Obama

[Soldier4Christ]

2nd U.S. soldier in Iraq challenges eligibility
Says issue could decide if 'we are a Constitutional Republic'
Posted: February 24, 2009
8:30 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Another U.S. soldier on active duty in Iraq is joining a challenge to President Obama's eligibility to be commander-in-chief, citing WND's report on 1st Lt. Scott Easterling, who has agreed to be a plaintiff in a lawsuit over the issue, as his inspiration.

"I was inspired by 1LT Easterling's story and am writing you to inform you that I would like to be added as a plaintiff against Obama as well if you feel it would help your case," the soldier, identified for this report only as a reservist now on active duty in Iraq.

He letter was directed to California attorney Orly Taitz who, along with her DefendOurFreedom.us Foundation, is working on a series of legal cases seeking to uncover Obama's birth records and other documents that would reveal whether he meets the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.

Easterling, who confirmed separately to WND that he is questioning Obama's authority, wrote to Taitz that, "As an active-duty officer in the United States Army, I have grave concerns about the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to hold the office of president of the United States."

(Story continues below)

          

The second soldier wrote, "I am an Army reservist who was activated last August and am currently serving with a military police battalion in Camp Bucca, Iraq. I will be here until at least June 2009."

He continued, "When I enlisted last year I had to show my birth certificate, as well as my driver's license, high school diploma, college transcripts, social security card; I also filled out loads of paperwork to include listing the names, addresses and phone numbers of my family members and had to answer any questions regarding foreign travel.

Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 270,000 others and sign up now!

"I think it is reasonable for Obama to prove his citizenship status thus certifying his eligibility. I too raised my right hand and swore an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States," he told Taitz. "I believe the case you are filing could very well determine if we are in fact a Constitutional Republic or a nation of mob rule. I would be honored to be a part of your efforts."

Perhaps anticipating a wave of outrage from Obama supporters, he asked that he be given no "unnecessary publicity," although his name eventually would become public when a case is filed.

Taitz told WND she was making contingency plans that could include her travel to Iraq should a military case be brought against the soldiers who are speaking their minds about Obama.

"I told him if there is any prosecution, he can get in touch with me. I would even fly to Iraq and work with the attorney there to provide his defense," she told WND.

She said undoubtedly a part of the defense would be a demand for documentation on Obama's actual qualifications to serve as U.S. president.

WND has reported on multiple legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." While representatives for Obama has called such claims "garbage," the Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

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

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

Several of the cases have involved emergency appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court in which justices have declined to hear arguments. According to a report from the Associated Press today, another such case has been rejected. The appeal by Cort Wrotnowski alleged Obama was a British subject at birth and, therefore, ineligible to be president.

There was no comment from the court, the same treatment the justices have given cases brought by several other lawyers, including Philip Berg, Leo Donofrio and Taitz.

WND reported yesterday when Easterling agreed to be a plaintiff in Taitz' case.

Taitz told WND she had advised Easterling to obtain legal counsel before making any statements regarding the commander-in-chief, but he insisted on moving forward. His contention is that as an active member of the U.S. military, he is required to follow orders from a sitting president, and he needs – on pain of court-martial – to know that Obama is eligible.

Taitz said other legal cases questioning Obama's eligibility filed by members of the military mostly have included retired officers, and courts several times have ruled they don't have standing to issue their challenge.

Easterling, however, is subject to enemy fire and certainly would have a reason to need to know the legitimacy of his orders, she argued.

"Until Mr. Obama releases a 'vault copy' of his original birth certificate for public review, I will consider him neither my Commander in Chief nor my President, but rather, a usurper to the Office – an impostor," Easterling's statement said.

Here is a partial listing and status update for some of the cases over Obama's eligibility:

    * New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo has filed a case on behalf of Charles Kerchner and others alleging Congress didn't properly ascertain that Obama is qualified to hold the office of president.

    * Pennsylvania Democrat Philip Berg has three cases pending, including Berg vs. Obama in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a separate Berg vs. Obama which is under seal at the U.S. District Court level and Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, brought on behalf of a retired military member who could be facing recall to active duty by Obama.

    * Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.

    * Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.

    * Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public's support.

    * Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.

    * Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied.

    * In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.

    * In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied.

    * In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.

    * California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters.

In addition, other cases cited on the RightSideofLife blog as raising questions about Obama's eligibility include:

    * In Texas, Darrel Hunter vs. Obama later was dismissed.

    * In Ohio, Gordon Stamper vs. U.S. later was dismissed.

    * In Texas, Brockhausen vs. Andrade.

    * In Washington, L. Charles Cohen vs. Obama.

    * In Hawaii, Keyes vs. Lingle, dismissed.

[nChrist]

Brother,

I don't remember how many petitions I've signed to demand that Obama prove who he is and prove his eligibility. I don't know how far these petitions have gotten, but I firmly believe that every citizen has STANDING to demand proof.

Obama's continuing refusal to submit proof of his eligibility STANDS ALONE as evidence of a significant problem. Further, HUGE SUMS of money have been spent to stop or twist legal RIGHTS to know this information and publicize it. What HAS been publicized are pitiful documents that are obvious frauds. Every citizen should now QUESTION the eligibility of Obama and who he is. All citizens have the right to know who their President is, and this RIGHT will be fulfilled.

[Shammu]

Obama Declares War on Investors, Entrepreneurs, Businesses, And More
Friday, 27 Feb 2009
Larry Kudlow

Let me be very clear on the economics of President Obama’s State of the Union speech and his budget.

He is declaring war on investors, entrepreneurs, small businesses, large corporations, and private-equity and venture-capital funds.

That is the meaning of his anti-growth tax-hike proposals, which make absolutely no sense at all — either for this recession or from the standpoint of expanding our economy’s long-run potential to grow.

Raising the marginal tax rate on successful earners, capital, dividends, and all the private funds is a function of Obama’s left-wing social vision, and a repudiation of his economic-recovery statements. Ditto for his sweeping government-planning-and-spending program, which will wind up raising federal outlays as a share of GDP to at least 30 percent, if not more, over the next 10 years.

This is nearly double the government-spending low-point reached during the late 1990s by the Gingrich Congress and the Clinton administration. While not quite as high as spending levels in Western Europe, we regrettably will be gaining on this statist-planning approach.

Study after study over the past several decades has shown how countries that spend more produce less, while nations that tax less produce more. Obama is doing it wrong on both counts.

And as far as middle-class tax cuts are concerned, Obama’s cap-and-trade program will be a huge across-the-board tax increase on blue-collar workers, including unionized workers. Industrial production is plunging, but new carbon taxes will prevent production from ever recovering. While the country wants more fuel and power, cap-and-trade will deliver less.

The tax hikes will generate lower growth and fewer revenues. Yes, the economy will recover. But Obama’s rosy scenario of 4 percent recovery growth in the out years of his budget is not likely to occur. The combination of easy money from the Fed and below-potential economic growth is a prescription for stagflation. That’s one of the messages of the falling stock market.

Essentially, the Obama economic policies represent a major Democratic party relapse into Great Society social spending and taxing. It is a return to the LBJ/Nixon era, and a move away from the Reagan/Clinton period. House Republicans, fortunately, are 90 days sober, as they are putting up a valiant fight to stop the big-government onslaught and move the GOP back to first principles.

