Archive for the month “June, 2012”

Hidden Obamacare Secret: “RFID Chip Implants” Mandatory for All by March 23, 2013

Thursday, May 26, 2011 10:44:54

Republican Congressman Ron Paul from Texas, states on his website:

“Buried deep within the over 1,000 pages of the massiveUSHealth Care Bill (PDF) in a “non-discussed” section titled: Subtitle C-11 Sec. 2521— National Medical Device Registry, and which states its purpose as…….. He quotes that part of the law and then goes on to say: “In “real world speak”, according to this report, this new law, when fully implemented, provides the framework for making the United States the first Nation in the World to require each and every one of its citizens to have implanted in them a radio-frequency identification microchip for the purpose of controlling who is, or isn’t, allowed medical care in their country”.

Read the entire story at:

And now we come to it. On Sunday March 21, 2010 the Senate Healthcare bill HR3200 was passed and signed into law the following Tuesday. Like I said before, there are a legion of horrible and just plain evil aspects to this bill and I’m sure you’ve heard a lot them by now. I don’t want to discount them but what cannot be missed here is this new law now opens a prophetic door on a magnitude not seen since the reformation ofIsrael.

This new law requires an RFID chip implanted in all of us. This chip will not only contain your personal information with tracking capability but it will also be linked to your bank account. And get this, Page 1004 of the new law (dictating the timing of this chip), reads, and I quote: “Not later than 36 months after the date of the enactment”. It is now the law of the land that by March 23rd 2013 we will all be required to have an RFID chip underneath our skin and this chip will be link to our bank accounts as well as have our personal records and tracking capability built into it.

In just a minute I’m going to show you the black and white of the law itself and you can see it with your own eyes and wonder why an event of this magnitude which is nothing less than seismic in nature is met with little more than silence in the Christian community.

Is it now starting to dawn on you just where exactly we are in prophecy? I’ll ask that question again in a minute and follow up on it, but now I want to show you the law itself. I’ve downloaded a PDF copy of HR3200 from the government’s website so what I’m about to show you is from the bill itself its nothing that I’ve written. You can access it all and see it all for yourself straight from the source itself.

H.R. 3200 section 2521, Pg. 1001, paragraph 1.
The Secretary shall establish a national medical device registry (in this subsection referred to as the ‘registry’) to facilitate analysis of postmarket safety and outcomes data on each device that— ‘‘is or has been used in or on a patient; ‘‘and is— ‘‘a class III device; or ‘‘a class II device that is implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining.”

What exactly is a class II device that is implantable? As you saw earlier, it is the device approved by the FDA in 2004.

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act:…

A class II implantable device is an “implantable radio frequency transponder system for patient identification and health information.” The purpose of a class II device is to collect data in medical patients such as “claims data, patient survey data, standardized analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of data from disparate data environments, electronic health records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the Secretary.”

Going back to what we just looked at, the creation of the national medical device registry in section 2521, page 1002 line 5:

“In developing the registry, the secretary shall…”

And the law continues on with a laundry list of items that the secretary must do in the process of creating this registry. In this laundry list of items to do, Line 17, subparagraph B: “validating methods for analyzing patient safety and outcomes data from multiple sources and for linking such data with the information included in the registry as described in subparagraph (A)”

Going back to subparagraph A [right above subparagraph B], it says: “including in the registry, in a manner consistent with subsection (f), appropriate information to identify each device described in paragraph (1) by type, model, and serial number or other unique identifier;”

Don’t be confused by the intentional obfuscation and skillful wording, This law first creates the national device registry and then immediately list all the task the secretary of health and human services will have do in the process of creating this registry.

The very first two items in the list mandates that the secretary first gives a unique identification to each of the items listed in paragraph 1 which is:

‘‘a class III device; or ‘‘a class II device that is implantable.”

Then, the very next thing the secretary is to do is to create the process by which “patient safety and outcomes data from multiple sources”, which is electronic medical records, that are linked to these newly and uniquely identified items from paragraph 1 which are the class III and class II implantable devices.

Class III devises are items such as breast implants, pacemakers, heart valves, etc. A Class II device that is implantable is, as you seen from the FDA, an implantable radio frequency transponder, RFID chip. From breast implants, to pacemakers, to RFID chips which one is the only possible one that can used for the stated purpose in section B which is, “for linking such data with the information included in the registry”? As we know from subsection A, the information in the registry is the name of a device. In plain speak, we are in a clear way being told that our electronic medical records are going to be linked to a class II implantable device!

Continuing a few lines down in this same section, section B subsection ii on still on page 1002, the “patient safety and outcomes data from multiple sources”, that is to be linked is clearly spelled out as electronic medical records. It reads:  “link data obtained under clause (i) with information in the registry”. Information in the registry is, as we know from subparagraph A, the name of the device. So what is the data obtained under clause i? Back up a few lines to clause i

It reads: “obtain access to disparate sources of patient safety and outcomes data, including Federal health-related electronic data”. Again, from breast implants, to pacemakers, to RFID chips which one is the only possible one that can used for the stated purpose in section B? That stated purpose is for linking such data and the such data is electronic medical records.

What we already have already seen in just the creation of this registry, is the device that will serve as the link, which is an RFID microchip that is categorized as a Class II implantable device, as well as what it will be the link for which is your electronic medical records.

In case the law wasn’t clear enough on that point, still in the laundry list of things to do a few more lines down on the next page, page 1005

“The Secretary to protect the public health; shall establish procedures to permit linkage of information submitted pursuant to subparagraph (A, remember subparagraph A is the class 2 implantable device reference) with patient safety and outcomes data obtained under paragraph (3, which is electronic medical records); and to permit analyses of linked data;”

Continuing on to page 1007, in the STANDARDS, IMPLEMENTATION CRITERIA, AND CERTIFICATION CRITERIA section, the secretary of health and human services is given full power to intact all mandates from the laundry list of to-do items in the creation process of the registry as well as dictate how the devises listed in the National Medical Device Registry are to be used and implemented.

“The Secretary of the Health Human Services, acting through the head of the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, shall adopt standards, implementation specifications, and certification criteria for the electronic exchange and use in certified electronic health records of a unique device identifier for each device described in paragraph 1 (National Medical Device Registry), if such an identifier is required by section 519(f) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360i(f)) for the device.”

Now on Page 503, section E Lines 13-17 and I quote: “encourage, as appropriate, the development and use of clinical registries and the development of clinical effectiveness research data networks from electronic health records, post marketing drug and medical device surveillance efforts”. Let me say that again, medical device surveillance efforts!

Now lets look at section 163 of HR3200, which gives the government a direct electronic access to your bank account which will work in conjunction with an implanted chip.

Page 58 Lines 5 through 15 reads:
(D) enable the real-time (or near real time) determination of an individual’s financial responsibility at the point of service and, to the extent possible, prior to service, including whether the individual is eligible for a specific service with a specific physician at a specific facility, which may include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identity detection card; (E) enable, where feasible, near real-time adjudication of claims

What does this mean? It means that the government will give everybody a health ID card that contains a machine readable device (magnetic strip or RFID chip) similar to a credit card. Embedded in this chip or strip is your Health Identification Number. When you visit a medical provider, the medical claims will be processed while you are still in the office. The medical providers will be paid in real time. The portion that you owe will be deducted from your bank account, in real time, according to HR 3200.

Notice here in this part which is at the beginning of 2000 plus pages of the law, it is carefully worded “which may include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identity detection card”. Here we are told that it may be a card. As you have already seen, deeper in the law [Sec. 2521 Pg. 1000] what this “may” utilize is clearly spelled out as a “class II device that is implantable”.

We can only speculate at this point why the law is set up this way. Most likely this section was written to account for the gap in time from when the process of chipping begins to when everyone has received a chip. A means of starting with a card for the sake of expedience while the process of chipping citizenry plays out. One thing is certain, the law mandates that within 3 years we will all have a chip under our skin that will serve this purpose.

Evidence of this logic is found in the deadline set for the start of the registry on page 1006.

“EFFECTIVE DATE.—The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall establish and begin implementation of the registry under section 519(g) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as added by paragraph (1), by not later than the date that is 36 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, without regard to whether or not final regulations to establish and operate the registry have been promulgated by such date.”

Also on page 259, this law requires the use of Electronic medical records system in all hospitals by 2012 which will leave a gap of at least a year before the class II implantable device is required.

Republican Congressman Ron Paul fromTexas, states on his website:

Click here to open this page

“Buried deep within the over 1,000 pages of the massive US Health Care Bill (PDF) in a “non-discussed” section titled: Subtitle C-11 Sec. 2521— National Medical Device Registry, and which states its purpose as…….. He quotes that part of the law and then goes on to say: “In “real world speak”, according to this report, this new law, when fully implemented, provides the framework for making the United States the first Nation in the World to require each and every one of its citizens to have implanted in them a radio-frequency identification microchip for the purpose of controlling who is, or isn’t, allowed medical care in their country”.

That is from a currently serving member of congress. Cutting through all the political ease, the bottom line is that eventually if you want to participate in a government healthcare plan you will have to have this chip implanted in you. This law mandates that you have to have insurance and by virtue of this law guarantees that all private healthcare insurers will be driven out of business with only the government option left. We will be in a single payer system and you will have to have an imbedded chip to be a member of this system and it is mandatory that you be a part of this system.

Uploaded by senzalamundicom on May 4, 2011

This was published on the Telegraph’s website a few months ago in instalments. It depicts terrorist attacks occurring across the western world, and the resulting measures taken by the government/ Illuminati. Some of the things it predicts is another world war (nuclear), a new centralised government, a single currency for the America’s, massive loss of freedoms and civil liberties, mandatory ID Cards and RFID chips, Mass censorship of the internet, detention of people in FEMA camps.

Is this another example of predictive programming in the mainstream media, or is this one of their cryptic warnings? I don’t know but this really does send a shiver down your spine. Make up your own mind.

 So Folks are you ready to be chipped by your government? This won’t stop illegals from getting medical help they already have id that will allow them to be chipped and we will still pay the tab!


Another solar company, another bankruptcy, another loan guarantee leaving taxpayers holding the bag

Rick Moran

Abound Solar, Inc. was awarded a $400 million loan guarantee courtesy of you and me and has now suspended operations. They plan to declare bankruptcy.

They borrowed $70 million against that guarantee, but taxpayers will still be out $40 million.

It turns out, its solar panels were too expensive to compete. Gee – who would have thought it?

Abound borrowed about $70 million against the guarantee, the Loveland, Colorado-based company said today in a statement. It plans to file for bankruptcy protection in Wilmington, Delaware, next week.

The failure will follow that of Solyndra LLC, which shut down in August after receiving a $535 million loan guarantee from the same U.S. Energy Department program. Abound stopped production in February to focus on reducing costs after a global oversupply and increasing competition from China drove down the price of solar panels by half last year.

“Aggressive pricing actions from Chinese solar-panel companies have made it very difficult for an early stage startup company like Abound to scale in current market conditions,” the company said in the statement.

U.S. taxpayers may lose $40 million to $60 million on the loan after Abound’s assets are sold and the bankruptcy proceeding closes, Damien LaVera, an Energy Department spokesman, said in a statement today.

“When the floor fell out on the price of solar panels, Abound’s product was no longer cost competitive,” LaVera said.

I really wish these companies – and the government – would stop blaming China for their failures. China may be subsidizing their solar companies but in case you didn’t notice, so are we. The fact that we gave this loan guarantee to a sure fire loser of a company keeps proving the point about this idiotic energy department program; trying to pick winners in the alternative energy business is too risky for taxpayers to foot the bill if the bureaucrats are wrong.


Obama to Soldiers: Pay Up

What happened to this won’t raise your premiums?

Threatens to veto bill unless it hikes health care fees for service members


BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff – June 29, 2012 10:22 am

The Obama administration on Friday threatened to veto a defense appropriations bill in part because it does not include higher health care fees for members of the military.

“The Administration is disappointed that the Congress did not incorporate the requested TRICARE fee initiatives into either the appropriation or authorization legislation,” the White House wrote in an official policy statement expressing opposition to the bill, which the House approved in May.

President Obama’s most recent budget proposal includes billions of dollars in higher fees for members of TRICARE, the military health care system, and is part of the administration’s plan to cut nearly $500 billion from the Pentagon’s budget.

Some fear the administration’s proposal is an effort to increase enrollment in the state-run insurance exchanges mandated under the president’s controversial health care law.

The administration urged the House to “reconsider” to fee increase, arguing they are “essential for DOD to successfully address rising personnel costs.”

