Showing posts with label Rahm Emanuel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rahm Emanuel. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 1, 2013

Did Obama tell Jason Collins: I wish I had your courage? Maybe some day the truth will also come out of the closet…

By: Nelson Abdullah - Conscience of a Conservative

“Many a true word is spoken in jest” said William Shakespeare and “Some truths, too painful or too likely to provoke, can be spoken only when the listener has been disarmed by laughter” are proverbial truths.

Barack Hussein Obama cracked a joke at the White House Correspondents Dinner the other day when he said, “I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist I used to be.” The correspondents who worked for the Democrat Party rolled in laughter. Really, Barry? After you wrote about being mentored for 10 years by a card-carrying Communist named Frank Marshall Davis before you went off to college I would never have guessed you were a socialist. And after you were enrolled in school in Indonesia as a Muslim where you learned to appreciate the sound of the Muslim call to prayers 5 times a day and to read and recite the Qur’an in fluent Arabic, I would never have guessed you were a Muslim. And if you still are a Muslim you must be a very special one who enjoys privileges that no other Muslim enjoys, because as you know Islam demands that homosexuals be condemned to death and if you are no longer a Muslim you also know Islam demands that those who convert to another religion from Islam become Apostates and they also are condemned to death.

One day later in the midst of simmering crises in all corners of the globe, within an hour after an obscure NBA player named Jason Collins made the announcement that he was a homosexual, Barack Hussein Obama felt it necessary to telephone him and congratulate him for his courage. One can only wonder if that telephone conversation was just another joke, a la William Shakespeare, and if it was, did Barry Soetoro //aka// Barack Hussein Obama also tell Jason Collins, “I wish I had your courage.”

This story follows the infamous Newsweek magazine cover in May 2012 and Obama’s famous girly-man pitch at the opening of the baseball season a few years back. But it also follows some very dark accusations from a homosexual drug dealer from Chicago named Larry Sinclair who revealed that he had a sexual relationship with him while Obama was in the Illinois legislature. Oh, and then there was the murder of the homosexual choir director, Donald Young, at Obama’s Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago shortly before Obama started his presidential campaign and the allegations about the gay men’s bath house, and so on and so on. It all just suggests that some people were cleaning up some unsavory details to make their candidate look squeaky clean. And when you think about what details they didn’t clean up it makes the mess left behind look even more dirty. But now that Obama doesn’t have to worry about his next election he has no reasons to avoid the truth.

Yahoo News reported this.

An NBA player coming out of the closet as gay. Wait, there’s more:

A groundbreaking pronouncement from NBA veteran Jason Collins — “I’m gay” — reverberated Monday through Washington, generating accolades from lawmakers on Twitter and a supportive phone call from President Barack Obama.

Hours after Collins disclosed his sexuality in an online article, Obama reached out by phone, expressing his support and telling Collins he was impressed by his courage, the White House said.

Collins, 34, becomes the first active player in one of four major U.S. professional sports leagues to come out as gay. He has played for six teams in 12 seasons, including this past season with the Washington Wizards, and is now a free agent.

I wrote about the darker side of the story here:

Monday, May 14, 2012

Did Newsweek accidentally reveal one of Obama’s darkest secrets when they inadvertently called him, “The First Gay President”

Fox News reported a story this morning about next week’s issue of Newsweek magazine. By some accidental quirk did Newsweek let the cat out of the bag when they called Barack Hussein Obama, ‘The First Gay President’? Fox News ran their story with this headline:

Newsweek calls Obama ‘The First Gay President’ on cover

WASHINGTON – Following President Barack Obama’s public announcement backing gay marriage last week, Newsweek magazine has featured him on its front cover with the headline, “The First Gay President.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/14/newsweek-calls-obama-first-gay-president-on-cover/#ixzz1urKtVARX

What else can one say after seeing our Great Leader throw out the opening pitch of the baseball season and tossing the ball like a girl? The cover story in Newsweek was all about the recent announcement by Barack Hussein Obama coming out in favor of same sex marriage. But there may be another side to the story. A much darker side that some people went to great lengths to cover up. Newsweek’s slip of the lip may help to re-invigorate some interest in those old stories from Chicago that involved gay sex, cocaine and murder. There were lots of rumors in Chicago from the 1990′s time period about a young Illinois politician named Barack Hussein Obama having very close contacts with certain homosexuals and drug dealers. And some unsavory attempts to cover it up.

Maybe we need to reexamine the accusations of one Larry Sinclair, from Chicago. You probably don’t remember him, he was buried by the news media. Read these two excerpts, below, from a 2009 story posted on Canada Free Press:

Barack Obama & Larry Sinclair: Cocaine, Sex, Lies & Murder?

- Joy Tiz Tuesday, August 4, 2009

Sinclair asserts that he met Obama twice in 1999. Their rendezvous was orchestrated by limo driver, Jagir Multani. Sinclair avers that Multani may have been in the United States illegally. Sinclair alleges that Obama smoked crack cocaine and directed Sinclair to administer a Lewinsky—which Sinclair obliged. According to Sinclair, the following day Obama materialized at Sinclair’s hotel to solicit supplementary Lewinskyization. That was the entirety of their affair, per Sinclair. Expecting to be serviced with no impulse to reciprocate is certainly consistent with Obama’s consummate narcissism.

If Obama habitually enjoyed these sorts of trysts, we would presume others witnesses would surface. To date, no one else has gone public with comparable reports. Maybe the late Donald Young, choir director at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago could have confirmed that Obama didn’t indulge in this type of conduct. Sadly, Young was murdered on December 23, 2007.

The forty-seven-year old choirmaster had attended Obama’s church since the age of twelve.

Or even this one, just a book review, posted on Prison Planet. It has a few more details.

OBAMA AND THE LARRY SINCLAIR AFFAIR

Barack Obama & Larry Sinclair: Cocaine, Sex, Lies & Murder?
Breaks Top 10 in Amazon Category

Book Review:

“All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.”

July 18, 2009

By John Medlin “StayAlive” (USA)

[...]Sinclair’s book would discuss his homosexual and cocaine sharing experiences with then Illinois State Senator Barack Obama in November 1999 and the events that followed after Sinclair’s public disclosure of these events on YouTube in January 2008.

I had been following Sinclair’s story on the Internet since February 2008. Having been a Press Officer in the US Army and an Internal Auditor, I was familiar with what can happen when the media turns against you and more importantly the patterns of people who tell the truth and those who don’t. What impressed me most over the following nine months was Sinclair’s story stayed the same, that on multiple occasions efforts were made to silence him on the Internet, and yet he persisted in the face of threats of murder to him and harm to members of his own family.

Yesterday, 14 July 2009, I received copy Number 81 of Sinclair’s book, “Barack Obama & Larry Sinclair: Cocaine, Sex, Lies & Murder?

This books reeks of the truth and the words and style of Larry Sinclair. It is not “ghost-written”. It is not a literary masterpiece and there are several typographical and grammatical mistakes. Most importantly it tells the true story of a man committed to exposing the truth. Sinclair pulls no punches and does not hide behind any equivocations about his past or his many flaws. He does provide very specific details about the dangerous journey he has taken to get the truth published, to speak truth to power. While parts of the book were previously published on his websites, he adds much more detail about what happened at the Democratic National Committee meeting in May 2008, the storm trooper tactics by the DC Metro Police after his appearance at the National Press Club in June 2008, the false charges initiated by Joe Biden’s son, Attorney General Beau Biden in Delaware, the continued failure of the Chicago Police to investigate the murder of Donald Young in December 2007, the openly gay choir master of Obama’s Trinity United Church of Christ, and of course the very specific details about President Obama’s private parts.