Noteworthy up here on Wall Street, a great many Obama supporters — especially hedge-fund types who voted for “change” — are becoming disillusioned with the performances of Obama and Treasury man Geithner.

There is a growing sense of buyer’s remorse.

Well then, do conservatives dare say: We told you so?

Obama Declares War on Investors, Entrepreneurs, Businesses, And More

[Shammu]

We Watch Now As Funds Get Vaporized
February 25 2009
Bob Chapman

Real  inflation has been raging, purchasing power diminishing, pension plan funds being systematically  starved, expect a dollar dump by foreign holders, new tax laws and new strings attached, Still not sure why we have to bail out fraudster bankers, bailouts will only help banks to continue to fleece the public.

Since 1997, real inflation, as opposed to ridiculously understated official inflation, has raged at a minimum of 8% annually, and has soared as high as 14-16%.  This means that you have lost a minimum of two thirds of your 1997 purchasing power.  So, if you invested $10,000 in the Dow components in 1997, not only would you have no gain whatsoever, you would have losses on the stocks which were dropped from the index due to poor performance and, in addition, to add insult to injury, your purchasing power has been reduced from $10,000 to approximately $3,000 in terms of 1997 dollars.  In other words, that $10,000 you invested in 1997 will today only buy what $3,000 would have bought in 1997.  

Effectively, anyone playing the general stock markets has been wiped out by this combination of lost capital gains and reduced purchasing power.  Those who began investing after 1997 have done even worse because they have suffered major capital losses in addition to having suffered reduced purchasing power.  So much for the much touted 10% average annual gains for stocks.  By contrast, you could have bought gold in 1997 for about $300 per ounce and more than tripled your money at today's prices.  Your $10,000 would have become $30,000+, however, due to inflation caused by the Fed's profligate increase in the money supply, which the Fed intentionally orchestrated in order to impoverish you and bring you to your knees so you will accept world government, your purchasing power would only be about $10,000 in 1997 dollars.  So you would at least be even in terms of purchasing power.   Certainly, $10,000 in purchasing power is a whole lot better than $3,000.  This example is a classic illustration of how gold preserves your wealth.  As you can see, failure to invest in gold, silver and their related shares is tantamount to committing financial suicide.  The bankruptcy courts will soon be full of the tens of millions of US citizens who ultimately will ignore gold and silver as a safe haven, or who will simply lack the capital to invest in gold and silver in any case because they are in hock up to their ears, or because they have become unemployed, or both.

Pension plans, often heavily invested in stocks and real estate, asset classes which have seen tens of trillions of dollars disappear in a matter of months, are now so far behind in funding due to their ludicrous underlying assumptions about ROI (return on investment) that they are effectively bankrupt and will have to be bailed by the grievously under-funded PBGC (Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation), which of course can only provide pennies on the dollar unless another bailout is orchestrated to save middle class pensions, which is not going to happen, and these losses do not even take into account loss of purchasing power due to inflation, which is understated officially to screw retirees out of their social security benefits.  Instead of a PBGC bailout, we more likely will see the US follow in the footsteps of Argentina by nationalizing private pension money, mixing it with government entitlements.  If you were wondering where the elitists plan to park a large portion of those new treasuries being issued to fund all the bailouts, look no further than your IRA's, 401(k)'s and your company pensions, which will be forced to purchase these treasuries as part of the process by which the elitists will nationalize your pensions.  Also, as part of this process, the types of assets you are allowed to invest in will be greatly limited, and your pension will be overseen by your corrupt, bungling government, insuring a complete financial clusterf--k.  That way, you get the unspeakable privilege of owning dollar-denominated paper assets that will be vaporized along with Federal Reserve notes (aka toilet paper, aka "worthless paper") when foreign owners of dollar forex all head for the exits to see who can dump their dollars the fastest as they try to purchase as many tangible, real assets as they can find in the US.  You won't know, of course, because statistics about foreign ownership in the US are, conveniently, no longer published by the FTC.  However, you will find out soon enough as you are Zimbabwe'd and Weimar-ized.  And that only addresses problems due to devaluation of the dollar.  Wait until the interest rates skyrocket as hyperinflation takes hold and risk reaches new heights.  This will collapse the treasury market, and the value of all your pension plan assets, which the government will have forced you to invest in treasuries, will go down in flames with it.

Also, many pension-sponsoring companies are going to go under because they are being systematically starved of necessary capital by the big, so-called "legacy banks," who are using the financial debacle to eliminate their competition and that of their fellow elitist business corporations, especially transnational conglomerates.  When these victims of the financial holocaust go under, the pension funds they sponsor will go under with them and there will be precious little in the way of bailouts to make up for these losses.  Rest assured that the elitist companies will get their equity injections, toxic waste buyouts and loss assumptions, while everyone else gets the shaft.  This is what the Pelosi Political Pork/Plunder Payoff Plan is all about, as well as the multi-trillion Obama bank bailout, which supposedly will help Main Street in addition to Wall Street, based on the tiresome platitudes offered in Tuesday's presidential speech.  If you believe that, then we still have that bridge in Brooklyn for sale at pennies on the dollar, at least until one of the dollar surplus nations uses its hundreds of billions in dollar forex to gobble it up.

Note that all the new tax laws concerning pensions encourage you to put more money in, and to keep it there longer.  The scum in our government and on Wall Street want to encourage you to place your money into accounts to which they have strings attached with onerous tax law penalties.  They want to make sure you put as much of your hard-earned savings in such accounts as possible, and to keep it there as long as possible, so they have sufficient time and opportunity to steal it from you via inflation, dollar devaluation, insider trading, investment fraud, depreciation of asset values through deflation, direct taxation, foreclosure sales, bankruptcy auctions and outright confiscation. That is with the assistance of the SEC and CFTC.

There is no end in sight for the real estate market, which will not bottom for several years.  Once interest rates go into double digits, option ARM's implode and unemployed government employees bring the overall unemployment rate up to 30% or even higher, we could be looking at a roll-back to 1981 home prices.  Once these three factors are in full swing, you won't be able to give a house away.  No one wants to buy a home that is plummeting in value, few will be able to afford it even if they did want to buy it, and the few remaining who wanted to buy it and were still able to afford it will not have the credit or down payment money that is necessary to obtain a loan to buy it.   Bank sales of foreclosed property will dominate the markets at all levels, and in all geographic areas.  Few areas in the US will be spared from drastically declining home values.  Also, once deflation takes over during the next one to three years, those who are liable under those big mortgages they took out based on inflated real estate prices will be unable to sell in any case, because they will be underwater and unable to clear their liens.  If we get cram-down authority for our bankruptcy judges, where loan balances can be reduced to levels commensurate with value, there will be few if any homeowners who are drastically underwater who will not take advantage of this bankruptcy protection whether or not they can swing the mortgage payments.  No one wants to pay more for a home than it is worth.  That means that virtually all real estate derivatives could become worthless regardless of quality.  That also means that all the large banks are hopelessly insolvent even if we set aside the Quadrillion Dollar Derivative Death Star waiting to implode as ongoing business failures set off counter-party liability on credit default swaps (CDS's), and as double digit interest rates fry those on the wrong side of interest rate swaps (IRS's).  Therefore, all money thrown at these zombie financial institutions is not only being wasted, but is also stoking further hyperinflation without generating any offsetting benefits whatsoever in return.  In addition, any common stock, preferred stock or bonds given to taxpayers by any of these walking dead elitist banks and financial institutions is absolutely worthless.   These walking dead must be shot in the head with a silver bullet or have wooden stakes driven through their hearts to put them out of their misery, and all their existing accounts should be given to the successful regional banks whose executives had the foresight to stay clear of all the financial carnage.  Many of the current and former executives of these zombie institutions and of the Clinton Administration, which set up this nightmare scenario, are now advising the Obama Administration on what to do about the depression we are in.  So we are now asking drunk drivers and reckless speeders to give us lessons about highway safety.  Only in America.