The House bill has significant bipartisan support, and easily passed by a margin of 299 to 120






by ROBERT ALLEN BONELLI 29 Jun 2012, 7:13 AM PDT

While we were all debating the cost to our liberty due to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), we were ignoring the cost to our pockets.  If there ever was a reason for bipartisan rage about this law, it should be on the twenty – yes, twenty – hidden new taxes of this law.  Making matters even more relevant is that seven of these taxes are levied on all citizens regardless of income.  Hence, Mr. Obama’s promise not to raise taxes on anyone earning less than $250,000 is just another falsehood associated with this legislation.

The first, and best known, of these seven taxes that will hit all Americans as a result of Obamacare is the Individual Mandate Tax (no longer concealed as a penalty). This provision will require a couple to pay the higher of a base tax of $1,360 per year, or 2.5% of adjusted growth income starting with lower base tax and rising to this level by 2016.  Individuals will see a base tax of $695 and families a base tax of $2,085 per year by 2016.

Next up is the Medicine Cabinet Tax that took effect in 2011.  This tax prohibits reimbursement of expenses for over-the-counter medicine, with the lone exception of insulin, from an employee’s pre-tax dollar funded Health Saving Account (HSA), Flexible Spending Account (FSA) or Health Reimbursement Account (HRA).  This provision hurts middle class earners particularly hard since they earn enough to actually pay federal taxes, but not enough to make this restriction negligible.

The Flexible Spending Account (FSA) Cap, which will begin in 2013, is perhaps the most hurtful provision to the middle class.  This part of the law imposes a cap of $2,500 per year (which is now unlimited) on the amount of pre-tax dollars that could be deposited into these accounts.  Why is this particularly hurtful to the middle class?  It is because funds in these accounts may be used to pay for special needs education for special needs children in theUnited States.  Tuition rates for this type of special education can easily exceed $14,000 per year and the use of pre-tax dollars has helped many middle income families.

Another direct hit to the middle class is the Medical Itemized Deduction Hurdle which is currently 7.5% of adjusted gross income.  This is the hurdle that must be met before medical expenses over that hurdle can be taken as a deduction on federal income taxes.  Obamacare raises this hurdle to 10% of adjusted gross income beginning in 2013.  Consider the middle class family with $80,000 of adjusted gross income and $8,000 of medical expenses.  Currently, that family can get some relief from being able to take a $2,000 deduction (7.5% X $80,000 = $6,000; $8,000 –$6,000 = $2,000).  An increase to 10% would eliminate the deduction in this example and if that family was paying a 25% federal tax rate, the real cost of that lost deduction would be $500.

The fifth new tax on the middle class, and all Americans, is the Health Savings Account (HSA) Withdrawal Tax Hike.  This provision increases the additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10% currently to 20% beginning in 2013.  This provision actually sets these accounts apart from Investment Retirement Accounts (IRAs) and other tax advantaged accounts, all of which remain with a 10% early withdrawal tax.

Another regressive tax that is part of this law began in 2010 and that is the Indoor Tanning Services Tax, which places a 10% excise tax on people using tanning salons.  While some may regard this as insignificant, the broader implication is that this act of taxation is a blatant move by the federal government to control the behavior of citizens.  This provision, as does the Individual Mandate and as Justice Kennedy said during the oral arguments on the constitutionality of the law said, “….fundamentally changes the relationship between the federal government and the citizen.”

The seventh new tax that directly impacts the middle class, along with all citizens, is the Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans or the “Cadillac” Health Insurance Plan Tax.  These are plans that provide extensive coverage and that are generally fully paid for, or largely paid for, by employers.  This provision imposes a 40% excise tax on the employer-paid premium on taxpayers who are covered by such plans, beginning in 2018.  The reason it begins in 2018 is because most unionized workers are covered by plans that fall under this definition and a deferral was made to spare union members from this tax for at least a period of time.

There are thirteen other taxes that apply to businesses and that apply to high income (over $250,000 per year) households.  While these additional provisions will not impact the middle class directly, they can have serious indirect consequences for middle and low income earners.  Beginning in 2014, the Employer Mandate Tax will impose an annual non-deductible tax on employers with more than 50 employees who do not provide health insurance for their employees.

The impact of this provision on low and middle income earners, and really all working Americans, is that employers will be confronted with three choices. The first is provide some level of health insurance, as many do today, and there would be no impact on employees.  The second choice is to pay the penalty, which would most likely be less expensive than providing health insurance, and force employees to seek their own health insurance or purchase it through federal government controlled state exchanges.  Studies have estimated that 20 million Americans will lose their employee funded health insurance as a result of this provision and employers electing this option.  The third choice is for employers to lay off employees, or not hire additional employees, because Obamacare forces them to either provide health insurance or pay the new tax.

Another new tax, the Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers that begins in 2013, places a 2.3% excise tax on all items retailing for more than $100.  This provision will not only drive up the cost of various medical devices ranging from mobility assistance devices to personal testing supplies, but will also impact an industry that employs 360,000 people in 6,000 plants across our country.  This tax, while not a direct tax, would have significant negative impact on the middle class.

The Surtax on Investment Income for households earning $250,000 and more, beginning in 2013, will raise the Capital Gains Tax from 15% to 23.8% on investment income for these households and will raise Taxes on Dividends from 15% to 43.4% for the same households.  Aside from the impact on retired citizens dependent on dividends, this provision will pull income from the private economy.  In addition, the tax rate on Other Investment Income earned by Subchapter S Corporation (which many small business are organized as, allowing the owners to claim all business income as personal income) will rise from 35% to 43.4%.  This part of the provision would place additional pressure on small businesses resulting in more layoffs and less hiring, impacting all American workers.

All but one of the remaining new taxes in Obamacare are directed at health industry businesses and while they will not impact middle income families directly, the additional costs will most likely be passed on to the public.  The last new tax is really interesting, it is a tax on certain biofuels! 

What in the world does biofuels have to do with medical programs? WHAT???

These are the facts.  It does not matter if you support Mr. Obama and his new law or if you oppose it, the new taxes on the middle class or real and all Americans should understand their impact on their families and the economy.  Citizens, regardless of political beliefs, should recognize that Obamacare was passed with almost no sunlight shined on these middle class tax increases and need to understand that the new law was sold with the promise that there would be no new middle class taxes.  This is not partisan, it is simply the reality of politics.

Cowardly Obama Suppresses Fast And Furious “Smoking Gun”

June 27, 2012 By Doug Book



Under questioning by Senator Charles Grassley, Attorney General Eric Holder testified that a handful of emails written to Department of Justice officials by former ATF Acting Director Kenneth Melson are being withheld illegally from congressional committees as a result of Barack Obama’s claim of executive privilege.  Kept now under lock and key thanks to the June 20th order,  the emails have been described by Melson as “smoking guns” in that–contrary to Holder’s testimony to Congress–they “show senior DOJ officials knew about and approved the gun walking tactics in Fast and Furious.”

Fifteen months ago, Melson began his own investigation of Fast and Furious by reading through the wiretap affidavits sent by the ATF to Main Justice in Washington.  He found that the information included in the necessarily detailed documents bore little resemblance to the “facts” that had earlier been relayed to Congress by Assistant Attorney General Ron Weich. In a February 4th, 2011 letter to Senator Charles Grassley, Weich claimed that the ATF had not “sanctioned or otherwise knowingly allowed” weapons to be sold to straw purchasers or walked intoMexico. Of course, that infamous letter was retracted by the DOJ, only after the Department had maintained its assertions for a full 9 months.

The wiretap applications also made it clear that Eric Holder had lied when he repeatedly claimed to congressional committees that the DOJ knew nothing of the tactics ATF employed during the Operation. This is because wiretap applications—forms asking a court’s permission to perform a wiretap—are completed in extraordinary detail and list all previous tactical methods employed by law enforcement to gather evidence in a particular case. And each of the applications had been approved and signed by Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer, a top DOJ political appointee.


After reading the applications, Melson immediately addressed emails to a NUMBER of DOJ officials telling them to “…back off the [February 4th Weich] letter to Senator Grassley in light of the information in the affidavits (applications).” As Grassley himself later said of Melson “… he was alarmed the information in the affidavits contradicted the [DOJ’s] public denial to congress.” (1)

Sent to the Department in March of 2011, Melson’s emails alerted the DOJ to its false and potentially criminal claims just one month after the Weich letter and 3 months after the death of Brian Terry. The emails exposed lies perpetuated by both Weich and Eric Holder. Yet not only did the DOJ ignore Melson’s warnings; Holder continued his claims of innocence and ignorance on behalf of the Department and its officials—including, of course, himself.

The incriminating wiretaps applications have been sealed by a federal judge, so although copies were leaked to congressional committees, they cannot be released to the public or used in evidence against the DOJ.

And although Ken Melson informed Grassley and Issa of his emails and their content in a July 4th deposition to Committee representatives, the only copies are now sealed under Obama’s privilege order. Prior to that, the DOJ refused to provide them to Congress.

If a bare handful of documents prove the Fast and Furious guilt of Eric Holder and the Department of Justice, what could be revealed by the remaining 80,000 currently in Barack Obama’s “executive” custody? Will the American people ever know?

 These folks need to be charged and walked to jail NOW!

New Disability Regs Limit Slope of Mini Golf Holes, Require Businesses to Admit Mini Horses as Guide Animals


By Elizabeth Harrington

June 26, 2012

Mona Ramouni, who is blind, rides a bus to work with her guide horse inLincoln Park,Mich.Growing up inDetroit, Ramouni could never get a dog because her devout Muslim family considered dogs unclean. (AP Photo/Carlos Osorio/File)

( the Justice Department has extended the deadline for America’s hotels to comply with regulations regarding handicap access to swimming pools, new Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines are already being applied at miniature golf courses, driving ranges, amusement parks, shooting ranges and saunas.

Among the provisions in the “Revised ADA Standards for Accessible Design,” which went into effect on March 15, is one requiring businesses to allow miniature horses on their premises as guide animals for the disabled. Another limits the height of slopes on miniature golf holes.

“The new standards, for the first time, include requirements for judicial facilities, detention and correctional facilities, and recreational facilities,” Assistant Attorney General Thomas E. Perez said during a conference inBaltimore on June 7.

“We expect the implementation of these accessibility standards to open up doors for full participation in both the responsibilities, such as jury duty, and the benefits, such as playing at city parks, of civic life for people with disabilities,” he said.

The 2010 ADAstandards for Accessible Design require that at least 50 percent of golf holes on miniature golf courses be “accessible” – with a ground space that is “48 inches minimum by 60 inches minimum with slopes not steeper than 1:48 at the start of play.”

Other regulations include:

Saunas – provision of accessible turning space and an accessible bench.

Shooting facilities – provision of accessible turning space “for each different type of firing position.”

Golf courses – “an accessible route to connect all accessible elements within the boundary.” An accessible route must also “connect golf car rental areas, bag drop areas, teeing grounds, putting greens, and weather shelters.”

Gyms – at least one of each type of exercise machine must be positioned for use by a person in a wheelchair.

Your going to have to provide access to a treadmill, stair climber, and bikes to wheel chairs WTH!

Amusement parks – any new or altered ride must provide at least one seat for a person in a wheelchair.

A section of the guidelines regulating commercial facilities states that, “a public accommodation shall make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or procedures to permit the use of a miniature horse by an individual with a disability if the miniature horse has been individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of the individual with a disability.”

A public accommodation is defined as “a private entity that owns, leases (or leases to), or operates a place of public accommodation.”

“Miniature horses were suggested by some commenters as viable alternatives to dogs for individuals with allergies, or for those whose religious beliefs preclude the use of dogs,” the rules state.  Also mentioned as a reason to include the animals is the longer life span of miniature horses – providing approximately 25 years of service as opposed to seven years for dogs.

“Some individuals with disabilities have traveled by train and have flown commercially with their miniature horses,” the Justice Department notes.

“Similar to dogs, miniature horses can be trained through behavioral reinforcement to be ‘housebroken,’” it adds.

However, “Ponies and full-size horses are not covered.”

A business owner can deny admission to a miniature horse that is not housebroken, whose handler does not have sufficient control of the animal, or if the horse’s presence compromises “legitimate safety requirements.”

The miniature horse addition has come under the scrutiny of at least one member of Congress, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), who offered an amendment that passed the House, banning funding to implement the provision. Chaffetz penned an editorial last month in opposition to the rule entitled, “Horses in the Dining Room?

