Obama

[nChrist]

WND Exclusive HEAT OF THE MOMENT
Guess who holds patent for carbon-trading plan - Page 2 of 2
Disgraced Fannie Mae CEO set to cash in for millions

He continued, writing as if Fannie Mae and CO2e.com were the patent applicants, listed as "inventors," rather than third parties that received a beneficial interest in the patent through an assignment process: "Fannie Mae and CO2e.com LLC opted to protect this business method through the joint filing of a patent application to allow the concept to be implemented by industry participants without their having to fear patent and royalty claims by others, should others obtain a patent on the concept if Fannie Mae and CO2e.com LLC did not."

Contrary to these representations, Fannie Mae and CO2e.com are not listed as applicants or inventors on either patent.

Issa and Chaffetz did not respond to a WND request for comment. Issa's office said it is aware of the story and is looking into it.

Raines at Fannie Mae

As WND reported, Raines and two other top Fannie Mae executives agreed to pay $24.7 million, including a $2 million fine, to settle a civil lawsuit filed in December 2006 accusing them of manipulating Fannie Mae earnings, allowing executives to pocket hundreds of millions in bonuses from 1998 to 2004.

Raines was forced to give up Fannie Mae stock options valued at $15.6 million as part of the settlement.

On July 17, 2008, the the Washington Post ran a profile piece on Raines stating he "has been quietly constructing a new life for himself" in which he takes "calls from Barack Obama's presidential campaign seeking his advice on mortgage and housing policy matters."

Prior to the settlement, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, the government regulator that oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, had sought $100 million against Raines and the other two executives, plus restitution totaling more than $115 million in bonus money tied to the accounting scheme.

Fannie Mae separately paid a $400 million civil fine in a settlement with the oversight office and the SEC in an agreement to make top-to-bottom changes in its accounting procedures to avoid future accounting scandals.

The SEC accused Fannie Mae under Raines' leadership of misstating earnings for three and a half years, leading to an estimated $9 billion earnings restatement that wiped out 40 percent of Fannie Mae's profits from 2001 to 2004, according to Business Week.

Central to the Raines accounting scandal was a strategy to "cook the books" of Fannie Mae to show the type of earnings that would trigger hundreds of millions of bonuses to Raines and other key Fannie Mae executives.

When the scandal surfaced, Raines resigned from Fannie Mae in December 2004 with a $19 million severance package.

Fannie Mae accounting manager Roger Barnes charged that the mortgage giant had been manipulating its earnings through "cookie jar" accounting to justify payment of hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses to top executives.

In his 26-page testimony before the oversight office, Barnes detailed multiple Fannie Mae deviations from generally accepted accounting practices and his repeated efforts to bring the irregularities to a wide range of Fannie Mae managers and executives, all without positive result.

Barnes said he left Fannie Mae in October 2003 because he felt "forced out" once Fannie Mae excluded him from working on the office's investigation.

"As a result of Fannie Mae's refusals to take the concerns I had raised about financial and accounting practices seriously, and the retaliation I faced for raising these concerns, I had no choice to but to separate from the Company in October 2003," Barnes said on page 25 of his written October 6, 2004, testimony to the Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Financial Services.

Still, the office's report on the Raines scandal cited Barnes 34 times in the first 80 pages of the 200-page document.

Barnes, an African-American, reportedly received a $1 million settlement after threatening a whistleblower lawsuit charging racial discrimination, according to USA Today.

Subprime housing

WND also reported that despite having served as Fannie Mae chief executive officer, Raines was named in a housing scandal as one of the "Friends of Anthony" in a low-income-mortgage deal arranged by Anthony Mozilo, the former chief executive of the now-bankrupt subprime-mortgage broker Countrywide Financial Corp.

Raines was also a repeat customer at Countrywide while he was Fannie Mae chief executive, receiving four home loans between 1999 and 2003 totaling nearly $4 million.

One of Raines' properties included a 98-year-old seven-bedroom stucco colonial with a pool, a movie theater and a shared tennis court, overlooking a national park.

