’t you? Think again! You have been, you are now, and you will continue to break the law for the rest of your life, because there are too many laws, with millions more laws to follow. Many of these laws are totally unconstitutional but have never been challenged in the courts. Sometimes you break the law without any knowledge of it, even though ignorance of the law is not an excuse, if you are caught. But worse, millions are breaking the law because they are convinced the laws are illegal, or just plain stupid. With more people intentionally breaking the law, eventually the rule of law breaks down, as does our Republic.

The examples of stupid laws would fill volumes. Examples of conflicting laws would fill even more volumes. Some (or is it most) lawmakers just aren’t very smart.

Since the final draft of the U. S. Constitution became the Supreme Law of the Land, legislators have been legislating, that is they have been passing law ..... after law ..... after law. Do you want to know why you are a criminal? Here is why. “The U.S. Code, which contains all federal statutes, occupies 56,009 single-spaced pages. Its 47 volumes take up nine feet of shelf space. An annotated version, which attempts to bring order out of chaos, is three feet long and has 230 hardcover volumes and 36 paperback supplements. Administrative lawmaking under statutes fill up the 207-volume Code of Federal Regulations, which spans 21 feet of shelf space and contains more than 134,488 pages of regulatory law. … Federal law is further augmented by more than 2,756 volumes of judicial precedent, taking up 160 yards (almost twice as long as a football field) of law-library shelving.”

This is just federal law and it is growing by the second. All of this law does not include the millions of state, county and city laws that have been passed since we won our freedom in our first revolution. State and local laws are also growing by the second. The Obama/Pelosi/Reid Stimulus package was over 1,000 pages of more law that no one read and it included more taxes and much more socialism. More so-called “stimulus” packages are on the way, requiring trillions more of our dollars that the government doesn’t own and must “steal” from us, by force, to “fix” the problem that they themselves created.

Too many laws create competing special interests who lobby the system to entrench their own little worlds, while the un-represented (that’s millions of Americans) are left out in the cold. We have become a government of cronies, in a world run by cronyism, in an atmosphere of corruption, Hell bent on driving America and Americans into unabashed socialism and the one-world-order.

Too many laws create victims who inadvertently violate one or more laws and spend their life’s savings trying to defend themselves against an intransigent, all-powerful and abusive government. Too many laws lead to powerful, entitled special interests and the innocent victims are left with no political power at all.

Interestingly, America contains an almost ghostly, silent majority .... mostly silent and heard from rarely, but it does exist. Most of this group are trying to live out their lives as best they can, earn a living and raise their children in a country they thought was the land of the free. You know, a government they could trust, a government that protects the unalienable, individual rights as granted to us by our creator and codified into law by our constitution, and a government that operates within the enumerated powers allowed them by that very same constitution.

Unfortunately, in the silent majority’s silence, their government, without the silent majority’s consent, assumed powers that far exceeded their constitutional powers. They passed laws to pander to (or buy off) special interest groups, or to increase their political powers and then levied ever-increasing taxes to pay for it all. Even as the regulations rose exponentially and as taxes became more burdensome, the silent majority, to their discredit, still remained silent. Their silence, their apathy and their disinterest in what government has been and is doing, has unknowingly turned each and everyone of them into criminals ..... law breakers, who can be subject to fines and imprisonment for violating laws they know nothing about.

America was founded on the principles of a Constitutional Republic. That is, a system of government by the rule of law, with the Constitution as the foundation of all law. What the Founders failed to realize, or maybe they did but didn’t account for it, was that lawmakers have but one goal in life, that is the passing of laws. The lawmakers very rarely consider repealing laws, or remove conflicting laws, upon which clever attorneys can twist to fit a particular case, which they do all too often. The net result is we have become enslaved by the passage of too many laws and we became unintentional law breakers of those laws ..... thus perpetual criminals whom have yet to be caught.

As the silent majority watches our government use our tax money and our children’s tax money to increase their pandering and buying off of special interest groups, as government pours our hard-earned money into banks and businesses, as they prop up people who have acted irresponsibly with more of our money that we earned responsibly, they are increasing their power over us and increasing the laws that control us ..... laws eliminating our individual rights, gun rights, property rights, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the sovereignty of states and the people under the 9th and 10th Amendments and equal protection under the law contained in the 14th Amendment. The 5th Amendment is all but null and void through the passing of draconian environmental regulation, along with government abuse of eminent domain.

However, the days of the silent majority being silent, must be over. Once we realize that, if the silent majority suddenly united as one in defiance of more laws and more of our money and our children’s money being stolen by the government, at the point of a gun, (just try not paying your taxes, even though Senator Harry Reid thinks our tax system is voluntary) to buy off banks, businesses and irresponsible individuals, we could turn America around in months. If the Consent of the Governed, that Silent Majority, "esplained" it to government to get out of the way, our economy would improve naturally, in a shorter period of time, based on sound economic and capitalistic principles, not government manipulated insanity.