cont'd next post

[Shammu]

The bailout for mortgage borrowers is rife with moral hazard, as is the bailout of zombie banks and financial institutions.  We keep hearing Barack "Nero Fiddled While Rome Burned" Obama and Sheila "We Just Can't Let This Happen" Bair, the head of the FDIC, tell us that we have to bail out bankster gangsters and borrower felons, and that we just can't allow these banksters and borrowers to go under, nor can we allow the overall financial situation to deteriorate further.  Not only can we, but we absolutely should allow these borrowers and bankster gangsters to go under.  The situation is going to deteriorate further no matter what they do, and they are in fact exacerbating the ongoing debacles by creating money out of nothing and then throwing it at people and institutions that are already dead, financially speaking.  Tim Geithner, the Fed's hatchet-man and tax cheater who is now acting as our Treasury Secretary, wants to apply stress tests to these banks like some sort of bank doctor, when he should be acting as the official bank coroner.  Instead of trying to see how banks will react to various financial stresses, which tests should have been conducted years ago by our bogus regulators who looked the other way while collecting their pay, he should simply be determining the cause of death and listing it on the banks' death certificates.  Had these stress tests been conducted in a timely fashion, it would not have mattered anyway, because as our subscribers know, these deaths were by suicide, and not by natural causes.  These institutions have self-destructed on orders from the Puppet Masters to collapse the world financial system to make way for a new one-world system in place of the nation-state system.

People who acted wisely and stayed on the sidelines while everyone else want on a felonious spending and lending binge in the real estate markets, which felonious activity occurred with the full encouragement of our government who practically arm-twisted many lenders into giving loans, under threat of discrimination lawsuits, to anyone who could fog a mirror, and which felonious activity and loan malfeasance the Fed actively encouraged via Mr. Bubbles, Alan Greenspan, who was the former Fed Chairman before Buck-Busting Ben took over, still cannot get into the real estate market because the prices are being kept artificially high by all the bailouts.  They watch in silent anger and consternation as those who committed felonies by taking out "liar loans" get their mortgage principal reduced and payments lowered to avoid generating foreclosures which would take real estate prices down to a more realistic level that honest, qualified buyers could afford.  They watch in stupefied horror and frustration as those banks which engaged in derivative and loan fraud and over-leveraged speculation get hundreds of billions of taxpayer largesse doled out to them so they can continue to defraud the public and make nonsensical loans to keep the daisy chain of fraud going while they collect their commissions and spreads on new issuance of toxic waste using money that has been borrowed interest-free, while charging usurious rates, relative to their borrowing costs, to anyone else who needs to borrow money.  These bankster gangsters then have the gall to say they are not accountable to taxpayers as to how the money is used, while glomming salaries, bonuses and dividends out of money that has been handed to them which they did nothing to earn, and some of this money is even used as takeover money to hostilely acquire the honest, healthy banks in order to eliminate competition while simultaneously hoarding the gifted bailout money to force the rest of their competition to fail and go under because they can't borrow to meet their capital requirements.  Obama's bogus promises that these horrendous and fiendish practices will not be allowed to occur with respect to future bailout funds is just window-dressing and inane platitudes for the ignorant masses.  Business will go on as usual in Washington and on Wall Street -- as corrupt as ever.  Right has become wrong, and wrong has become right, just as the Bible warned. 

We Watch Now As Funds Get Vaporized

[Shammu]

Obama 'in running for Nobel peace prize'

Friday, 27 February 2009

The US president Barack Obama and his French counterpart Nicolas Sarkozy are believed to be among the record 205 nominations received for the 2009 Nobel peace prize.

The awards committee, based on Oslo, Norway, refuses to say who is nominated. It just says that 172 individuals and 33 organisations were on the final count released today.

The previous record was 199 in 2005.

Thousand of people have nomination rights for the coveted prize and sometimes announce their selections.

This year those names include Mr Obama, Mr Sarkozy, American musician Pete Seeger, Macedonian humanitarian Zivko Popovski-Cvetin, Austrian children's charity SOS-Kinderdorf International, Vietnamese religious leader Thich Quang Do, and American Greg Mortenson for his Asian school-building charity.

Obama 'in running for Nobel peace prize'
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Do you know what exactly has he done to deserve a nomination??......................... He is a liberal!!

Really now...who takes the Nobel prize seriously anymore?  Actual achievements mean nothing anymore. They gave it to Carter for raving against his own country's military action in Iraq. They gave it to Yasser Arafat, the terrorist dictator. They gave it to Al Gore, rejecting a woman who had risked her life to save hundreds of Jewish children and babies from Nazi death camps in World War II.

[nChrist]

Brothers and Sisters,

I never thought that I would be saying and thinking some of the things I am today. I don't have any questions left about what's going on. It all appears to be completely clear. I'm just going to be BLUNT:

Our current government has no desire for our economy to recover because that would ruin their overall plans. SO, all recoveries must fail, and they are designed to FAIL specifically from the start. YES - you heard me right. They intend for everything to FAIL so they can take CONTROL. NO, I don't think this is a wild conspiracy theory.

DO THE MATH:  what is being proposed can't work because it CAN'T BE PAID FOR. If all of the rich people paid 100% in taxes, that would not be enough money to pay the bills. If you do the MATH, there is NO POSSIBILITY of this working. It is designed from the start to FAIL because FAILURE is part of the AGENDA to install SOCIALISM OR COMMUNISM. Taxes and money are not material parts of this discussion. The only AGENDA is the type of country we live in, AND THEY WANT THE OLD AMERICA GONE FOREVER. You can believe this or not, but this is what's happening under our noses right now.

None of the other things we argue about are worthy of argument when folks are trying to STEAL A COMPLETE COUNTRY! The new form of COUNTRY won't have these arguments because the people won't be running it. The people won't have anything to say about it. Nobody will care what the people have to say, and nobody will care about the OLD RULE OF LAW AND THE CONSTITUTION. Those things will be gone, and they want them to be forgotten as quickly as possible. All of them stand in their way of getting what they want. What do they want: A STRONG-ARM SOCIALIST OR COMMUNIST GOVERNMENT! Believe it or not, that's what we are watching. Everything MUST fail first so the OPTIONS are removed from the table. The WORSE things are - the BETTER for their overall AGENDA. YES - THEY WANT TO DESTROY THIS COUNTRY AND BUILD ANOTHER ONE THAT'S THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT WE HAD!