[nChrist]

WND Exclusive LIFE WITH BIG BROTHER
Is Obama getting Web 'kill switch'?
Plan cites security to ramp up government control over Internet

Posted: June 17, 2010
8:37 pm Eastern

By Michael Carl
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Congress is proposing a tighter grip by the government on the Internet, with a new "Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010" that would, among other things, give the president a "kill switch" on the Web, critics charge.

Officials with Judicial Watch, a government-watchdog group that investigates and prosecutes government misbehavior, said the plan simply is "keeping with the big-government script" of the Obama administration.

The organization said the bill would grant the federal government "absolute power" to shut down Internet activity and allow the president to take it over in the name of "national security."

The proposal essentially would require broadband providers, search engines and software firms to "immediately comply with any emergency measure or action developed" within the Department of Homeland Security.

Punishment would await offenders.

Judicial Watch said the alarming plan would give the government the power to force private companies to participate in "information sharing" with the government and allow authorities to monitor the "security status" of private websites and others.

"Yet another new government agency (National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications) will be created to police the industry and any company that 'relies on' the Internet, the telephone system or any other component of the 'information infrastructure' will be subject to its command," the organization said.

"The new (National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications) will have no less than two deputy directors and liaison officers to the Defense, Justice and Commerce departments as well as the director of national intelligence."

Judicial Watch also said arming the president with an Internet "kill switch" easily could be misused to silence free speech "under the pretext of a national emergency."

There already is an organization set up to manage such situations and it includes personnel from the National Security Agency, Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force and policymakers (politicians), according to a report from WND columnist Andrea Shea King.

The administration agency, dubbed CYBERCOM, is set up within the Department of Defense and reports it is both a defense and an offense in that it can engage in preemptive "strikes" intended to disrupt threats, she reported.

At a site called "Tech 1984 - Where Technology and Big Brother Collide," a commentator suggested: "Even though the primary purpose of CYBERCOM is to protect government and military networks, there is incredible pressure to extend that 'protection' to civilian and business networks as well. In fact, the second-highest official at the Pentagon, William Lynn III, deputy secretary of defense, recently announced that the Department of Defense might start a protective program for civilian networks. Defense Secretary Robert Gates stated the same thing in June 2009."

The new legislative proposal comes at the same time the Federal Communications Commission still is attempting to act on a policy called "net neutrality." CNET Networks reported in April that a federal court ruled that the FCC could not act on net neutrality, but the court decision hasn't stopped the push for that agenda as the FCC is still attempting to regulate the Internet using federal rules used to control phone lines.

A government systems analyst who publishes the Tech 1984 site and prefers to use the pseudonym Winston, a name borrowed from Winston Smith from George Orwell's "1984," said the newly activated Cyber Command was proposed last year by Defense Secretary William Gates as a means to protect the military's vast Internet network from attacks by outside or hostile forces.

"Winston" is a confidential source with connections to the cybersecurity industry.

Director Maj. Gen. Steven Smith said in a statement posted on the Army's site that the new agency will be responsible for defending Army information networks from threats around the globe.

"The mission for (the Cyber Command) is to direct the operation and defense of all Army networks, and, on order, conduct full-spectrum operations in support of our combatant commanders and coalition partners," Smith said.

Smith said the new unit will use existing Army and Defense resources and bring together parts of the 9th Signal Command, the First Information Operations Command and the Intelligence and Security Command.

However, Winston, the analyst, believes the new move will be aimed at civilian computer networks. Winston bases his assessment on a recent statement made by Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn.

"The best-laid defenses on military networks will matter little unless our civilian critical infrastructure is also protected. Critical infrastructure will certainly be targeted in a military conflict," Lynn stated.

"The Department of Homeland Security appropriately has the lead to protect the dot-gov and dot-mil domains. The Defense Department plays an important supporting role in this mission, and has direct responsibility for securing defense-industry networks," Lynn added.

The Defense Daily Network site lists corporations such as Northrop-Grumman, BAE Systems, Inc., and other private corporations as defense corporations that would likely come under the Cyber Command umbrella.

