Obama Campaign - "If I Wanted America To Fail"

Total Pageviews

Daily Devotions


If you support our national security issues, you may love and appreciate the United States of America, our Constitution with its’ freedoms, and our American flag.

If you support and practice our fiscal issues, you may value worldly possessions.

If you support and value our social issues, you may love Judeo-Christian values.

If you support and practice all these values, that is all good; an insignia of “Wisdom” . - Oscar Y. Harward

Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Fly the American Flag on 9/11.


FLY THE FLAG of the United States of America .


On Sunday, September 11th, 2011, an American flag should be displayed outside every home, apartment, office, and store in the United States . Every individual should make it their duty to display an American flag on this tenth anniversary of one our country's worst tragedies. We do this in honor of those who lost their lives on 9/11, their families, friends and loved ones who continue to endure the pain, and those who today are fighting at home and abroad to preserve our cherished freedoms.

In the days, weeks and months following 9/11, our country was bathed in American flags as citizens mourned the incredible losses and stood shoulder-to-shoulder against terrorism. Sadly, those flags have all but disappeared. Our patriotism pulled us through some tough times and it shouldn't take another attack to galvanize us in solidarity. Our American flag is the fabric of our country and together we can prevail over terrorism of all kinds.

Action Plan:

So, here's what we need you to do ...

(1) Forward this email to everyone you know (at least 11 people). Please don't be the one to break this chain. Take a moment to think back to how you felt on 9/11 and let those sentiments guide you.

(2) Fly an American flag of any size on 9/11. Honestly, Americans should fly the flag year-round, but if you don't, then at least make it a priority on this day.

Thank you for your participation. God Bless You and God Bless America
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
By Gary Varvel - August 30, 2011

Democrats plan to win in 2012

Nancy Pelosi called Harry Reid into her office one day and said, "Harry, I have a plan to win back Middle America in 2012!"

"Great, but how?" asked Harry.

"We'll go to Wall-Mart, get some cheesy clothes and shoes like most middle Americans wear then stop at the pound and pick up a Labrador . When we look the part, we'll go to a nice old country bar in Montana and show them how much admiration and respect we have for the hard working people living there."

So they did, and found just the place they were looking for in Whitefish, Montana. With the dog in tow they walked inside and stepped up to the bar. The Bartender took a step back and said, "Aren't you Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi?"

"Yes we are," said Nancy, "And what a lovely town you have here. We were passing through and Harry suggested we stop and take in some local color."

They ordered a round of bourbon and ditches on the house and started chatting up a storm with anyone who would listen.

A grizzled old farmer came in, walked up to the Labrador , lifted its tail and looked underneath, shrugged his shoulders and walked out. A few moments later, in came another old farmer. He walked up to the dog, lifted its tail, looked underneath, scratched his head and left the bar. For the next hour, another dozen farmers came in, lifted the dog's tail, and left looking puzzled.

Finally, Nancy asked, "why did all those old farmers come in and look under the dog's tail? Is it some sort of custom?"

"Lord no," said the bartender. "It's just that someone told them there was a Labrador in here with two assh0les!"

Judges of our Federal Courts are relevant to our survival

By Oscar Y. Harward

US Senators are neglecting Americans by protecting Constitutional law in its failings to complete research on Judicial nominees, specifically at the District Court level, and later at the Court of Appeals; then by voting to reject or confirm each nominee minus a base on principles. When Presidential nominees are presented to the Senate as a SCOTUS nominee, there is usually a history to review on the nominee. 
Our President nominates all vacancies on Federal Courts. Judicial nominees are recommended to the respective President by other members of the same political party to the, then sitting, President. 
Judicial nominees to the Federal Court gets involved in the “political process”; usually based on the President’s established information of belief as to what the nominee’s “political ideologies” may be considered upon. It is time to require all nominees to present their political fiscal and social issue values, as well as their National Security principles, for all to know what “we, the people” may expect of the Judge’s decisions. 
US Senators should confirm Judges who protect fiscal and social values, as well as Constitutional freedoms.  The Federalist Papers confirms that our Republic was founded on Judeo-Christian values http://teachingamericanhistory.org/ratification/timeline-centinel.html. This concept may be mandatory in restoring our nation. 
Democrats and Republicans must become more informed regarding all Judicial nominees as presented to the US Senate for their confirmation or rejection. Our Federal Judges and Courts are utmost important to our Constitution. All of us are depending on our Federal Courts and our Constitution.

Saturday, August 20, 2011

ObamaCare hands Big Labor billions



Dear Madd,
“ObamaCare is a threat to your health, your freedom — and your pocketbook.”

There is a growing chorus of politicians, academics, and news types who are saying this.
I’ll let them continue to study the law.