It is shameful that the various mainstream media have refused to follow up on Sinclair’s story, to challenge him on the facts, to challenge Joe and Beau Biden and the DC Metro Police on their false charges and imprisonment of Larry Sinclair in June 2008. Just imagine if they and the powerful interests they represent can do this to relatively unknown Larry Sinclair, what can they do to you?

“Barack Obama & Larry Sinclair Cocaine, Sex, Lies & Murder?” is a book worth reading for all those who seek the truth, an example of what a little, flawed man with incredible courage and persistence can achieve in speaking truth to power. Job well done.

“All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.”

Thomas Jefferson

Or even this one, originally posted on The JagHunter blog. Here it is reposted on The Fellowship of the Minds web site:

Washington Insider: Obama Member of Chicago Gay Man’s Club

Posted on May 27, 2010 by Dr. Eowyn

Obama and Emanuel: Members of same gay bath house in Chicago

President Obama and his chief of staff Rahm Emanuel are lifetime members of the same gay bath house in uptown Chicago, according to informed sources in Chicago’s gay community, as well as veteran political sources in the city.

The bath house, Man’s Country, caters to older white men and it has been in business for some 30 years and is known as one of uptown Chicago’s “grand old bathhouses.” WMR was told by sources who are familiar with the bath house that it provides one-year “lifetime” memberships to paying customers and that the club’s computerized files and pre-computer paper files, include membership information for both Obama and Emanuel. The data is as anonymized as possible for confidentiality purposes. However, sources close to “Man’s Country” believe the U.S. Secret Service has purged the computer and filing cabinet files of the membership data on Obama and Emanuel.

Members of Man’s Country are also issued club identification cards. WMR learned that Obama and Emanuel possessed the ID cards, which were required for entry.

Obama began frequenting Man’s Country in the mid-1990s, during the time he transitioned from a lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School to his election as an Illinois State Senator in 1996. Emanuel, reportedly joined Man’s Country after he left the Clinton White House and moved back to Chicago in 1998, joining the investment firm of Wasserstein Perella and maintaining his membership during his 2002 campaign for the U.S. 5th District House seat vacated by Rod Blagojevich, who was elected governor.

Man’s Country appears to be a “one stop shopping” center for gay men. The club’s website advertises steam rooms, “fantasy rooms,” bed rooms, male strippers, adult movies, and lockers.

However, Man’s Country was not the only location for Obama’s predatory gay sex activities. The Chicago gay community is aware that Obama often made contacts with younger men at his famous “pick-up basketball” games. It was at these “pick up” matches where Obama first met Emanuel and a young Democratic campaign worker and senior bank vice president named Alexi Giannoulias. Currently running for Obama’s old U.S. Senate seat now occupied by Roland Burris, Giannoulias successfully ran for Illinois Treasurer in 2006 after being drafted for the run by Chicago’s Democratic machine.

When you have a person like Barack Hussein Obama, who habitually hides his entire background, you cannot help but think there is some sinister reason behind it. We now know that Barry Soetoro//aka//Barack Hussein Obama publicly displayed on national television a forged Birth Certificate in April 2011. We now know he had a fake Selective Service Registration Card and has a Social Security Number previously issued in Connecticut to another person. We also know Obama was registered in school in Indonesia as a Muslim yet he claims he is a Christian for no other reason that he attended the radical racist Trinity United Church of Christ run by the equally racist, anti-American, Rev. Jeremiah Wright. And now there is even someone who suspects that Barack Hussein Obama was the son of a black Communist named Frank Marshall Davis and not Keyan-born Barack Obama. Sr., whose name appears on Barry’s fake birth certificate. As WND.com reported last month about a full-length documentary film scheduled for release in July titled: “Dreams from My Real Father: A Story of Reds and Deception,” made by Joel Gilbert. Read the “WND EXCLUSIVE: Film: President’s father not Barack Obama 2 years of research, rare photos support compelling case Published: 04/25/2012 at 8:51 PM”

Remember that problem that Joe Biden has with not being able to control what comes out of his mouth? Maybe it is an infectious disease and it’s very possible that Newsweek may have caught it.

My name is Nelson Abdullah and I am Old Ironsides.

Related:

Another Coincidence… How Many Can There Be?

Jesse Jackson, Wright ‘Arranged’ Obama Marriage

The Obamas… “Let Them Eat Cake” or Is That Drink Tea? – Updated

Lesbian Activist’s Surprisingly Candid Speech: Gay Marriage Fight Is a ‘Lie’ to Destroy Marriage

What Are The Chances? Obama, Jarrett, and Axelrod, All Connected to Communist Frank Marshall Davis

Obama’s Plan to Destroy America Hatched at Columbia Says Classmate

Another Sheriff Asking for Obama Documents and More Leaks About Obama 2008

Friday, December 21, 2012

Chicago: 446 school age children shot so far this year with strongest gun laws in country - media silent

Screen Shot 2012-12-19 at 9.45.28 AMFireAndreaMitchell.com The cesspool known as Chicago probably has the toughest gun laws in the country, yet despite all the shootings, murders, and bloodshed, you never hear a peep about this from the corrupt state run media. In Chicago, there have been 446 school age children shot in leftist utopia run by Rahm Emanuel and that produced Obama, Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, etc. 62 school aged children have actually been killed by crazed nuts in Chicago so far this year with almost two weeks to go. So why isn’t this news worthy? Is it because it would embarrass those anti second amendment nuts who brag about Chicago’s tough gun laws? Is it because most of the kids who were shot and killed were minorities? Or is it because the corrupt media doesn’t want to show Chicago in a bad light?

THE LIST OF MURDERED SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN 2012
18 YEARS OLD- 15

17 YEARS OLD- 16

16 YEARS OLD- 16

15 YEARS OLD- 6

14 YEARS OLD- 4

13 YEARS OLD- 2

12 YEARS OLD- 1

7 YEARS OLD- 1

6 YEARS OLD- 1

446 School Age Children Shot in Chicago so Far This Year

THE LIST OF SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN SHOT IN 2012

18 year old- 110

17 year old- 99

16 year old- 89

15 year old- 62

14 year old- 39

13 year old- 21

12 year old- 10

11 year old- 2

10 year old- 3

9 year old- 1

7 year old- 3

6 year old- 2

5 year old- 1

4 year old- 1

3 year old- 1

1 year old- 2

Related:

Gun Control is Genocide – documentary by Mike Adams

A 'what if' gun-seizure scenario

So How Do These Gun Totting Libs Justify Their Anti-Gun Stance and Legislation?