The newly operational status of the Cyber Command also is driving concern about the federal government's interest in taking control of the Internet. CNET News reported last August concern over a federal takeover of the Internet was fueled by the introduction of a Senate bill that would give President Obama the authority to take command of the system – or prevent private computers from having access.

The fury over possible federal control of the Internet has not abated, according to a report by Federal News Radio's Tom Temin and Amy Morris.

Temin and Norris say the bill proposed by Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, Maine Sen. Susan Collins and Delaware Sen. Tom Carper would give the president authority to shut down the Internet in the event of a cyber attack. The shutdown actions would be done through the Department of Homeland Security.

Center for Strategic and International Technology scholar James Lewis said the bill is misguided.

"I've never understood this shut-down-the-internet stuff. It wouldn't be easy, may not be possible and in any case is not in our interest – we depend on it more than others," Lewis observed.

Lewis added there are legitimate concerns about securing the military Internet, but he sees no sign that the Cyber Command would have the authority to intervene in the civilian Internet.

"There is a capability to monitor and intercept malware, but so far there are no decisions or policies to let Cyber Command do this, either solo or in partnership with the Tier 1 service providers," Lewis said.

"Most Tier 1 providers already do some monitoring for (quality-of-service) purposes, but they don't work together and they don't work with Cyber Command or DHS. As a nation, we prefer a disaggregated point defense, even though it makes us vulnerable, as it offers some protections for civil liberties. Other countries will act differently and may get an advantage over us," Lewis explained.

WND reported in November 2009 that the National Security Agency is building two new facilities for storing all communications intercepts. The connection to the NSA is the basis for Winston's concerns.

"CYBERCOM is commanded by Gen. Keith B. Alexander who is also the head of the NSA. Alexander was promoted to general on May 21, 2010. The official purpose is: 'Plans, coordinates, integrates, synchronizes and conducts activities to: direct the operations and defense of specified Department of Defense information networks and; prepare to, and when directed, conduct full-spectrum military cyberspace operations in order to enable actions in all domains, ensure US/Allied freedom of action in cyberspace and deny the same to our adversaries,'” Winston explained.

"The previous official responsible for cybersecurity in the United States, Rod Beckstrom, director of the National Cyber Security Center, resigned his post in protest over the fact that NSA had too much control and would not cooperate with (the center)," Winston detailed.

Winston said the new structure could be used to infringe on Americans' constitutional liberties.

"This would violate the 4th Amendment to our Constitution. Warrants are required to seize any private property. It can also be argued that this is a violation of the 4th Amendment’s provision against illegal searches as well. Warrants can only be obtained from a court or magistrate and would typically be the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court," Winston explained.

[nChrist]

WorldNetDaily Exclusive Commentary
The Great Pretender
A Voice Of Sanity
Robert Ringer

Posted: June 18, 2010

1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

The Marxmeister in the White House now says he takes full responsibility for ending the oil mess in the Gulf. He also says he wants to "know whose a-- to kick," that he "can't suck it up with a straw," and … well, you know … the ongoing narcissistic spiel – "I, me, my … blah, blah, blah" – day after day, week after week, ad nauseam.

Watching his recent performances on the Gulf oil disaster made me think about a monster hit The Platters had in the '50s called "The Great Pretender." Little did they know that the champion Great Pretender wouldn't even be born until 1961 – probably in Kenya … but, then, no one is really sure about that because no one is allowed to see his birth certificate.

Everyone but 1) those on the far left, 2) Bill O'Reilly and 3) the loons (O'Reilly's word) who have yet to return from lunch realizes that The Great Pretender has had a Marxist agenda since even before his pot-smoking days at Columbia. Names like Wright, Ayers, Lloyd, Dunn, Sunstein, Holdren and Jones (both Jeff and Van) are well-known to those who have taken the trouble to learn about The Great Pretender's agenda.