One thing is certain, though: The new law is loaded with forced unionism provisions buried deep in its 2,500 pages. Nancy Pelosi famously said, “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what’s in it.”
Well, Foundation attorneys have studied the law, and they tell me it is filled with obscure and overt provisions that will hand union officials billions of new forced-dues dollars.

That’s why I am writing to you today.

You see, even if the new Congress tries to repeal some of the forced unionism provisions in ObamaCare, the union bosses will fight back every step of the way. And President Obama always sides with Big Labor.

Foundation attorneys must be prepared to aggressively fight the union bosses in the courts to stop workers nationwide from being forced under union boss control as a result of this new law.

Here’s just one example of the dangers uncovered by Foundation attorneys:

The union bosses will fight to keep provisions like Title VIII that creates the “Community Living Assistance Services and Supports” (CLASS) program. Under this program, ALL 50 states are ordered to create legal entities to serve as “employers” of home health care providers.

Foundation attorneys know from direct experience that schemes like this are just a trick to force non- union home health care providers into forced unionism.

We know because the Foundation is already fighting these schemes at the state level. Union bosses in Michigan, Illinois, and as many as 15 other states cooked up schemes to seize millions of dollars in forced union dues from home health care providers.

Without lifting a finger.

Foundation attorneys filed class action lawsuits in federal court in Michigan and Illinois to blow apart this forced-dues bonanza, and we can build on this crucial legal experience to attack the forced unionism provisions in ObamaCare as well.

Millions of dollars in compulsory dues are at stake in Michigan alone, but there’s an even greater danger looming.

You see, Big Labor’s scheme will also corrupt the political process by enabling Big Labor’s political puppets to handpick unions as the sole representatives for thousands of workers — and even for independent contractors.

This scheme marks a new low and is a gross violation of workers’ rights under the Constitution. Our attorneys believe this issue is so important that it could ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Now, let me explain how this politically inspired scheme to increase forced unionism power happened in Michigan.

Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm is a politician who looks for ways to expand Big Labor’s government-granted special privileges. That’s why she ordered Michigan’s Department of Human Services to enter into an agreement creating a new public body called the “Michigan Home Based Child Care Council.”

The Council that Granholm created was given a vague mandate to improve home child care through public advocacy, but its real purpose is to be the phony bargaining partner with a new union created to represent home child care providers.

The whole arrangement is a sham!

As Governor Granholm created the phony Council, union bosses of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) and the United Auto Workers (UAW) got together and created a new union to “bargain” with the phony Council.

They called the new union “Child Care Providers Together Michigan.” However, it really doesn’t have anything to bargain about with the phony Council, since the Council doesn’t set any terms and conditions of employment for home child care providers.

In fact, the State of Michigan itself is not the employer for the child care providers. The state just provides a taxpayer subsidy for eligible children that goes to the estimated 40,000 workers, many of whom are small businesses or independent contractors working in their own homes.

The phony “Michigan Home Based Child Care Council” recognized the phony “Child Care Providers Together Michigan” union as the monopoly bargaining agent (“exclusive representative”) of all home child care providers in the state. This union recognition followed a mail-ballot election in which roughly 5,000 workers subjected 40,532 providers to the forced-dues scheme.

Foundation staff attorneys are attacking this forced unionism scheme in federal court with a class action lawsuit on behalf of all 40,000 workers.

There are three big reasons why this lawsuit is one of the most important the Foundation is currently prosecuting — and why I need your support today:
  • If a politician can handpick favorite union bosses to be the political representative of 40,000 workers (all forced to pay union dues), then any group that receives any public money can be swept into forced unionism.
  • Millions of dollars in forced union dues are at stake –- money that union bosses will use to buy more political influence and gain still more special privileges.
  • Union bosses are already spreading this scheme nationwide. Foundation attorneys are poised to launch lawsuits in many other states where politicians are eager to hand their Big Labor patrons millions in forced-dues windfalls.
But if Foundation attorneys win this Constitutional challenge to the Michigan scheme, they will have a valuable precedent to attack this Big Labor scam in every other state — and to attack similar provisions in ObamaCare!

Foundation attorneys have crafted the legal strategy to achieve maximum effectiveness by filing a class action lawsuit on behalf of all 40,000 workers affected by the Michigan scheme. Class action lawsuits are highly effective because they can return millions of dollars in refunds to workers in one lawsuit.

And because Foundation attorneys are challenging the Michigan scheme as a violation of the U.S. Constitution, a victory will serve as a precedent in other states as well.

Most importantly, victory could derail similar schemes lurking in ObamaCare. With so much at stake for the union bosses, I suspect this case will go to the U.S. Supreme Court.

That’s why I urgently need your help today. I need to know you stand ready to support the Foundation’s entire legal aid program as we carry on these strategic, important lawsuits in Michigan, Illinois, and other states.

And, because there is so much at stake here and in the new ObamaCare law, I hope you will also chip in with a generous, tax-deductible contribution of $50.