Last month the Justice Department extended the deadline for the rule requiring permanent wheelchair access to recreational pools. Citing “significant concerns and misunderstandings among a substantial number of pool owners and operators,” the department issued a notice in the Federal Register extending compliance from March 15 to May 21 this year. The date has now been pushed back further, to January 31, 2013.

The regulation requires large pools – those with over 300 linear feet of pool wall – to have two accessible means of entry, and smaller pools to have one.

For existing pools, owners making structural alterations are obliged to remove architectural barriers “to the extent such compliance is readily achievable.”

“As I consider the department’s accomplishments to date, and our plans for the future, I continue to take my inspiration from people with disabilities and their families,” Perez said inBaltimore.

“These individuals express the harm of segregation and the value of integration more eloquently than any lawyer’s brief ever could.  They are the heroes of this civil rights movement.”

A person with a disability is defined by theADA as, “a person who has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, a person who has a history or record of such an impairment, or a person who is perceived by others as having such an impairment.” is not funded by the government like NPR. is not funded by the government like PBS. relies on individuals like you to help us report the news the liberal media distort and ignore. Please make a tax-deductible gift to today. Your continued support will ensure that is here reporting THE TRUTH, for a long time to come. It’s fast, easy and secure.

Obama’s Impeachable Offenses (UPDATED)


by Michael Connelly, J.D., RedFlag Reader

April 10, 2012


Author’s Note:  Tuesday, April 10, 2012. In the 12 weeks that has passed since the original publication of this op-ed, ask yourself if President Obama’s actions have led him more, or less, in the direction of an impeachment and imprisonment. This op-ed (now with more than 5 million views) has been updated with the most current facts for the case of Obama’s Impeachable Offenses. Stay tuned right here at for future updates!

I have repeatedly been asked by a number of different people if I think that the President of the United States, Barack Obama, has committed any offenses that subject him to being impeached by the Congress of the United States. The answer is without a doubt, yes because he has repeatedly breached his oath of office. The oath of office of the President of the United States is simple and concise. It reads:

“I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Instead of living up to that oath, President Obama has actively attempted to subvert, ignore, and completely destroy large parts of the Constitution. I believe the President of the United States is well aware of what he is doing, and it is completely intentional. Based from my years as a constitutional attorney, listed below are what I believe are impeachable offenses, and the list continues to grow.

1.  President Obama has appointed numerous people to cabinet level positions without the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate, as is required by the Constitution. These individuals are given extraordinary power and independent funding, and are not under the scrutiny of Congress. The fact that Obama calls them Czars does not make them legal. He has also made illegal recess appointments of other members of his cabinet that required Senate approval. He simply declared that the U.S. Senate was in recess despite the fact that no such declaration had been made by the Senate. The President has no Constitutional authority to do this.

2.  The push by Pres. Obama to pass healthcare legislation in the Congress of the United States that he was fully aware was unconstitutional. He has continued to use his powers and executive branch of government to implement this legislation despite the fact that a federal judge had declared the entire law unconstitutional, and ordered that it not be implemented. In addition, Obama has directed members of his administration to violate the right to freedom of religion protected by the 1st Amendment to the Constitution.

Religious institutions such as churches and schools have been ordered to provide contraceptives and abortion inducing morning after pills to employees as part of the health care bill requirements. The fact that this is a direct violation of their religious teaching is of no concern to Obama.

3.  Despite the fact that the United States Senate refused to pass the Cap and Trade bill, the President has ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to use regulations to implement key portions of the bill, including those regulating so-called greenhouse gases. Obama himself has acknowledged that this will force energy prices in this country to skyrocket. He is taking these actions in direct defiance of the will of the people of the United States, the will of Congress, and the Constitution. The actions of the EPA include regulations that will force many coal burning power plants to close.

4.  Through the Department of the Interior (DOI) Obama has placed a moratorium on offshore oil drilling or exploration off both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the United States and in parts of the Gulf of Mexico. He has also prohibited new drilling exploration on federal land in any state within the United States. These actions by the DOI have continued in direct defiance of several court orders issued by Federal Judge Martin Feldman in New Orleans, Louisiana declaring that the department had no authority to issue such a moratorium on drilling in the Gulf. In fact, the Secretary of the Department of the Interior (DOI) has been held in contempt by the same judge. The administration has claimed to be complying, but has tied up the drilling permits in so much red tape that the effect is the same.

5.  Instead of allowing American companies to drill for oil domestically, Obama has betrayed the American people and authorized loans of billions of dollars to countries like Brazil and Mexico so that they can drill for oil, and then sell that oil to the United States. This will dramatically increase our dependence on foreign nations including Venezuela, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, and even Libya that do not serve the interest of America or the American people.

Obama has also refused to approve the keystone pipeline from Canada to the United States that would not only lessen our dependence on oil from countries like Venezuela and Saudi Arabia, but create thousands of new jobs in the United States. The decision on the pipeline is one that belongs in the hands of the members of Congress, not the President.

6.  President Obama has abdicated his responsibility to enforce the laws of the United States against illegal immigration. He has virtually declared our southern border an open border by declaring certain areas of federal land in states like Arizona as off-limits to federal, state, and local authorities. This is despite the fact that these areas are being used to bring in thousands of illegal immigrants, massive amounts of drugs, and also being used by foreign terrorists to infiltrate the United States. He has also ordered the border patrol not to arrest most illegal immigrants entering the country, and has stopped deportation proceedings against thousands of people in this country illegally. He is in effect instituting the so-called “dream act” bypassing the Congress of the United States which has sole authority over immigration matters.

7.  The President and his Attorney General Eric Holder have clearly violated their oath of office by joining with foreign countries such as Mexico, Bolivia, and Columbia, in lawsuits against the sovereign states of Arizona, Georgia, and Alabama to stop them from enforcing the federal immigration laws.

8.  President Obama has ordered the Federal Communications Commission to adopt regulations giving the federal government control of the Internet and its contents, including providing Obama with a kill switch that gives him authority to shut down the Internet if he sees fit. This is in direct violation of a decision by the United States Supreme Court that the FCC has no Constitutional authority to control the Internet.

There were two bill pending in Congress to effectively give Obama the kill switch he wants over the Internet. When these two proposals, the Stop Internet Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) were withdrawn amid public outcry Obama announced he will sign an international treaty that purports to give him the same authority. He has signaled his intention to do this as an “Executive Act” and not bring the treaty to the Senate for ratification as required by Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution. I believe he intends to take the same action in regard to the United Nations Small arms treaty and the UN Law of the Sea treaty that are both unlikely to get Senate approval.

9.  One of the paramount responsibilities of the President of the United States and his executive branch of government is to enforce and defend laws adopted by Congress unless they are declared unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court. Obama has decided that he should ignore this Constitutional mandate, and that as President he is more powerful than either the Congress of the United States or the Supreme Court. He has unilaterally declared that the Defense of Marriage Act passed by the Congress is unconstitutional, and further declared that he will not have the Justice Department defend it against lawsuits.

His administration has also refused to enforce laws against voter intimidation and federal law that requires states to purge their voter registration lists of deceased individuals and those that are registered illegally. In addition, the Justice Department is refusing to allow states to enforce laws requiring proof of identity by voters at the polls. Obama has essentially said that he is the supreme ruler of the United States, and that the Congress and the Federal Judiciary are irrelevant.

10.  It has been widely reported that acting through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms the Obama administration was involved for months in getting legitimate and law-abiding gun store owners along our southern border to supply weapons to straw buyers who the government knew would deliver them to the drug cartels in Mexico. This was billed as a sting operation against the cartels when in fact it was designed to produce fraudulent data showing that large numbers of weapons were going from the United States to the Mexican drug dealers.

This data was then to be used, and is being used, to try to justify new gun control regulations to limit the rights of American citizens to keep and bear arms. It has nothing to do with arresting members of the drug operations. The administration has, in effect, armed our enemies, and one border patrol agent has already been killed by one of these weapons. Now, Obama continues to impose gun control laws by Executive order so he will not have to deal with Congress. The administration is also refusing to cooperate with the committees in the House of Representatives that are investigating the entire operation. It is even defying Congressional subpoenas.

11.  The President of the United States is not authorized by the Constitution to take our nation to war without the consent of the Congress of the United States. The only exception to this is the authority granted to the President by Congress under the War Powers Act. This law allows the President to take immediate action without the consent of Congress if there is an imminent threat to the security of the United States, or its citizens. Although there was clearly no such imminent threat caused by the Civil War in Libya, the President committed members of the United States military to combat missions in a foreign country without the consent of Congress. He based his authority on a United Nations resolution, and a resolution by the Arab League.

Now, the President has carried it one step further. During testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 7, 2012, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta told Senators that the President has authority to take our country to war without the Congressional approval required by Article 1, Section 8, of the Constitution. The administration is taking the position that it can ignore Congress as long as it has United Nations approval or NATO approval.

However, these actions may be the least of the worries facing the American people. The White House insisted that language be included in the recently passed National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that gives the President sole authority to order the military to arrest and indefinite detain American citizens on U.S. soil if the President suspects them of terrorist ties. This was amazingly passed overwhelmingly by Congress. It appears to be another situation where few members read the bill before voting on it.

This was almost immediately followed by another unconstitutional executive order titled the National Defense Resources Preparation order. It is similar to orders signed by past Presidents, but this one includes language that appears to give Obama the authority to declare martial law in peacetime, and take over the allocation of everything from food and fuel to transportation and health care. This violates the Constitution in a number of different ways.

12.  Last but not the least of my dirty dozen of impeachable offenses, is the fact that since taking office the President has used executive orders, laws pushed through Congress in the dark of night, and administrative actions by his departments to nationalize and control automobile manufacturers, banks, insurance companies, and portions of the healthcare industry. This is designed to take our country from a free enterprise economy to a socialist economy. There is absolutely no authority in the Constitution of the United States that allows the President to do this.

Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution provides as follows:

“The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

I contend that among those high crimes and misdemeanors is the intentional violation of the oath of office administered to the President and all other federal officials. In fact, federal law at 5 U.S.C. 7311 specifically provides that violation of the oath of office includes advocating the overthrowing of our constitutional form of government. This is specifically declared a criminal offense in 18 U.S.C. 1918 and is punishable by both a fine and imprisonment.

In the 12 areas I mentioned in the paragraphs above I firmly believe that Obama, Eric Holder, and numerous other members of his administration have gone beyond just advocating the overthrow of our constitutional form of government. They are actually engaged in making it happen, and as a result should be impeached and convicted. There are also the emerging issues of corruption such as the Solyndra scandal caused by Obama using stimulus money to pay off campaign contributors.

Will there be an impeachment and conviction in the current Congress? Probably not, since it takes a two thirds vote in the House of Representatives to impeach, and a two thirds vote in the Senate to convict. With Harry Reid and the progressives still in control of the Senate, and many of them guilty of some of the same impeachable offenses, they will resist it.

However, we are the American people and we still have a right to control our government, and the people elected to represent us. Therefore, I am personally calling on the conservative members the House of Representatives to bring this action based on the grounds I have enumerated so that the American people can understand what is really at stake here. Then “we the people,” can make our voices heard.

— Michael Connelly, retired constitutional lawyer

Check out Michael Connelly’s new radio talk show that airs every Wednesday at 4:00 PM Eastern on America’s Web Radio. Be sure to visit his non-profit organization Constitutional Law Alliance (CLA) where he has written a booklet on the U.S. Constitution that every patriotic American should own and distribute to friends and relatives.Michael Connelly teaches constitutional law through Education to Go, an online company that provides courses to numerous universities. He is a retired attorney, the author of four books, publisher of a website, and U.S. Army veteran.

SPEAK UP! Do you have something to say? Share your opinion on RedFlag’s Opinion page! Read our simple instructions on how to submit an op-ed for review by clicking here.




Why the House Must Impeach President Obama

We, the lovers of freedom and the supporters of limited government, cannot merely wait the clock out on the Obama presidency

– Dr. Robert R. Owens  Friday, June 22, 2012


In America today, just like in Lake Woebegone, every child is above average and every child gets a trophy. We may score low in international grade comparisons but we rank number one in self-esteem. In other words, American students may not be doing well but they think they are. Those of us old enough to remember how Dad could control the situation with a look and when you got in trouble in school your parents didn’t sue or contact the School Board, you got in trouble at home, too, are also old enough to remember Watergate.