GOD and GOD'S WORD unify, so that's a bad thing. GOD and GOD'S WORD already establish RIGHT AND WRONG, so that's a bad thing. SO, there is no room for GOD and GOD'S WORD in the new society they want to create. They want to be in TOTAL CONTROL, and that's why COMMUNIST COUNTRIES BAN GOD. They want to be in TOTAL CONTROL, and they want to DEFINE RIGHT AND WRONG. GOD, GOD'S WORD, Christians, and people with preconceived notions of right and wrong stand in the way. They must be removed, even to the point of mass killing. Nobody can question THE STATE, and they won't allow GOD OR GOD'S WORD to state that THE STATE IS EVIL AND WRONG!

After much thought and prayer, these things appear to be OBVIOUS to me. NO, I'm not claiming a revelation of any kind - just a tiny bit of common sense as a Christian. GOD and Christians are standing in the way and slowing down the progress the devil wants to make. As an individual Christian, I will keep standing in the way at every opportunity I get. I once had thoughts that it might be good for Christians to concentrate on other things, and I still have mixed emotions about this. HOWEVER, I won't call evil GOOD, and I won't call GOOD evil. As Christians, our opportunities to do the LORD'S WORK are also at stake. We must consider the overall big picture. Should we remain quiet and do nothing? NO!! We can't remain quiet if we want to serve the LORD. ALL SERVICE TO THE LORD STANDS AS A ROADBLOCK IN WHERE THE DEVIL WANTS TO GO! SO, the LORD'S WORK must go or be eliminated for their AGENDA.

What else do they need to destroy? -- EVERYTHING WE HOLD DEAR! Can they do this? They're trying it right now, and I say NO! Is anything GOOD associated with their AGENDA? - NO! - Is evil a big part of their AGENDA? - YES! - Are they going to try and force Christians to do evil things? - YES! - Don't say no until you think about this! - Aren't they already forcing Christians to pay for the killing of babies with their tax money? - YES! - Where do they want to go with education for THE NEW SOCIETY? - Don't you know? - If not, why don't you know? - They want to start indoctrinating our children in pre-school, and they want us to pay for this - even though we know the indoctrination is EVIL!

Let's get REAL and talk about what THEY want for the future. GOD, GOD'S WORD, Christians, decency, morals, ethics, and RIGHTS OR FREEDOMS have NO PART IN THE NEW SOCIETY THEY ARE TRYING TO MAKE! Please know that they must FIRST destroy what's left of this one, and that's what they're doing right now! I must add that they're doing an EXCELLENT DEMOLITION JOB IN RECORD-BREAKING TIME! Here's a big question for all of us:  IS IT RIGHT OR CHRISTIAN FOR US TO ALLOW THIS?  --  NO!! Christians have an obligation to STAND UP FOR RIGHT AND AGAINST WRONG for the remainder of the time we have left in this short life! Don't we know this?  --  YES - we should know it!  --  WE MUST DO EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER TO STOP THIS  --  AND I DO MEAN EVERYTHING!  --  WE HAVE WILLINGLY FOUGHT TO THE DEATH FOR LESS, AND THEY SHOULD KNOW THIS!  --  NO!!  --  WE ARE NOT GOING TO LET THEM DO THIS!! This has NOTHING to do with politics!  --  This is the forcing of EVIL and the removal of FREEDOM!  --  It is the attempted establishment of EVERYTHING decent people STAND AGAINST!  --  NO!  --  WE ARE NOT GOING TO LET THEM DO THIS!!  --  WAKE UP!  --  WATCH!  --  LISTEN!!  --  ASK QUESTIONS!  --  PAY ATTENTION!  --  SAY NO!!  --  AND MEAN IT!!

[Soldier4Christ]

More military officers demand eligibility proof
Plaintiff: 'In the worst case … it's going to be revolution in the streets'


Military officers from the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines are working with California attorney Orly Taitz and her Defend Our Freedoms Foundation, citing a legal right established in British common law nearly 800 years ago and recognized by the U.S. Founding Fathers to demand documentation that may prove – or disprove – Barack Obama's eligibility to be president.

Taitz told WND today she has mailed to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder a request that he "relate Quo Warranto on Barack Hussein Obama II to test his title to president before the Supreme Court."

The lengthy legal phrase essentially means an explanation is being demanded for what authority Obama is using to act as president. An online constitutional resource says Quo Warranto "affords the only judicial remedy for violations of the Constitution by public officials and agents."

Requesting the action are Maj. Gen. Carroll Childers; Lt. Col. Dr. David Earl-Graef; police officer Clinton Grimes, formerly of the U.S. Navy; Lt. Scott Easterling, now serving on active duty in Iraq; New Hampshire state Rep. Timothy Comerford; Tennessee state Rep. Frank Nicely and others.

"As president-elect, Respondent Obama failed to submit prima facie evidence of his qualifications before January 20, 2009. Election officers failed to challenge, validate or evaluate his qualifications. Relators submit that as president elect, Respondent Obama failed [tO] qualify per U.S. CONST. Amend. XX [paragraph] 3," the document said.

John Eidsmoe, an expert on the U.S. Constitution now working with the Foundation on Moral Law, an organization founded by former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore after he was removed from office for formally recognizing the Ten Commandments' influence in the U.S., said the demand is a legitimate course of action.

"She basically is asking, 'By what authority' is Obama president," he told WND. "In other words, 'I want you to tell me by what authority. I don't really think you should hold the office.'

"She probably has some very good arguments to make," Eidsmoe said.

The letter, dispatched to Holder today, is the latest development in the quest by a multitude of lawyers and plaintiffs nationwide for documentation that Obama qualifies to be president under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.

[nChrist]

Brothers and Sisters,

There's more, and I can assure everyone this PROOF OF ELIGIBILITY issue is not going to go away.

WorldNetDaily Exclusive

Join 300,000 others in seeking citizenship proof

Petition demands verification of Obama's eligibility
--WND

When I signed this petition, the number is still going up. As citizens, voters, and taxpayers - we ALL HAVE STANDING TO DEMAND THIS PROOF!

NO PERSON IS ABOVE THE LAW AND CONSTITUTION!  FORTUNES HAVE BEEN SPENT BY OBAMA AND HIS SUPPORTERS TO KEEP THIS INFORMATION OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE PUBLIC!  WHAT HAS BEEN SHOWN TO THE PUBLIC IS AN OBVIOUS FRAUD - ALREADY VERIFIED AS A FRAUD!  A VERY POOR QUALITY CRIMINAL DID THE WORK!

[nChrist]

ELECTION 2008
Marxist 'mentor' sold drugs with Obama - Page 1
Alleged Communist Party member published book boasting of sex with minors
Posted: October 30, 2008
12:00 am Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

HONOLULU, Hawaii – The late Marxist activist Frank Marshall Davis, frequently accompanied by young Barack Obama and his grandfather Stanley Armour Dunham, sold marijuana and cocaine from a "Chicago style" hot dog cart Davis operated near his home on Kuhio Avenue in Waikiki in the early 1970s, WND has established.