I know that $50 is a lot to ask of you, but the principles at stake in these lawsuits are so important that I hope you will be as generous as you can.

Even a lesser contribution of $25 or $10 will help us fund these lawsuits while keeping our entire strategic legal program moving forward.

The important thing is that you act today by making a generous, tax-deductible contribution.
I’m waiting to hear from you.

Mark Mix
Mark Mix

P.S. Forced unionism provisions buried in the ObamaCare law could hand the union bosses millions of new forced-dues dollars. Foundation attorneys have filed lawsuits to rip apart similar schemes at the state level, and they could establish a key precedent. This issue may ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Administration Bankrolls Massive Internet Propaganda Campaign to Push Obamacare

Judicial Watch Uncovers New Documents: Obama

Obama HHS Spends Millions of Taxpayer Dollars on “Guerrilla Campaign” to Track Search Engine Web Traffic and Push Internet Search Engine Users to Government Website Promoting Obamacare; Propaganda Campaign Targets Key Obama Campaign Voter Demographics
Contact Information:  Press Office 202-646-5172, ext 305

Washington, DC -- August 18, 2011

Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it obtained documents from the Obama Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) showing that the Obama White House helped coordinate a multimillion dollar taxpayer-funded campaign to use Internet search engines such as Google and Yahoo to drive web traffic to a government website promoting the Affordable Health Care Act (also known as Obamacare). The expressed purpose of this campaign is to increase public support for the president’s health care overhaul among key Obama campaign demographics, specifically Hispanics, blacks, and women.

The 2,328 pages of records, obtained by Judicial Watch pursuant to a March 23, 2011, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit (Judicial Watch v. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 11-608)), include internal correspondence between officials at the HHS office of the Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs (ASPA), as well as communications with representatives from The Ogilvy Group, the public relations firm hired by the Obama administration to manage the Obamacare campaign. The following are highlights from the documents:
  • The Obama HHS launched a campaign to track Internet searches and to use online search engines such as Google and Yahoo to drive traffic to a government website promoting Obama’s healthcare overhaul. Using “pay-per-click” advertising tools, such as Google Adwords, HHS purposely targeted for influence people searching the term “Obamacare,” a word that has been described as “disparaging” by political agents of the president. One HHS email details:
    A few keyword groups continue to be top performers, and have subsequently driven most of the traffic to the campaign websites:
  • Affordable Care Act, including such terms as health care reform, government health insurance, Obamacare, and affordable care act.
  • Health Insurance Group, including terms as health insurance.
  • Health Care Group, including terms as health care.
While other keyword groups have not performed as well, and are not driving significant traffic to the campaign websites:
  • Health Insurance, Health insurance options, Medical Insurance, and Insurance companies.
  • According to a budget summary prepared by Ogilvy, from October 2010 through February 2011, the Obama administration spent $1,435,009 on these online advertisements alone, including advertising campaigns with Google and Yahoo, almost $300,000 per month.
  • According to a December 10, 2010, email from Margo Gillman, Senior VP of Ogilvy Public Relations to Jenny Backus, the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs and the Principal Deputy for Strategy and Planning for HHS, the Obama White House was involved in coordinating the HHS propaganda campaign:
    Just a quick note to see if you have any feedback/direction on how we should proceed with the radio and TV concepts that were presented a few weeks ago. You mentioned on our last call that you were planning to discuss them with the White House on either Friday or yesterday. We would appreciate any guidance that you can provide, so we can determine immediate next steps and a production schedule. Also, we are awaiting your feedback on the overarching strategic campaign plan.
    Another HHS internal email dated December 1, 2010, from then-HHS official Jaime Mulligan to agency colleagues references the need to present recommendations to the White House regarding a number of components of the Obamacare campaign, including “a big guerilla campaign splash…” (Mulligan is currently the White House New Media Analyst for Public Health.)
  • A number of documents address the need to target the Obamacare propaganda campaign to Hispanics, blacks, and women. For example, according to an email from Chris Beakey, Vice President of Ogilvy PR Worldwide, to HHS officials on December 16, 2010, summarizing a conference call, “You want to utilize the bulk of their paid media efforts (which would include expenditures for Radio One and Univision) on media that reaches African Americans and Hispanics. The money will go farther and these audiences continue to be a top priority.” A January 18, 2011, email from Ogilvy to HHS New Media Communications Director Julia Eisman notes with respect to a Spanish banner ad campaign, “I realize we really can’t use the blond mom and child for this audience.”
  • An October 25, 2010, email from Julia Eisman to Imani Green, Senior Vice President and Director of Paid Media for Ogilvy Washington suggests changing the online advertising campaign to accommodate web traffic patterns caused by the mid-term elections: “Given the high performance, we’re wondering if we should we consider reallocating resources from the lesser performing words and put more $$ to ‘Obamacare’ - at least for the next 7 days,” she suggests.
In previous documents uncovered by Judicial Watch, HHS describes in detail the key to success of the propaganda campaign in a “Statement of Work” accompanying the agency’s Acquisition Plan:

“Health and program-related messages are processed by the target audience according to a particular reality, which he or she experiences. Attitudes, feelings, values, needs, desires, behaviors and beliefs all play a part in the individual’s decision to accept information and make a behavioral change.” [Emphasis added.] These documents suggest the total cost of the Obamacare propaganda campaign could reach as much as $200 million.

