Tuesday, February 28, 2012

NATO and Karzai Government going after our guys!!

Looks as if the NATO commend and the Karzai Government have come to an agreement to bring to "trial" those US soldiers responsible for the accidental burning of the Muslims "holy book".
Oh, and get this:
"National Council of Ulemma and the National Assembly were assigned and dispatched to investigate the circumstances and causes that have led to the inhumane incident.

The delegations, while deeply touched by the religious sentiments shown by the Afghan Muslim and Mujahid nation, inform our citizens of the following:

1. In view of the particular security situation in the country, we call on all our Muslim citizens of Afghanistan to exercise self-restraint and extra vigilance in dealing with the issue and avoid resorting to protests and demonstrations that may provide ground for the enemy to take advantage of the situation.

2. After the shameful incident by the US soldiers stationed in Bagram, senior NATO and American officials expressed their deep apologies to the Muslim nation of Afghanistan and assured that such incidents will not happen again.

3. NATO officials promised to meet Afghan nation’s demand of bringing to justice, through an open trial, those responsible for the incident and it was agreed that the perpetrators of the crime be brought to justice as soon as possible.

4. The assigned delegations demand from the government of Afghanistan to take over from the Americans the authority of the Bagram prison so no such incidents can recur and calls on the US government to fully and comprehensively cooperate to this end.

5. The delegations also want from the Afghan government to formally praise those brave Afghan army soldiers and all others who showed feelings against the disrespectful act by preventing more religious books and Quran copies from burning, so that the pure Muslim sentiments of our honored Mujahid nation can remain alive.
Anyone reading this, I would hope you'd CALL YOUR REPRESENTATIVE AND SENATORS AND TELL THEM "Hell no" And if it happens, We the People will hold you responsible for the Afghanistan trail of OUR soldiers.

Saturday, February 25, 2012

An Apology from America to President Karzai

Now here is the message that SHOULD have been sent to President Karzai, over the accidental burning of the Koran, that has led to many more, unnecessary deaths of Americans by the hands of barbarians.

Along with the message to the Afghanistan President, is a message to Obama, and just how to do it RIGHT.

This is my message too!
Nice work, Kira Davis.

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Message from Christie to Buffett

"Write a check and shut up"

Governor Chris Christie on CNN's Money tells Buffett  (and the left), who are playing the fair share card, to just whip out the old checkbook, ink in a figure and send it in to the Treasury Dept, if they feel the "top 1%" aren't paying enough in taxes.


Saturday, February 18, 2012

Bay Area Tea Party Wags it's Finger at Obama

As reported on The City Square blog.

Obama held a fundraising event in the San Francisco bay areas Nob Hill Masonic Center and a Tea Party erupted.
Hundreds of Tea Party Patriots gathered to give Obama a Jan Brewer style tongue lashing over a verity of topics.

But most notable was the finger hands, that mimics Jan Brewers scolding of Obama on the tarmac in Arizona.

This protest was organized by the San Francisco Bay Area Patriots and supported by the North Bay Patriots (Marin County) and MyLiberty (San Mateo County).

With HHS and the Obama administration decision to stomp on the 1st amendment by requiring Catholics institutions to provide heathcare insurance policies that cover birth control and morning after pills to their employee's, (against their beliefs) even a catholic nun got in to the protest. (Note her checking her IPhone. Either she just got done taking a picture, or she is getting instructions from her pastor.

Of course it wouldn't be fair and balance not to note that pro Obama supporters did hold a counter-protest across the street.....

And they say the Tea Party is dead! HA. We're not going ANYWHERE!

(h/t to John for the pics)

Friday, February 17, 2012

Slavery Still Alive in America

Last night, Representative Allen West met up with Van Susteren on the set of On the Record to remind us of who is actually still beholding to slavery in America today.

Fla. congressman explains why he believes Dems don't promote economic freedom and love 'handouts'

But I am sure MadMax-ine Waters might call him a "demon".