So how does the American silent majority unite as one? It rallies around one simple idea or symbol and uses that idea or symbol as the rallying cry for freedom and liberty and the reduction of government power. In the coming weeks we will be releasing just such an idea, a symbol and some simple principles, around which the American Silent Majority can rally!

No, the war is hardly lost, it is just getting interesting, as more Americans of the silent majority, wake up to what their government has perpetrated upon them, over the last 80 to 100 years. They grow weary of too many laws that make them unintended criminals and angry with a government, at all levels, that has become helplessly and hopelessly out of control. It is way past time for the Silent Majority to cease being silent and return control to where it belongs ..... to the Consent of the Governed.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/8674

This will where they will house you until you behave.

CHRIS DODD IS ANOTHER DAMN CROOK RUNNING OUR GOVERNMENT !

I am sickened that we have so much corruption in our government. We need another revolution and soon. This insanity going on needs to stop and stop now.

Dodd Took 850k From TARP Banks In 2008
The KC Tribune isn't happy with any politicians just now. But they elevate Dodd to the top of their list of usual suspects<---(click here) They think the pols that took TARP bank money in 08 should give it back. Dodd received $854,200 from banks in the TARP program. Yeah, there's a guy who should be regulating banks. But the Senior Senator from Connecticut who said he personally turned a four-page draft into 80-plus pages of legislation that was passed, has crossed an ethical line. While he was crafting legislation to rescue his friends, Dodd “received $854,200 from the T.A.R.P. companies in the 2008 election cycle, including money to his presidential campaign” according to a recent Center for Responsive Politics (CRP) report. I'm getting the sense this editor is rather miffed. But you can't argue with his points. But then Obama took in over $4 million from them. And as he seems to be the one driving all the change, I'm thinking they just might not have time enough to do that. In committee, Sen. Dodd, on behalf of the American public, chastises the Federal Reserve Bank, the Treasury Department, heads of Auto Corporations about scandals, executive bonus compensation, private jets, junkets for bailout banks to Vegas. Everyday it seems another financial institution C.E.O., is being dragged before the Senate and House Finance and Banking committees to explain themselves, with Dodd acting indignant. It is political theater at its most twisted and grotesque. President Barack Obama should show leadership and return millions of dollars in campaign contributions received from T.A.R.P. recipients or their employees. Candidate Obama received an estimated $4.3 million in contributions from them during his presidential campaign. But Obama’s campaign wasn’t the only one receiving campaign cash, as Republican candidates John McCain and Mitt Romney made the list as well as top House and Senate Republicans who chair important committees. “Some of the top recipients of contributions from companies receiving TARP money are the same members of Congress who chair committees charged with regulating the financial sector and overseeing the effectiveness of this unprecedented government program. They include Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut, chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs (he received $854,200 from the companies in the 2008 election cycle, including money to his presidential campaign) and Sen. Max Baucus of Montana, chair of the Senate Finance Committee (he received $279,000). blockquote>

http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/

The Audacity of the Obamas with TAXPAYERS MONEY !

This man has stepped into a job that he is not capable of doing. The people he has put in place to help him are just as damn bad. Just a bunch of Chicago style crroks, liars, tax cheats and mobsters. HE HAS NO CLUE HOW TO DO THE JOB THE AMERICAN IDIOTS VOTED HIM IN TO DO. I HOPE TOO MUCH DAMAGE TO OUR GREAT COUNTRY WILL NOT BE DONE IN THESE NEXT 4 YEARS. PRAY...JUST PRAY.

Who would have thought that a CEO position would be tiring? And not just any CEO but the President of the United States, the leader of the free world, the Commander in Chief and the Messiah.




Apparently Barack Obama had no idea that all of that hard work would actually be just that -- hard work. I suppose he thought the job of POTUS would be just as much fun as the two years he spent on the campaign trail. He must have been under the illusion that the citizens of this great country would swoon over his tax cheating choices for cabinet members and staff, and that the kool-aid buzz evident during the campaign would keep the media brainwashed for the four years of his term.


Unfortunately for Obama, the buzz is quickly wearing off. And apparently, he is realizing that because after just two weeks of living in America's most famous mansion, what did the Obamas do? They escaped the stress of the job and ran to a local public elementary school to read books with seven year olds. According to the report,


"'We were just tired of being in the White House,' the president candidly told the gleeful second-graders at Capital City Public Charter School."


"'We got out! They let us out!' Mrs. Obama said as the kids and their teachers laughed."


I have to say, I'm not laughing. This was a cute concept in the movie Dave when Kevin Kline and Sigourney Weaver snuck out of the White House one night for some ice cream. But Kevin Kline wasn't actually the President (although he certainly acted more Presidential than Obama has exhibited over the past several weeks) and Dave was just a movie.