“The Obama administration is using taxpayer dollars to manipulate public opinion regarding his socialist healthcare overhaul while also trying to get a leg up in the 2012 presidential campaign,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The American people should be disturbed that the Obama administration is using taxpayer funds to try to brainwash people simply searching the Internet for information on health care. This Big Brother campaign is underhanded, potentially unlawful, and it must be stopped. As the congressional ‘super-committee’ begins negotiations to cut the deficit, this wasteful Obamacare propaganda campaign is the first place they should look.”

In November 2010, Judicial Watch obtained documents from HHS regarding a series of three Medicare TV ads featuring actor Andy Griffith. The Obama Administration spent $3,184,000 in taxpayer funds to produce and air the ads on national television in September and October 2010 to educate “Medicare beneficiaries, caregivers, and family members about forthcoming changes to Medicare as a result of the Affordable Care Act.” However, according to FactCheck.org, a project of the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center, the ads intentionally misinformed the American people.

Documents Uncovered

Wednesday, August 17, 2011

Obama is a victim of Bush's failed promises


Columnist | Posted: Sunday, February 7, 2010 12:00 am

Barack Obama is setting a record-setting number of records during his first year in office.

Largest budget ever. Largest deficit ever. Largest number of broken promises ever. Most self-serving speeches ever. Largest number of agenda-setting failures ever. Fastest dive in popularity ever.

Wow. Talk about change.

Just one year ago, fresh from his inauguration celebrations, President Obama was flying high. After one of the nations most inspiring political campaigns, the election of Americas first black president had captured the hopes and dreams of millions. To his devout followers, it was inconceivable that a year later his administration would be gripped in self-imposed crisis.

Of course, they dont see it as self imposed. Its all George Bushs fault.

George Bush, who doesnt have a vote in Congress and who no longer occupies the White House, is to blame for it all.

He broke Obamas promise to put all bills on the White House web site for five days before signing them.

He broke Obamas promise to have the congressional health care negotiations broadcast live on C-SPAN.

He broke Obamas promise to end earmarks.

He broke Obamas promise to keep unemployment from rising above 8 percent.

He broke Obamas promise to close the detention center at Guantanamo in the first year.

He broke Obamas promise to make peace with direct, no pre-condition talks with Americas most hate-filled enemies during his first year in office, ushering in a new era of global cooperation.

He broke Obamas promise to end the hiring of former lobbyists into high White House jobs.

He broke Obamas promise to end no-compete contracts with the government.

He broke Obamas promise to disclose the names of all attendees at closed White House meetings.

He broke Obamas promise for a new era of bipartisan cooperation in all matters.

He broke Obamas promise to have chosen a home church to attend Sunday services with his family by Easter of last year.

Yes, its all George Bushs fault. President Obama is nothing more than a puppet in the never-ending, failed Bush administration.

If only George Bush wasnt still in charge, all of President Obamas problems would be solved. His promises would have been kept, the economy would be back on track, Iran would have stopped its work on developing a nuclear bomb and would be negotiating a peace treaty with Israel, North Korea would have ended its tyrannical regime, and integrity would have been restored to the federal government.

Oh, and did I mention what it would be like if the Democrats, under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, didnt have the heavy yoke of George Bush around their necks. There would be no earmarks, no closed-door drafting of bills, no increase in deficit spending, no special-interest influence (unions), no vote buying (Nebraska, Louisiana).

If only George Bush wasnt still in charge, wed have real change by now.

All the broken promises, all the failed legislation and delay (health care reform, immigration reform) is not President Obamas fault or the fault of the Democrat-controlled Congress. Its all George Bushs fault.

Take for example the decision of Eric Holder, the presidents attorney general, to hold terrorists trials in New York City. Or his decision to try the Christmas Day underpants bomber as a civilian.

Two disastrous decisions.

Certainly those were bad judgments based on poor advice from George Bush.

Need more proof?

You might recall that when Scott Brown won last months election to the U.S. Senate from Massachusetts, capturing the Ted Kennedy seat, President Obama said that Browns victory was the result of the same voter anger that propelled Obama into office in 2008. People were still angry about George Bush and the policies of the past 10 years, and they wanted change.

Yes, according to the president, the voter rebellion in Massachusetts last month was George Bushs fault.