Of course, she has become part of the problem in Washington because she has to much to say, but with little content to back it up, when she lays claim that "These are legislators who are destroying the country" even though HER party had complete control of the government for 2 full years and STILL controlled 2/3 of the legislature and executive branch these last 2 years.

Wednesday, February 15, 2012

Preschool Policing- Whats Next

What would you say if you spent the time to make your child their lunch for school that day, only to find out that the school nutrition police/inspector/gestapo would confiscate it because it didn't meet "Government Standards" for nutrition?

Yep, I'd say the same thing.

Carolina Journal via carolinajournal.com
Written By Sara Burrows:

A preschooler at West Hoke Elementary School ate three chicken nuggets for lunch Jan. 30 because a state employee told her the lunch her mother packed was not nutritious.
The girl’s turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips, and apple juice did not meet U.S. Department of Agriculture guidelines, according to the interpretation of the agent who was inspecting all lunch boxes in her More at Four classroom that day.

The Division of Child Development and Early Education at the Department of Health and Human Services requires all lunches served in pre-kindergarten programs — including in-home day care centers — to meet USDA guidelines. That means lunches must consist of one serving of meat, one serving of milk, one serving of grain, and two servings of fruit or vegetables, even if the lunches are brought from home.
When home-packed lunches do not include all of the required items, child care providers must supplement them with the missing ones.
The girl’s mother — who said she wishes to remain anonymous to protect her daughter from retaliation — said she received a note from the school stating that students who did not bring a “healthy lunch” would be offered the missing portions, which could result in a fee from the cafeteria, in her case $1.25.

“I don’t feel that I should pay for a cafeteria lunch when I provide lunch for her from home,” the mother wrote in a complaint to her state representative, Republican G.L. Pridgen of Robeson County.

“With a turkey sandwich, that covers your protein, your grain, and if it had cheese on it, that’s the dairy,” said Jani Kozlowski, the fiscal and statutory policy manager for the division of Child Development.

The state regulation reads:
“Sites must provide breakfast and/or snacks and lunch meeting USDA requirements during the regular school day. The partial/full cost of meals may be charged when families do not qualify for free/reduced price meals.
“When children bring their own food for meals and snacks to the center, if the food does not meet the specified nutritional requirements, the center must provide additional food necessary to meet those requirements.”

Now I don't know about you, but parents need to be vigilant of their childs consumption of food, preferably healthy ones for the childs development.
But in this case, the mother provided a healthy one that day, but because it didn't meet GOVERNMENT standards, it was confiscated.

Since when did the parent become secondary parents and the Government become custodial???
This SH*T needs to stop!!!

Monday, February 13, 2012

The Programing of the Brain Dead Liberal

This is the Administration scratched LP album stuck in it's groove of wash, rinse and repeat on taxation.
Fair Share, Shared sacrifice, Buffet Rule, Race to the bottom, Greater good, Fortunate Americans don't contribute at all....
AND now we have "Global minimum tax"

Gene Sperling came out today, spewing and regurgitated the President's scratch LP album message that we have a taxation problem in this country, all the while the President throws at our feet a budget that adds a $1.3T deficit.

Let me refresh Americans minds for just a few:
From 2002- 2008, Bush ran a deficit of $2.1T.... TOTAL! And Yes that is a lot.
HOWEVER in 2009 and 2010 the deficit shot up by $2.7T

And it is estimated to skyrocket an additional $1.6T in 2011 and $1.1T this year.
In 3 years, on Obama's watch, he will have ran a deficit of $4.3T, doubled that of Bush last 6 years.

Lets compare federal government revenue stream, starting with the Bush tax cuts in 2003, and compare them with unemployment and government outlay, shall we?
Because that is the true factor of why tax receipts as down... Just so there is no confusion and some clarity, because with Obama and his economic councils chief, Sperling are laying out a smoke screen so Americans buy the BS coming from this administration on their class warfare tactic.