The ultimate expose on the radical nature of our 44th president: "The Manchurian President: Barack Obama's Ties to Communists, Socialists and Other Anti-American Extremists"

As ever more people come to realize that the country has been hijacked by this angry young Marxist, many would argue that a better title for him might be The Great Reactor. Obama listens to the news – especially Fox News – then reacts to his critics by saying or doing whatever they accuse him of not saying or doing, or by changing his tune regarding something he's said or done that offends too many people. Sort of humorous to watch – if the fate of an entire country were not at stake, that is.

Perhaps I'm getting soft with age, but I almost feel sorry for The Great Pretender. His flipping and flopping and spinning and twisting and contradictions have become downright embarrassing. He's Abbott and Costello and Laurel and Hardy all rolled into one. I admit it – I'm truly embarrassed for him.

Now, of all people, Mike Huckabee – continuing his swift turnabout in an effort to make voters forget about his slobbering interview of Michelle Obama (who, he tried to convince us, wakes up every morning frantically worrying about childhood obesity) – has succeeded in making The Great Pretender look like an incompetent, arrogant boob.

Hopefully, you saw The Huckster's show last weekend. He paraded out one guest after another – entrepreneurs, inventors, engineers and chemists – to present remarkable solutions for cleaning up the oil in the Gulf. It truly was amazing to watch the simplicity of the methods presented, as contrasted with The Great Pretender's spending his time talking about kicking a--, wagging his finger at everyone and bending over and picking up a lonely tar ball on the beach in his daily photo-ops.

Was the oil spill really just an accident? Probably. BP America Chairman and President Lamar McKay recently said that it was caused by "a failed piece of equipment." I'll buy that, at least for now. But it doesn't matter. Rahm never said that you have to create a crisis. He already knew there are crises popping up all the time. All he said was that you should never allow a good one to go to waste.

In the case of the BP oil accident, it was a slam-dunk. More to the point, it was like unlocking the door to the EPA's cage. Obviously – surprise, surprise – offshore drilling is now out of the question, right?

So it puts a few hundred thousand people out of work (ripple effect) … so what? The progressive must do what he must do to protect "the people," even if it means taking away their jobs and giving them higher gas prices to boot. What in the world would we do without government to protect us?

So, yes, the BP crisis will not be wasted if it results in an end to offshore drilling. Nevertheless, I think The Great Pretender is going to have to come up with another crisis – or two – before November to pull off a number of miracles for the Demagogic Party.

The Dems, of course, would have us believe that they can win because so-called moderates will pull away from Republican candidates affiliated with the tea parties. If they really believe that, it would be wonderful. But, quite frankly, I don't think they're that stupid.

So I, for one, am still thinking crisis. A manufactured crisis is much better than an unforeseen one, of course, because you can have a prefabricated "solution" prepared in advance. You don't have to do anything that actually helps make things better for people. All you need are a few talented individuals to put the right words on your teleprompters and be good at pretending you're making things better.

Obama has been following FDR's dictatorial playbook to the T. In his 1937 inaugural address, at a time when unemployment was still rising (15 percent on Inauguration Day), FDR bodaciously said, "Our progress out of the Depression is obvious."

Sound familiar? It should. With the economy on the verge of total collapse, The Great Pretender continues to look his teleprompters in the eye and tell Americans how he's saved the country from a depression and that "the worst is now behind us." He always sounds so darn convincing when he says these things, but I hear through the White House grapevine that on at least one occasion after slinging this kind of B.S., he was overheard singing to himself in the Oval Office:

Oh yes, I'm the great pretender,
Pretending that I'm doing well.
My need is such, I pretend too much,
I'm lonely but no one can tell.

Lacking a really great crisis, The Great Pretender, hopefully, is going to feel a lot lonelier starting next January.

[nChrist]

WorldNetDaily Exclusive Commentary
Alan Keyes
Barack Obama and the slumming of America

Posted: June 18, 2010
1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

Slums are not born, they are made. When I was a child, my father (a career Army NCO) would use most of his annual leave during the summer. On several occasions, my parents, my next older brother and I bundled into the car and spent the time making the rounds of family who lived mainly in North Carolina (my mother's birthplace), Maryland (my father's) and New York (where both my parents were partly raised, living with near relations).