Former FBI Informant Says: Obama Will Destroy America Once He Has All The Guns… as Details of False Flag and Conspiracy in Connecticut Shooting Appear

Gun-Free Zones Are a Magnet for Attacks Like the Tragedy In Binghamton… Aurora, Columbine and Connecticut

Stampeding Gun Control Through Crisis

Expert Says Ban Gun Free School Zones, Allow Teachers to Carry

Pastor Chuck Baldwin’s Comments on the Connecticut School Shooting

Sandy Hook Elementary: 3 Shooters (A CLOSE LOOK)

My Thoughts on the Sandy Hook Shooting

It Isn’t About the Guns… It Is About Control… Controlling You!

John Bolton: Gun control a top goal of Obama 2nd Term

Why Do They Want Us Disarmed?

Hillary & Barack will BAN GUNS during the UN GUN TREATY on JULY 27, 2012!!!!

Saturday, July 28, 2012

"Eat Mor Chikin" while Rahm eats crow!

Threats to Chick-fil-A 'height of stupidity'

Legal team warns city officials, like Chicago’s Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who promise trouble for restaurants:  “Make My Day”

Rahm Now Clarifies His Chick-fil-A Stance… Like His Former Boss Spends a Lot of Time Walking Off-the Cuff Comments Back

Free Chick-Fil-A Coupons Save w/ Top Chick-Fil-A Coupons! Free Chick-Fil-A Coupons.

Sign Petition Supporting Chick-fil-A, freedom of speech and freedom of religion HERE

The issue before us is not an anti-gay issue.  It is a pro-freedom of speech and freedom of religion issue.  Chick-Fil-A does not discriminate against gays.  But Chick-Fil-A is a private company whose owner stand-up for their Christian beliefs.  Hello, this is America where that is allowed.  And America is still the land of the free, governed by a Bill of Rights and Constitution, where the majority of people are Christians.

Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy said he believes in the natural, biblical view of marriage as being between one man and one woman.

How, in America, could that viewpoint possibly be considered controversial or discriminatory?

Have our nation’s values and culture collapsed that far?

Apparently, liberal politicians like Chicago’s Mayor Rahm Emanuel think so. Upon hearing of Cathy’s stand, radical pro-homosexual organizations and sympathizers immediately began calling for boycotts, “kiss-ins,” and other types of protests against the family-friendly national chain of restaurants.

Then, government officials from major U.S. cities like Chicago and Boston said they plan to prevent Chick-fil-A from opening new restaurants in their jurisdictions.

Demanding a public apology from Cathy, Chicago Alderman Joe Moreno said that he will deny Chick-fil-A from opening a restaurant in Chicago’s Logan Square. Boston Mayor Thomas Menino told the Boston Herald that he would block Chick-fil-A from opening a restaurant in the “Cradle of Liberty.”

Never one to “let a good crisis go to waste,” Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel followed suit. Emanuel’s statement that “Chick-fil-A’s values are not Chicago’s values” was both legally ignorant and ill-advised. Emanuel, the former Chief of Staff at the Obama White House, surely knows that viewpoint discrimination violates federal Civil Rights statutes!

++These threats of action and discrimination against Chick-fil-A because of the viewpoint of its owner are not only illegal – they are toxic to every business and businessman in America!

To deny business permits or zoning approvals to Chick-fil-A because the president of the privately-owned family business expressed his biblical view of natural marriage is outrageous.

Any city trying to ban Chick-fil-A will not win this battle. If this discrimination is challenged in court – Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Boston Mayor Thomas Menino will be eating crow, and in large portions! Even the ACLU condemned the knee-jerk announcements by ultraliberal Mayors Emanuel and Menino!

These government officials ought to be ashamed. For a public official to threaten denial of a right to do business because the president of a private company supports natural marriage is the height of stupidity and intolerance.

Unfortunately, their response is typical of intolerant homosexual activists. They will go to any lengths to silence the majority of Americans who believe that children do best when raised in a natural family with one mom and one dad.

Chick-fil-A

A legal team that specializes in religious and civil rights and the Constitution says city officials who are promising to punish Chick-fil-A restaurants for the religious beliefs followed by their chief are asking for trouble.

“These government officials ought to be ashamed. For a public official to threaten denial of a right to do business because the president of a private company supports natural marriage is the height of stupidity and intolerance,” said Mathew Staver, chief of Liberty Counsel.

“Unfortunately, their response is typical of intolerant homosexual activists. They will go to any lengths to silence the majority of Americans who believe that children do best when raised in a natural family with one mom and one dad,” he said.

The issue has turned into a firestorm over the last couple of days. Among the results? The Henson Co., creator of the Muppets characters, said it no longer would work with Chick-fil-A. The mayor of Boston publicly bashed the restaurant chain. Chicago officials said they would not want the company to operate in their wards. And “kiss-in” protests were announced in front of company outlets on college campuses.

Boston’s mayor reconsiders his position on Chick-fil-A expansion in his city.

All brought on by advocates for homosexual behavior because Dan Cathy, whose father, Truett Cathy, founded the $4 billion-plus a year business, gave an interview to the Baptist Press.

“We are very much supportive of the family – the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that,” Cathy said.

In a separate radio interview, Dan Cathy said, “I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say, ‘We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage. I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think we can try to define what marriage is all about.”

Earlier today, Billy Graham, the longtime dean of Christian leaders in the United States, expressed his support for the Cathy family

“I want to express my support for my good friends Truett Cathy and his son Dan Cathy, and for their strong stand for the Christian faith,” he said in a statement released by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association.

“I’ve known their family for many years and have watched them grow Chick-fil-A into one of the best businesses in America while never compromising their values. Chick-fil-A serves each of its customers with excellence, and treats everyone like a neighbor. It’s easy to see why Chick-fil-A has become so popular across America,” he said.

Liberty Counsel noted the city officials who are on thin ice include Chicago Alderman Joe Moreno, who “said that he will deny Chick-fil-A from opening a restaurant in Chicago’s Logan Square. Boston Mayor Thomas Menino told the Boston Herald that he would block Chick-fil-A from opening a restaurant in the ‘Cradle of Liberty.” Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel followed suit.”

“There is absolutely no evidence that Chick-fil-A has discriminated against anyone,” Staver continued. “The intolerance displayed by these government officials ought to serve as a wakeup call to the majority of Americans who support the commonsense understanding of natural marriage.

“If given the chance, these intolerant officials would silence anyone who supports natural marriage. They have placed extreme ideology over freedom,” Staver said.

“To deny business permits or zoning approvals to Chick-fil-A because the president of the privately owned family business expressed his biblical view of natural marriage is outrageous. Any city trying to ban Chick-fil-A will not win this battle,” Staver said.

Liberty Counsel is an international nonprofit, litigation, education, and policy organization dedicated to advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of life, and the family since 1989, by providing pro bono assistance and representation on these and related topics.

But as WND reported, hundreds of thousands of people across America are pledging to support Chick-fil-A restaurants.

A Facebook campaign has been launched by Gov. Mike Huckabee seeking to build support for the chicken-sandwich chain famous for closing its stores on Sundays so employees can attend church if they choose.

Huckabee, a 2008 Republican presidential candidate, invited Americans to join him Wednesday, Aug. 1, for a “Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day.” Some supporters are advocating showing support every Wednesday.

He noted the company now is a $4 billion a year effort with more than 1,600 stores.