2003 total tax receipts= $1.782T: Unemployment= 6.0: Outlay= $2.159T
2004 total tax receipts= $1.880T: Unemployment 5.5: Outlay= $2.292T
2005 total tax receipts= $2.153T: Unemployment 5.1: Outlay= $2.472T
2006 total tax receipts= $2.406T: Unemployment 4.7: Outlay= $2.655T
2007 total tax receipts= $2.568T: Unemployment 4.7: Outlay= $2.728T

2008 economy begins to tank
2008 total tax receipts= $2.524T: Unemployment 5.8: Outlay= $2.982T
2009 total tax receipts= $2.105T: Unemployment 9.3: Outlay= $3.517T
2010 total tax receipts= $2.162T: Unemployment 9.3: Outlay= $3.456T

So, as you can see, we don't have a taxing problem.
No need to raise taxes on ANYONE.
Increased tax revenue stream correlates directly with lower unemployment rates.
Getting Americans back to work is the solution. But over bearing regulation by the government stagnates hiring, which in turns stagnates revenues.
They are doing it to themselves!
And what is more telling, tax revenue receipts in 2010 are nearly the same as in 2005, but employment figures are 4% higher. Ever wonder why... Tax increases that you were never made aware of.

In 8 years, our total outlays have been $22.3T, but revenues stands at only $17.58T. A difference of -$4.72T, And in reality, nearly $2.7T of that came from this administrations spending habits the last 2 years.

And what does Harry Reid think of the Presidents new budget?
"Dead On Arrival!" What does that say to his own party leader?

Saturday, February 11, 2012

Obama Backs Off His Circumvention of the 1st Amendment

Or did he?

Yesterday, Obama relaxed his HHS demands that religious institution must provide "preventative medicine" aka birth control and the morning after pill, to their employee's healthcare policy and pay for it.

In a statement release yesterday, Obama said:

"Whether you're a teacher or a small businesswoman or a nurse or a janitor, no woman's 's health should depend on who she is, or where she works, or how much money she makes, it's a core principle"
"As a citizen and as a Christian I cherish this right," Obama said. "I saw that local churches did more good for a community than a government program ever could."

"Religious organizations won't have to pay for these services, and no religious institution will have to provide these services directly."
 First off, WHO's core principle?

Second, take "no woman's 's health should depend on who she is, or where she works, or how much money she makes" and change it to "no woman's tax rate should depend on who she is, or where she works, or how much money she makes" Then we have something there.

Third, "as a Christian I cherish this right" If he truly cherished that right, why then did he fight this for so long? Why did he flip flop when Biden and Penneta urged him not to go there,  and then once HHS Kathleen Sebelius got her claws in to him, he abandon the "Cherished right"?

Lastly, keyword in his last statement...."Directly". Based on the "compromise" woman who work for the catholic institutions can go directly to the insurance company and request these pills, for free. So who pays for it?
Answer: Those who have insurance policies in these institutions (and outside those institutions) as the insurance provider will hide the cost in their premiums. Thats how the cost of free stuff is accounted for.
Also, keep in mind, that you have to get a prescription to get these pills directly from the insurer. Who has to write these prescriptions? Doctors. Some who might work for the catholic institutions.

So as you can see, this is no compromise. It's a shell game.

Thursday, February 9, 2012

Chris Matthews Has a Moment of Clarity?

Did Chris Matthews have a moment of clarity about the Obama Administration and the HHS forcing Catholics institutions to provide health insurance policies that pay for birth control and the morning after pill medication?

Hell has frozen over!!! Chris has actually figured out that something Obama did is indeed dangerous!

OR, is he and MSNBC just trying to boost ratings? ......

Wednesday, February 8, 2012

The 5000 Year Leap

Despite Ruth Bader Ginsburg who said last week, to those attending her University of Charo speech, that Egypt should embrace a South African Constitution vs a US Constitution, WE think OUR constitution stands mountains above the rest.