This scandal that the general public still does not understand brought down a president and led to the Watergate Congress which threw away the victory in Vietnam and solidified the Progressive control of Congress until 1994. Today we are confronted with contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law that makes the Watergate Scandal look like the tempest in a teapot that it actually was. How many people died as a result of the Watergate Scandal = 0. How many have died as a result of the Fast and Furious debacle = at least 200 and still counting, including an American law enforcement officer. How did Richard Nixon disrespect, disregard or violate the Constitution in the Watergate Scandal = 0 (although his use of Executive privilege did spark a constitutional crisis). How many times has Barack Obama disrespected, disregarded or violated the Constitution during his time in office = at least twice as documented below by making recess appointments while Congress was still in session and refusing to enforce laws.

There is an old saying, “That’s good enough for government work.” This saying comes out of the big government make-work programs of the 1930s and has been used ever since as short hand for “Approximate is close enough,” which might as well be the new national motto. In societies that rob Peter to pay Paul the stage before all the Peters change their names to Paul is typified by government bean counters picking winners and losers. This process discourages producers and encourages non-producers assuring you get less of the former and more of the latter. As an educator I have a belief that if you don’t teach someone to do something right you are teaching them that doing it wrong is acceptable.

If Congress does not assert its place as a co-equal branch of government, the Imperial Presidency of Barack Obama will continue to usurp power. From recess appointments while Congress is in session to refusing to enforce the laws of the land this President is fundamentally transforming our system of government. Not through the amendment process, but through a campaign of unconstitutional and therefore illegal actions designed to buy him enough votes for a second term. Whether it is through the money laundering schemes that are government negotiations with public service unions, pork barrel payoffs to political donors, or back-door amnesty, this is nothing more than buying votes: a time-honored Chicago tradition. Combine this with a campaign to resist any attempt to verify who is voting and the stage is set for an election that would make any managed society proud.

His supporters may call it the Audacity of Hope Campaign, but if it is successful it will be the audacity which crushes any hope of limited government, personal liberty, and economic freedom. The dreams from his father will become the nightmares of our children and grandchildren. With no authority Mr. Obama is attempting to rule by decree. Executive orders have previously been used to direct the Executive Departments how to implement laws. Mr. Obama is using them to legislate, and that is in direct contravention to the separation of powers clearly outlined in the Constitution.

President Obama has built a shadow government that parallels and is standing ready to supplant our constitutional government. He has appointed more Czars than most of his predecessors and these Czars are not just advisers, they are actually tasked with duties that under our traditional American governmental structure have been the responsibility of Cabinet Secretaries. These Czars are not confirmed; they are anointed, and none of them are accountable to anyone but the President. Even though Congress voted to defund his Czars, President Obama has said he will ignore that part of the Budget and keep them anyway. A cult of personality surrounds him typified by a compliant media which fawns over his every action and defends his every transgression.

As if to add icing to the cake, the Obama Administration has invoked Executive Privilege to support Attorney General Holder in his refusal to surrender all requested documents in the Fast and Furious Scandal. What national security issues could there be in this matter? If the documents proved that the operation really did start under the Bush administration as Mr. Holder contends does anyone doubt they would have been on the table yesterday?  Either the President is attempting to protect his Attorney General, some member of the White House staff, or himself. Either way, this may eventually provide a real similarity to the Watergate Scandal. Though in this case the cover-up could not be worse than the crime it could lead to enough fallout to make his own supporters leave a sinking ship to avoid the stigma of a failed presidency and a looming constitutional crisis.

If this slide into tyranny is not stopped it will continue. If it is not protested it will be accepted. I know there are not enough Senators to convict, but if these blatant attacks upon the checks and balances are not punished, at least by the shame and reproach of an Impeachment Resolution, they are being silently condoned. Speaker Boehner, stand up and lead the House! Don’t just make a speech; present a case. Don’t just give us a photo op; give us a fighting chance to save this great experiment in human freedom.

If you don’t stand for something you will fall for anything. America, it is time to stand up to this Southside Chicago bully, and let him know he can’t have our lunch money anymore, and he can’t subvert our Republic, either, at least not without us protesting and using every legal means available to stop him and preserve limited government.

We, the lovers of freedom and the supporters of limited government, cannot merely wait the clock out on the Obama presidency. Because if he wins another term with all these affronts to constitutional government unchallenged combined with a campaign based upon class warfare and the redistribution of wealth he and his statist backers will declare it a mandate for more of the same, on steroids. An oligarchy of the perpetually re-elected veneered over a permanent nomenclature of federal bureaucrats will easily fall in line behind a complacent and complicit media to cheer the new order as the soft tyranny of the central planners tell us what is best for us and then forces us to say thank you.

Protest the lawless Progressive counter-revolution! Contact you Representative and demand an impeachment hearing to investigate President Obama for the High Crimes of subverting the Constitution. He should be investigated for:

  • making recess appointments while Congress was still in session
  • for ignoring his obligation to enforce the laws of the land in the areas of Immigration and the Defense of Marriage Act
  • for incorrectly using a claim of Executive Privilege to cover up reckless and possibly criminal activity in the Fast and Furious scandal.

Act today! Contact your Representative and let them know patriotic Americans want this tyranny ended and limited government restored. Keep the faith. Keep the peace. We shall overcome.

IT is WAY past time to IMPEACH this whole administration NOW!

How can you claim Executive Privilege on something You never saw?

June 23, 2012 4:00 A.M.

Fast and Furious and OCDETF
Whom is executive privilege protecting?

By Andrew C. McCarthy

Eric Holder testifies before Congress on May 3, 2011.

The media commentary about “executive privilege” makes your eyes glaze over. That’s intentional: When you are throwing sand in the public’s eyes, as the administration is in the Fast and Furious scandal, you want the talking heads droning on about the jurisprudence of “presidential communications” and “deliberative process.” Blather about the legal contours diverts your attention from the only question that really matters: Why?

Why is President Obama denying Congress and the public access to critical information about his administration’s part in a shockingly ill-conceived investigation that resulted in the murder of Brian Terry, a heroic federal Border Patrol agent and veteran U.S. Marine. And when I say “his administration’s part,” that, too, is intentional.

When the president intervened with an eleventh-hour privilege assertion as the House committee verged on citing his obstructive attorney general for contempt, the Obamedia storyline, naturally, was that Obama was protecting Holder. But if we know anything after a half-decade of closely watching Barack Obama, it is this: The One is in it for The One. The president invoked executive privilege because he is protecting himself.

On March 22, 2011, in an interview on Spanish-language television, President Obama, unbidden, brought up Fast and Furious in what were obviously considered remarks. He declared:

There have been problems, you know. I heard on the news about this story that — Fast and Furious, where allegedly guns were being run into Mexico, and ATF knew about it, but didn’t apprehend those who had sent it. Eric Holder has — the attorney general has been very clear that he knew nothing about this.

By the time the president volunteered these words, a cover-up was already well underway within his administration. Weeks earlier, on February 4, 2011 — nearly two months after Agent Terry was murdered — Holder’s Justice Department sent Congress a letter flatly denying that it had facilitated the illegal transfer of weapons to Mexico and insisting that its agencies always make “every effort to interdict weapons that have been purchased illegally and prevent their transportation to Mexico.” These representations, we now know, were outrageous falsehoods. But what is not well understood is just how outrageous.

In point of fact, top Justice Department officials certainly knew about the Fast and Furious investigation’s use of the fateful “gunwalking” tactic for many months before this letter was submitted — probably for over a year. They were banking on Fast and Furious as a great success story. But when Agent Terry was killed, they abruptly changed tack, first denying that gunwalking had happened and, when that failed, scrambling to distance the Justice Department’s political appointees and the White House from the inevitable murder and mayhem the gunwalking has caused — and will continue to cause. That was the burden of the president’s unsolicited comments: to maintain that “ATF knew” about the gunwalking but Holder did not . . . and Obama did not.

Indeed, on May 3, 2011, in astounding House testimony, Holder claimed that he’d only heard about Fast and Furious “for the first time probably over the last few weeks.” This not only contradicts Obama’s account, which has Holder discussing the case (and denying knowledge of its tactics) two months earlier; it defies everything we now know, including that Holder was planning to attend a triumphant Fast and Furious press conference back in 2010 — before Agent Terry’s death sent the Obama administration reeling.

Understanding this calls for some “inside baseball” about how the Justice Department works. In particular, you’ll want to introduce yourself to “OCDETF,” a term near and dear to the DOJ heart, though one unknown to the public — and boy, does the administration ever want to keep it that way.

OCDETF stands for the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force. It was created during the Reagan administration to throw the coordinated muscle of Justice’s component investigative agencies — especially the FBI and the DEA — at domestic and international organized crime, a scourge that had been dramatically exacerbated by unprecedented drug-trafficking millions.

I was working at the U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan at the dawn of OCDETF — which at DOJ is referred to as if it were a word, “Osedef.” In those days, with New York City both the notorious capital of La Cosa Nostra and the target market of Colombian drug cartels, I was fortunate to be assigned to some of the original “Osedef cases.”

Very soon, everybody wanted to work on them, and investigative agencies jabbed their sharpest elbows in the competition to have their prize investigations designated OCDETF. The reason was straightforward: OCDETF cases were the cases the Justice Department cared about, meaning: They were the cases that got bottomless funding and extensive resources.

OCDETF cases are Justice’s crown jewels: the investigations that go on for months (sometimes more than a year) and result in vast arrest sweeps, bells-and-whistles press conferences, high-profile trials, and epic convictions and sentences. To carry such cases off demands mega manpower. Besides developing and exploiting informants, the agencies infiltrate criminal conspiracies with undercover agents, use the information gathered as the basis for wiretaps, and coordinate this eavesdropping with physical surveillance. It takes scores of agents to monitor bugs, conduct sometimes 24/7 spying on multiple subjects, and manage informants, who tend to be very high-maintenance. This costs money, lots of money.

OCDETF money pours out, but not without one very big string attached: the involvement of Justice Department headquarters in Washington — known as “Main Justice” in DOJ circles.

The vast majority of federal criminal investigations have virtually nothing to do with Main Justice. They are run exclusively by the local district U.S. attorney’s offices (of which there are 94 throughout the country), working in each case with the field offices of a federal investigative agency: FBI, DEA, ATF, Secret Service, postal inspectors, etc. Almost never do these mundane cases involve wiretaps or multiple agencies conducting extensive surveillance. When they end successfully, the investigative agency and the U.S. attorney may put out a press release to the local media, but no one in Washington ever hears about them.

OCDETF cases are very different. They get to the front of the line when it comes to resources, particularly wiretapping — one of the only investigative techniques for which federal law requires approval by the attorney general or his designee (a top DOJ official) before the investigating agency and the district U.S. attorney may seek court approval. (For example, no Main Justice green-light is needed to seek a search warrant, make an arrest, flip an informant, convene a grand jury, issue a subpoena, or collect evidence in sundry other ways.)

Moreover, as you might expect, given that the “OC” in OCDETF stands for “Organized Crime,” OCDETF investigations almost always contemplate — and frequently indict — racketeering charges under RICO (the statute outlawing “Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations”). RICO is one of the few federal laws under which a district U.S. attorney needs permission from Main Justice before indicting.

Why go through all of this detail? Because the Obama administration has offered a palpably false narrative about Fast and Furious. It is this: Acting on their own, recklessly irresponsible ATF agents in Arizona — under the ostensible direction of the local U.S. attorney, who was actually asleep at the switch — dreamed up the Fast and Furious investigation, with its rogue “gunwalking” tactic. Against all government protocols, thousands of firearms were allowed to be transferred from “straw purchasers” to violent Mexican drug gangs, in the vain hope that they’d turn up in crime scenes and searches of high-ranking cartel operatives, enabling the U.S. government to make spectacular cases against the kingpins rather than the low-ranking nobodies.

This went on for a time with inadequate supervision, and, predictably, when the arsenal fell into the hands of the savage criminals, it resulted in violent crimes, including murders — murders that tragically included Agent Terry’s. Finally, word of the operation slowly made it across the country to Washington, where Obama DOJ appointees raised concerns with top ATF officials. Though they may be faulted for moving too slowly, eventually these DOJ appointees alerted their boss, Attorney General Holder, who was horrified and acted decisively to shut the operation down.

Bunk. In fact, Fast and Furious was an OCDETF case. That made it a Main Justice case, not the orphan Arizona debacle of media portrayal.