Therefore, in retaliation, they elected a Republican to the Ted Kennedy seat, ending a half-century of domination by Democrats.

It is all George Bushs fault.

Will the failed administration of George Bush ever end, and the time for hope and change ever arrive?

Will President Obama ever accept responsibility for something anything?

Chuck Green, veteran Colorado journalist and former editor-in-chief of The Denver Post, syndicates a statewide column and is at chuckgreencolo@msn.com

Tuesday, August 16, 2011

President Obama and Capitol Hill Democrats report “shadow jobs”

By Oscar Y. Harward

Many years ago, a friend told a story of growing up so poor, his parents served “shadow ham” on a regular basis.  What is “shadow ham”?  This is when “cured country ham” was hung up where you could smell it for days or weeks before cooking and eating it.  The aroma is “shadow ham”.

Today, President Obama and Capitol Hill Democrats seem to be practicing “shadow jobs”.  On a daily basis, President Obama and the Democrat Party have become the Never Under Taxed (NUT) Party, who talk about new and expanded jobs, but do nothing in creating jobs in the private sector. 

The “NUT Party” criticizes the “Taxed Enough Already” (TEA) Party in an effort to block ordinary, middle-income working class Americans who believe they are over-taxed.  TEA Party supporters are fed up with liberals on Capitol Hill who spend monies without concern to taxpayers’ cost.

The major differences between Democrats and Republicans are that Democrats choose to create jobs on the government payroll.  Margaret Thatcher once said, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually, run out of other people’s money.”

Republicans prefer to create an atmosphere for individuals and small businesses that can/will create new jobs in the private sector.

Today, President Obama and Capitol Hill Democrats report “created or saved jobs”, but never identify the “saved jobs”.  As unemployment rates remain unacceptable, Democrats appear to be reporting “shadow jobs” rather than factual jobs.

Rick Perry Has Some Explaining to Do


rick Perry Muslim
I’ve often been told that you can accurately judge a person by the friends that they keep. Using this premise, let’s take a look at some of the friends Presidential GOP candidate Gov. Rick Perry has kept and still keeps.
In 1988, President Ronald Reagan had already served his two terms as President and was ineligible to run again. The Republican Party ran then Vice-president George H.W. Bush after a hard fought primary campaign against Senator Bob Dole. The top Democratic candidates included Gov. Michael Dukakis, Sen. Al Gore and Rep. Dick Gephardt among others. At the time of the 1988 campaign, then Democratic Rep from Texas Rick Perry served as the Texas campaign head for Al Gore. After Bush handily defeated Dukakis for the White House, Perry switched parties and became a Republican in 1989, but still kept ties with Democrat Al Gore – inventor of the internet and crusader for a one-world economy and government.

In 1999, Perry became Lieutenant Governor of Texas and Governor in 2000. As Texas’s governor, Perry has openly courted relations with a number of Islamic leaders.

One of Perry’s friends with Aga Khan, the multimillionaire head of the Shi’ite sect of Islam known as the Ismailis. As governor, Perry has used his association with Khan and other Ismailis leaders to establish cooperative programs with them and the state of Texas, including an education program to help teach children that Ismailis Muslims are peace loving people.

Perry has also been known to be friends with Grover Norquist. Norquist is married to a Palestinian wife who is the director of communications for Norquist’s Islamic Free Market Institute. He has been on the Islamic payroll before and after 9/11. Just fifteen days after the 9/11 attack on the US, Norquist arranged for President Bush to meet with fifteen Islamic leaders who were supposedly rejecting violence and terrorism. However, a number of those Islamic leaders have been supportive of Hamas, Hezb’allah and the Palestinian cause to eliminate Israel from existing as a nation and who have called for the destruction of all those nations who support Israel, including the US.

Gov. Perry claims to be a conservative Christian, just like Obama claimed before he was elected President and we have seen Obama’s track record of supporting Islamic peoples and nations while distancing the country from our Israeli allies. One can’t help but wonder if Perry is following a similar pattern.

Let’s face facts. Islam considers Christians to be infidels and peace loving or not (heavy on the not) does teach that infidels should be exterminated. Many Islamic leaders have taught the same and have vowed a Jihad – Holy War – against the US for being a nation of infidels.

So why would a professing Bible believing Christian be friends with people who have openly supported the destruction of Christianity, Judaism and the United States? I know Scripture says to love your enemies, but it does not say to make them your friends and to court their ways.

The Republican Party needs to pin Perry down and find out exactly where his allegiance is and whose side he’s on before any more voters head to a primary, unaware of his background.

President Obama and Capitol Hill Democrats' economic problem!

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

By Michael Ramirez - August 16, 2011

Why I voted Democrat

You and I have learned that the left-wing, big-spending Democrats may lead you down a darkened road to Socialism with diminishing freedoms.  

We have learned that there is a principled road for Constitutional freedoms with fiscal and social values.