Despite Obama's comment during the pre-super bowl interview that "Our founders design a system that makes it more difficult bringing about change I would like sometimes." We feel it necessary to keep our founding documents embraced with in our lives to the fullest.

Or despite Nancy Pelosi approval of Obama's end around on the Constitution on recess appointments by Obama, we still stand tall and say NO YOU CANNOT!

We will continue to follow the path of freedom of our founding fathers.

Principles of Freedom inspired by our Founding Fathers.

This is our message. 

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

It's our unalienable right.

If you take it from us, we the people may alter or abolish a government which has become tyrannical.

We will restore the republic! 

Monday, February 6, 2012

Obama blames Our Founding Fathers

Obama blames our founding fathers, not Bush any more, for not being able to push through every aspect of the things he said 2008.
Our founders design a system that makes it more difficult bringing about change I would like sometimes.

If this DOES NOT convince America that this guy is an out an out socialist, to dis our founders because of how they designed our country and our constitution, that it makes it more difficult for him to push through "change" he has been trying to ram through since he was elected, then once again Americans are not paying attention.

WAKE THE HELL AMERICA! Are you paying attention NOW?
Vote this clown OUT!

Saturday, February 4, 2012

Georgia Judge's Ruling Serves to Pervert and Corrupt the Office of POTUS!

For the first time in dozens of court cases challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president, a judge in Georgia has ruled that Obama must, in order to be a candidate on the Georgia ballot for president in 2012, meet the constitutional demands for candidates for the office.

The Supreme Court has defined “natural-born-citizen” as a person with two U.S. citizen parents, and Obama admits that his father was never a U.S. citizen.

The U.S. Supreme Court opinion cited is Minor v. Happersett from 1875. It includes one of very few references in the nation’s archives that address the definition of “natural-born citizen,” a requirement imposed by the U.S. Constitution on only the U.S. president.

That Supreme Court case states:

‘The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners’.

While Obama’s attorney, Michael Jablonski, had argued that the requirements didn’t apply to candidates for a presidential primary, the judge said that isn’t how he reads state law.

“Statutory provisions must be read as they are written, and this court finds that the cases cited by [Obama] are not controlling. When the court construes a constitutional or statutory provision, the ‘first step … is to examine the plain statutory language,” the judge wrote. “Section 21-2-1(a) states that ‘every candidate for federal and state office’ must meet the qualifications for holding that particular office, and this court has seen no case law limiting this provision, nor found any language that contains an exception for the office of president or stating that the provision does not apply to the presidential preference primary.”

The president’s lawyer boycotted the proceeding -- triggered by citizenship challenges brought by a group of so-called “birthers” -- calling it “baseless, costly and unproductive.” Lawyers for the challengers said the president should be held in contempt for not complying with a subpoena.

Judge Michael Malihi, who recently refused to quash the subpoena summoning Obama, never addressed the request. He cut off another lawyer when he began to complain that Obama’s no-show amounted to “contempt for the judicial branch.”

Secretary of State Brian Kemp, a Republican, said law required him to refer the challenges. “If you and your client choose to suspend your participation ... please understand that you do so at your own peril,” the secretary wrote.

So the case goes forward.

The following testimony and what was brought into court evidence as outlined by The National Patriot By Craig Andresen on January 26, 2012:

Court is called to order.

Obama’s birth certificate is entered into evidence.

Obama’s father’s place of birth, Kenya East Africa is entered into evidence.

Pages 214 and 215 from Obama’s book, “Dreams from My Father” entered into evidence. Highlighted. This is where Obama indicates that, in 1966 or 1967 that his father’s history is mentioned. It states that his father’s passport had been revoked and he was unable to leave Kenya.

Immigration Services documents entered into evidence regarding Obama Sr.

June 27th, 1962, is the date on those documents. Obama’s father’s status shown as a non citizen of the United States. Documents were gotten through the Freedom of Information Act.