A credible source, a well-known resident of Honolulu who spoke at length with WND on condition he not be named, disclosed that Davis was the source of drugs consumed by Obama. Davis was also the author of an autobiographical novel boasting of "swinging" and sex with minors, a copy of which WND obtained from Andrew Walden, a resident of Hilo on the island of Hawaii and publisher of the Hawaii Free Press.

Obama, in his autobiographical book "Dreams from My Father," discloses that he used both marijuana and cocaine as a high school student living with his grandparents in their Honolulu apartment.

The source said that on more than a dozen occasions he purchased "8-balls" consisting of approximately 3.6 grams of cocaine from Davis at the hot dog stand when Obama was present.

Get the book that started it all – Jerome Corsi's "The Obama Nation," personally autographed for only $4.95 – an amazing $23 discount!

"Obama was a young kid, about 14 or 15 years old," the source told WND. "I was told his name was Barry, and there was no doubt Barry knew Davis was selling marijuana and cocaine as well as hot dogs from the stand."

"Barry was also there with an older white gentleman I'm told was Stanley," the source said. "I thought Stanley was Barry's father."

WND has established that Stanley was Stanley Armour Dunham, Obama's grandfather.

"I bought cocaine from Davis at the hot dog stand," the source said. "The first purchase I made was in 1975. In total, I bought 14 purchases of cocaine from Davis. I bought what Davis called an '8-ball' that consisted of about 3.6 grams of cocaine. An '8-ball' cost $300."

As was established in "The Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality," Obama lived with his mother and his Indonesian Muslim stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, in Jakarta from 1967 to 1970, when Obama was approximately 6 to 10 years old.

Obama's mother sent him back to Hawaii alone in 1970 to live with his grandparents while she and Obama's sister, Maya, remained in Indonesia to continue living with Soetoro.

Ann Dunham subsequently divorced Soetoro and returned to Hawaii to continue pursuing a master's degree in anthropology from the University of Hawaii.

For a period of three years, Obama lived in what he described as "a small apartment a block away from Punahou," his high school.

Obama's mother returned with Maya to Indonesia to complete her anthropology field work in Indonesia.

Obama reports in his autobiography that he refused to go back to Indonesia to attend the international school there, preferring instead to remain in Hawaii and live with his grandparents in their apartment.

Obama reported that his grandfather at this time had a number of black male friends who "were mostly poker and bridge partners," describing them as "neatly dressed men with hoarse voices and clothes that smelled of cigars, the kind of men for whom everything has its place and who figure they've seen enough not to waste a lot of time talking about it."

Obama then reports that an exception was "a poet named Frank who lived in a dilapidated house in a run-down section of Waikiki."

The WND source confirmed this description matched Frank Marshall Davis's residence on Kuhio Avenue in Waikiki.

In "Unfit for Publication," the 40-page rebuttal the Obama campaign submitted to "The Obama Nation," the Obama campaign admitted for the first time, on page 9, that Frank Marshall Davis was the man Obama had identified in his autobiography as "Frank."

"Unfit for Publication" says under the heading "Reality" that Obama's memoir characterized Davis as a figure from his youth who "fell short" and whose view of race was "incurable," attempting to rebut the charge in "The Obama Nation" that Davis was a mentor to Obama during Obama's teenage years at Punahou.

In "Dreams from My Father," Obama admits his grandfather drank alcohol with Davis, "sharing whiskey with Gramps out of an emptied jelly jar."

Obama also admits in the autobiography that his grandfather took him "downtown to one of his favorite bars, in Honolulu's red-light district."

Both Walden and the WND source on Davis' drug-selling both affirmed that the bar involved was one of several then located in the largely black red-light district on Smith Street, at that time located near Honolulu's Chinatown.

Obama also admits drinking whiskey with Davis, describing in his autobiography that he drove to Waikiki to visit Davis and drink whiskey with him out of plastic cups. On that evening Obama had become upset learning that a black panhandler had approached his grandmother and scared her at a bus stop while she was waiting to go to work.

In the incident, Obama reports "reaching for the bottle, this time pouring my own," while listening to Davis explain that Obama's grandmother was "right to be scared."

Davis told Obama, "She understands that black people have a reason to hate."

In response, Obama said, "The earth shook under my feet, ready to crack open at any moment. I stopped, trying to steady myself, and knew for the first time that I was utterly alone."

Obama also admitted in his autobiography that in his first two years in college at Occidental he was involved with drugs: "I blew a few smoke rings, remembering those years. Pot had helped and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it."  ...... Continued

[nChrist]

ELECTION 2008
Marxist 'mentor' sold drugs with Obama
Alleged Communist Party member published book boasting of sex with minors
Posted: October 30, 2008
12:00 am Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2009 WorldNetDaily


Obama has never disclosed his source for purchasing drugs.

The Telegraph of London reported in August that Davis and Stanley Dunham smoked marijuana together and that Obama was first introduced to Davis by Dunham in 1970, when Obama returned from Indonesia.

Hard core

The Telegraph also documented that Davis was the author of "the hard-core pornographic autobiography published in San Diego in 1968 by Greenleaf Classics under the pseudonym Bob Green."

WND received independent confirmation that Davis was the author of "Sex Rebel: Black (Memoirs of a Gash Gourmet), from an established academic expert on Davis, who wished to remain anonymous.

In a forward to "Sex Rebel," Davis openly discussed that he lived the life of a sexual swinger, writing: "I admit, however, that my sex syndrome may be more complex than that of many swingers and swappers."

He continued to disclose, "Under certain circumstances I am bi-sexual." After enumerating various unusual and scatological sexual techniques he liked, Davis added: "I'm also a voyeur and exhibitionist. Occasionally I am mildly interested in sado-masochism."

Writing as Green, Davis admitted in the foreword that he "often wished" he had two male sex organs to double his sexual pleasure: "As you see, I partake of many of the variations that our Puritans label 'perversions' – a term which to me carries moral judgment and therefore has no place in my erotic vocabulary."

According to Walden, a typical passage beginning on page 274 of "Sex Rebel" describes Davis in November 1958 stalking Kapiolani Park in Waikiki. Davis, writing as Greene, "soon encounters two tourists – a Seattle couple he calls 'Dot' and 'Lloyd.'"

"Lloyd brags to the complete stranger [Davis] about Dot's figure," Walden explained. "After a few minutes of small talk to establish their mutual interest in 'swinging' … Davis then devotes almost all of Chapter 27 to a graphic and detailed description of their three-way sexual encounters over the next few days."

Although "Sex Rebels" is openly discussed as autobiography, Walden notes Davis/Greene frequently changes names and identities, even though Davis/Greene confirms that "all incidents I have described here have been taken from actual experiences."

Madelyn and Stanley Dunham came to Hawaii from Seattle, but there is no way in what is admittedly a fictional book to establish that "Dot" and "Lloyd" from Seattle were the Dunhams.

"Sex Rebels" also describes sexual encounters the fictional Greene and his wife had with underage children of both sexes, again without any possibility of reliably identifying the children who may have been involved.

Soviet activity

On Dec. 5, 1956, Davis appeared in executive session before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee investigating "the scope of Soviet activity in the United States," one of the McCarthy-era committees seeking to expose communists considered to be a security threat.