In New York City we mainly stayed with my Aunt Jenny. I always enjoyed those visits. My aunt was a wonderful cook (I especially remember roast lamb, rice with rich lamb gravy and green beans sautéed in a bit of pork fat before steaming – thoroughly unhealthy, as I later learned, but so tasty). She was also a meticulous housekeeper, and she and my Uncle Anthony had over the years assembled some handsome furnishings. But though I enjoyed staying with them, I always dreaded arriving at the building on Grand Avenue in Brooklyn, N.Y., where they had lived for over 20 years. I remember having to clamber over winos littered about the stairs that led up to the entrance. My aunt and uncle lived several floors up. We had to make our way up several flights, in sparse light and sometimes darkness, through puddles of water and unsavory smells of garbage, urine and vomit, with vermin skittering about in the shadows.

Their home hadn't always been thus. They had photos from the late '30s, I think, when it had been a pristine location – the streets clean, the building well-kept – much the way my aunt and uncle still kept their apartment. But as the neighborhood lost its ethnic diversity, the building probably became a cash cow for landlords with no interest in its maintenance. Lights weren't replaced, walls and ceilings were left in disrepair and old plumbing gave out. You know the story. The people who moved in once things were in such a condition often had no more care for themselves than the landlords had for the real estate. A depressing cycle of decline produced the result that inspired my childish dread.

Join Alan Keyes in September at WND's Taking America Back Conference and the Tea Party at Sea!

Those visits, and other such conditions I have seen in the years since then, keep coming back to my mind as I ponder the present plight of my country. The spreading stain of the Gulf oil spill haunts my sense of its condition, calling to mind the unsavory puddles that marred access to my aunt and uncle's home. I read stories of the deteriorating conditions along the border, and I think of the holes in the walls where rusted, leaky plumbing showed through. I read of the U.S. government ceding control of U.S. parkland to criminal thugs, and I think of the places we were told to avoid, where drug dealers, muggers and gangs made the streets unsafe for anyone who wasn't part of their netherworld.

America has become a cash cow for the Obama faction and their fellow traveling elitists. Like the exploitative landlords, they are milking it for all it's worth, with no regard for the future or the conditions in which its people will have to live. They give short shrift to the basic maintenance, of our borders, our waterways and our security from the terrorist and criminal thugs seeking to destroy us. They choose instead to amass power for themselves and distribute billions in pursuit of their agenda of totalitarian control. In these Obama years, we witness the slumming of America.

The projects, like the space program, a testament to our hopeful, striving spirit, are being shuttered now, like the overgrown parks and playgrounds of a neglected neighborhood. And like the people in such neighborhoods, we are being forced into ever-greater dependence on forces that care for nothing but their own power and profit. We are being patronized, lied to and maneuvered into inescapable subjection to their will. In these Obama years, we witness the slumming of America's spirit.

The people that more than once helped saved the world from desperate evil; that truly without meaning to conquered nations in the grip of soul-destroying tyranny, not in order to rule over them, but to return them to themselves; that called the world to conclave for the sake of peace and in the hope, however naively implemented, that the competition of war could be replaced with the constructive emulation of peaceful development: this people is now patronized by smug elitists. They demean our faith. They despoil our credit and good name. They stealthily subvert and surrender the ideas and institutions that allowed us to vindicate the people's capacity for self-government and so fulfill the hope often expressed as the nation began.

In these Obama years, we witness the slumming of America's past, of America's liberty, of America's Constitution, of America's decent pride. But most importantly of all, we witness the slumming of America's respect for God and the idea of justice that accords with God's will. Slyly, insistently, we see the promotion of policies that abandon the self-evident truths the nation was founded on. These truths demand respect for the lives of our nascent offspring. These truths demand respect for the integrity of the natural family. These truths demand respect for individual responsibility in economics and self-government. But in all these respects they are being cast aside.