“The militant homosexual advocates have launched an all out assault on Dan Cathy and Chick-fil-A, pushing for a boycott because the Cathy family has contributed to traditional marriage organizations. The attempts to hurt or destroy Chick-fil-A is nothing short of economic bullying. In the name of ‘tolerance,’ there is an effort being mounted to put pressure on people to stop eating at Chick-fil-A. Even worse is the vilification of the company and its employees. The Christian world view of Dan Cathy is being met with intolerance and vicious hate speech,” Huckabee’s announcement said.

“I ask you to join me in speaking out to your constituency via Facebook, Twitter, email, broadcast, etc., to make Wednesday, August 1 ‘Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day.’ No one is being asked to make signs, speeches, or openly demonstrate. The goal is simple: Let’s affirm a business that operates on Christian principles and whose executives are willing to take a stand for the Godly values we espouse by simply showing up and eating at Chick-fil-A on Wednesday, August 1.”

John Hayward at Human Events said the attacks are reaching unhealthy levels.

“The name of the game being played against Chick-fil-A involved ending the discussion, by ruling one side of this important social debate completely out of order, and dismissing their beliefs as unworthy of respect. All resistance to gay marriage is instantly transmuted into personal hatred of gay people. On the other hand, criticism of traditional marriage proponents cannot be viewed as hateful, no matter how angrily it might be expressed. It’s a rigged heads-we-win, tails-you-lose game,” he said.

Chick-fil-A appears to have taken itself off the soapbox, at least for now, with a corporate statement that said: “The Chick-fil-A culture and service tradition in our restaurants is to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect – regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender. We will continue this tradition in the over 1,600 restaurants run by independent owner/operators. Going forward, our intent is to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena.”

Related:

Can it be un-American to be a Christian? 

Rahm Emanuel chickens out on Chick-fil-A ban

'The View' Co-Hosts Defend Chick-Fil-A After Chicago Alderman Announces Ban

Biggest name in Christianity defends Chick-fil-A

Liberty Action Counsel Stands with Chick-Fil-A

See what the biggest companies in the nation are doing to promote homosexuality.

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel (and Former Obama Chief of Staff): Chick-Fil-A should be banished for Christian marriage beliefs

 

Announcing the Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day on August 1 

July 26, 2012
Christian-owned Chick-fil-A has come under assault once again, this time because CEO Dan Cathy recently affirmed his personal view that the Biblical view of marriage should be upheld.

The "Big Gay" machine has ramped up an un-relenting and vicious public attack against Chick-fil-A. Homosexual activists are spewing hate-filled bigotry and intolerance toward the company in unprecedented fashion.
Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day is our way of showing our support for a company whose leaders believe in marriage as that of one man, one woman. http://66.210.221.105/index.html
Join millions of others in showing support for Chick-fil-A by visiting your local Chick-fil-A on Wednesday, August 1, 2012. The plan is simple. At least once on August 1, eat a meal at Chick-fil-A and politely let the staff and management know you appreciate the company's Christian value system.

Let us know you're supporting Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day by signing up today! We'll let Chick-fil-A know to expect record sales on August 1! http://66.210.221.105/index.html

"Eat Mor Chikin" while Rahm eats crow!

Thanks to patriotic Americans of all stripes from Billy Graham to the ladies of The View, Chick –Fil-A’s media coverage and sales are up!

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

The Obamas… “Let Them Eat Cake” or Is That Drink Tea? – Updated

The Obamas, by New York Times reporter Jodi Kantor, has made headlines even before it goes on sale Tomorrow, 01.10.11.  A White House spokesman has dismissed it as an "over-dramatization of old news."

The book — a political dissection of a marriage and a chronological account of the rocky political education of the president and first lady.  It promises more than it delivers, so for readers expecting controversy, they may be disappointed. For those that can read between the lines… maybe not.

Although with the interesting timing of the exiting of Rahm Emanuel's replacement as Chief of Staff, Bill Daley, it might make some wonder what has been left out and wonder if this book is perhaps an under-dramatization? The early exit, not matter how it was framed by the White House, continues the whispers of internal meltdown.

The book is filled with stories of infighting among White House staff which includes (ed) Rahm Emanuel , Robert Gibbs, Valerie Jarrett and the First Lady. Beyond Washington, few will call it juicy, except for details of a 2009 "Hollywoodesque" Halloween party at the White House with Johnny Depp in costume as the Mad Hatter from his role in the film Alice in Wonderland.

Kantor contends the White House kept details secret, fearing how a splashy party would appear during a recession. (See more below…)

The book portrays Michelle Obama as more political than her image, but opens with an interesting assumption, that Obama's re-election "increasingly rests on attractive images and charming stories of him and his family."

Kantor's narrative is built on the couple's longstanding political differences — not over policies, but the role of politics. Kantor writes that Michelle Obama always doubted if "true change could be accomplished through the legislative process."

The couple's other differences are explored: He's tolerant of staff failures. She's not. Kantor attributes that to their childhoods. Both are Ivy League-educated lawyers from modest backgrounds. But he partly raised himself and has a "soft spot" for anyone who has helped him. With her strict parents, there were no excuses.

The book is best on the Obamas' enduring friendship with two African-American couples from Chicago and on the inner workings of the White House — how security and obsessive fears about image disrupt normal family life.

It's a book that will be viewed through its readers' politics: a liberal apology to conservatives, too focused on style for liberals yet in reality probably too much on the  surface and missing the real scandals and questionable mystery issues that keep reappearing no matter how much the Obama’s have tried to bury them including: the eligibility question, the missing documents from both their backgrounds, unending questions about the president’s family and their family connections and ties between the Geithners, the Jarrett's, and the Dunhams, tales of affairs and sexual proclivity, questions of both their dealings in Chicago; personal and professional Rezko land deal, follies like the 2016 Olympic bid and the list goes on…

Kantor concludes that the first lady has gained influence, "ironically" because she "played the role of not-very-political wife and mom so well. The less popular her husband became, the more powerful she became."

She's the "more confrontational Obama, the one who tended to slip into what one friend called 'mama bear' mode when her husband was threatened." On Obama's re-election campaign, Kantor writes, "This would be the last race he would ever run, and his wife intended for him to win." We'll see if Kantor has exaggerated the first lady's role.

White House threw secret 'Alice in Wonderland' bash during recession

It was the tea party The Obamas just couldn’t resist… just like all those vacations, shopping trips and golf games. But you ordinary Americans… tighten your belt peeps~

New York Post A White House “Alice in Wonderland” costume ball — put on by Johnny Depp and Hollywood director Tim Burton — proved to be a Mad-as-a-Hatter idea that was never made public for fear of a political backlash during hard economic times, according to a new tell-all.

The Obamas,” by New York Times correspondent Jodi Kantor, tells of the first Halloween party the first couple feted at the White House in 2009. It was so over the top that “Star Wars” creator George Lucas sent the original Chewbacca to mingle with invited guests.

The book reveals how any official announcement of the glittering affair — coming at a time when Tea Party activists and voters furious over the lagging economy, 10-percent unemployment rate, bank bailouts and Obama’s health-care plan were staging protests — quickly vanished down the rabbit hole.

“White House officials were so nervous about how a splashy, Hollywood-esque party would look to jobless Americans — or their representatives in Congress, who would soon vote on health care — that the event was not discussed publicly and Burton’s and Depp’s contributions went unacknowledged,” the book says.