Invoking his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination, Davis refused to answer a direct question asking if he was then a communist. A year earlier, in 1955, a Commission on Subversive Activities organized by the government of the Territory of Hawaii identified Davis as a member of the Communist Party USA. The committee singled out for criticism several articles Davis published in the "Communist Honolulu Record" that were critical of the commission.

The commission also found objectionable a 1951 story Davis published, entitled "Hawaii's Plain People Fight White Supremacy," in the November 1951 issue of a New York City communist tabloid.

The two African-American writers Obama mentions to give "Frank" some context both had communist connections as well. Langston Hughes and Richard Wright were the two African-American writers most identified with the Communist Party USA in the 1930s.

Hughes, a prolific writer who was best known for his 1921 poem "The Negro Speaks of Rivers," told the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations in 1953 that he had been a communist sympathizer.

Hughes further testified there was a period of his life when he believed in the Soviet Union's form of government and that books he authored were written to follow the communist line. Wright, best known for his 1940 novel "Native Son," was the Harlem editor of the communist newspaper Daily Worker in 1937.

John Edgar Tidwell, a professor of English at the University of Kansas who produced an anthology of Davis' poems also confirms Davis joined the Communist Party. Tidwell argued Davis' radical poetry and newspaper articles "put him on a collision course" with the House Un-American Activities Committee and the FBI.

In his autobiography, "Livin' the Blues," Davis himself tells of being pursued by the U.S. government, saying it did not bother him.

Openly, he wrote, "I knew I would be described as a Communist, but frankly I had reached the stage where I didn't give a damn. Too many people I respected as Freedom Fighters were listed as Red for me to fear name calling."

Davis wrote, "The genuine Communists I knew as well as others so labeled had one principle in common: to use any and every means to abolish racism." Davis said he wrote to give "the widest possible publicity to the many instances of racism and the dissatisfaction of Afro-American with the status quo."

[nChrist]

WorldNetDaily Exclusive
Communists: Obama 'best opportunity in decades'
Crowds plot next steps in 'expansion' of U.S. president's victory
Posted: March 01, 2009
7:34 pm Eastern

By Aaron Klein
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

President Obama's leadership is "one of the best opportunities that Americans have had in decades," declared a civil rights activist addressing an overflow crowd at a gathering sponsored by the official newspaper of the Community Party USA.

The Peoples Weekly World last weekend held its 35th Annual African American History Month celebrations in Connecticut, drawing large crowds in both Hartford and New Haven, including high school students who participated in an arts competition with the theme "Dear President Obama, My dream is ... ."

Panelists at both events spoke about and took questions on this year's theme: "Building the Momentum for Change. Realizing the Dream for Jobs – Peace – Equality."

The events featured local guests, music and a tribute to the author and civil rights activist W.E.B. Du Bois, who was a Communist Party member according to expert Trevor Loudon.

A report in Peoples Weekly World stated speakers at the events were asked to "reflect on [the] next steps to achieve equality and how to keep the unity growing that elected Obama."

"You are not going to agree with everything Obama does," exclaimed New Haven panelist Clifton Graves, identified by the Communist newspaper a long time civil rights activist, "but it is up to us to keep the momentum going for change. This is one of the best opportunities that Americans have had in decades."

Panelist Brian Steinberg, a Communist Party USA member, was quoted explaining Obama’s election represents an "expansion of democracy in our country, won by the unity of the people, which must continue on."

[nChrist]

LIFE WITH BIG BROTHER
Radio chip coming soon to your driver's license?
Homeland Security seeks next-generation REAL ID
Posted: February 28, 2009
12:25 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Privacy advocates are issuing warnings about a new radio chip plan that ultimately could provide electronic identification for every adult in the U.S. and allow agents to compile attendance lists at anti-government rallies simply by walking through the assembly.

The proposal, which has earned the support of Janet Napolitano, the newly chosen chief of the Department of Homeland Security, would embed radio chips in driver's licenses, or "enhanced driver's licenses."

"Enhanced driver's licenses give confidence that the person holding the card is the person who is supposed to be holding the card, and it's less elaborate than REAL ID," Napolitano said in a Washington Times report.

REAL ID is a plan for a federal identification system standardized across the nation that so alarmed governors many states have adopted formal plans to oppose it. However, a privacy advocate today told WND that the EDLs are many times worse.

Radio talk show host and identity chip expert Katherine Albrecht said REAL ID earned the opposition of Christians because of its resemblance to the biblical "mark of the beast," civil libertarians opposed it for its "big brother" connotations and others worried about identity theft issues with the proposed databases.

"We got rid of the REAL ID program, but [this one] is way more insidious," she said.

Enhanced driver's licenses have built-in radio chips providing an identifying number or information that can be accessed by a remote reading unit while the license is inside a wallet or purse.

The technology already had been implemented in Washington state, where it is promoted as an alternative to a passport for traveling to Canada. So far, the program is optional.

But there are other agreements already approved with Michigan, Vermont, New York and Arizona, and plans are under way in other states, including Texas, she said.

Napolitano, as Arizona's governor, was against the REAL ID, Albrecht said. Now, as chief of Homeland Security, she is suggesting the more aggressive electronic ID of Americans.

"She's coming out and saying, 'OK, OK, OK, you win. We won't do REAL ID. But what we probably ought to do is nationwide enhanced driver's licenses,'" Albrecht told WND.

"They're actually talking about issuing every person a spychip driver's license," she said. "That is the potential problem."

Imagine, she said, going to a First Amendment-protected event, a church or a mosque, or even a gun show or a peace rally.

"What happens to all those people when a government operator carrying a reading device makes a circuit of the event?" she asked. "They could download all those unique ID numbers and link them."

Participants could find themselves on "watch" lists or their attendance at protests or rallies added to their government "dossier."

She said even if such license programs are run by states, there's virtually no way that the databases would not be linked and accessible to the federal government.

Albrecht said a hint of what is on the agenda was provided recently by California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. The state's legislature approved a plan banning the government from using any radio chips in any ID documentation.

Schwarzenegger's veto noted he did not want to interfere with any coming or future federal programs for identifying people.

Albrecht's recent guest on her radio program was Michigan State Rep. Paul Opsommer, who said the government appears to be using a national anti-terrorism plan requiring people to document their identities as they enter the United States to promote the technology.

"The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative was … just about proving you were a citizen, not that you had to do it by any specific kind of technology," Opsommer said.

But he said, "We are close to the point now that if you don't want RFID in any of your documents that you can't leave the country or get back into it."

Opsommer said his own state sought an exception to the growing federal move toward driver's licenses with an electronic ID chip, and he was told that was "unlikely."

He was told, "They were trying to harmonize these standards with Canada and Mexico [so] it had to apply to everybody. I was absolutely dumbfounded."

WND previously has reported on such chips when hospitals used them to identify newborns, a company desired to embed immigrants with the electronic devices, a government health event showcased them and when Wal-Mart used microchips to track customers.

Albrecht, who has worked on issues involving radio chip implants, REAL-ID, "Spychips" and other devices, provided a platform for Opsommer to talk about drivers licenses that include radio transmitters that provide identity information about the carrier. She is active with the AntiChips.com and SpyChips.com websites.