The Justice Department is so high on OCDETF, and has been for 30 years, that the program has its own special place on the DOJ website. There, readers learn that OCDETF is “the centerpiece of the United States Attorney General’s drug strategy to reduce the availability of drugs by disrupting and dismantling major drug trafficking organizations and money laundering organizations and related criminal enterprises.” The most important of these “related enterprises” is the illegal acquisition and use of guns — which, besides being evidentiary staples of narcotics and RICO prosecutions, are coveted by investigators because they significantly increase jail sentences upon conviction.

The website goes on to explain that the “OCDETF strategy” is implemented “under the direction of the Deputy Attorney General” — second in command to Holder at DOJ (and, in fact, the position Holder himself occupied in the Clinton/Reno Justice Department). With the coordinated effort of numerous investigative agencies and U.S. attorneys under Main Justice’s leadership, OCDETF is depicted as not only “disrupt[ing] the drug market” but “bolster[ing] law enforcement efforts in the fight against those terrorist groups supported by the drug trade.” Main Justice annually develops a “Regional Strategic Plan” for the country by requiring OCDETF participants to “identify major Regional Priority Organizational Targets.” And it has established an “OCDETF Fusion Center” as “the cornerstone” of its “intelligence-driven law enforcement, an essential component to the OCDETF program.”

In other words, the defining features of OCDETF are investigative coordination under the Justice Department’s leadership and the liberal sharing of information across the department’s array of agencies. No OCDETF case is an outlier.

Now let’s consider some of the information chairman Darrell Issa’s House investigating committee has gathered — much of it from whistleblowers, not Holder’s stonewallers.

Fast and Furious began in the fall of 2009, when agents in ATF’s Phoenix office developed their strategy — including the fateful gunwalking tactic — with the U.S. attorney. But things really got going in January 2010. It was then that the case became an OCDETF investigation. This does not just happen in the blink of an eye. It is a deliberate process. ATF and the U.S. attorney had to apply to Main Justice for OCDETF status. A case gets approval for funding — which can run well into the millions of dollars — only if senior Justice Department officials, after studying the formally submitted proposal, determine that the investigation has great promise.

The Obama Justice Department made exactly that determination. And this was no rubber stamp — it never is, given the number of agencies across the country competing over the OCDETF pot of gold. Chairman Issa’s most recent memo (dated May 3, 2012) explains that, to win its OCDETF designation, Fast and Furious was “reorganized as a Strike Force including agents from ATF, FBI, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) component of the Department of Homeland Security.” Because of the investigation’s importance, a senior ATF agent (who later became a whistleblower) was transferred to Phoenix to help oversee the case.

The OCDETF designation enabled Fast and Furious investigators to use wiretaps. This is highly unusual in ATF-run cases — almost all federal wiretapping is done in investigations led by the FBI or the DEA. As noted above, wiretapping requires Main Justice approval. But that’s not all: As I’ve previously outlined, federal wiretap law mandates that the application to the court describe the investigative tactics that have been used in the investigation and explain why those tactics cannot achieve the investigation’s objectives without wiretapping. If the Fast and Furious wiretap applications complied with federal law, they must have described the gunwalking tactic. These applications cannot be submitted to a federal judge until they have been approved by Main Justice; they are submitted to the Department’s Office of Enforcement Operations, which screens them very carefully.

There is little doubt that the wiretap applications would show that senior DOJ officials were aware of the gunwalking tactic long before Agent Terry was gunned down on December 14, 2010. But that’s not the half of it. Bet your bottom dollar that gunwalking was discussed in the consideration of whether to make Fast and Furious an OCDETF case in the first place. OCDETF investigations, moreover, are carefully monitored by the Justice Department throughout, to ensure that the extraordinary flow of funding continues to be worthwhile. I’m wagering that senior DOJ officials — which is to say, Obama-administration political appointees — knew about the gunwalking for close to a year before Agent Terry’s death.

With that as background, consider this little-noticed paragraph from the Issa memo:

Washington-based Justice Department officials had earlier [in 2010] discussed bringing Attorney General Eric Holder to Phoenix for a triumphant press conference with Arizona U.S. Attorney Dennis Burke to herald the conclusion of the Department’s flagship firearms trafficking case. In the aftermath of Agent Terry’s death, the task of announcing indictments at a press conference fell to ATF Phoenix Division Special Agent in Charge William Newell and Burke. Holder did not attend.

The “lights, camera, action” press conference is a standard feature of OCDETF cases. It is discussed for weeks, if not months, on end. It has to be. The amount of funding lavished on these cases results in great pressure to bring them to a fittingly spectacular conclusion as soon as practicable — with a barrage of arrests and search warrants. But the attorney general will be made to look foolish if, after enormous sums have been spent, in addition to thousands of agent and prosecutor work hours invested, the case ends without arrests, or the suspects arrested are not the main culprits, or the main culprits manage to flee before agents can find and put handcuffs on them.

Orchestrating the “takedown” is thus no mean feat. It always results in extensive consultations among all the participating components, including Main Justice, to decide when the arrests should occur, what the state of the evidence is against the main targets, and whether the main targets are “in pocket” — covered by surveillance so agents know they can be grabbed the moment the takedown starts. This goes double when there is to be a press conference attended by the attorney general himself.

If, prior to Agent Terry’s murder, plans were already being made for Attorney General Holder to appear at the anticipated press conference to announce arrests, it is inconceivable that discussions about the case were not ongoing between the U.S. attorney’s office and Main Justice — which, of course, would already have been quite familiar with the case because of the OCDETF designation and the wiretaps.

OCDETF cases get the attention of the Justice Department’s top hierarchy. What gets that level of attention gets the attorney general’s attention. And what gets the attorney general’s attention very often gets the president’s attention.

That would be the president who just invoked executive privilege.

Andrew C. McCarthy is the author, most recently, ofThe Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America.

Obama bars Congress from obtaining Fast and Furious papers

No Cover up here from the most transparent administration in our history. These Liars need to be Impeached then thrown in to Gitmo where they can share a cell with their buddys!

Published: 20 June, 2012, 19:47

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder (Reuters / Jonathan Ernst)

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder (Reuters / Jonathan Ernst)

US President Barack Obama has intervened in a Capital Hill probe centered on Attorney General Eric Holder, asserting executive privilege to keep documents linked to the Fast and Furious gun smuggling operation withheld from Congress.

In the midst of an investigation being spearheaded by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, President Obama once more departed from his campaign promise of a transparent presidency by granting executive privilege on behalf of Holder early Wednesday to keep Congress from obtaining documents involved in the gunwalking scheme. The House committee was considering charging Holder with being in contempt of Congress for refusing to release documents to the panel, to which the White House responded on Wednesday by allowing the attorney general to go ahead with his refusal.

Attorney General Holder appealed to President Obama for assistance on Tuesday following a lengthy Capitol Hill hearing. On Wednesday, Deputy Attorney General James Cole informed Rep. Darrell Issa (R-California) the president has granted the request, a practice fairly uncommon since being legitimized by the Supreme Court during the Nixon administration when that president refused to comply with congressional demands.

Nonetheless, Rep. Issa has remained adamant about obtaining information that the panel considers being crucial into the botched gun smuggling ring orchestrated by the Justice Department. Holder, however, insists that the documents being demanded by Congress pertain to the “deliberative process” on how to handle congressional and media inquiries and are unfit for release.

“We regret that we have arrived at this point, after the many steps we have taken to address the committee’s concerns and to accommodate the committee’s legitimate oversight interests regarding Operation Fast and Furious,” Cole’s letter reads. “Although we are deeply disappointed that the committee appears intent on proceeding with a contempt vote, the department remains willing to work with the committee to reach a mutually satisfactory resolution of the outstanding issues.”

During a Tuesday meeting between Holder and the House, Rep. Issa told reporters that the attorney general brief the panel on the contents of the documents but was persistent with keeping them from being released.

“We want the documents. Brian Terry’s family would like the documents that are responsive to how in fact their son was gunned down with weapons that came from lawful dealers but at the … behest of the Justice Department,” Issa told Fox News.

Earlier Issa had said, “We’re not looking to hold people responsible. We’re looking for document production.”

On Wednesday, Rep. Issa implied that the House committee would continue to go about their investigation, tweeting, “Prepping for #contempt proceedings against #Holder for #FastAndFurious stonewalling. Didn’t have to be this way, but we’ll do our duty.”


Today’s Meeting with AG Holder about Fast and Furious Documents and Contempt


June 19, 2012

Today’s Meeting is at 5 p.m. in the Capitol

Chairman Issa, Senator Grassley, and Attorney General Holder have agreed to meet this evening at 5 p.m. in the Capitol.  The best place to stake out the meeting is the Rotunda (Members of Leadership and their staff will not be participating in the meeting).  DOJ has requested that Rep. Elijah Cummings and Sen. Patrick Leahy also be permitted to attend.  Chairman Issa has indicated he will grant this request.  Currently, DOJ has not delivered or shown the Committee ANY of the documents it has said it is prepared to produce.  It is not clear if they will actually produce these documents to the Committee before the Wednesday vote to facilitate a postponement.

Possibility of postponement is and always has been about whether DOJ produces a described subset of documents before Wednesday’s vote 

This evening’s meeting between Chairman Issa and Attorney General Holder is NOT being done “in exchange”  for a postponement of Wednesday’s vote.  Chairman Issa has repeatedly stated over the past week that a postponement of Wednesday’s vote would only come after the delivery of a subset of Post February 4 documents that Attorney General Holder said he was prepared to produce and the Department of Justice further outlined to Committee investigators on Thursday, June 14.  The length of any postponement would depend on the amount and substance of documents delivered.

• On June 14, 2012, Attorney General Holder wrote that, “the Department is prepared to provide documents that, while outside the scope of the Committee’s interest in the inappropriate tactics used in Fast and Furious, are responsive to how the Department’s understanding of the facts regarding that matter evolved throughout 2011 and how the Department came to withdraw its February 4, 2011, letter to Senator Grassley.”

• On June 15, 2012, Chairman Issa wrote to the Attorney General that, “production of the documents noted in your letter and outlined yesterday in a meeting with Committee staff would be sufficient for me to justify a postponement of the Committee’s scheduled vote on contempt to facilitate their review and discussions with the Department.  I am prepared to announce this delay once the Department produces these documents.”

• On June 18, 2012, Chairman Issa reiterated this position writing, “only the delivery of documents outlined and offered by the Department of Justice last Thursday to staff will be sufficient to justify a postponement of Wednesday’s scheduled vote.”

The Committee is not in a position to take contempt completely and permanently off the table at this evening’s meeting

• On June 15, 2012, Chairman Issa indicated to the Attorney General that documents that could justify a postponement still leave, “substantial concerns that these documents may not be sufficient to allow the Committee to complete its investigation.”

• On June 18, 2012, Chairman Issa reiterated this position:  “I will not be in a position tomorrow to negotiate over whether certain actions – short of full compliance – are sufficient to warrant more than a delay of contempt proceedings.”

Chairman Issa has explained what DOJ needs to do to have serious discussions about fully and finally ending contempt proceedings

On June 18, Chairman Issa explained that full information is necessary for the Committee to determine exactly what post February 4, 2011, documents the Department may not need to produce:

“The Department has also failed to provide a log that includes descriptions of documents, the dates they were created, who created them, and individualized explanations for why the Department believes these documents should not be produced pursuant to the subpoena.  Only the Department knows what it possesses.  A full understanding of the post-February 4, 2011, documents under subpoena that the Department is not prepared to produce is essential for the Committee to determine whether the Department has substantially met its obligations.”

Chairman Issa ultimately seeks an agreement rendering contempt unnecessary

On June 13, Chairman Issa wrote to Attorney General Holder:  “I believe the interests of the Department, Congress, and those directly affected by reckless conduct in Operation Fast and Furious are best served by an agreement that renders the process of contempt unnecessary.”

Chairman Issa, as outlined above, has indicated that he will continue to pursue contempt if the Justice Department does not agree to produce documents they have indicated they will produce prior to the scheduled contempt vote.

House has narrowed its request to accommodate DOJ’s concerns about material gathered that could affect prosecutions

Chairman Issa has outlined the substantial efforts he and House leadership have made to accommodate the Justice Department’s wish to avoid producing materials gathered during the Fast and Furious investigation.  This has been done by narrowing the focus to subpoenaed documents created after the investigation ended and indictments had been announced.

Why are the post February 4, 2011, documents critically important?