In a sense steeped in the blood, sweat, tears and faithfulness of all the generations before us, our fate is still in our own hands. Each ballot we have the right to cast represents a piece of it. We are the landlords here. And we will have at least one more opportunity to prove it this coming November. We may use it to declare in no uncertain terms that the slumming of America ends now, along with the self-exalting power of those responsible for it. But only if we are willing to reject those who want us to believe that we can stop the rot without restoring our nation's allegiance to the God who made us free. Our fate and that of the nation is in our hands, but only if we act as America's founders did and submit our hearts, and the heart of the nation, to the authority of the Creator God.

[Shammu]

Village Academic Curriculum Video of the Week

'I am an Obama scholar.' You won't believe it until you see it.

Thanks brother, I got sick (physically) watching that video. The first half was fine, till the teacher starts indoctrination Obamadamnanation into these children.

[Soldier4Christ]

I've also seen quite a few singing praises to Obama. Propaganda indoctrination makes me sick, especially with an ENEMY of our nation and a real LOSER.

By the way, I just locked this thread because I have a series of posts I'm thinking about where moderators only would be appropriate. Hopefully, the other moderators will have some like posts. You'll see what I mean soon.

I've seen a whole lot more of this sort of information on other sources that I think is applicable. I have always been very skeptical of conspiracies. Especially when they come from certain people that really reach out for the weirdest of weirds but many of these are very easily verifiable. As you already know I have to research things completely to get to the truth. There has indeed been a conspiracy to destroy America from within that has been going on for many decades. It has reached the point that these people are no longer trying to hide nor cover up any of their actions.

[nChrist]

WorldNetDaily Exclusive
DOCTOR'S ORDERS
Lawsuit to feds: Constitution says, 'No you can't'
'Case is about power of government, which is to be limited'

Posted: June 01, 2010
9:28 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

The newest legal brief in a court challenge to "Obamacare," the president's nationalization of health care, says the Constitution simply doesn't allow the federal government to demand a payment for not doing something.

The case was brought by the Thomas More Law Center on behalf of several individuals.

It challenges the government's plan to force individuals to buy health-care insurance and pay for abortions, among other issues, or be penalized. It was brought in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan and seeks an injunction to halt the plan.

Named as defendants in the lawsuit are President Obama, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.

In a brief in support of their request for a preliminary injunction, the plaintiffs argue that there's not even any dispute.

"This case is about the fundamental relationship between the power of the federal government, which is limited by the Constitution, and the liberty interests of those it governs," said the brief, filed just days ago. "Defendants' explanation of the national health care problems this country is facing and the efforts by the federal government to provide solutions to them through the Health Care Reform is, at the end of the day, beside the point.

"No matter how convinced defendants may be that the challenged Health Care Reform Act is in the public interest, their political objectives can only be accomplished in accordance with the Constitution."

The brief said, "Defendants' arguments ultimately claim for the federal government the power to force all Americans … to engage in a commercial transaction in which they otherwise would not engage. … Defendants do not – because they cannot – refute plaintiffs' claim that if the federal government does possess such power, then it also has the power to force private citizens 'to engage in [other] affirmative acts, under penalty of law, such as taking vitamins, losing weight, joining health clubs, buying a GMC truck, or purchasing an AIG insurance policy.'"

The case was launched by the Thomas More Law Center and attorney David Yerushalmi as soon as Obama signed the legislation March 23. Robert Muise, Thomas More's senior trial counsel, and Yerushalmi have worked on the legal arguments.

The original complaint asserts the health-care reform law imposes unprecedented governmental mandates that trample on the personal and economic freedoms of Americans in violation of their constitutional rights.

It also alleges Congress had no authority under the Commerce Clause to pass the law and that by usurping the power reserved for the states and the people, Congress violated the Tenth Amendment.

The lawsuit also contends that by forcing private citizens to fund abortion, contrary to their rights of conscience and the free exercise of religion, Congress violated the First Amendment.

The newest brief cited the dangers of the government's line of thinking in the case.

"Further troubling is defendant's suggestion that 'unelected judges' should refrain from 'pass[ing] upon the validity' of the act," the argument said.

The brief argues that the federal government in the U.S. simply does not have the power to "fundamentally change the structure of our Constitution in order to advance legislation they perceive is in the public interest."

The brief also tries to shoot a hole in the government's argument that health care always is commercial activity.