I find this scary. Great leaders do not say after just two weeks on the job that they are tired of being in their office. Great leaders do not complain and they certainly do not have wives that joke about being paroled from living in a mansion. When one student asked the Obamas what it was like to live in the White House, Michelle responded by,


"...delighting the kids with all the perks of life in America's most famous house: a florist, a bowling alley, a movie theater, even a special place where people make chocolate and candy.


‘You should come visit,' she said."


Throughout the campaign, it was abundantly clear the Obamas were completely out of touch with Middle America. Now that they "won," they continue to exhibit arrogance beyond comprehension. Joking to these students who may very well be economically challenged that they "let" her leave her home where servants make her candy and she can bowl in her basement is one of the most callous and ignorant statements that Michelle has made to date.


Just after the Obama's field trip, France's President Sarkozy announced that he may not seek re-election because the job is too tiring. When asked to explain, he stated,


"Because my job is very difficult. It needs a lot of energy, a lot of strength to do it and I have put all my strength into doing it as well as possible."


Prior to his inauguration, it appeared that Obama was actually up to the task and ready to put all of his strength into doing as good a job as possible (limited as many of us expected that to be). Karl Rove wrote in an opinion published in the Wall Street Journal,


"Mr. Obama's tendency to work late into the night will also pose problems. Politico.com reports that the White House staff is ‘preparing for a return to long nights, heavy weekend shifts.' Requiring a senior staff that meets at 7:30 a.m. to work until 11 p.m. or 12 a.m. will quickly cause burnout and diminish the quality of advice and oversight.


Mr. Obama and his team are confident that they can keep the pace of a campaign going in the West Wing, which no one before them has done. That intoxicating idea will fade. The question is how they will deal with the challenges created by their organization of the West Wing's policy-making apparatus."


But my suspicion, based on Obama's behavior to date, is that Obama does not really plan on working hard at all -- he plans on delegating. And what could prove this hypothesis better than the way in which he delegated possibly the most important legislation of his administration to the devices of Nancy Pelosi. While Nancy and her money hungry colleagues toiled day and night adding more and more pork to the spending bill, the Obama's were taking a break from the rigors of just three weeks in the White House to vacation at Camp David.


"You can see that during the summer it's going to be a nice place to spend a lot of time. Hit a few golf balls. Played a little basketball."


And since Michelle has already announced to the country that Barack will require everyone to work hard, she was kind enough to recognize the work of the government employees that will be maintaining their vacation home by noting that,


"Some of the greatest adventures that we experience in life here in this nation, like family vacations, and camping, and hiking, and fishing, if you're blessed to have access to those resources, are possible because of the work that you do right here in [the Department of the Interior]... And Barack and I and the girls, as you may have read, just had a little retreat away. We visited Camp David for the first time, and got to experience the beautiful, the beauty of those grounds, and it was just wonderful to get a bit of a break and to spend some quality time as a family in nature."


I have no doubt that the employees at the Interior Department to whom Michelle was speaking were pleased to hear that the Obamas were able to "get a bit of a break" because they are "blessed to have access to those resources." I just wonder how pleased the citizens were to hear that in these trying times, when few can afford a family vacation, that the Obamas have already taken two at taxpayer expense.


Yes, a weekend at Camp David was not enough of a rest for the First Family. They required a weekend in Chicago in order to celebrate Valentine's Day this past weekend. It would seem that Michelle was not satisfied with the White House chef that she hand picked to cook for her for the next four years so after just a brief ride on Air Force One, the Ones found themselves snuggling in a corner booth at a swanky restaurant in their home town.


Under normal circumstances, I do not imagine that anyone would begrudge the Obamas a weekend in Chicago, but these are far from normal circumstances. According to the President, a failure to quickly pass his stimulus package would have resulted in catastrophe for the country. And Congress diligently obeyed the Messiah and passed the 1100 page bill without time to even read it. Hence, it must have been that Obama pulled a muscle in his signing hand while playing basketball the previous weekend at Camp David because wheels up on Air Force One occurred after the plan was passed by Congress but without the President's signature.


The Obama's have never truly experienced hard work despite their rhetoric requiring the citizens of the country to prepare themselves for years of it (someone has to earn a living and pay taxes so that the Obamas will be able to vacation at whim and elaborately celebrate superfluous holidays).


The extravagances that the Obamas have enjoyed in their first few weeks in office are turning into the bitter pill that the rest of the hard working Americans will have to swallow over the next four years. Americans are losing their jobs, being warned of impending catastrophe and the Obamas are acting like self-entitled royalty. They have yet to earn their position as First Family, let alone the perks that go along with it.


Get ready for the sequel to Obama's autobiography "The Audacity of Hope." At this rate it will be called "The Audacity of Laziness."

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/02/the_audacity_of_the_obamas.html