However, the White House made certain that more humble Halloween festivities earlier that day — for thousands of Washington-area schoolkids — were well reported by the press corps.

Then the Obamas went inside, where an invitation-only affair for children of military personnel and White House administrators unfolded in the East Room.

Unbeknownst to reporters, the State Dining Room had also been transformed into a secretive White House Wonderland.

Tim Burton decorated it “in his signature creepy-comic style. His film version was about to be released, and he had turned the room into the Mad Hatter’s tea party, with a long table set with antique-looking linens, enormous stuffed animals in chairs, and tiered serving plates with treats like bone-shaped meringue cookies,” reports the book, which The Post purchased at a Manhattan bookstore.

“Fruit punch was served in blood vials at the bar. Burton’s own Mad Hatter, the actor Johnny Depp, presided over the scene in full costume, standing up on a table to welcome everyone in character.”

The Obamas’ daughters, Malia and Sasha, then 11 and 8 respectively, “sat at the table, surrounded by a gaggle of their friends, and then proceeded to the next delight, a magic show in the East Room.”

Kantor’s book details more personal aspects of the Obama White House, serving up glimpses of the first couple’s marriage, parenting, sometimes tense handling of staff issues and even the president’s sly sense of humor when it comes to race.

One morning during his Senate campaign, Obama didn’t show up to a meeting with donors. “After a frantic search, a white staffer named Peter Coffey called Obama’s barbershop to find that, yes, he was there.”

The president confronted Coffey about the call later that day.

“ ‘The relationship between a black man and his barber is sacred,’ Obama bellowed . . . ‘For failing to understand this truth, your punishment is to watch the movie “Barbershop.” And for further punishment, you will then watch the sequel, “Barbershop 2.” ’ ”

Often White House staffers found themselves in the middle of husband-and-wife quarrels.

“The advisors could feel hopelessly caught between husband and wife,” Kantor writes. “The Obama marriage was awkward for everyone: for the aides, for the president . . . and for the first lady.”Johnny Depp played host, as the Mad Hatter, at a 2009 White House bash, but a new book says it was kept quiet from the press for fear of backlash amid the recession.

Post photo composite

TEA PARTY! Johnny Depp played host, as the Mad Hatter, at a 2009 White House bash, but a new book says it was kept quiet from the press for fear of backlash amid the recession.

Updated (Photos from the Blaze… the truth has no agenda):

PICTURES SURFACE FROM THE OBAMA'S EXTRAVAGANT HALLOWEEN PARTY  

  Two years after the President and his family threw an over-the-top, Alice In Wonderland themed halloween party (complete with actor Johnny Depp in full Madhatter costume and makeup), pictures from the event are making the rounds. Was it wrong for the First Family to partying in such a grand fashion while the nation's unemployment was sitting at 10%? Get the details and decide for yourself HERE

A lot has been said over the last two days about the White House’s now-infamous “Alice in Wonderland” Halloween party from 2009. It was an extravagant affair featuring actor Johnny Depp and filmmaker Tim Burton in costume. Conservatives have panned the president for having such a party during economic turmoil, and generally keeping it hush-hush. Liberals (and even some conservatives) have defended the president, either saying the party was mentioned to some degree, or that the president‘s Halloween plans shouldn’t be national news.

No matter what side you take, it’s still conceivable that you would want to see pictures from the event, right? We thought so.

Intrepid blogger Zombie tracked down some of the photos from the night and posted them here. We’ve included some of them below (Depp is dressed as the Mad Hatter, Burton is the one with the eye patch, and the dog, well, that’s the Obama family canine named “Bo”):

You can see more of the pictures that Zombie tracked down, including more of the decorations and some from what seems to be an exclusive after-party, here and here.

By the way, the White House’s official statement defends the party as no secret:

One of the anecdotes that has received wide attention [from the new book The Obamas] has been a supposedly secret Alice in Wonderland themed Halloween party in 2009. This was an event for local school children from the Washington DC area and for hundreds of military families, and certainly nothing that the White House was ashamed of.

Of course…. If there was nothing to be ashamed of, the why was this story hidden from the press and the American people… word has it that it is logged nowhere on the White House records.

The Obamas

Will Ignorance Lead to a Second Obama Term??

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

U.S. hits $14.3 TRILLION debt ceiling. Obama raids pensions to keep gov’t going! As Geithner Prepares to Blame GOP for Economy/Housing Woes

Enron execs are in prison for a long time for doing things like this.

WALL STREET JOURNAL: The U.S. government hit the $14.294 trillion debt ceiling today (Monday, May 16, 2011) and has now already exceeded it, setting in motion an uncertain, 11-week political scramble to avoid a default.

Remember last week when Geithner said that all of a sudden we had until August, instead of this week for Congress to increase the debt ceiling?  And we were all wondering where this money to cover the shortage was coming from? The Treasury Department plans to announced it will stop issuing and reinvesting government securities in certain government pension plans, part of a series of steps designed to delay a default until Aug. 2.

The Treasury’s moves buy time for the White House and congressional leaders to reach a deficit-reduction agreement that could clear the way for enough lawmakers to vote to raise the amount of money Congress allows the nation to borrow.

However most informed American people and a majority of the experts do not want the debt ceiling raised.  If for once Congress would listen and not hike the debt ceiling… what happens to these pensions?  What happens to them is exactly what happened to Social Security that is a treasure chest filled with I.O.U’s from the Federal Government instead of the funds people have paid in for generations now.  

GEORGE SANTAYANA is often quoted for the aphorism that “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Looking back on the financial crisis, we can see why the study of history is often so contentious and why revisionist histories are so easy to construct. There are always many factors that could have caused a historical event; the difficult task is to discern which, among a welter of possible causes, were the significant ones — the ones without which history would have been different.

Using this standard, I believe that the sine qua non of the financial crisis was U.S. government housing policy, which led to the creation of 27 million subprime and other risky loans — half of all mortgages in the United States — which were ready to default as soon as the massive 1997-2007 housing bubble began to deflate. If the U.S. government had not chosen this policy path — fostering the growth of a bubble of unprecedented size and an equally unprecedented number of weak and high-risk residential mortgages — the great financial crisis of 2008 would never have occurred.

It was the U.S. government’s housing policies — and nothing else — that were responsible for the 2008 financial crisis.

The inquiry has to begin with what everyone agrees was the trigger for the crisis — the so-called mortgage meltdown that occurred in 2007. That was the relatively sudden outbreak of delinquencies and defaults among mortgages, primarily in a few states — California, Arizona, Nevada, and Florida — but to a lesser degree everywhere in the country. No one disputes that the losses on these mortgages and the decline in housing values that resulted from the ensuing foreclosures weakened financial institutions in the U.S. and around the world and were the precipitating cause of the crisis.

This raised a significant question. The U.S. had experienced housing bubbles in the past. Since the Second World War, there had been two — beginning in 1979 and 1989 — but when these bubbles deflated they had triggered only local losses. Why was the deflation of the housing bubble in 2007 so destructive?