"Defendants argue that when plaintiffs sit at home and do not engage in the regulated economic activity, plaintiffs are in reality engaging in precisely the economic activity in which they have not engaged," the brief said.

"We are led to believe that this imputed mental decision morphs into an activity that is defined by defendants as 'the act not to purchase health insurance,'" the brief said. "But neither defendants nor Congress have the metaphysical power or authority to magically convert non-activity into activity."

That's not the end, either.

"The congressional inferences, however, do not end here. Thus, once the imputed mental choice not to purchase health insurance is converted into an affirmative economic decision and this imputed decision somehow morphs into an actual act akin to purchasing something, only then does Congress impose the additional inferences that this individual belongs to a class of individuals who will (1) use the health care system and (2) nonetheless unfairly exploit the health care system by either not paying for health care or health insurance or by paying below market rates.

"In fact, the inferences here piled one on top of another do not consist of only a chain of inferred causal relationships, but per force begin with the metaphysical conversion of a non-act – an imputed decision – into a specific activity called 'a choice regarding the method of payment,'" the brief argues.

The brief explains it really doesn't matter what Congress wants sometimes.

"Whatever value such congressional findings might have in the academic world of economic theory, they have neither de facto nor de jure power to change reality or to re-write the Commerce Clause."

"Our Founding Fathers sought to limit the federal government's powers to those specifically enumerated in the Constitution. … If Congress can effectively re-write the Commerce Clause and grant itself the authority to reach all sorts of purely local activity, and indeed to reach non-activity, by simply crafting some regulatory scheme and issuing a finding of 'essentiality,' Congress will actually be incentivized to create intrusive regulatory schemes as constitutional cover for naked power grabs. This stands the enumerated powers doctrine on its head."

The brief suggests the most effective way to handle the dispute would be to advance the trial on the merits of the claims with a hearing on a preliminary injunction.

"Our lengthy and detailed reply to the government's defense of the Health Care Reform Act demonstrates the weakness of the government's superficial arguments," Muise said.

According to a Washington Watch report at MedPageToday, the government had told the judge the case should be dismissed because the penalties aren't taking effect immediately, so the plaintiffs "demonstrate no current injury."

The Thomas More Law Center case against the president was brought on behalf of four individuals, Jann DeMars, John Ceci, Steven Hyder and Salina Hyder. They explained they currently are uninsured and do not plan to buy health insurance. They will be harmed by the government's new penalties, they assert.

Besides a clear problem with the Commerce Clause if the government is allowed to demand residents purchase health insurance, the new law also conflicts with the First Amendment's conscience and free expression of religion provisions as well as the Fifth Amendment's equal protection provisions, the case alleges.

It is the court, the case explains, that is "a guardian of those fundamental liberties, and it possesses the constitutional authority to enjoin government acts that tread upon them."

[Soldier4Christ]

The whole problem with this is when you have an administration that does not recognize the Constitution or anything else American as being law. What this administration recognizes is sharia law and world law. Until this nation stands up and enforces our existing laws it will do no good. When I say 'this nation' I mean the majority of The People and not just a few here and there.

[nChrist]

The whole problem with this is when you have an administration that does not recognize the Constitution or anything else American as being law. What this administration recognizes is sharia law and world law. Until this nation stands up and enforces our existing laws it will do no good. When I say 'this nation' I mean the majority of The People and not just a few here and there.

There are clearly many illegal and Unconstitutional things going on. Now - what will the court do with them? If blunt common sense were to prevail, we would already have the answer. But, how much faith do we have in the courts? They could have a split decision on whether the earth is flat or not. It will be interesting to see what happens. The people and the states have already said NO! - and I think that they do mean NO!

[Soldier4Christ]

AP just confirmed that obama is relieving McChrystal and replacing him with Petraeus.

Although Petraeus has is a good choice, McChrystal is an excellent General that has his Troops respect better than Petraeus ever did. I hope that McCrhystal will take this to public life and go after obama.

[nChrist]

AP just confirmed that obama is relieving McChrystal and replacing him with Petraeus.