We now know these common-sense, principled standards are supported by an overwhelming majority of our Republican Party members. – Oscar Y. Harward

When your "friends" cannot explain why they voted for Democrats, give them this list. They can then pick their reasons from this "TOP 12"...

1. I voted Democrat because I believe oil companies' profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene, but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn't.

2. I voted Democrat because I believe the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.

3. I voted Democrat because Freedom of speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.

4. I voted Democrat because I'm way too irresponsible to own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers and thieves.

5. I voted Democrat because I believe that people who can't tell us if it will rain on Friday can tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don't start driving a Prius.

6. I voted Democrat because I'm not concerned about millions of babies being aborted so long as we keep all death row inmates alive.

7. I voted Democrat because I think illegal aliens have a right to free health care, education, and Social
Security benefits.

8. I voted Democrat because I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as the Democrats see fit.

9. I voted Democrat because I believe liberal judges need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would never get their agendas past the voters.

10. I voted Democrat because I think that it's better to pay billions to people who hate us for their oil, but not drill our own because it might upset some endangered beetle or gopher.

11. I voted Democrat because while we live in the greatest, most wonderful country in the world, I was promised "HOPE AND CHANGE".

12. I voted Democrat because my head is so firmly planted up my ass, it's unlikely that I'll ever have another point of view.

Sunday, August 14, 2011

Comet Elenin is coming into our neighborhood


Revelation 8 - King James Version (KJV)

Revelation 8: 

 1 And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven about the space of half an hour.  

 2 And I saw the seven angels which stood before God; and to them were given seven trumpets.  

 3 And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne.  

 4 And the smoke of the incense, which came with the prayers of the saints, ascended up before God out of the angel's hand.  

 5 And the angel took the censer, and filled it with fire of the altar, and cast it into the earth: and there were voices, and thunderings, and lightnings, and an earthquake.  

 6 And the seven angels which had the seven trumpets prepared themselves to sound. 

 7 The first angel sounded, and there followed hail and fire mingled with blood, and they were cast upon the earth: and the third part of trees was burnt up, and all green grass was burnt up.  

 8 And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood;  

 9 And the third part of the creatures which were in the sea, and had life, died; and the third part of the ships were destroyed. 

10 And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters;  

11 And the name of the star is called Wormwood: and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter.  

12 And the fourth angel sounded, and the third part of the sun was smitten, and the third part of the moon, and the third part of the stars; so as the third part of them was darkened, and the day shone not for a third part of it, and the night likewise.  

13 And I beheld, and heard an angel flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth by reason of the other voices of the trumpet of the three angels, which are yet to sound!

Friday, August 12, 2011

How Eisenhower solved illegal border crossings from Mexico

By John Dillin / July 6, 2006


George W. Bush isn't the first Republican president to face a full-blown immigration crisis on the US-Mexican border.

Fifty-three years ago, when newly elected Dwight Eisenhower moved into the White House, America's southern frontier was as porous as a spaghetti sieve. As many as 3 million illegal migrants had walked and waded northward over a period of several years for jobs in California, Arizona, Texas, and points beyond.

President Eisenhower cut off this illegal traffic. He did it quickly and decisively with only 1,075 United States Border Patrol agents – less than one-tenth of today's force. The operation is still highly praised among veterans of the Border Patrol.

Although there is little to no record of this operation in Ike's official papers, one piece of historic evidence indicates how he felt. In 1951, Ike wrote a letter to Sen. William Fulbright (D) of Arkansas. The senator had just proposed that a special commission be created by Congress to examine unethical conduct by government officials who accepted gifts and favors in exchange for special treatment of private individuals.

General Eisenhower, who was gearing up for his run for the presidency, said "Amen" to Senator Fulbright's proposal. He then quoted a report in The New York Times, highlighting one paragraph that said: "The rise in illegal border-crossing by Mexican 'wetbacks' to a current rate of more than 1,000,000 cases a year has been accompanied by a curious relaxation in ethical standards extending all the way from the farmer-exploiters of this contraband labor to the highest levels of the Federal Government."

Years later, the late Herbert Brownell Jr., Eisenhower's first attorney general, said in an interview with this writer that the president had a sense of urgency about illegal immigration when he took office.

America "was faced with a breakdown in law enforcement on a very large scale," Mr. Brownell said. "When I say large scale, I mean hundreds of thousands were coming in from Mexico [every year] without restraint."

Although an on-and-off guest-worker program for Mexicans was operating at the time, farmers and ranchers in the Southwest had become dependent on an additional low-cost, docile, illegal labor force of up to 3 million, mostly Mexican, laborers.