The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission’s answer was that there were weaknesses in the financial system — failures of regulation and risk management, excessive leverage and risk-taking — that were responsible for the ensuing devastation. To establish this idea, the Commission had to show that these weaknesses were something new. It didn’t attempt to do this, although that was an essential logical step in establishing its point. And the Commission ignored a more obvious answer: the quality of the mortgages in the bubble. As I noted earlier — and as the Commission never acknowledged or disputed — by 2008, half all mortgages in the U.S. — 27 million — were subprime or otherwise risky loans. If the Commission had really been looking for the reasons that the collapsing bubble was so destructive, the poor quality of the mortgages in the bubble was a far more likely hypothesis than that there had been a previously undetected weakening in the way the U.S. financial system operated.  (Read full Article HERE at American Spectator)

With a failing and ailing housing market that Zillow predicts won’t hit bottom until 2012 *at the earliest*…, a US dollar with rapidly declining value driving prices of oil up, as well as every product down line in the transportation chain, this administration’s leadership thru the US economic woes have proven not to steer the nation towards recovery, but instead thrown us into a double dip recession.

With a new POTUS election year looming, this comes as quite the inconvenient talking point. So it comes as no surprise that Geithner decides to play politics with a crises… laying the groundwork for blaming policies that brought us to this point on on the GOPs demands for spending cuts in exchange for raising the debt ceiling.

A short-term default on government debts would do “irrevocable damage” to the American economy, according to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.

In addition, failing to raise the debt limit and forcing the government to miss payments on some obligations would “likely push us into a double dip recession,” he warned Friday in one of the administration’s bluntest warnings yet on the dangers of inaction.

In a letter sent to Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Geithner painted a bleak picture of what would happen if Congress were to fail to raise the $14.3 trillion debt limit in time. A government default would hurt an already weak housing market, drive down household wealth by hitting 401(k) accounts and pension funds, and actually increase the government’s debt burden by driving up costs.

I’m not sure if Geithner’s bothered to look closely, but with, or without, that debt ceiling, a double dip recession has already been upon us. That is if you want to focus on the economic health of anyone other than the financials, who’ve been the biggest beneficiaries of Fed’s low interest/big bucks capital gains scenario. Main Street is feeling anything but recovery as our home values continue to tumble, unemployment remains high, and costs of necessities rise unabated. And I’m sure many of will consider candle making when the inexpensive incandescent bulb is mandated out of existence thanks to a nanny “green” Congress.

Political rhetoric, in the form of the game of “chicken”, is at the foundation of this cheap fear mongering. As evenMike Shedlock at Mish’s Global Economic points out, there’s no doubt the debt ceiling will be raised. It’s just under what circumstances that it will. The GOP is using the debate as leverage for spending/cutting concessions from across the aisle, and from this big spending WH denizen.

In what is one of Mish’s more uncharacteristically harsh observations, Shedlock calls the Geithner/Bennett letter staged.

Last week Senator Michael Bennett of Colorado sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner asking what would happen if the debt ceiling was not raised.

Geithner’s Fear-Mongering Response to Senator Michael Bennett was quite entertaining. Here are a few select quotes from Geithner

A default would call into question, for the first time, the full faith and credit of the U. S. government. As a result, investors in the United States and around the world would demand much higher rates, reflecting the increased risk we might default on our obligations again.

A Default would not only increase borrowing costs for the Federal Government. but also for families, businesses, and local governments.

Even a short-term default could cause irrevocable damage to the American economy.

The letter goes on and on with colorful warnings about double-dip recessions.

The entire setup looks like a staged event. Michael Bennett is a Democrat from Colorado who wants the debt ceiling raised. Purposely or not, Bennett lobbed a softball to Geithner who drooled all over it.

To link the non existent housing recovery – as well as a stagnant (at best) economy in the wake of the massive government injection of taxpayer stimulus cash – to the current event of the debt ceiling is an obvious political feint, designed to mask the fiscal policy failures of the current administration and Fed Reserve. To buy into this nonsense, we would have to assume that an automatic raise of the debt ceiling, unopposed, would result in the rosy future this admin attempts to paint at every opportunity.

This deliberate mischaracterization for political gain is a dangerous game of chicken for we, the people. Our problem is less the specifics of the debt ceiling debate than it is the effect of both spending and never ending QE policies onthe stability of the US dollar. While the days and weeks bring us a yoyo effect, the dollar has been steadily losing against the Euro over the years, driven by the nation’s increasing debt.

Nor does it give me a bit of satisfaction that the dollar has risen against the yen…. Give me a break. If there’s a nation that’s never recovered fully from their “lost decade”, and now in further economic crisis by their earthquake and tsunami, it’s Japan.

Below is a chart from the St. Louis Fed site, with the weighted average of the US dollar against the Euro area, Canada, Japan, the UK, Switzerland, Australia and Sweden from 1970 to 2011. The officially recognized US recession eras are noted by the shaded grey.

There are some who see a devalued dollar as a boost… and that’s true if you only want to consider short term, immediate effects. But we’re anything but short term with our soaring debt, reduced abilities to grow the economy or our individual incomes. Playing chicken with the dollar, while never curtailing out of control spending, is the stuff currency failures are made of historically. Something that many of you may remember is the third phase of the Kevin D. Freeman “Financial Terrorism” report I wrote about in March of this year. While “financial terrorism” may not be the stated goals of the Treasury Sec’y, the Fed Reserve or this WH, one can’t help but notice they are proceeding right along the path this report warns of for the fall of the US as a superpower.

At the very least, Bernanke – riding herd on continued low rates while continuing to run the US printing presses – and Geithner are doing a delicate tightrope act without a safety net. And neither are above playing political cards with fear mongering and cheap tricks to stay balanced on that wire.

The problem with the Geithner/Bernanke circus act they aren’t telling the audience when the show is over, nor how they plan to get off that tightrope. But Geithner is going to make sure that, in the inevitable fall, it’s definitely not his fault, or that of his WH POTUS. They are already pointing that finger at the GOP, and hoping the US voter buys their storyline that the GOP, holding the debt ceiling vote hostage on spending cut negotiations, is the reason they tumbled.

ECO-Fis-0037-Stock

When is the best time to hold a fiscal crisis?

The obvious answer might seem to be: never. Crises are not much fun, can be very costly, and people tend to get hurt. Had President Obama embraced the recommendations of his own bipartisan fiscal commission, or had he put forward a budget that addressed the country's long-term fiscal imbalances, 'never' might have been an option. But he did not. Instead, the country is on an unsustainable fiscal path of borrowing and escalating debt.

As Herb Stein once aptly put it, if something cannot go on forever, it will stop. In fiscal matters, such stops can precipitate crises. When the rest of the world decides a country is not credit-worthy, interest rates can soar at the same moment that the country is trying to cut back on spending and raise taxes, thus combining contractionary fiscal and monetary policy in an ugly mix.

If that is what lies in the future for the United States, is it better to face that future sooner or later? It may depend on whom you ask. For the country as a whole, there are a number of reasons to prefer sooner.

First, the longer fiscal adjustment is postponed, the greater and more painful the ultimate fix needs to be. The debt burden rises over time and inescapable interest payments rise with it. For spending cuts, if those in and near retirement are to be shielded from major entitlement changes, the "grandfathered" populations will grow dramatically in the years ahead.

Second, crises can occur at inopportune moments. The global financial crisis that exploded in September 2008 came at a particularly bad time. The country was led by a lame duck administration that felt it had little sway over an opposition Congress. The political class was caught up in an election that was not conducive to crafting a careful, bipartisan policy response.