Although Petraeus has is a good choice, McChrystal is an excellent General that has his Troops respect better than Petraeus ever did. I hope that McCrhystal will take this to public life and go after obama.

I haven't heard this news, but this is what I expected. I didn't think that Obama could handle much because of his arrogance and pride. I realize it was a mistake for McChrystal and his staff to talk openly in front of a reporter, even if it was the truth. I just hope that the troops don't have to pay in any way for this mistake and the resulting decision by Obama.

[Soldier4Christ]

It's definitely about to be a much different Military.

[nChrist]

It's definitely about to be a much different Military.

As we have discussed numerous times, I always feel bad when anyone does anything negative to those in the Armed Forces. I still take every opportunity to thank them in person for their service, and I think that they know I mean it from the bottom of my heart.

As a contrast, I honestly think this administration could care less about the Armed Forces unless it effects their political agenda. I had a multitude of reasons for forming this opinion, and much of it has to do with old-fashioned respect and patriotism - OR LACK THEREOF (i.e. Our Flag and what it stands for). I would have never dreamed in my wildest imagination that we would ever have an administration like this that hates our country and everything it stands for.

[Shammu]

As a contrast, I honestly think this administration could care less about the Armed Forces unless it effects their political agenda. I had a multitude of reasons for forming this opinion, and much of it has to do with old-fashioned respect and patriotism - OR LACK THEREOF (i.e. Our Flag and what it stands for). I would have never dreamed in my wildest imagination that we would ever have an administration like this that hates our country and everything it stands for.

Well here is one in agreement with you brother, yes I know it's a year and a half old but............

Obama Snubs Nation's Heroes, Becomes the First President to Skip Ball Honoring Medal of Honor Recipients in Over 50 Years
January 21, 2009

Barak Obama may have stumbled over his words briefly during his inauguration, but he made an even bigger blunder later Tuesday evening. The newly sworn-in President opted not to appear at what should have been one of the most important Balls on his agenda that evening - The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball.

The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball was begun in 1953 for President  Dwight Eisenhower's inauguration. The event recognized recipients of the Medal of Honor, the nation's highest military award. There were 48 Medal of Honor recipients in attendance, who were undoubtedly disappointed by the Commander-in-Chief's failure to show. Over the past 56 years and 14 inaugurations, no President has skipped this event - until now.

The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball is sponsored by the  American Legion, and co-sponsored by 13 other veteran's service organizations, including those such as the Paralyzed Veterans of America and the  Military Order of the Purple Heart.

Instead of attending this ball honoring our nation's heroes, Obama was busy making stops at 10 other official balls. Obama and his wife's first stop was at the  Neighborhood Ball. From there they went to the Home State Ball for Illinois and Hawaii, the Commander-in-Chief Ball, the Youth Inaugural Ball, and the Home State Ball for Delaware and Pennsylvania. They finished off the night with brief appearances at the Mid-Atlantic, Western, Midwest, Eastern, and Southern regional Balls.

Celebrities were a plenty at the balls, with  Stevie Wonder, Shakira, Mary. J. Blige, Faith Hill, Jay-Z,  Alicia Keys, Adam Levine, will.i.am, Sting, Mariah Carey, and  Leonardo DiCaprio in attendance at the Neighborhood Ball. In addition, the other nine balls also featured a star-studded lineup including Kanye West and Kid Rock at the Youth Ball, Marc Anthony at the Western Ball, and Cheryl Crow at the Western Ball.

It was the party without all of the celebrities that Obama skipped. The very people who he sought to have support him during his candidacy and campaign, who have fought to protect this country, were snubbed in favor of publicity and the opportunity to rub shoulders - yet again - with the out-of-touch Hollywood elite.

Obama Snubs Nation's Heroes, Becomes the First President to Skip Ball Honoring Medal of Honor Recipients in Over 50 Years

[nChrist]

Great Article - thanks for sharing it. I don't remember ever hearing about this one, but that could be just bad memory on my part. It further reinforces my thoughts about his disrespect for those who give their all in service to their country.