On February 4, 2011, the Department of Justice denied whistleblower allegations that guns in Operation Fast and Furious had been allowed to “walk” to Mexico and defended the Operation itself. Ten months later, on December 2, 2011, the Justice Department formally withdrew this denial and acknowledged that Fast and Furious was “fundamentally flawed.” In responding to Congress, however, the Justice Department has taken the position that it will not share its internal deliberations related to Operation Fast and Furious that occurred after it denied anything inappropriate occurred on February 4, 2011. This position effectively denies Congress and the American people information about:

o The Justice Department switching its view from denying whistleblower allegations to admitting they were true.

o Hiding the identity of officials who led the charge to call whistleblowers liars and retaliate against them.

o The reactions of top officials when confronted with evidence about gunwalking in Fast and Furious, including whether they were surprised or were already aware.

o The Justice Department’s assessment of responsibility for officials who knew about reckless conduct or were negligent.

o Whether senior officials and political appointees at fault in Operation Fast and Furious were held to the same standards as lower level career employees whom the Department has primarily blamed.

While officials at the Department of Justice had earlier claimed that divulging this information would have a “chilling effect” on future internal deliberations, they have more recently expressed a greater willingness to produce this material. Congress, under both Democratic and Republican leadership, has never recognized internal agency discussions as privileged and protected.

Obama, Napolitano, Resettlement

– John Burtis Saturday, June 16, 2012

The longer the Obama regime remains in power, the more it begins to resemble a dictatorship.  And from my perspective as a German historian, not just any dictatorship.

As the long night began to fall across Europe, beginning with the destruction of Czechoslovakia in 1938 and 1939, and the invasion of Poland in September of 1939, the Nazi’s, and in particular Heinrich Himmler as head of the SS, and hence of all the myriad operational groups which made up this “state within a state”, plans were hatched to begin a vast resettlement of peoples.

Populations indigenous to these two initial states, were to be broken up into a series of classes according to race. Those judged by Himmler and his RuSHA (die Rasse und Siedlungs Hauptamt; the Race and Settlement Main Office) to be of racial value were sent to Germany. Those who were not were either sent to Germany as foreign workers to replace the German industrial workers were called into the armed services, while the others, of lesser racial value, remained behind to be worked to death in various Nazi industrial enterprises or were transferred to the camp system for death through forced labor.

Later, after the invasion of the Soviet Union in June of 1941, and the enormous territory won that first summer, which stretched from Leningrad in the north, through Smolensk, outside Moscow, to the Crimean Peninsula in the south, Himmler and his minions had vast spaces to resettle, tens of millions of local people to assess for racial value, to move, and to murder. The aim of the Nazi colossus at this point in the war, before the snows in front of Moscow, before Stalingrad and the loss of an entire year of military production and 90,000 POW’s, and the enormous losses incurred in the Battle of Kursk in the summer of 1943, was to be a complete re-ordering of the populations of Europe through the resettlement of Germans and the newly Germanized, the classification of the former occupants by racial characteristics, and the application of mass murder to achieve this goal.

Only the victory of the Allied Powers prevented the completion of this element of Hitler’s and Himmler’s vast utopian continent wide plans for a new population order.

Yesterday, Friday, June 15th, 2012, President Barack Obama issued an executive order to Janet Napolitano, our U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security, to cease deporting illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. before they were 16 and are younger than 30. They also must have no major criminal offenses in their backgrounds, have been in the country for at least five continuous years, have graduated from a U.S. high school or have earned a GED, or served in the military. Individuals who have been convicted of a felony, a significant misdemeanor offense, or three or more other misdemeanor offenses not occurring on the same date and not arising out of the same act, omission, or scheme of misconduct are not eligible to be considered for deferred action under the new process.

These are young people who study in our schools and play on our playgrounds,” President Obama stated. “They are Americans in every single way but one – on paper.”

They already broke the Law by coming into country ILLEGAL

Those now eligible also can apply for a work permit that will be good for two years with no limits on how many times it can be renewed. The change is expected to impact roughly 800,000 illegal immigrants.  Or more.  Nobody knows how many.

So, on a Friday out of nowhere, Obama and Napolitano, decide to forego Congress and overlook our sacred Constitution yet again, this time with the clear aim of the resettlement of a criminal class and a further re-ordering of America’s racial make-up, all designed to better his chances in November, to increase the number of Democratic voters and those beholden to a swollen central government, and to further hasten the end of the white majority.

Let’s for a moment compare the Nazi’s ideas and those of Obama. Hitler and Himmler, according to their way of thinking, were going to move German and part-German settlers into a conquered area after the so called “riff-raff” had been eliminated. And their instrument of choice was RuSHA. Obama and his slavish paladin, Napolitano, have waved a magic wand over 800,000 illegal aliens, called them Americans in everything except on paper (read the poor, bedraggled federal law for ‘paper’), and have given them until forever to remain here, oh, unless we want the infamous DREAM Act forced on us so all the illegal aliens can stay. The gold dust twins are using Homeland Security in the America of today, a unique juxtaposition of terms, to offer asylum to a criminal class for criminal ends.

But, in both cases, resettlement was and is a radical proposition.The first attempt failed, luckily. Will the second serve as a basis for reordering our country? Only November will tell.

UPDATE Fort Hood massacre survivors were afraid shooter would ‘finish the job’


Last Updated:8:31 AM, June 16, 2012

Posted:8:30 AM, June 16, 2012

FORT HOOD, Texas — Survivors of the Fort Hood massacre say they expected the accused shooter, Maj. Nidal Hasan, to “come in and finish the job,” according to interviews to be broadcast on “Fox Files: The Enemy Within.”

“I saw the muzzle of the weapon pointed at me about six feet away,” Pvt. George Stratton III told FOX News in his first TV interview since the Nov. 5, 2009, shooting that killed 13 and injured more than 43 others.

Stratton, who had just turned 18 at the time of the shooting, said the readiness center was turned into a battlefield bathed in blood, as the wounded crawled to the exit doors to save themselves.

Maj. Nidal Hasan

“As soon as I got out the first set of doors, I got up to my knees, pushed the other door open and kneed my way out, and I got up to my feet,” he said.

Stratton, who needed his family’s permission to enlist at the age of 17, thought he might be safe until he heard a soldier cry out that the shooter was following the wounded.

“He’s coming around the corner with the gun, he’s shooting and killing people,” Stratton said. “I just sat there — felt helpless — felt hopeless waiting for this person to come in and finish the job.”

Staff Sgt. Shawn Manning was shot six times, with one bullet narrowly missing his heart. Manning said he had sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. Manning paused as he described the shooter.

“Domestic enemy, I mean, that’s what this was,” Manning said. “He might have worn the uniform, but he wasn’t a soldier. He didn’t act like a soldier. He tried to kill soldiers. I mean, he was an enemy — plain and simple.”

When it came to Hasan, Manning said, there was a double standard. Hasan wrote emails to radical American cleric Anwar al Awlaki — seeking advice on reconciling his Muslim faith with serving in the Army. This fact was known to the FBI.

“You could lose your security clearance in the Army for having bad credit and be kicked out of the Army. But you can’t lose your security clearance for talking to a member of al Qaeda, through email. I mean, it doesn’t make any sense,” Manning said.

Despite calls from some members of Congress, none of the injured or murdered soldiers from the 2009 shooting has been awarded the Purple Heart.

WHY hasn’t this muslim not been tried and court-martial yet? What is the hold up you have a Marine Sgt who made a facebook quote against our socialist idiot in the WH and he is out in a very short time but this MUSLIM has yet been tried WTF??? This guy should have been tried and executed already!!


‘A Mafia operation was run in the early infancy of the state’

Published: 20 hours ago

CertificateThe lead investigator for Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse– which already has found probable cause that Barack Obama’s publicly released birth certificate is a forgery– says any Hawaii documentation for Obama’s birth that exists would probably be of little value.

Mike Zullo, a retired New Jersey detective now heading Arpaio’s volunteer investigative team, explained in an interview that at the time of Obama’s birth during the state’s early years, Hawaii birth documentation routinely was purchased by foreigners for children not born in the state.

Arpaio’s investigation was launched last September after constituents came to the sheriff with their concern that Obama was ineligible for the presidency and would perpetrate a fraud by placing his name on the state’s ballot.

Zullo’s comments came in an interview with Tea Party Power Hour host Mark Gillar.

Gillar described the process in the 1960s: Foreign nationals, primarily from Japan, would fly to Hawaii and buy a birth registration for their son or daughter, not with the goal of one day having them become president, but to obtain the benefits of being a U.S. citizen.

Zullo said that when he was in Hawaii last month following up on leads, he talked to older locals who “informed us about a syndicate operation, a Mafia operation if you will, being run in the early infancy of the state of Hawaii where birth certificates were being sold to Japanese refugees on a black market basis.”

At that time, Japan was still undergoing post-war reconstruction while America was an established superpower.

Zullo said there was a business in Hawaii in “birth certificates … for profit.”

Obama released an image of a Hawaiian birth certificate last year as “proof positive” of his birth in the U.S. and “natural born” citizenship, a constitutional requirement for the presidency.

There have been numerous challenges to Obama’s eligibility. Some say that regardless of where he was born, he isn’t qualified because the Founding Fathers understood a natural-born citizen to be the offspring of two U.S. citizens. Obama’s father was a foreign national who only attended school in the U.S.

Zullo also debunked again the contention that 1961 newspaper birth announcements prove anything. He argued the listings were generated automatically by the state and delivered for publication based on the registration of any child with the state.

Anybody that is hanging their hat on a newspaper entry to prove … Barack Obama [was] born in the state of Hawaii doesn’t know what they’re talking about,” he said.

The births of Japanese children whose parents purchased Hawaii birth certificates also would be listed in the papers, he explained.

During that time period, Japanese parents would fly to Hawaii so their children, born in Japan, could have the benefits of American citizenship, he said.

For that reason, he said, Obama can’t claim that a Hawaii birth certificate is proof he was born in the state.

The interview:

The interview also addressed unanswered questions about the “discovery” of the Obama birth documentation. Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie, when elected, promised to track down the documentation to put to rest the arguments over Obama’s birth location and eligibility.

The governor eventually concluded, in January 2011, that there was something “written” in state records, but he was unable to produce any documents to the public.

Then, when Obama requested a certified copy of the original documentation three months later, state officials reportedly produced the documentation.

Abercrombie is no longer eager to address the issue.

Earlier this week, WND tried to find out what happened to the governor’s self-initiated research into Obama’s birth documentation.

Initially, Abercrombie  spokeswoman Donalyn Delacruz told WND she was happy to help with questions – until she found out the subject.

When WND asked in an email for an explanation of why Abercrombie’s investigation could not turn up the documentation, she refused to answer.

What news organization are you with?” she demanded. “We get frequent ‘birther’ questions and this would fall in that category.”

Subsequently, she refused to respond to email questions.

When WND called, a receptionist in the office responded to the same inquiry with “That’s been done” – apparently meaning president had released the birth certification image. But she promised to take a message and have someone call back.

No one did.

WND had questions about the anomalous results: The governor’s stated inability to find the documentation and the state agency’s later simple recovery and alleged duplication of the same record.

It was shortly after his election that Abercrombie vowed to end the questions from those who doubted Obama’s status as a “natural born citizen.”

Stated Abercrombie then: “We’ll do what we can as quickly as we can to make it inevitable that only those who wish the president ill, only the ones with a political agenda, will be the ones doing this kind of thing.

The president is entitled to the respect of his office and he’s entitled to have his mother and father respected,” he said.

He said he was instructing his attorney general and the chief of the state’s health agency to look at what legal avenues could be used to release information.

This is a transparent state in terms of our communication with one another,” Abercrombie said. “This is the Aloha state. We care for each other, we look out for each other, we’re family.”

or translated we will cover up if need be IMHO!

He told CNN in that interview that he would pursue the information regardless of the feelings of the White House.

It’s a matter of principle with me. I knew his mom and dad. I was here when he was born. Anybody who wants to ask a question honestly could have had their answer already,” he announced.

Obama’s narrative states that he was born Aug. 4, 1961, at Kapiolani Hospital in Honolulu.

However, after a flurry of high-profile media interviews in which he blasted “birthers,” Abercrombie suddenly went silent even though polls reveal nearly six on 10 doubt Obama’s own eligibility story.

He told the Honolulu Star-Advertiser about Obama’s documentation: “It actually exists in the archives, written down.”The London Daily Mail, however, noted Abercrombie “suggested that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Barack Obama may not exist within the vital records maintained by the Hawaii Department of Health.”

Yet, when Obama wanted the records, the state instantly waived a ban on reproducing long-form birth certificates and copies were produced to be delivered to Judith Corley, a private attorney.