Portugal provides a more recent example of awkwardly-timed crisis. Its government fell just as it was negotiating a financial rescue package that required painful and contentious adjustments. It was constitutionally prohibited from holding a quick election and has thus been trying to conduct critical and difficult bailout negotiations with only a caretaker government.

So why not move quickly to address an impending fiscal crisis? If you're an incumbent politician, later can look better than sooner. You might hope that something unexpected will come along to avert the crisis, such as a global economic boom. Or, at least, you might hope that the crisis will wait until you've left office. Moreover, if you choose to address the crisis sooner and successfully avert it, there will inevitably be those who wonder whether all the painful adjustment was really necessary and whether the crisis would have taken place at all. This may be the case in Britain, which took serious steps to address its fiscal imbalance this past year.

Back in the United States, at present, commentators have heaped scorn on Republicans for daring to play chicken with the debt ceiling, calling it wildly irresponsible. Implicitly, those are arguments that it is better to hold our crisis later rather than sooner. That may be neither responsible nor right.

If U.S. political leaders do not act now to address the growing federal debt, when is the next propitious moment?  Given recent rhetoric, it seems unlikely that a bipartisan accord would spontaneously emerge during an election year. One can imagine electoral outcomes that would allow serious action in 2013, after the next vote, but that begs the question of whether global financial markets will wait that long. At the moment, U.S. debt is precariously balanced between dire analyses, such as that accompanying the recent S&P downgrade warning, and the woeful lack of attractive alternatives on the world scene. This balance could persist for years, but to assume it will is undeniably risky.

Given the president's reluctance to put forward or embrace viable fiscal solutions, the debt ceiling looks like one of the very few options for forcing an adult conversation about fiscal imbalances in the near future. Critics are correct that this approach risks a crisis, but that's really just a question of timing. If the confrontation prompts a serious approach to fiscal issues, that may be the country's best hope of avoiding a crisis altogether.

Remember Rahm Emanuel and Hillary Clinton’s famous lines:  Never let a good crisis go to waste… and perhaps create one if you need it?

Source: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research

Monday, May 16, 2011

Most Watched City in the World…

Which one… Chicago; the home of our President and now run by Rahm Emanuel whose coronation, ah swearing in, is today, May 16th, 2011…  1984 has arrived in Chicago and if we don’t stand up NOW… coming to your city next!

In what has been dubbed Operation Virtual Shield, thousands of public and privately owned security cameras have been put in place in Chicago and linked together, creating a capsule of surveillance over the entire city, more extensive than anywhere else in the United States. Chicago holds the record for number of surveillance cameras, estimated at up to 10,000. The network is said to have cost $60 million. Officials say it is worth the price, but privacy concerns are at a peak.

Video:  May 16, 2011 !!!1984!!! YOU NEED TO KNOW!!!

Your rights and freedoms are being consciously and deliberately stripped away. This is NOT about public safety!
It is about power and control by a self appointed few.

Red Squad Back Big Brother cameras zoom in on Chicago
http://www.youtube.com/user/RussiaToday#p/u/8/drdYYrzgnP4
RussiaToday | May 15, 2011 | 4,134 view

Benjamin Franklin, “He who gives up his liberty for security ends up with neither!!”

Culture of Corruption

Monday, February 15, 2010

The New World Empire

This is cleverly done!

The NEW WORLD ORDER EMPIRE ...!!!

The decline and fall of the American Empire:

clip_image001

Party guest from left to right: Tim Geithner, John Kerry, KSM, Oprah, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Axelrod, Barack Obama, Michelle Obama, Hillary Clinton, Party Crasher #1, Rahm Emanuel, Eric Holder, Party Crasher #2, Harry Reid, John Edwards, Bluto, Andy Stern, Bill Clinton, Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Barney Frank, Kevin Jennings

Statues left to right: Che Guevara, Saul Alinsky, Obama, Chairman Mao, Lenin

Shades of Dictator Instincts… Rahm Emanuel says Obama ready to use executive powers to forge ahead with his domestic initiatives

Rahm Emanuel says Obama ready to use executive powers to forge ahead with his domestic initiatives

rahm-emanuel-3Now that the super majority is gone in the Senate, Obama is ready to circumvent the U.S. Congress and enact his progressive liberal policies by executive order, including on energy, the environment and the economy. Dead Fish Rahm Emanuel speaking to the New York Times says that they are reviewing a list to “get the job done”.

“We are reviewing a list of presidential executive orders and directives to get the job done across a front of issues,” said Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff.

Any president has vast authority to influence policy even without legislation, through executive orders, agency rule-making and administrative fiat. And Mr. Obama’s success this week in pressuring the Senate to confirm 27 nominations by threatening to use his recess appointment power demonstrated that executive authority can also be leveraged to force action by Congress.

Mr. Obama has already decided to create a bipartisan budget commission under his own authority after Congress refused to do so. His administration has signaled that it plans to use its discretion to soften enforcement of the ban on openly gay men and lesbians serving in the military, even as Congress considers repealing the law. And the Environmental Protection Agency is moving forward with possible regulations on heat-trapping gases blamed for climate change, while a bill to cap such emissions languishes in the Senate.

In an effort to demonstrate forward momentum, the White House is also drawing more attention to the sorts of actions taken regularly by cabinet departments without much fanfare. The White House heavily promoted an export initiative announced by Commerce Secretary Gary Locke last week and nearly $1 billion in health care technology grants announced on Friday by Kathleen Sebelius, the health and human services secretary, and Hilda L. Solis, the labor secretary.

White House officials said the increased focus on executive authority reflected a natural evolution from the first year to the second year of any presidency.

“The challenges we had to address in 2009 ensured that the center of action would be in Congress,” said Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director. “In 2010, executive actions will also play a key role in advancing the agenda.”

The use of executive authority during times of legislative inertia is hardly new; former Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush turned to such powers at various moments in their presidencies, and Mr. Emanuel was in the thick of carrying out the strategy during his days as a top official in the Clinton White House.

But Mr. Obama has to be careful how he proceeds because he has been critical of both Mr. Clinton’s penchant for expending presidential capital on small-bore initiatives, like school uniforms, and Mr. Bush’s expansive assertions of executive authority, like the secret program of wiretapping without warrants.

Obama Declares He Will Rule by Authoritarian Decree

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
February 14, 2010

The Obama administration has announced it will now rule by fascist decree and ignore Congress and the American people.

“With much of his legislative agenda stalled in Congress, President Obama and his team are preparing an array of actions using his executive power to advance energy, environmental, fiscal and other domestic policy priorities,” reports The New York Times. “We are reviewing a list of presidential executive orders and directives to get the job done across a front of issues,” said Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff who is fond of cracking his knuckles in Obama’s face.

Socialist Obama to Push Executive Orders - Video

According to The New York Times, ruling in authoritarian fashion is normal and acceptable. “Any president has vast authority to influence policy even without legislation, through executive orders, agency rule-making and administrative fiat.”

In fact, Obama’s plan to rule by authoritarian decree is unconstitutional. Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution states: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” Article II, Section 3 states that the president may call Congress into emergency session during a national crisis.