According to the Handbook of Texas Online, published by the University of Texas at Austin and the Texas State Historical Association, this illegal workforce had a severe impact on the wages of ordinary working Americans. The Handbook Online reports that a study by the President's Commission on Migratory Labor in Texas in 1950 found that cotton growers in the Rio Grande Valley, where most illegal aliens in Texas worked, paid wages that were "approximately half" the farm wages paid elsewhere in the state.

Profits from illegal labor led to the kind of corruption that apparently worried Eisenhower. Joseph White, a retired 21-year veteran of the Border Patrol, says that in the early 1950s, some senior US officials overseeing immigration enforcement "had friends among the ranchers," and agents "did not dare" arrest their illegal workers.

Walt Edwards, who joined the Border Patrol in 1951, tells a similar story. He says: "When we caught illegal aliens on farms and ranches, the farmer or rancher would often call and complain [to officials in El Paso]. And depending on how politically connected they were, there would be political intervention. That is how we got into this mess we are in now."

Bill Chambers, who worked for a combined 33 years for the Border Patrol and the then-called US Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), says politically powerful people are still fueling the flow of illegals.

During the 1950s, however, this "Good Old Boy" system changed under Eisenhower – if only for about 10 years.

In 1954, Ike appointed retired Gen. Joseph "Jumpin' Joe" Swing, a former West Point classmate and veteran of the 101st Airborne, as the new INS commissioner.

Influential politicians, including Sen. Lyndon B. Johnson (D) of Texas and Sen. Pat McCarran (D) of Nevada, favored open borders, and were dead set against strong border enforcement, Brownell said. But General Swing's close connections to the president shielded him – and the Border Patrol – from meddling by powerful political and corporate interests.

One of Swing's first decisive acts was to transfer certain entrenched immigration officials out of the border area to other regions of the country where their political connections with people such as Senator Johnson would have no effect.

Then on June 17, 1954, what was called "Operation Wetback" began. Because political resistance was lower in California and Arizona, the roundup of aliens began there. Some 750 agents swept northward through agricultural areas with a goal of 1,000 apprehensions a day. By the end of July, over 50,000 aliens were caught in the two states. Another 488,000, fearing arrest, had fled the country.

By mid-July, the crackdown extended northward into Utah, Nevada, and Idaho, and eastward to Texas.

By September, 80,000 had been taken into custody in Texas, and an estimated 500,000 to 700,000 illegals had left the Lone Star State voluntarily.

Unlike today, Mexicans caught in the roundup were not simply released at the border, where they could easily reenter the US. To discourage their return, Swing arranged for buses and trains to take many aliens deep within Mexico before being set free.

Tens of thousands more were put aboard two hired ships, the Emancipation and the Mercurio. The ships ferried the aliens from Port Isabel, Texas, to Vera Cruz, Mexico, more than 500 miles south.

The sea voyage was "a rough trip, and they did not like it," says Don Coppock, who worked his way up from Border Patrolman in 1941 to eventually head the Border Patrol from 1960 to 1973.

Mr. Coppock says he "cannot understand why [President] Bush let [today's] problem get away from him as it has. I guess it was his compassionate conservatism, and trying to please [Mexican President] Vincente Fox."

There are now said to be 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens in the US. Of the Mexicans who live here, an estimated 85 percent are here illegally.

Border Patrol vets offer tips on curbing illegal immigration

One day in 1954, Border Patrol agent Walt Edwards picked up a newspaper in Big Spring, Texas, and saw some startling news. The government was launching an all-out drive to oust illegal aliens from the United States.

The orders came straight from the top, where the new president, Dwight Eisenhower, had put a former West Point classmate, Gen. Joseph Swing, in charge of immigration enforcement.

General Swing's fast-moving campaign soon secured America's borders – an accomplishment no other president has since equaled. Illegal migration had dropped 95 percent by the late 1950s.

Several retired Border Patrol agents who took part in the 1950s effort, including Mr. Edwards, say much of what Swing did could be repeated today.

"Some say we cannot send 12 million illegals now in the United States back where they came from. Of course we can!" Edwards says.

Donald Coppock, who headed the Patrol from 1960 to 1973, says that if Swing and Ike were still running immigration enforcement, "they'd be on top of this in a minute."

William Chambers, another '50s veteran, agrees. "They could do a pretty good job" sealing the border.

Edwards says: "When we start enforcing the law, these various businesses are, on their own, going to replace their [illegal] workforce with a legal workforce."

While Congress debates building a fence on the border, these veterans say other actions should have higher priority.

1. End the current practice of taking captured Mexican aliens to the border and releasing them. Instead, deport them deep into Mexico, where return to the US would be more costly.

2. Crack down hard on employers who hire illegals. Without jobs, the aliens won't come.

3. End "catch and release" for non-Mexican aliens. It is common for illegal migrants not from Mexico to be set free after their arrest if they promise to appear later before a judge. Few show up.