WND continues to report on multiple legal challenges to Obama over his status as a “natural born citizen.” The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states: “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

Some of the lawsuits question whether Obama actually was born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama’s American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama’s citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Further, others contend it’s impossible for him to be considered a “natural born citizen” as his father was a foreign national.

author-imageby BOB UNRUH

Bob Unruh joined WND in 2006 after spending nearly three decades writing on a wide range of issues for several Upper Midwest newspapers and the Associated Press. Sports, tornadoes, homicidal survivalists, and legislative battles all fell within his bailiwick. His scenic photography has been used commercially, and he sometimes plays in a church worship band.

Executive Overreach


By John Yoo June 15, 2012 8:26 P.M.

President Obama’s claim that he can refuse to deport 800,000 aliens here in the country illegally illustrates the unprecedented stretching of the Constitution and the rule of law. He is laying claim to presidential power that goes even beyond that claimed by the Bush administration, in which I served. There is a world of difference in refusing to enforce laws that violate the Constitution (Bush) and refusing to enforce laws because of disagreements over policy (Obama).

Under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution, the president has the duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” This provision was included to make sure that the president could not simply choose, as the British King had, to cancel legislation simply because he disagreed with it. President Obama cannot refuse to carry out a congressional statute simply because he thinks it advances the wrong policy. To do so violates the very core of his constitutional duties.

There are two exceptions, neither of which applies here. The first is that “the Laws” includes the Constitution. The president can and should refuse to execute congressional statutes that violate the Constitution, because the Constitution is the highest form of law. We in the Bush administration argued that the president could refuse to execute laws that infringed on the executive’s constitutional powers, particularly when it came to national security — otherwise, a Congress that had a different view of foreign policy could order the military to refuse to carry out the president’s orders as Commander-in-Chief, for example. When presidents such as Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, and FDR said that they would not enforce a law, they did so when the law violated their executive powers under the Constitution or the individual rights of citizens.

The president’s right to refuse to enforce unconstitutional legislation, of course, does not apply here. No one can claim with a straight face that the immigration laws here violate the Constitution.

The second exception is prosecutorial discretion, which is the idea that because of limited resources the executive cannot pursue every violation of federal law. The Justice Department must choose priorities and prosecute cases that are the most important, have the greatest impact, deter the most, and so on. But prosecutorial discretion is not being used in good faith here: A president cannot claim discretion honestly to say that he will not enforce an entire law — especially where, as here, the executive branch is enforcing the rest of immigration law.

Imagine the precedent this claim would create. President Romney could lower tax rates simply by saying he will not use enforcement resources to prosecute anyone who refuses to pay capital-gains tax. He could repeal Obamacare simply by refusing to fine or prosecute anyone who violates it.

So what we have here is a president who is refusing to carry out federal law simply because he disagrees with Congress’s policy choices. That is an exercise of executive power that even the most stalwart defenders of an energetic executive — not to mention the Framers — cannot support.

A Comprehensive List Of Obama’s Worst Executive Orders

June 15, 2012 By Laurie Roth

King Obama SC A Comprehensive List Of Obamas Worst Executive Orders

There have been over 900 Executive orders put forth from Obama, and he is not even through his first term yet. He is creating a martial law ‘Disney Land’ of control covering everything imaginable. Some of the executive orders he has signed recently have been exposed thanks to ‘Friends of Conservative Action Alerts.’ They have compiled a choice list of ‘Emergency Powers, Martial law executive orders’: Get your headache medication out while you still can without a prescription.

* Executive Order 10990 allows the Government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.

* Executive Order 10995 allows the government to seize and control the communication media.

* Executive Order 10997 allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels, and minerals.

* Executive Order 11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision.

* Executive Order 11001 allows the government to take over all health education and welfare functions.

* Executive Order 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons.

* Executive Order 11003 allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.

* Executive Order 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate and establish new locations for populations.

* Executive Order 11005 allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways, and public storage facilities.

* Executive Order 11049 assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issues over a fifteen-year period.

* Executive Order 11051 specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.

* Executive Order 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute Industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.

* Executive Order 11921 allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit, and the flow of money in U.S. financial institutions in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when the president declares a state of emergency, Congress cannot review the action for six months.

It is more than clear that Obama is planning for the total control and takeover of America via Martial Law. Food, energy, transportation, work, banking, and health…he has it covered.

While Obama is busy pulling executive orders out of the sky to control everything inside our country, he has been issuing executive orders to force us to submit to international regulations instead of our Constitution. Sher Zieve exposed this in one of her recent articles. Damn the U.S. Constitution, damn the American people and damn U.S. sovereignty.

We must send faxes, emails, and make calls to all congressman and demand they stop Obama’s perverted, extreme, and Unconstitutional abuse of Executive Orders. It is time to demand our elected leaders start protecting America, our sovereignty, and our Constitution. So far, they seem to be protecting the Obama – Marxist takeover plans…peppered with a little U.N. and Islam.

Chinese plot to strip Americans of firearms

Jeff Knox explains how communist ideals converge in both Asia and U.S.

Published: 21 hours ago

author-image by Jeff KnoxEmail |

Jeff Knox is a second-generation political activist and director of The Firearms Coalition. His writing can regularly be seen in Shotgun News and Front Sight magazines as well as here on WorldNetDaily.



On May 25, the State Council Information Office of the People’s Republic of China published a report titled “The Human Rights Record of the United States in 2011″ as a counterattack response to a U.S. human rights report that was critical of China.

The first thing on China’s list of U.S. human rights failures was our failure to adequately protect our citizens from crime and, specifically, the easy availability of firearms.

The report laments that, “The United States prioritizes the right to keep and bear arms over the protection of citizens’ lives and personal security and exercises lax firearm possession control, causing rampant gun ownership. The U.S. people hold between 35 percent and 50 percent of the world’s civilian-owned guns, with every 100 people having 90 guns.”

The same idiotic complaint we have heard from propaganda groups like the Brady Bunch and the Violence Policy Center for decades as firearms ownership has climbed sharply, while crime has simultaneously gone down to record lows.

As a matter of fact, the firearms portion of the Chinese report could have been written by Brady staffers, as it pulled up one bogus cliché after another, generally supported only by some isolated statistic or anecdotal example.

The report went on to attack the U.S. over our failures regarding freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. To support these assertions, they used select tidbits from reports about the way various governments shut down the “Occupy” protests (without mentioning the intentional civil disruption and unsanitary conditions associated with those protests) and critical essays from rights advocates like the Electronic Frontier Foundation complaining about government interference with the Internet. Columnists warning about potential dangers in the Patriot Act and erosion of rights in the name of the “War on Terror” were presented as proof of the nations flagging commitment to individual rights of privacy and due process, as were examples of wrongful imprisonment, police abuses and our overall prison statistics.

It’s not that these accusations are totally false or of no concern. We have our issues, and we certainly don’t always live up to our principles.

But a lecture on human rights from the people who committed the Tiananmen Square atrocity and are even now waging a long-running genocide against women and the unborn is the ultimate in hypocrisy. The fact that virtually all of the criticisms of our failings in the areas of privacy, freedom of speech, due process and economic justice are a direct result of misguided political leaders following down the path of socialist/communist government control and micro-management adds irony to the hypocrisy.

Certainly there are corrections needed in the laws and enforcement policies of our nation, but they are corrections that would move us away from the communist ideal and toward personal responsibility and individual liberty – things that the Chinese government abhors.

What is left unsaid in the Chinese critique of U.S. policies is the fact that we the people have the authority and duty – morally and legally – to change things any time we find the government headed down the wrong path. While there are issues, we retain the right and power of free speech and assembly, a free press and the power of the vote. As a last resort, we also retain the right, as expressed in the Declaration of Independence, to “throw off” an unjust government and “provide new Guards” for our future security.

I find it interesting that the first attack of the Communist Chinese against U.S. social policy targets the means by which we secure our other rights. Yes, the U.S. is awash in firearms of every conceivable design and capability, but the very numbers of those firearms belies the suggestion that it is the guns that cause the crimes. If this were true, we would have all killed each other long ago.

The fact is, that like cars or pharmaceuticals, firearms can be abused, misused and do great harm, but like cars and pharmaceuticals, they also serve the greater good. Only a tiny fraction of firearms are ever involved in criminal or accidental harm. The most common abuse being their use in suicides, which evidence strongly suggests would be carried out regardless of the availability of a firearm. Firearms are safely and responsibly possessed by over half the population and are used in defensive situations more than twice as often as they are used in offensive actions.

More importantly, the U.S. recognizes the right of the individual to be in control of their own security for self-defense and for the defense of families, communities, states and the nation.

To date, no gun-control scheme of any sort has ever been proven to deliver even minor reductions in crime, accidents or suicides in any nation. Even if restrictions were to reduce some aspect of crime, they could not be justified because they undermine both the individual right to self-defense and the collective right to political self-determination.

Some scoff at suggestions that hunters and target shooters could successfully challenge the power and technology of a modern army, and there is no doubt that a civil war would be an ugly and terrible thing, would even Chinese troops have dared to move against the protesters in Tiananmen Square if there were guns and ammunition in over half of Chinese homes?

It is telling that the Chinese report “The Human Rights Record of the United States in 2011″ should point an accusing finger toward numerous instances of the U.S. emulating Chinese political philosophy and practices (in minor ways) and also decry the core principle of liberty that guarantees against those policies and practices being advanced or expanded upon. The right to arms is a fundamental individual right that serves to protect not only the individual, but the nation as well. Tyranny cannot coexist with the individual right to arms.

Si vis pacem, para bellum: “If you seek peace, prepare for war.” This is true of citizens as well as nations – and the Chinese know it.


KGB Propaganda now in on presidential race

Judi McLeod Thursday, June 14, 2012

In the 1950s, school children were taught how to crouch under their desks during air raid drills.  The Lib-Left of the day ridiculed the drills as Cold War paranoia.

Who knew back then that celebrities would pre-fund $3.5 million for a soft landing to the Gorbachev Foundation for a move into a new, white shingled bay-front house at the historic Presidio overlooking San Francisco’s Golden Bridge? From his scenic, paid-for digs former Soviet Union leader Mikhail Gorbachev began systematically dismantling America’s military bases.

Who knew during the Cold War that one far off day,  a pro-Russia, anti-American president would be caught on camera mic boasting to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev that he would soon have the ‘flexibility’ to make a deal on ballistic missile defenses in Europe, while boasting of an already assured reelection victory?

Nothing in James Bond flicks could ever come close to the real shudders down the spine so many felt in hearing the picked up by microphone whispered message to Medvedev from a president whose unabashed mission has been and remains to be,  the Total Transformation of America.

Pope John Paul II, Ronald Reagan and Maggie Thatcher were all prescient and willing to do something to warn the free masses about the inherent evil of Communist Russia.

Courageous Pope John Paul II, who as Karol Wojtyla, celebrated Mass within range of Soviet rifles,  proudly wore the earned honour of being the Kremlin’s Public Enemy No. 1.  Reagan’s noble, immortal command, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall” still rings in the human heart decades after he first uttered it.

All these heroes of our time knew that by the time the Free World celebrated the fall of the Big Tree of Communism, its roots had already spread to fertile pockets of the West.

Nothing has significantly changed in the Russian agenda.  Gorbachev is given free rein fomenting for revolution on American soil; coldblooded, former KGB agent Vladimir Putin is now President of Russia.

Though, you won’t see it on the nightly news, bloodthirsty to spread propaganda about blood in the streets of America, the KGB is in on the American presidential election.

“According to the Kremlin, blood has already been spilled.” (Douglas V. Gibbs, Canada Free Press, June 14, 2012).

“Then again, this is the same propaganda arm of the Russian government that used to show images of Skid Row to Russians, claiming that was a typical scene in the United States.”

The deliberate spread of propaganda in quest of completing a Marxist-Socialist agenda is common on today’s Worldwide Web.

       Faux stories like the one in which The Russian Federal Security Service allegedly reports that last week a “violent” battle erupted in Michigan between American rebels, and military personnel loyal to the Obama Regime—including a casualty list of at least 380 men, women and children among 500 gathered, in a rally against America’s “slide towards a totalitarian dictatorship”, are proof positive that Russian intelligence service or their agents will play a big part in what they hope is the reelection of Barack Hussein Obama.

Like their friends in the Obama regime, Russian Intelligence work to kill off Tea Party popularity.

According to the Russian report, the purpose of the gathering of patriots was to “form a 50-State alliance of local law enforcement and political officers seeking to turn the tide of their nation’s path towards dictatorship even, should it be necessary, by armed force.”