Opsommer said he's been trying for several years to gain permission for his state to develop its own secure license without a radio chip.

"They have flat out refused, and their reasoning is all about the need for what they call 'facilitative technology,' which they then determined was RFID," he said during the recent interview.

According to the U.S. State Department, which regulates international travel requirements, U.S. citizens now "must show proof of identity and proof of U.S. citizenship when entering the United States from Canada, Mexico, Bermuda and the countries of the Caribbean by land or seas."

Documentation could be a U.S. passport or other paperwork such as birth certificates or drivers' licenses. But as of this summer, one of the options for returning residents will be an "Enhanced Driver's License."

The rules are being promulgated under the outline of the WHTI, a result of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, which requires travelers to present a passport or other identity documents on entry into the U.S.

While the government has expressed confidence that no personal or critical information will be revealed through the system, it also says drivers will need special information on how to use, carry and protect the radio-embedded licenses as well as "a shielded container that will prevent anyone from reading your license."

But Albrecht, the author or co-author of six books and videos, including the award-winning "Spychips: How major corporations and government plan to track your every move with RFID," warns it goes much further.

"This must be nipped in the bud. Enhanced DL's make REAL ID look like a walk in the park," Albrecht said.

"Look, I am all in favor of only giving drivers licenses to U.S. citizens or people that are otherwise here in this country legally," Opsommer said, "But we are already doing that in Michigan. We accomplished that without an EDL, as has virtually every other state via their own state laws.

"But just because we choose to only issue our license to U.S. citizens does not mean that our licenses should somehow then fall under federal control. It's still a state document, we are just controlling who we issue them to. But under the EDL program, the Department of Homeland Security is saying that making sure illegals don't get these is not enough. Now you need the chip to prove your citizenship," he continued.

Opsommer further warned the electronic chips embedded in licenses to confirm identity are just the first step.

"Canadians are also more connected to what is going on in Britain with the expansion of the national ID program there, and have seen the mission creep that occurs with things like gun control first hand … Whatever the reason, as an example, just last week the Canadian government repatriated a database from the U.S. that contained the driver's license data of their citizens," he said.

"Someone finally woke up and realized it would not be a good idea for that to be on American soil … I think it is only logical that we as state legislators really understand how the governments of Mexico and Canada will have access to our own citizen's data. Right now it is very ambiguous and even difficult for me to get answers on as a state representative."

But Opsommer said Big Brother concerns certainly have some foundation.

"So if EDLs are the new direction for secure licenses in all states, it just reinforces what many have been telling me that DHS wants to expand this program and turn it into a wireless national ID with a different name," he said. "We'll wake up one day and without a vote in Congress DHS will just pass a rule and say something like 'starting next month you will need an EDL to fly on a plane, or to buy a gun, or whatever.'"

[nChrist]

WND Exclusive Commentary
Chuck Norris

Obama + Congress = Economic chaos
Posted: March 02, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

© 2009

Ronald Reagan was right, "Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it."

The political and financial math is easy to calculate. It doesn't take an MBA or a rocket scientist to figure it out – just an honest assessment of Washington's present landscape. Here's how the equation pans out:

America's political love affair with President Obama

+     The Democratic majority's coercions in Congress

=  Trillions of dollars in new debt for Americans (or more economic chaos)

The next stage of out-of-control government spending started with Bush's Wall Street bailout, or TARP, of $700 billion (new debt No. 1). But Congress didn't learn through that failure, and apparently neither did Obama. So the newly elected president pushed for the next $787 billion stimulus bill (debt No. 2). And that wasn't enough either, so the recent $410 billion omnibus spending bill (with 9,000 earmarks – 60 percent Democrat and 40 percent Republican in origin) is being railroaded through Congress to keep government moving until September (debt No. 3). And then Obama informed us last week that another $634 billion would be required for a down payment for universal healthcare – before there's a plan, there's already a payment (debt No. 4). And all of that doesn't include other stimuli on the government horizon, as Rep. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, noted when he called the mammoth $787 billion spending bill "stimulus No. 1" (that's debt No. 5, debt No. 6, debt No. 7, etc.).

If that isn't enough, Obama is asking for another roughly $3,600,000,000,000 (nearly $4 trillion) budget proposal for 2010, despite that the White House projects a 2009 budget shortfall of $1.5 trillion – triple the $455 billion in 2008. Even liberal media admits that Obama's spending will "leave a string of deficits dwarfing any in the nation's history."

All of these wild expenditures would be a little more bearable if we saw any signs of economic recovery. But how has all this alleged stimuli stabilized and grown the economy and the market? As our government has bailed, the Dow has dropped 2,000 points since Obama took office, roughly 200 points after every major speech he has made. And, yet, the borrowing and bailing goes on and on and on.

At what point does a spend-happy Democrat-leaning Congress protest its primary leader's outrageous borrowing and budget? When he reaches $5 trillion? $8 trillion? Is any Democrat politician concerned that such levels of escalating debt and spending will promote hyper-interest rates and a dead-in-the-water value of the dollar that leads other nations to no longer risk the purchase of our treasury bonds? Will the American public allow Washington to drive us to the poor house, as they prompt us to continue to chant, "Yes we can!" keep borrowing?

How can Obama and any congressional leaders tolerate for one moment during this recession any of the 9,000 earmarks, totaling $7.7 billion, in the $410 billion omnibus spending bill? How can they justify $1.8 million for swine odor control in Iowa or $200,000 for a tattoo removal program in Los Angeles? Have they all lost their fiscal minds?

So the big question is: How does Obama get away with racking up more expenses in his first 30 days in office than all the presidents combined had since the founding of our republic? Some say our recession warrants it. Others say his administration has played, or preyed, upon our economic woes. But I think it takes more than even a real depression to cause the type of unbridled spending we've seen over the last months. It takes the perfect economic and political storm, which is brewing right now over our nation, led by a president who has convinced the majority that "only government" is our savior.

Bernard Goldberg's "A Slobbering Love Affair" is a great book about the media's blind bias and infatuation with Obama, but his hypnotic effects permeate every stratum of society, from political corridors to public schools. Why? Because he's young, hip, cool, liberal and charismatic – and that's what sells today in America. Objectiveness and criticism flies right out the window at the mere mention of his name or any discussion of his excessive spending plans.

If G.W. Bush were still in office and made the exact same financial and legislative proposals, he would be publicly filleted and politically hung out on the wire for reckless monetary rule. Yet Obama's economic spending makes Bush's wartime bills look like chicken feed. But few Democratic leaders or pundits even question, let alone criticize, his fiscal leadership. Financial gurus who once railed Bush for excessive bailing now bow the knee at Obama's unbridled borrowing. Proof can be witnessed on television nearly every day, and last week was no exception.

On "Good Morning America" last Thursday, two of ABC's financial experts graded Obama's excessive borrowing and fiscal performance as a "B," while guest FOX financial expert Dave Ramsey rated it an "F." Despite the two "B" grades, one of the ABC financial experts quipped that one of the biggest problems with Obama's bailouts is that there is no real form of government accountability over the money pouring out of Washington. Yet they maintained their "B" grade for Obama's stewardship plan?