Testimony regarding the definition of Natural Born Citizen is given citing Minor vs Happersett opinion from a Supreme Court written opinion from 1875. The attorney points out the difference between “citizen” and “Natural Born Citizen” using charts and copies of the Minor vs Happersett opinion.

It is also pointed out that the 14th Amendment does not alter the definition or supersede the meaning of Natural Born. It is pointed out that lower court rulings do not conflict with the Supreme Court opinion nor do they over rule the Supreme Court Minor vs Happersett opinion.

The point is, to be a natural born citizen, one must have 2 parents who, at the time of the birth in question, be citizens of the United States. As Obama’s father was not a citizen, the argument is that Obama, constitutionally, is ineligible to serve as President.

Judge notes that as Obama nor his attorney is present, action will be taken accordingly.

Carl Swinson takes the stand.

Testimony is presented that the SOS has agreed to hear this case, laws applicable, and that the DNC of Georgia will be on the ballot and the challenge to it by Swinson.

2nd witness, a Mr. Powell, takes the stand and presents testimony regarding documents of challenge to Obama’s appearance on the Georgia ballot and his candidacy.

Court records of Obama’s mother and father entered into evidence.

Official certificate of nomination of Obama entered into evidence.

RNC certificate of nomination entered into evidence.

DNC language does NOT include language stating Obama is Qualified while the RNC document DOES. This shows a direct difference trying to establish that the DNC MAY possibly have known that Obama was not qualified.

Jablonski letter to Kemp yesterday entered into evidence showing their desire that these proceedings not take place and that they would not participate.

Dreams From My Father entered.

Mr. Allen from Tuscon AZ sworn in.

Disc received from Immigration and Naturalization Service entered into evidence. This disc contains information regarding the status of Obama’s father received through the Freedom of Information Act.

This information states clearly that Obama’s father was NEVER a U.S. Citizen.

At this point, the judge takes a recess.

The judge returns.

David Farrar takes the stand.

Evidence showing Obama’s book of records listing his nationality as Indoneasan. Deemed not relevant by the judge.

Orly Taitz calls 2nd witness. Mr. Strunk.

Enters into evidence a portion of letter received from attorney showing a renewal form from Obama’s mother for her passport listing Obama’s last name something other than Obama.

State Licensed PI takes the stand.

She was hired to look into Obama’s background and found a Social Security number for him from 1977. Professional opinion given that this number was fraudulent. The number used or attached to Obama in 1977, shows that the true owner of the number was born in the 1890. This shows that the number was originally assigned to someone else who was indeed born in 1890 and should never have been used by Obama.

Same SS number came up with addresses in IL, D.C. and MA.

Next witness takes the stand.

This witness is an expert in information technology and photo shop. He testifies that the birth certificate Obama provided to the public is layered, multiple layered. This, he testifies, indicates that different parts of the certificate have been lifted from more than one original document.

Linda Jordan takes the stand.

Document entered regarding SS number assigned to Obama. SS number is not verified under E Verify. It comes back as suspected fraudulent. This is the system by which the Government verifies ones citizenship.

Next witness.

Mr. Vogt.

Expert in document imaging and scanners for 18 years.

Mr. Vogt testifies that the birth certificate, posted online by Obama, is suspicious. States white lines around all the type face is caused by “unsharp mask” in Photoshop. Testifies that any document showing this, is considered to be a fraud.

States this is a product of layering.

Mr. Vogt testifies that a straight scan of an original document would not show such layering.

Also testifies that the date stamps shown on Obama documents should not be in exact same place on various documents as they are hand stamped. Obama’s documents are all even, straight and exactly the same indicating they were NOT hand stamped but layered into the document by computer.

Next witness, Mr. Sampson a former police officer and former immigration officer specializing in immigration fraud.

Ran Obama’s SS number through database and found that the number was issued to Obama in 1977 in the state of Connecticut . Obama never resided in that state. At the time of issue, Obama was living in Hawaii.