The Patrol veterans say enforcement could also be aided by a legalized guest- worker program that permits Mexicans to register in their country for temporary jobs in the US. Eisenhower's team ran such a program. It permitted up to 400,000 Mexicans a year to enter the US for various agriculture jobs that lasted for 12 to 52 weeks.

John Dillin is former managing editor of the Monitor.

Dhimmitude – What does it Mean? Obama Used It In the Health Care Bill

Courtesy of Keeleynet.com

10/08/10 – Dhimmitude — What does it mean? Obama used it in the health care bill.

Now isn’t this interesting? It was used in the health care law. Every day there’s another revelation of what Obama and his fellow Democrats are doing to our country. Dhimmitude — I had never heard the word until now. Type it into Google and start reading. Pretty interesting. It’s on page 107 of the healthcare bill. I looked this up on Google and yep, it exists. It is a REAL word. Amish , scientologists, christian scientists and Muslims are exempt …ARE EXEMPT …from the requirements of the health care bill). I think I could become Amish a whole lot easier than muslim.

Word of the Day: DhimmitudeDhimmitude is the Muslim system of controlling non-muslim populations conquered through jihad. Specifically, it is the TAXING of non-muslims in exchange for tolerating their presence AND as a coercive means of converting conquered remnants to Islam.

ObamaCare allows the establishment of Dhimmitude and Sharia muslim diktat in the United States. Muslims are specifically exempted from the government mandate to purchase insurance, and also from the penalty tax for being uninsured. Islam considers insurance to be “gambling”, “risk-taking”, and “usury” and is thus banned. Muslims are specifically granted exemption based on this. How convenient. So I, as a Christian, will have crippling IRS liens placed against all of my assets, including real estate, cattle, and even accounts receivables, and will face hard prison time because I refuse to buy insurance or pay the penalty tax. Meanwhile, Louis Farrakhan will have no such penalty and will have 100% of his health needs paid for by the de facto government insurance. Non-muslims will be paying a tax to subsidize muslims. Period. This is Dhimmitude. Dhimmitude serves two purposes: It enriches the muslim masters AND serves to drive conversions to Islam. In this case, the incentive to convert to Islam will be taken up by those in the inner-cities as well as the godless Generation X, Y, and Z types who have no moral anchor. If you don’t believe in Christ to begin with, it is no problem whatsoever to sell Him for 30 pieces of silver. “Sure, I’ll be a muslim if it means free health insurance and no taxes. Where do I sign, bro?” 1. snopes.com: Health Insurance Exemptions •••

Are various religious groups exempt from requirements to obtain health insurance?

…Health Insurance Exemptions Claim: Scientologists, Amish, Christian Scientists, and Muslims will be exempt from requirements to obtain health insurance….

…their presence AND as a coercive means of converting conquered remnants to islam. The ObamaCare bill is the establishment of Dhimmitude and Sharia…

…to Obama-Care that is denied to main-stream Christians and Jews. Or if you prefer a New-Age religion to Islam, you may become a Scientologist and Opt Out…

Wed, 06 Oct 2010 19:38:09 GMT http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/exemptions.asp And a contrary argument; “Who told you this nonsense, how could you be so gullible as to believe it, and why would you be so anxious to show the rest of us how easily you are duped by right-wing propaganda? There is nothing in the bill specific to Muslims. Are you really naive enough to believe people haven’t read the bill or won’t check your claims? The only religious reference on page 107 is this: “In the case of an individual seeking exemption based on the individual’s status as a member of an exempt religious sect or division, as a member of a health care sharing ministry, as an Indian, or as an individual eligible for a hardship exemption, such information as the Secretary shall prescribe.”" – Email

Thursday, August 11, 2011

PHOTO OUTRAGE: White House Violates Wishes of SEALS' Families

A President Obama, as a US Senator, consistently failed to vote for the US Military on the issues,  may now using one of America’s worst tragedies for his own political campaign.  How low will Obama go? – Oscar Y. Harward



AP Graphics - Lolita C. Baldor, Seattle Times
A White House photographer was allowed to take and widely distribute a photo from the ceremony Tuesday for the return of the remains of 30 American troops killed in a weekend helicopter crash in Afghanistan despite the Pentagon's claim that any public depiction of the scene would violate the wishes of bereaved families.

News media coverage of the ceremony had been banned by the Pentagon over the objections of several news organizations.

Pentagon officials had said that because 19 of 30 of the American families of the dead had objected to media coverage of the remains coming off a plane at Dover Air Force Base, no images could be taken. In addition, the Pentagon rejected media requests to take photos that showed officials at the ceremony but did not depict caskets.

President Barack Obama attended the ceremony, called a "dignified transfer," for those killed in the worst single loss of the nearly 10-year war. An official White House photo of a saluting Obama was distributed to news media and published widely. It also was posted on the White House website as the "Photo of the Day." It showed Obama and other officials in silhouette and did not depict caskets.