Here's an even better example. As Obama addressed Congress last Tuesday, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi led the way in emotive spontaneous applause for her political hero. Pop-up Pelosi was bouncing up and down like Tigger on steroids, forcing Vice President Biden to rise "slowly" every time she jumped up, while trying to hide his frustration with her. Her eyes and facial expressions seemed almost giddy as she gazed at Obama, like a teenager infatuated with the popular high school jock.

As I watched this obsessive congressional circus, I asked myself, "Is this the type of objective bipartisan leadership we want running our government, leading our nation, and spending our money?"

If we are ever to restore the fiscal and leadership sanity to our government and economy, we need not reinvent the Great Depression wheel of Roosevelt's New Deal. We need to look to a time when Congress was more frugal in its spending and stabilized our government and economy. And in the past 100 years, one of the best examples of that occurred when Newt Gingrich led Congress in the mid-to-late '90s. I'm not justifying every financial move they made back then, but, despite losing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution by only one Senate vote, they still committed to spending caps and balancing the budget, which they did for four consecutive years for the first time since the 1920s.

The Congress of the 1990s steadied and strengthened the economy by following four priorities and principles, which, fascinating to note, are being turned on their heads at this moment by the present administration. As Newt noted in his excellent book, "Real Change," Congress' top priorities were to:

      1. Cut taxes to increase economic growth and therefore increase revenues (unlike Obama's tax hikes, which will retard economic growth and depress revenues);

      2. Set priorities, and increase spending in key areas while reducing it in nonessential areas (unlike Obama's fiscal priorities of "healthcare, energy and education," which are based not upon what is best for the economy, but what is reflective of typical partisan preferences and doing what is politically expedient);

      3. Eliminate pork-barrel spending (unlike the 9,000 earmarks in the present $410 billion omnibus spending bill, which is nothing short of absolute economic ludicrousness, mismanagement and waste within our present crisis.);

      4. Shift from expensive, wasteful systems to smarter spending; don't merely look at more inexpensive ways but productive ones too (unlike Obama's theory to spend our way to prosperity, which is sure way to sink America.)

Our government is hemorrhaging money. The nanny state is becoming the norm. Our founders are rolling in their graves. And at this very moment, Washington's credit-crazy and debt-accumulating addiction is dissolving our sovereignty like a sugar cube in coffee by handing our financial autonomy over to the power of other nations.

In other words, Rome is burning, and Caesar is stoking the fire!

Time is running out, but it's not too late to reverse Washington's fiscal frenzy. Don't just write, but hound your representatives to live and legislate by the preceding four proven priorities and principles of governmental and monetary prudence.

[nChrist]

Physicians: Obama plan will 'shut down hospitals'
'Radically pro-abortion agenda' would remove conscience protections
Posted: February 28, 2009
12:30 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Doctors are forecasting the closure of hospitals and clinics across America and a mass migration of physicians and their assistances to other careers should the Obama administration succeed in its attempt to overrule their rights of conscience.

"Thousands of conscientious and compassionate physicians, nurses, hospitals and clinics currently serve poor women and those who live in medically underserved areas," said David Stevens, CEO of the Christian Medical Association today.

"Many of these professionals and institutions are motivated and guided by longstanding Hippocratic ethics and biblical principles that preclude participation in abortion and other controversial procedures. Infringing on their right to practice medicine according to these life-affirming ethical standards will force them to leave the profession and to shut down the hospitals and clinics," he warned.

Stevens was reacting to reports in several newspapers that the Obama administration is moving quickly to rescind a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services rule that currently protects civil rights and the exercise of conscience in healthcare.

The rule had been adopted under the Bush administration.

"The move to rescind the healthcare provider conscience regulation imperils women's healthcare access, threatens healthcare professionals' freedom to practice medicine according to ethical standards, and exposes the myth of moderation in Obama's abortion policy," he said.

"The Obama administration claims, without offering a shred of statistical evidence, that the regulation has 'created confusion' and will somehow hinder access to healthcare. What can be clearer than not using federal funds to force healthcare professionals to violate longstanding principles of medical ethics like the Hippocratic Oath, which guided medicine for over two millennia?

"The real threat to healthcare access is driving out every healthcare professional who conscientiously practices medicine according to life-affirming ethical standards," Stevens said.

He said that four in 10 of the organization's members "report being pressured to violate ethical standards. Physicians report losing positions and promotions because of their life-affirming views. Residents report losing training privileges because they refuse to do abortions. Medical students report changing career tracks away from obstetrics for fear of pressure to do abortions."

"We hear a lot of rhetoric from abortion advocates about the government not interfering with the physician-patient relationship. Why is this argument no longer employed when the physician and the patient disagree with abortion on demand? It would appear that for all the abortion 'choice' rhetoric, 'choice' is really a one-way street. When it comes to pro-life individuals, abortion choice quickly turns into abortion mandate," Stevens said.

Stevens said Obama's attack on doctors reveals "the myth of their moderation on abortion."

"They have no tolerance for moderate abortion policies like informing parents when their children seek an abortion, banning the essentially infanticidal partial-birth abortions, or protecting the civil rights of healthcare professionals who follow the Hippocratic Oath," Stevens said.

The rule-change plan comes on the heels of Obama's decision to lift the Mexico City policy, which forces taxpayers to support international groups facilitating abortions. Obama also plans to give tax money to the United Nations population program that the U.S. State Department found to have been aiding China's mandatory abortion policy.

According to the Los Angeles Times, Obama's move to demand doctors participate in the abortion industry came earlier today. The report said the move was being made "quietly" even as most of Washington was focusing on the president's budget plan.

WND recently reported on legal challenges to the Bush rule.

Experts for the Alliance Defense Fund and Christian Legal Society then reported they were gearing up to defend three laws that allow medical professionals to follow their conscience and not participate in abortions.

"Medical professionals should not be forced to perform abortions against their conscience," Casey Mattox,  litigation counsel with the CLS's Center for Law & Religious Freedom, said at the time.

"Planned Parenthood, the ACLU and their pro-abortion allies are seeking to punish pro-life medical professionals for their beliefs," Mattox said. "Far from arguing for 'choice,' these lawsuits seek to compel health care workers to perform abortions or face dire consequences."

The public-interest legal groups have filed motions to intervene in three separate lawsuits that seek to invalidate a federal law protecting medical professionals from discrimination because they refuse to participate in abortions.

"For over three decades, federal law has prohibited recipients of federal grants from forcing medical professionals to participate in abortions," said ADF Legal Counsel Matt Bowman. "The arguments in the lawsuits themselves demonstrate lack of compliance with these laws and the necessity of the regulation they are challenging."

Obama, while a state lawmaker in Illinois, objected to requiring doctors to provide medical care for infants who survive abortions and advocated virtually unlimited abortion on demand.

During his presidential campaign he said he would not want one of his daughters "punished" with a baby.

House Republican Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio said the Obama plan "will hurt faith-based health providers and hospitals throughout our nation who are committed to caring for Americans at this critical time. It will also inevitably result in more abortions being performed nationwide."

"It is beginning to look like the administration is intent on enacting [Freedom of Choice Act] incrementally ... through low-key legislative maneuvers and executive orders," Boehner said.

FOCA would overturn all abortion regulations nationwide.