Serial number on birth certificate is out of sequence with others issued at that hospital. Also certification is different than others and different than twins born 24 hours ahead of Obama.

Mr. Sampson also states that portion of documents regarding Mr. Soetoro, who adopted Obama have been redacted which is highly unusual with regards to immigration records.

Suggests all records from Social Security, Immigration, Hawaii birth records be made available to see if there are criminal charges to be filed or not. Without them, nothing can be ruled out.

Mr. Sampson indicates if Obama is shown not to be a citizen, he should be arrested and deported and until all records are released nobody can know for sure if he is or is not a U.S. Citizen.

Taitz shows records for Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama, showing he resides in Hawaii and in Indonesia at the same time.

Taitz takes the stand herself.

Testifies that records indicate Obama records have been altered and he is hiding his identity and citizenship.

Taitz leaves the stand to make her closing arguments.

Taitz states that Obama should be found, because of the evidence presented, ineligible to serve as President.

And with that, the judge closes the hearing.

The Judge's Verdict:

President Barack Obama’s name will remain on the Georgia primary ballot after a state law judge flatly rejected legal challenges that contend he can not be a candidate.

In a 10-page order, Judge Michael Malihi dismissed one challenge that contended Obama has a computer-generated Hawaiian birth certificate, a fraudulent Social Security number and invalid U.S. identification papers. He also turned back another that claimed the president is ineligible to be a candidate because his father was not a U.S. citizen at the time of Obama's birth.

With regard to the challenge that Obama does not have legitimate birth and identification papers, Malihi said he found the evidence "unsatisfactory" and "insufficient to support plaintiffs' allegations."

A number of the witnesses who testified about the alleged fraud were never qualified as experts in birth records, forged documents and document manipulation and "none ... provided persuasive testimony," Malihi wrote.

Addressing the other claim that contends Obama cannot be a candidate because his father was never a U.S. citizen, Malihi said he was persuaded by a 2009 ruling by the Indiana Court of Appeals decision that struck down a similar challenge. In that ruling, the Indiana court found that children born within the U.S. are natural-born citizens, regardless of the citizenry of their parents.

Obama "became a citizen at birth and is a natural-born citizen," Malihi wrote. Accordingly, Obama is eligible as a candidate for the upcoming presidential primary in March, the judge said.

"By deciding this matter on the merits, the court in no way condones the conduct or legal scholarship of defendant's attorney, Mr. Jablonski," Malihi wrote. "This decision is entirely based on the law, as well as the evidence and legal arguments presented at the hearing."


This judge’s perverted ruling has taken the POTUS above the law and has emboldened Obama to ignore the laws in America and be rewarded for his lawless actions.

This ruling continues to promote the Liberal/Progressive/Communist/Marxist/Fascist political ideology and political partisanship of the Obama Administration that has corrupted our political institutions, our laws, the lives of Americans and even the rulings of the Supreme Court.

In essence, it serves Obama’s promise to transform America and destroy the U.S. Constitution and American Liberty.

Sources: AmericanThinker.com, LibertyLegalFoundation.org, www.ajc.com, www.wnd.com, TheNationalPatriot.com

Friday, February 3, 2012

Who Was There During the Coup in Congress in the 1990's

Senator Lindsey Graham was.
And the fine Senator from South Carolina went On the Record the other night, reminding people of what it was like to work with Newt Gingrich in those days.

The Senator also openly admitted that they had been to hard on Gingrich back then, because it was a difficult achievement to fight the good fight, as Newt did, and come out with results.

So when you hear those referring to the days of which Newt was House Speaker as leaving in disgrace, or how he is still bitterly despised by some in the GOP, don't buy in to it that they all are.

Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Trump to Make An Announcement Tomorrow About the GOP Race

Sources with in Trump circle of trust are saying Donald Trump will make a major announcement tomorrow in Vegas.

If this holds true, it'll say a lot about a big business man NOT endorsing another business man who is now running for the Presidency.