In other words, rule buy fiat is treason. Another section of the Constitution covers treason. Article II, Section. 4 states: “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.”

Rahm Emanuel should be arrested and prosecuted for treason under federal statute, specifically Title 18 U.S.C. § 2. It states: “Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal.”

Treason is spelled out in Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution. “The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason,” it states.

“White House officials said the increased focus on executive authority reflected a natural evolution from the first year to the second year of any presidency,” The New York Times continues.

Hitler exploited this “natural evolution” to turn Germany into a fascist dictatorship through executive orders. In fact, Reagan, Clinton and Bush the Lesser issued a flurry of executive orders that surpassed anything Hitler or Stalin issued.

Executive orders have been around since the beginning of the republic. George Washington issued a number of proclamations, dispositions and recommendations. For instance, a suggestion that a day of Thanksgiving take place on Thursday, November26, 1789. He was severely criticized for issuing a proclamation suggesting U.S. citizens joining or aiding the war between Austria, Prussia, Sardinia, Britain and the Netherlands be prosecuted. George Washington’s proclamations, however, did not over rule legislation passed by Congress.

Executive Orders From Hell – Video

Executive orders did not really pick up steam until the presidency of Abraham Lincoln. During the invasion of the South for opposing the federal government, Lincoln issued a large number of executive orders allowing the federal military to steal land and turn prisoners of war into forced labor slaves.

The grand daddy of executive orders was Franklin Roosevelt. He issued 3,723 of them. Here is a sample. Roosevelt’s most notorious executive order was 6102. It permitted the federal government to steal all privately held gold in the United States.

Ronald Reagan — sold to the people as a “conservative” — issued 381 executive orders, more than George W. Bush. Clinton came close to Reagan. He issued 364. Reagan violated the Constitution directly when he issued Executive Order 12611 ordering “Assistance for Central American Democracies and the Nicaraguan Democratic Resistance,” in other words providing assistance to the Contras, a violation of the Boland Amendment.

Clinton used executive orders to defy Congress and conduct a murder campaign against the people of Yugoslavia. Clinton also violated Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution when he bombed the European country. Article 1, Section 8 states that “Congress shall have power to… declare War,” not the president.

During the election, Obama not only said he would not issue executive orders but he would reverse those issued during the Bush era. On his very first day in office, Obama broke this pledge and implemented and signed into law Executive Order 13489 barring the release of presidential records (presumably including his birth certificate).

Obama also signed executive orders allowing Interpol to operate beyond the law in the United States and establishing the Council of Governors.

Obama will continue the process of rule by decree established by his predecessors. He will rule in the tradition of the Roman Second Triumvirate and the Lex Titia decree under Gaius Octavian, general Mark Antony and pontifex maximus Aemilius Lepidus.

It should be noted that the resolution paved the way for the Final War of the Roman Republic and the total collapse of republican government.

Prison Planet.tv Members Can Watch Fall Of The Republic Right Now Online - Don't Miss Out!

The Dependency Agenda

by George Will

WASHINGTON -- Only two things are infinite -- the expanding universe and Democrats' hostility to the District of Columbia's school choice program. Killing this small program, which currently benefits 1,300 mostly poor and minority children, is odious and indicative. It is a small piece of something large -- the Democrats' dependency agenda, which aims to multiply the ways Americans are dependent on government.

Democrats, in their canine devotion to teachers unions, oppose empowering poor children to escape dependency on even terrible government schools. Unions and their poodles say school choice siphons money from public schools. But federal money funds D.C.'s program, so killing it denies education money to D.C. while increasing the number of pupils D.C. must support.

Most Democrats favor a "public option" -- a government health insurance program. They say there is insufficient competition among the 1,300 private providers of insurance, so people should not be dependent on those insurers. But tuition vouchers redeemable at private as well as public schools is a "private option" providing minimal competition with public schools. Government, with 89 percent of the pupils, dominates education grades K through 12. So, do Democrats favor vouchers to reduce American's dependence on government education? Of course not.

For congressional Democrats, however, expanding dependency on government is an end in itself. They began the Obama administration by expanding the State Children's Health Insurance Program. It was created for children of the working poor but the expansion made millions of middle-class children eligible -- some in households earning $125,000. The aim was to swell the number of people who grow up assuming that dependency on government health care is normal.

Many Democrats favor -- as Barack Obama did in 2003 -- a "single-payer" health insurance system, which means universal dependency on government. The "public option" insurance proposal was to be a step toward that. So was the proposed "alternative" of making 55- to 64-year-olds eligible for Medicare. Both of these dependency multipliers will be revived.

As will the Democrats' drive for "cramdown" legislation that would empower government (courts) to shred mortgage contracts, thereby making borrowers eager to embrace dependency on judges. Soon, the two most important financial decisions most families make -- to get a mortgage and a college tuition loan -- will almost always be transactions with the government.

The government used TARP funds not for their stipulated purpose of buying the "toxic assets" of banks, but to pull auto companies and other economic entities into the spreading web of dependency. Servile -- because dependent -- banks were pliable during the farce of Chrysler's bankruptcy, but secured creditors resisted when settled law was disregarded. Nevertheless, those creditors received less per dollar than did an unsecured creditor, the United Auto Workers, which relishes dependency on government as an alternative to economic realism.

Democrats' "reforms" of the financial sector may aim to reduce financial institutions to dependent appendages of the government. By reducing banks to public utilities, credit, which is the lifeblood of capitalism, could be priced and allocated by government.

Many Democrats are untroubled by governments' rampant abuses of eminent-domain powers. Wealthy interests embrace dependency on collaborative governments that seize property from less wealthy people and transfer it to those wealthy interests who will pay more taxes to those governments.

Many Democrats, opposing the Supreme Court, advocate new campaign finance "reforms" that will further empower government to regulate the quantity, timing and content of speech about government. Otherwise voters will hear more such speech than government considers good for them. Such paternalism is American progressivism's oldest tradition.

A century ago, Herbert Croly published "The Promise of American Life," a book -- still in print -- that was prophetic about today's progressives. Contemplating with distaste America's "unregenerate citizens," he said "the average American individual is morally and intellectually inadequate to a serious and consistent conception of his responsibilities." Therefore, Croly said, national life should be a "school" taught by the government: "The exigencies of such schooling frequently demand severe coercive measures, but what schooling does not?" Unregenerate Americans would be "saved many costly perversions" if "the official schoolmasters are wise, and the pupils neither truant nor insubordinate."

Subordination is dependency seen from above. Today, it is seen approvingly by progressives imposing, from above, their dependency agenda.

There is no school choice here; no voucher will enable Americans to escape from enveloping dependency on this "government as school." The dependency agenda is progressive education for children of all ages, meaning all ages treated as children.

--------------

Dr. John Drew, a political scientist at Occidental College, reports on young Obama's marxist socialist perspective in the Fall of 1980: I met the young Barack Obama during the fall of 1980. I got a chance to see how his mind worked from my conversations with him. He was already an ardent Marxist socialist by the time he was a sophomore at Occidental College. I would be curious to know how and why his beliefs changed...if, indeed, they have changed.

YouTube - Dr. Drew Reports on Young Obama's Marxist Socialist Perspective as of the Fall of 1980 - http://tinyurl.com/yz6hget