In layman’s terms, Russia is stirring the pot.  This time with the potency of its celebrated rot-gut vodka.

Some people will believe the Russian propaganda if only because they want to believe it.

Right out of Conspiracy 101 were the supposed KGB claims of airstrikes over Michigan, “the largest being a 2,000 lb. laser-guided bomb that hit in the middle of those gathered at the rally killing over three quarters of them instantly”.

Like proverbial spies yearning to come in out of the cold through the gateway of the USA, Communist Russia, Socialist France and their sidekick radical Islam nations, are all chafing at the bit to get Obama re-elected this November.

But while they have Obama swimming in their shark tank, they haven’t seen that he’s really a puppet-stringed paper tiger who excels not in anything substantial but only in shooting basketball hoops, swinging golf clubs and shilling for $3 donations from life’s little people.

Free Phones Costing Taxpayers $2.1 Billion Per Year


Spending Off the Hook:

by John Sexton

You’re probably familiar with the food stamp program which grew from $35 billion in 2008 to $75 billion last year. But did you know that getting food stamps also makes you eligible for a free government cell phone?

A program called Lifeline provides free phones and free monthly minutes to anyone on food stamps, WIC, Medicaid, Head Start, and several other government programs. And just like food stamps, Lifeline (aka “phone stamps”) has been growing by leaps and bounds since 2008, at significant cost to taxpayers.

Lifeline was started in the mid-’80s to reduce the cost of phone service to rural and needy customers. The program’s costs are covered by a tax included on every monthly phone bill called the Universal Service Charge. The program eventually grew to include discounted cell service but took off in 2009, partly because TracFone announced a new program whereby eligible individuals could get a free phone and free monthly minutes. As a result, participation in the program (and costs) skyrocketed:

Program participation was stable from 2005 to 2008, from 6.9 million to 7.1 million participants, but increased to 8.6 million in 2009. Likewise, support payments were relatively stable from 2005 to 2008, from $802 million to $823 million annually, before increasing to approximately $1 billion in 2009.

The rapid growth of the program has continued since then. In 2011, the FCC estimated the cost (page 153) of the program would be $2.1 billion and said it would reach $3.3 billion by 2014 absent major reforms. The FCC also found that part of the problem with the program was rampant fraud:

[O]ur ongoing oversight has revealed that a substantial number of subscribers are receiving duplicative Lifeline support, which includes individuals receiving two or more Lifeline benefits from ETCs as well as two or more individuals in a household receiving benefits from multiple ETCs.

How bad is the fraud? A survey conducted by the FCC across 17 states and territories found that, on average, 9% of phone recipients were ineligible (page 243). In some states like Alabama, New Hampshire, and West Virginia, the ineligibility rate was 18-19%. And all of that is based on a survey to which 27% of users refused to respond to questions.

In order to combat this problem, the FCC recommending the creation of a national database to keep track of multiple users. The project was expected to cost $7.5-$10 million to set up, though this is much less than the amount the government is expected to save by cutting duplicate lines.

And the freebies won’t end with basic calling service. As part of the effort to extend broadband, the FCC has been discussing making broadband service part of the Lifeline program. In other words, taxpayers could soon be paying for smartphone features on these free government phones.

The real question is why American consumers should be providing free cell phones and free monthly talk time to 10 million people in the first place. As you can see in this video report from a Chicago ABC affiliate, some people signing up for these free phones are doing so to replace cell phones they already have (and have to pay for). If the goal is really to connect individuals to essential services such as fire and police, FCC rules already mandate that carriers transmit those calls along with detailed location information regardless of whether an individual has service with a carrier or not. Given our debt and our deficits, it is time to consider hanging up on this booming, fraud-ridden Lifeline to taxpayer’s wallets.

Who’s the racist now?

There is a common misconception that republicans are racist and that is part of the reason why african-american people side with dumb-o-crats. Well, Here’s a few facts for you that might make you stand up and take notice.

March 20, 1854:To stop the Democrats’ pro-slavery agenda, anti-slavery activists founded the Republican party, starting with a few dozen men and women in Ripon, Wisconsin.

 Shortly After: Democratic opposition arose to combat Republican efforts to protect the civil rights of all Americans. Democrats bitterly opposed equality for blacks, and therfore founded the Ku Klux Klan, which operated as the party’s terrorist wing.

May 22, 1856: Two years after the Grand Old Party’s birth, U.S. Senator Charles Sumner (R., Mass.) rose to decry pro-slavery Democrats. Congressman Preston Brooks (D., S.C.) responded by grabbing a stick and beating Sumner unconscious in the Senate chamber. Disabled, Sumner could not resume his duties for three years.


July 30, 1866: New Orleans’s Democratic government ordered police to raid an integrated GOP meeting, killing 40 people and injuring 150. (New Orleans Massacre)

September 28, 1868: Democrats in Opelousas, Louisiana killed nearly 300 blacks who tried to foil an assault on a Republican newspaper editor.

October 7, 1868: Republicans criticized Democrats’ national slogan: “This is a white man’s country: Let white men rule.”

April 20, 1871: The GOP Congress adopted the Ku Klux Klan Act, banning the pro-Democrat domestic terrorist group.

October 18, 1871: GOP President Ulysses S. Grant dispatched federal troops to quell Klan violence in South Carolina.

September 14, 1874: Racist white Democrats stormed Louisiana’s statehouse to oust GOP Governor William Kellogg’s racially integrated administration; 27 are killed.

August 17, 1937: Republicans opposed Democratic President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Supreme Court nominee, U.S. Senator Hugo Black (D., Al.), a former Klansman who defended Klansmen against race-murder charges.

February 2005: The Democrats’ Klan-coddling today is embodied by KKK alumnus, Robert Byrd, West Virginia’s U.S. senator and, having served since January 3, 1959, that body’s dean. Thirteen years earlier, Byrd wrote this to the KKK’s Imperial Wizard: “The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia.” Byrd led Senate Democrats as late as December 1988. On March 4, 2001, Byrd told Fox News’s Tony Snow: “There are white niggers. I’ve seen a lot of white niggers in my time; I’m going to use that word.” National Democrats never have arranged a primary challenge against or otherwise pressed this one-time cross-burner to get lost.

Contrast the KKK Democrats with the GOP.

-When former Klansman, David Duke ran for Louisiana governor in 1991 as a Republican, national GOP officials scorned him. Local Republicans endorsed incumbent Democrat Edwin Edwards, despite his ethical baggage. As one Republican-created bumper sticker pleaded: “Vote for the crook: It’s important!”


What Republicans HAVE DONE FOR Blacks in this Country:

-Republicans also have supported legislation favorable to blacks, Starting with the 1854 First Republican Party Platform…

1865: Congressional Republicans unanimously backed the 13th Amendment, which made slavery unconstitutional. Among Democrats, 63 percent of senators and 78 percent of House members voted: “No.”

1866: 94 percent of GOP senators and 96 percent of GOP House members approved the 14th Amendment, guaranteeing all Americans equal protection of the law. Every congressional Democrat voted: “No.”

February 28, 1871: The GOP Congress passed the Enforcement Act, giving black voters federal protection.

February 8, 1894: Democratic President Grover Cleveland and a Democratic Congress repealed the GOP’s Enforcement Act, denying black voters federal protection.

January 26, 1922: The U.S. House adopted Rep. Leonidas Dyer’s (R., Mo.) bill making lynching a federal crime. Filibustering Senate Democrats killed the measure.

May 17, 1954: As chief justice, former three-term governor Earl Warren (R., Calif.) led the U.S. Supreme Court’s desegregation of government schools via the landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision. GOP President Dwight Eisenhower’s Justice Department argued for Topeka, Kansas’s black school children. Democrat John W. Davis, who lost a presidential bid to incumbent Republican Calvin Coolidge in 1924, defended “separate but equal” classrooms.

September 24, 1957: Eisenhower deployed the 82nd Airborne Division to desegregate Little Rock’s government schools over the strenuous resistance of Governor Orval Faubus (D., Ark.).

May 6, 1960: Eisenhower signs the GOP’s 1960 Civil Rights Act after it survived a five-day, five-hour filibuster by 18 Senate Democrats.

July 2, 1964: Democratic President Johnson signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act after former Klansman Robert Byrd’s 14-hour filibuster and the votes of 22 other Senate Democrats (including Tennessee’s Al Gore, Sr.) failed to scuttle the measure. Illinois Republican Everett Dirksen rallied 26 GOP senators and 44 Democrats to invoke cloture and allow the bill’s passage. According to John Fonte in the January 9, 2003, National Review, 82 percent of Republicans so voted, versus only 66 percent of Democrats.

True, Senator Barry Goldwater (R., Ariz.) opposed this bill the very year he became the GOP’s presidential standard-bearer. However, Goldwater supported the 1957 and 1960 Civil Rights Acts and called for integrating Arizona’s National Guard two years before Truman desegregated the military. Goldwater feared the 1964 Act would limit freedom of association in the private sector, a controversial but Goldwater was a ‘principled libertarian’ and his objection rooted in the First Amendment rather than racial hatred.

June 29, 1982: President Ronald Reagan signed a 25-year extension of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The Republican party also is the home of numerous “Firsts.” Among them:

Until 1935, every black federal legislator was Republican. America’s first black U.S. Representative, South Carolina’s Joseph Rainey, and our first black senator, Mississippi’s Hiram Revels, both reached Capitol Hill in 1870. On December 9, 1872, Louisiana Republican Pinckney Benton Stewart “P.B.S.” Pinchback became America’s first black governor.

August 8, 1878: GOP supply-siders may hate to admit it, but America’s first black Collector of Internal Revenue was former U.S. Rep. James Rapier (R., Ala.).

October 16, 1901: GOP President Theodore Roosevelt invited to the White House as its first black dinner guest Republican educator Booker T. Washington. The pro-Democrat “Richmond Times” newspaper warned that consequently, “White women may receive attentions from Negro men.” As Toni Marshall wrote in the November 9, 1995, “Washington Times,” when Roosevelt sought reelection in 1904, Democrats produced a button that showed their presidential nominee, Alton Parker, beside a white couple while Roosevelt posed with a white bride and black groom. The button read: “The Choice Is Yours.”

GOP Presidents Gerald Ford in 1975 and Ronald Reagan in 1982 promoted Daniel James and Roscoe Robinson to become, respectively, the Air Force’s and Army’s first black four-star generals.

November 2, 1983: President Reagan established Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday as a national holiday, the .

President Reagan named Colin Powell America’s first black national-security adviser while GOP President George W. Bush appointed him our first black secretary of state.

President G.W. Bush named Condoleezza Rice America’s first black female NSC chief, then our second (consecutive) black secretary of State. In early 2005, one-time Klansman Robert Byrd and other Senate Democrats stalled Rice’s confirmation for a week. Amid unanimous GOP support, 12 Democrats and Vermont Independent James Jeffords opposed Rice — the most “No” votes for a State designee since 14 senators frowned on Henry Clay in 1825.


And just for the sake of repeating this:

March 20, 1854:To stop the Democrats’ pro-slavery agenda, anti-slavery activists founded the Republican party, starting with a few dozen men and women in Ripon, Wisconsin.

That is OUR Republican Party’s ORIGINAL platform people! It’s as true today as it was back then.

So tell me.. who’s the racist now?

Post Navigation


Honor America

China News

News and Opinions From Inside China

My Opinion My Vote

America needs saving


The greatest site in all the land!

Linux Power

Just another weblog

The ‘red pill’ and its opposite, ‘blue pill,‘ are pop culture terms that have become symbolic of the choice between blissful ignorance (blue) and embracing the sometimes-painful truth of reality (red). It’s time for America to take the red pill and wake up from the fog of apathy.

The Mad Jewess

Mirror Site For Reflection


Sudden, unexplained, unattended death and a families search for answers

Dedicated to freedom in our lifetimes

News You May Have Missed

News you need to know to stay informed


Making the web a better place

U.S. Constitutional Free Press

Give me Liberty, Or Give me Death!


Swiss Defence League

NY the vampire state

Sucking the money from it's citizens as a vampire sucks blood from it's victims. A BPI site

The Clockwork Conservative

All wound up about politics, history, culture... lots of stuff.

PUMABydesign001's Blog

“I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: as government expands, liberty contracts.” Ronald Reagan.




Weapons-grade blogging; quips, quotes and comments 'cause we live in a world gone mad.......

%d bloggers like this: